Join today and have your say! It’s FREE!

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.
Please Try Again
{{ error }}
By providing my email, I consent to receiving investment related electronic messages from Stockhouse.

or

Sign In

Please Try Again
{{ error }}
Password Hint : {{passwordHint}}
Forgot Password?

or

Please Try Again {{ error }}

Send my password

SUCCESS
An email was sent with password retrieval instructions. Please go to the link in the email message to retrieve your password.

Become a member today, It's free!

We will not release or resell your information to third parties without your permission.

Fabled Silver Gold Corp T.FCO


Primary Symbol: V.FCO.H Alternate Symbol(s):  FBSGF

Fabled Silver Gold Corp. is a Canada-based company. The Company is focused on identifying new opportunities.


TSXV:FCO.H - Post by User

Bullboard Posts
Comment by pcnisbeton Aug 26, 2005 12:50pm
123 Views
Post# 9467502

RE: Rio

RE: RioRio I have no relationship with FCO at this time. I have not had a relationship with FCO since Feb 1998. I am not being paid to be posting here on this board, something you claimed. I post here Rio, because I have a lot of friends who are shareholders in FCO or work for that company still. You also claimed that I was 'fired' from FCO, but Rio, you can not fire a director, I resigned so that I could explore for other things. On Arsenic You claimed that Formation would produce more arsenic than any other mine in the United States. The EPA's TRI shows that statement to be patently false. Its not a matter of opinion Rio, it was simply a lie you cooked up. The mines for Barrick in Carlin produce ten times the arsenic that FCO will and they dispose of them in their tailings, as noted by EPA. You stated that Arsenic wold be mobile in a tailings environment in the locatin of Blackbird Creek under wet conditions. There is no arsenic mobility within the existing million tons of tails in Ludwig Gulch, not has EPA ever cited Noranda for those tails with regard to arsenic. You earlier suggested that arsenic would be a water concern on the site, but no sample of water in the area have ever been found to contain water levels of arsenic above detection. You have claimed that the site would have an acid mine drainage problem, but the pH of the waters in the area are and have always been neutral. EPA has never had a protocal for concerns related to AMD. You have claimed that it will be impossible or at the very least blocking by legal means to transport concentrate from Salmon on US Highways to the CDA area, due to what you say are anti-mining forces in Montana. The legalities of interstate commerce in the United States make this statement a flat lie. The movement of far more harmful materials happens on a daily basis on the roads you mention. ON access They are currently accessing the site. They are drilling and have court approval to use the access for driving the decline. The only thing to be decided is what compensation they will give Noranda for widening the access road for going to production. So there is no access problem. I am not banned from the 'site'. Neeley does not work for Noranda. Yet you ran with that lie for quite a time. You claimed that management had not anticipated the issue of access, yet I have clearly stated that we surveyed all alternative routes into the property as early as 1995. There is the potential to use either the Little Deer or the Big Deer Creek roads, which though in disrepair, are more than adequate to provide access. USFS preferences are that the existing access be used, but in the event of any blocking of that, they would have to provide one of the other routes into the property. You make statements like "There has not been any Direct Shipping Ore since the days of the Swansea Smelter in the 1890's." Yet the El Indio Mine in Chile was a DSO operation over a century following that and there are other DSO operations currently active in the world. People involved in the real mining business know that Rio. It not about matters of opinion. The underlaying facts do not support any of your screed. I have presented the facts with links to proofs that you were whistling Dixie on your routines. You deal not in facts or in learned opinions, you deal in throwing cr-p at the wall and hoping that some of it will stick. Even when you are caught out in lies, you try to pass them over by saying that you have a learned opinion, yet provide no proofs that you have ever worked in the minerals industry. I have provided proofs of my expertise and the 25 years I have worked drawing a paycheck in this industry. You can have an opinion that the moon is made of green cheese, but it is not as valid as that held by the guys who have run analysis of the lunar rocks. Their knowledge is fact based, while yours is that of a blustering babbler. The opinion of a congential liar hardly rates when put next to people who have actually done their homework and present the actual data from the actual site. And indeed you are not my son, my kids are honest and truthful. Have a nice day.
Bullboard Posts
USER FEEDBACK SURVEY ×

Be the voice that helps shape the content on site!

At Stockhouse, we’re committed to delivering content that matters to you. Your insights are key in shaping our strategy. Take a few minutes to share your feedback and help influence what you see on our site!

The Market Online in partnership with Stockhouse