HHI Quote of the Day

"Naivete in grownups is often charming; but when coupled with vanity it is indistinguishable from stupidity." ~ Eric Hoffer

Rats, sinking ships, the usual

An unintentionally funny (as are most amusing things at HHI) exchange between the history poseurs today:

Admin: "Doc: your two most recent posts concern (and reference) the same legal document, do they not?"

Doc: "Sorry Admin, Please excuse. Yes, both excerpts refer to the same telling entry in the court documents. There was an emergency, a sinking vessel that morning, and I am remiss, a mistake in haste. I was unable to post the entire docket entry but it is most interesting."

So, in the "real world," Doc is dealing with sinking ships. It's amazing how sometimes life's metaphors speak loud and clear, no?

Today's Potpourri

It's hard to believe we started this blog less than a month ago. Launching on April 22nd, we've just broken the 3,000 hit mark today, something we're both proud and humbled by.

Thank you for reading us and please continue to support our efforts to shed some amusing light on the activities of the HHI bunch.

We have a couple disparate items today, so let's jump right in:

One of our readers has been turning the pages of Ron Suskind's wonderful book, The One Percent Doctrine, which details the Bush's administration's disastrous post-9/11 policies in its quest for the "war on terror." He came across a passage he believes perfectly captures the essence of the history poseurs' misguided and undeserved arrogance and its consequences:

"Hubris is, in its way, a loss of context. Those with hubristic clarity of their rightness view even small setbacks as a profound affront, an attack on one's gilded identity. Opposing points of view shrink to invisibility." ~ Ron Suskind, The One Percent Doctrine (p. 246)

Sound like anyone you know?

Issue 2: Our super-scientific objective poll on whether Odyssey should sue HHI closed, with predictable results:

We've opened another super-scientific objective poll that broadens our horizons a bit. This round we're examining the issue of Spain's domestic politics and how it may, or may not, in your opinion, be serving as the true engine behind efforts to defeat Odyssey over the BS find, and we suspect, other pressing matters as well. If you'd like to expand your thoughts on this topic, please send us a post, or use our comments section, which we'd love to see start heating up.

And again, thanks for your support and readership! Keep those ideas, content and suggestions coming....

Take that, Stemm!

The HHI nitwiteratti must have summoned the shock troops for a mass-action email campaign, as we’ve received tons of recent email all asking pretty much the same question over and over: How much are we being paid by Odyssey to run this site?

We’ve been perfectly clear about this from the beginning, and we’ve reiterated several times, that we don’t receive anything from Odyssey. Nor do we take direction or guidance on our content or topics. Frankly, we think they may have slightly more important things to do than try to saddle up a bunch of juvenile smart asses to do their bidding in the niche public arena known as the "blogosphere." We know, call us crazy realistic (unlike some people, right?).

Of course, we’re not surprised HHI would perpetuate this idea, as they do almost every day on their website (it’s a particularly popular theory of Sir Solomon the Angry Twit™). After all, they see an evil angle or rabid conspiracy behind anything even remotely beneficial to Odyssey, and stop the presses if anyone tries to defend the company from the never-ending HHI onslaught.

So we huddled and decided there was a sure-fire way to prove we’re not beholden to Odyssey: To attack CEO Greg Stemm. After all, according to the HHI poseurs, Stemm is the Devil himself. Evil incarnate. We figured if we displayed our bravery in insulting the dark knight personally, to brazenly mock the malignant forces allied behind OMEX, then we'd surely be able to convince skeptics of our independence.

So, at the risk of falling prey to the malevolent dark arts ourselves, here is why we don't like Greg Stemm:

He has a beard. A big one. We don’t like facial hair on men. And besides, beards are so ‘70s, an era that brought us disco and appallingly bad pornography.

He smiles too much. Why does he appear so happy all the time? He acts like he actually loves his life and work. But shouldn't he be more serious and pedantic? Perhaps wear a perpetual scowl like Solomon and Doc, and be as bitter, angry and hateful to everyone and everything? Trust us: something’s going on behind that smile and it's probably not cavities.

We don’t like the name “Stemm.” Why the extra “m”? Is “Stem” not good enough? Why not go all the way, Mister Fancy Pants, and just change your name to “Gregg”? We find this terribly inconvenient when typing.

He’s too skinny. Ask yourself: why isn't he fat like the rest of us Americans? We find this to be highly suspect. In fact, next time we see him, we're going to thrust a Big Mac in his face just to see what happens (maybe his black heart will explode?).

He drinks Green Tea. Lots of it. And that’s all we have to say about that.

There you have it. How much clearer can we be? We don’t like hairy, affable, anti-oxidant beverage swilling, skinny shipwreck explorers with extravagantly spelled last names. Especially one that's out finding underwater treasures; or, put another way, who's living the secret dream of every fat, middle-aged, bored male on this planet.

What more proof do you people need of our total and absolute independence now? So hey, HHI guys, can you please let up on the email? Pretty please? We’re trying to get some work done here.

** No Odyssey employees were consulted or maimed in the writing of this post.

Lubby needs a plush toy!

Gosh, look what we just found on the HHI website, ironically parked right next to Doc's sanctimonious kisser. The history poseurs will do anything to destroy Odyssey, but when it comes to collecting a few much-needed pennies from Google ads, well, Odyssey's banner ad works just fine, thank you very much.

Maybe Odyssey can offer a special discount for those HHI members clicking though to buy something fun and exciting. You know, something that will help put a smile on a face after a long day of reading Solomon's insufferably arrogant rants, Lubby's putrid poetry, Doc's regurgitation of the same tired hairball, and Smitty's impenetrable prose, perhaps?

Dope it down Doc

Doc was once again chastised by the "admin" of HHI (who we think is Sir Solomon the Angry Twit™) for posting news articles without appropriate comment or context (Doc's motto is: if it bashes Odyssey, I'm posting it!).

Admin: "Doc: these media reports you quote do not contain news, but rather repeat old charges (and we may guess from whence they came). We must be careful to not mislead readers, who should be aware that those making the allegations do not necessarily have the evidence to support them, for if they did, Spain would be advancing its case in a different type of court and Portugal would have been involved long ago. Yes, we may think we know more, but public proof is another matter."

Doc, as usual, sheepishly defers to the master:

Doc: "Admin, I concur. It does appear that we shall know more very shortly. Then I expect we shall see source and reference. The Media is the Media after all."

Isn't it funny that with Doc it's always "we shall shortly know." It's the equivalent of: "Psst, hey: I have some inside information that tomorrow morning -- are you ready for this?! -- the sun's going to come up!" Nothing ever happens except the confirmation of his foolishness.

And we love the conspiratorial media comment by Solomon and Doc's "The Media is the Media after all" comment. These clowns can't decide whether they love or hate these guys. Of course, anyone paying attention would recognize the rather easy HHI formula for the media...it goes something like this:

• Media that publishes negative articles on Odyssey: GOOD BOYS
• Media that isn't sufficiently critical of Odyssey: BAD BOYS

The HHI clowns are a pretty sophisticated read, no?

Goold the Ghoul

Of all the goofy, inconsequential pronouncements from HHI, Jim Goold, and assorted other anti-OMEX groupies over time, we found Goold's statement last week that Odyssey had "desecrated a war grave" with its Black Swan (BS) find to be the most loathsome ever.

Not surprisingly, the original thinkers over at HHI fell all over themselves promoting this absurd allegation, with several calling the company "sick," as if Odyssey was pushing aside heaps of rotting bodies to get at the treasure (which is surely what they'd like the uninformed public to mentally picture). Never mind that HHI had not once, ever, suggested this might be the case with the Mercedes. No, all they needed was their taskmaster to bark an order and they were as compliant as the meekest child.

First, let's recognize Goold's statement for what it really was: a despicable public relations gimmick intended to demonize Odyssey in the public eye. We've already said we don't think Judge Pizzo will appreciate this bad faith gesture, nor Goold's premature exclamation of victory in the case.

Second, it's the noxious nature of this gross and inappropriate allegation that reveals Goold's willingness to do practically anything to make a case against Odyssey. It's apparently not enough for him to go head-to-head in a courtroom, where law and decorum are the guiding principles, he has to stoop to throwing out highly charged accusations intended to inflict grievous damage to the reputation of his opponent. This tells us he is worried, for surely if he and his client felt the facts and the law were clearly on their side, they would not need to mire in the muck with these kinds of baseless, disgusting allegations.

So, what of this claim that Odyssey "violated" a "war grave"?

First, need we point out that no shipwreck was found where the BS treasure and artifacts were archaeologically recovered. Without a shipwreck, how does one honestly claim there are human remains to be found? What's more, bodies do not last underwater for long. With the exception of more modern ships sinking and essentially entombing its victims, there were no such scenario with the Mercedes 204 years ago. Those tragically killed in the explosion were most likely scattered and lost forever to the depths. In other words, there are no human remains from the Mercedes shipwreck existing any where underwater today. Period.

What else?

Well, we think it's rather important to note that Spain and Britain were not at war. Some of the information we've seen indicates the British "intervention" was not considered a military action by either Spain or Britain. Had Britain considered it so, the captured vessels would have been considered "prizes." Instead, they were considered "Droits of Admiralty." In times of war, captured vessels and cargo were considered "prizes" and generously awarded to the captors. This was not the case with the other three vessels of the Spanish fleet. Furthermore, Spain objected to Britain's action as an act of piracy, not of war.

In other words: No war, no war graves. No military action, no military graves.

We would add that we are not aware of any catastrophic sinking of any vessel that did not result in the unfortunate loss of human life. The Mercedes is no exception. You would think that even the amateur archaeologists at HHI would know there are not many archaeological recoveries that do not encounter graves at some point, and in fact, these graves are often the target of such recoveries.

Regardless, we doubt there were many, if any, human remains associated with the Black Swan, even if it proves ultimately to be the Mercedes. Considering the ship was destroyed by a magazine explosion, the hull of the ship would have broken apart, immediately dropping any cargo and ballast in the lower decks (some historical accounts have referred to this as an egg dropping its yolk). Passengers on the same deck as the explosion would likely have been immediately killed, reduced to shards along with the portions of the ship above the waterline, while others would have been injured or thrown from the vessel.

Still others may have been trapped. Both the forecastle and poop would have likely floated for some time, and indeed some of the contemporary reports bear this out. Survivors were plucked from the forecastle, although one account mentions the poop. Perhaps it was both. Since there are no apparent vessel remains, and bodies float (at least after awhile) and are much less dense than coins and ingots, we find it difficult to believe any human remains would have even sunk in the same area, much less continue to exist.

Surely these facts were as available and understandable to Goold the Ghoul as they were to us. So to make the claim he did was not only highly inappropriate, but we think also possibly unethical. We hope Odyssey will continue to aggressively counter these sorts of reckless charges with the facts, and where such gross allegations have the effect of libel and defamation, they will be appropriately pursued as well.

** HH Watch sincerely thanks several contributors for providing content and context for this post. We is much obliged!

Hollow Men

One of our highly cultured contributors was so "moved" by the HHI "poem" (he muttered something about bowels), he suggested we counter with some real art.

He recommended T.S. Eliot's brilliant poem, The Hollow Men, which we agree perfectly captures the angst and personality of the typical HHI history poseur. We particularly like the appropriateness of the first stanza:

We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
Or rats’ feet over broken glass
In our dry cellar

Link to the entire poem (do yourself a favor and read the entire piece.).

An Odoriferous Ode

We're hard at work on a rather longish reply to Spain's response to the court yesterday (it will be posted this weekend), as well as the ridiculous, highly inappropriate public comments by Jim Goold about Odyssey's supposedly "desecrating a war grave," but in the meantime, as we head into the long-awaited weekend, we'll amuse you with some appallingly bad "poetry" found on the HHI website and devoted to -- GUESS WHO? -- Yeah baby: HH Watch!

Ain't that cool? Apparently when the HHI poseurs aren't coming up with new and less-than-creative ways to libel and defame Odyssey, they fancy themselves "poets." Of course, in the same way they practice history and archaeology, their efforts reek of raw amateurism and half-baked ideas. But, it's still fun in a let's-watch-the-idiots-fall-on-their-face kind of way.

As we gagged our way through this "art," we were reminded of the famous Oscar Wilde quote:

All bad poetry springs from genuine feeling. To be natural is to be obvious, and to be obvious is to be inartistic.

Obvious and inartistic...yep, that captures our boys over at HHI perfectly! Ah well, at least we now know for certain our hit count is being run up by the poseurs too. Sweet!

The Ballad of a Wandering Poseur

The honored art of satire is often misunderstood,
It tries to strike a balance between Voltaire and Hollywood,
But every now and then, to occasion it does rise,
Irreverent Humor mixed with Truth is Satire’s normal guise,

But now and then there come a few who miss the meters rhyme,
And seek to use poor Satire in exchange for Odyssey’s shiny dimes,
Whose interest does this prattle serve with a constituency so thin?
For the Public wants its Truth and they want their stock to win.

From the Annals of Politics where Satire draws its finest breath,
To become a subject of such mirth is viewed with some respect,
Thus the object of good Satire is not just to entertain,
But to leave a mark or imprint of the Truth it does contain.

Such simple rules are hard to follow when one’s orders are so strict,
“Thou shalt joust with History Hunters their Truth to contradict.”
Of course we are free to wonder just how you seek to gain?
Perhaps with a short position? Or a trip to Sunny Spain?

All HHI desires is that Odyssey offer up some proof,
And stop spending Black Swan’s bullion on some History Hunters spoof.
The second quarter’s coming and there is not much left to sell.
Stockholders pray that something surfaces before the closing bell.

But back to History Hunters as we toil by light of lamp,
Over manuscripts and artifacts Odyssey considers scrap,
There is one lesson here to learn within these metered lines,
A business run by tooting pipers will certainly decline.

~ Jesus of Lubeck

Pandering for Goold

It's been a long, very tiring day for all of us at HH Watch (and we're sure you too). Between reading the various press reports, the HHI website, and slogging through the stinking heap of poo laid over at Yahoo (Doc and Smitty combined for over 35 worthless posts alone, as someone pointed out), our collective head is throbbing.

So, rather than parse to death all that's happened today (and there was a lot), we thought we'd give you our unprofessional, uninformed and unsolicited view from 35,000 feet.

First, the press conference.

How in the world did Jim Goold convince his client, Spain, to go out on a limb like this? In front of the entire world, and in advance of Judge Pizzo even having an opportunity to review Spain's filings, Goold announced the BS treasure was definitively from the Mercedes and his client was therefore entitled to 100% of the find, with zero compensation to Odyssey.

But Goold went even further, making what we think was a potentially fatal, profoundly stupid, miscalculation: he dramatically personalized the case, and in the process, completely and unfairly demonized Odyssey in the public eye, particularly in Spain and probably throughout Europe, where Odyssey is currently operating. In addition to essentially calling Odyssey immoral liars, he also incredibly said they had desecrated a Spanish war grave (of course, this is a completely ridiculous and unfounded charge, and we'll address it in more detail later).

Wow. We can only imagine how Judge Pizzo will react to this tomorrow when he opens his newspaper. How happy do you think he's going to be that Jim Goold arbitrarily decided to serve as judge, jury and executioner before the judge even had a chance to sip his morning coffee? Think he'll dig that move?

Worse, and this is where we think Goold seriously fucked up, his actions today virtually ensure that no compromise or settlement can be reached between the two parties, something the court almost always prefers. By purposely trying to paint a false mental picture of Odyssey shoving aside rotting Spanish corpses to greedily get at the BS treasure, Goold has forced his client into a sharp corner we're not sure he can escape from. How, for example, can he possibly say to the people and government of Spain: "Well, we know we initially said Odyssey is an immoral, grave-robbing, lying profit-mongrel, but today we think settling is our best course of action." (In other words, when Goold's losing the case and it's become obvious to everyone.)

We can't imagine any scenario where Judge Pizzo is going to be too happy about this behavior. If you think he was mad at Stemm for talking to a single Spanish reporter about the BS find the day when Odyssey's interrogatories were due, imagine how he's going to react about Goold spouting off to the world that as far as he's concerned, this trial is over and he's won. Call us crazy, but we think Judge Pizzo might have a thought or two about that.

So, how did the nimrods over at HHI respond? About as you'd expect. Interestingly, despite not one word ever being written on the site about the Mercedes as a "war grave," the whole bunch is all over it now, with one member even calling Stemm a "sick SOB." Smitty, or "SatDiver" on HHI, went so far as to argue that if a person believes and supports Odyssey about the BS find, then they're no different from those religious nutjobs who protest our servicemens' funerals after their ultimate sacrifice in Iraq and Afghanistan.

It never fails to amaze us the depths these people will go to score points against their hated enemy, Odyssey. Go read the site and see if you can find one decent voice of reason or sanity. You can't. Between Doc's endless accusations of OMEX malfeasance, Solomon's increasingly shrill, venomous insults hurled at Stemm and Odyssey investors, or those HHI members who, without basis, delight in calling the good people of Odyssey "frauds," "criminals," and of course, now thanks to Goold, "war grave desecraters."

Lovely, eh?

To conclude: We see nothing in today's actions that represent a credible threat against Odyssey. We don't see that Spain provided any evidence to buttress their arguments about the Mercedes. And, as we all know, the burden is on them to prove their ownership interest. Frankly, with no shipwreck to speak of, we don't know how they think they're going to pull this argument off, but we're going to have fun watching them try. Finally, Odyssey's press release tonight communicated a calm assuredness. The company clearly seems quietly confident about where this is all headed, and we're thrilled with that, obviously.

So, stay tuned. We're off to collapse now.

Why we fight

We received an email from a reader signed "Not Solomon" (would we kid you?) asking us why we're so hard on HHI, Solomon and Doc, and whether our behavior isn't ultimately stooping to their level and putting us in the category of "not credible."

First of all, who said we wanted to be "credible"? We obviously don't take ourselves too seriously and we certainly don't expect to be taking full credit for long articles in national magazines (ahem). We write this as much to make ourselves and others laugh and snicker as to rip HHI.

We don't proclaim to the world that we're experts in anything, let alone the fields of history, underwater exploration or archaeology. We don't have educational programs for children, the elderly or sick, or small pets. We don't raise alms for the poor. If we wanted to be any of these high-falutin things we'd strive for much higher standards.

For example, we'd actually make an effort to get our history and facts right. We'd strive for an objective tone. Skeptical? Absolutely, but also always fair. We'd never reduce ourselves to crass insults, blind hatred, name calling, or the employment of lies, distortions or mistruths to make a point. In other words, we'd try to be all the things HHI is not.

Instead, we exist to tweak HHI's hypocrisy and by calling out it's spiritual leaders, Solomon and Doc, for their visceral hatred of Odyssey, which, oddly enough, has never been fully articulated or explained. Who knows? Maybe it's a source of embarrassment for them, like one of them was denied a job, or perhaps a contract proposal sent to Odyssey was rejected for sheer stupidity?

We fight Virginia -- may we call you "Virginia"? -- because we hate hypocrites and bullies who demand people see things as they do with no room for reasonable disagreement, and who bleat on endlessly about civility and respect while displaying none of it themselves.

Are we juvenile? Um, yes. Are we insulting? We try. Do we care if we hurt HHI feelings? Uh, non. But, then again, we don't care what other people think. We do know this: we encourage open debate, we post comments contrary to our own opinions, and we don't ban or block people's IP address for daring to disagree with us. And considering that in as little as a couple of weeks we've already received nearly 2,500 hits, we'd say we've hit on a winning formula that at least some people like.

Does that answer it, "Not Solomon"?

Mice & Men

Our favorite punching bag, affectionately (well, okay, derisively) known here as Sir Solomon the Angry Twit, is showing increasing, though still amusing, signs of imbalance.

In yet another histrionic response on HHI to some nonsense posted by "Lubby" (we hear he's chubby) about a Greg Stemm quote from Reuters (of course, Solomon forgets that he just recently chastised Reuters for not being critical enough of Odyssey and being in the company's pocket), the Angry Twit practically self-immolated:

Solomon: "A strong point, Lubby, showing Stemm as the slippery, slimy character he is. He reminds me of that old adage: would you buy a used car from this man? Personally, I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw a postage stamp...."

It's pathetic, is it not, to see Solomon so eagerly stooping to this level of slander toward a man he's never met, and with whom he supposedly is just having an academic...well, more accurately, an amateurish...disagreement over tactics with? We're reminded of Solomon's sniffling, pinky extended lecture about about how HHI would meet their enemies challenges with class and dignity, saying something along the lines of "you do your worst, and we'll show you our best."

Uh huh. We know this: we'd lay cold hard cash down that Stemm has never called anyone he has a professional or business disagreement with a "slimy used car salesman," or a "pedophile," like some of the HH's "best" have done in public forums. Speaks volumes, no?

Solomon: "...Odyssey...is suing my co-founder of History Hunters International for my words. Mind you, they haven't even attempted to find out if he actually wrote any of the words claimed to be libelous. Until Odyssey's lawyer writes to ask me, they cannot even begin. That is how slack Odyssey is in its legal representations, as also demonstrated across a range of their documents...."

If anyone can decider what Solomon is babbling about here, we sure could use your help. Is he actually claiming Odyssey is suing Doc because of his words? Does that make sense? And why must Odyssey write to him to ask about Doc and his Odyssey claims, particularly since the reason McManus is being sued is because of comments he posted about OMEX on the Yahoo financial board. (For the record, we think the Angry Twit is just not paying very close attention here.)

What's more, if Solomon read all our content instead of just those posts about him (he's a narcissist through and through), he could actually examine the court documents that outline the libel charges for himself. And we wouldn't even ban him or block his IP address!

Solomon: "...It raises the question, in my mind at least, as to whether Stemm is a loose cannon. It is difficult to believe that this raving loudmouth is making considered decisions with the support of his legal and PR teams...Should I list the other cases for these monomaniacal idiots and their dunderhead investors? What about the cases of Odyssey being sued? Or their arrests? Is my partner the only legal subject on Stemm's tiny mind? So it appears. The quicker this lot is consigned to the dustbin of history, the better."

Monomaniacal dunderheads. We have a guilty confession: we dig this turn of phrase. It would make an excellent name for a band, especially one coming out of Liverpool with a modern take on the Oasis sound. But we digress.

More seriously, beyond the additional, gratuitous insulting of Stemm again, it is touching to see Solomon sticking up for his little buddy -- even if he has to occasionally smack Doc around for his own good. Being literary types (yeah, right), this reminds us of Steinbeck's famous Of Mice and Men, with Solomon as "George" (i.e. the idiot) and Doc as "Lennie" (i.e. the retarded idiot). In fact, the following scene from the book perfectly captures the relationship between our two favorite Odyssey haters:

George: Go to sleep, Lennie.
Lennie: George?
George: Go to sleep, Lennie!
Lennie: I am sleepin', George

HH Quote of the Day, et al

“The dumbest people I know are those who know it all." ~ Malcolm Forbes

Speaking of dumb know-it-alls (Doc), below are the super scientific objective final poll numbers about whether Meat McManus would be found guilty or not in his upcoming Odyssey libel trial (which, as we posted earlier, is obviously being pursued aggressively by OMEX). Shockingly, the vast majority of us hung him. Admit it: even though voting has no connection whatsoever to anything in reality, it felt good didn't it?

Totally understandable.

Speaking of dumber know-it-alls (HHI), be sure to vote in our latest super scientific poll -- on the right-side column of this blog -- about whether you think Odyssey should sue HHI for various counts of libel and defamation. Have any doubts about whether that would be justified or not? Keep reading our posts that parse and mock in detail the history poseurs own words.

Thanks.

Rites of McManus

Thanks to one of our readers in attendance at Odyssey's annual shareholder meeting this morning, we have a copy of the Q&A handed out. Very interesting. And if we were Doc, and we're obviously thrilled we're not, we'd be very concerned. How serious does Odyssey take its ongoing lawsuit again Doc, or "Jim McManus" as he's known in the real world? Enough so to add a question about the status of the case to the annual meeting Q&A:

What is the status of the McManus defamation lawsuit?

On September 5, 2007, Odyssey filed a two-count Complaint against Jim McManus for libel and libel per se. In its Complaint, Odyssey cited to over 20 postings made by Mr. McManus on the Yahoo Finance Message Board that Odyssey maintains are defamatory. Mr. McManus initially responded to the Complaint on October 7, 2007,
maintaining that he “never knowingly posted false information” concerning Odyssey. Since Mr. McManus’ initial response, Odyssey has filed several motions to compel Mr. McManus to comport with the rules of civil procedure and to properly answer each numbered paragraph of the complaint. Mr. McManus finally complied on March 17, 2008. In addition to answering, Mr. McManus has filed several Motions to Dismiss. In this regard, Odyssey recently received an Order from the Court striking all three of Mr. McManus’ Motions to Dismiss. Odyssey now intends to engage in discovery which it will utilize in support of a motion for summary judgment.

In general, we do support any individual’s right to voice his or her opinion, whether that opinion agrees with or is contrary to Odyssey’s position. However, when defamatory comments are brought to our attention that may adversely affect the value of our company, we have a duty to protect our stockholders’ interests, and we consider appropriate corrective measures.

Well Jimmy Boy, it would appear you're not in Kansas any more. The real world is beckoning and we suggest you sit up and take notice. Recess is over, son.

Regardless of your plans, we're going to sit back and enjoy the show!

The Bleat Goes On

The brief but lovely silence has been broken by the HH poseurs, who now gleefully screech about Odyssey's pending demise. Of course, this is nothing but premature postulation (there's medication for that fellas). Those who know Odyssey, and understand the company, are accustomed to opponents' constant doom's day predictions, so nothing new here. Odyssey has always forged on, oblivious to the non-stop bleating of know-it-all imbeciles.

This morning Scribe and Sir Solomon the Angry Twit (we're working on a trademark) are engaged in a lovefest, blissfully rolling about in what they perceive to be Odyssey's gore. It's not pretty, but it is amusing.

Scribe: "Receive a reward for a salvage Odyssey had been told - repeatedly - by the owner to not touch? Dream on, Stemm. Now look at this next part and try to count all the untruths: This sentence caught my attention: The Court also dismissed certain counts of Odyssey's Complaint which related to Spain's illegal actions against Odyssey. You bet the court did. How did Spain's detention of those ships relate to the admiralty arrest? Not in any way. And Odyssey is claiming the detention was illegal? Try going to a Madrid court and claiming that, fools!"

Where to begin with this lowlife? First, note the calm academic demeanor, so common to posts about Odyssey on the HH website: "Dream on." "Count all the mistruths." "Fools." No axe to grind here, no sir.

Next, the U.S. federal court dismissed Odyssey's claims against Spain's illegal detention of its ships because it does not have jurisdiction over such decisions, period. Finally, we'd be remiss if we didn't point out the sheer idiocy of Scribe's suggestion that Odyssey take its complaint against the Spanish government for the illegal seizure of its vessels to a "Madrid court," where he implies it would fail. Gee, you think?! No shite Sherlock. Do you charge for these powerful insights or do you try to give them away on a street corner?

Scribe: "I think we are seeing the end coming."

We're certain you do, Dirty Son of Solomon. But why should today be any different when you've been saying and predicting the same thing for years? Hmmm?

The Angry Twit, clearly titillated by all the tough-guy man talk, calls Odyssey "gutless" (some more of that objective tone and grand moral vision, we suppose) and chimes in:

Solomon: "First, OME claimed to all and sundry that Spain was blockading its ships at Gibraltar. This was an outright lie. Spain was doing the exact opposite: asking Odyssey to send its vessels out. 'Stay in' - 'come out' - as I said, the exact opposite.The lie has been repeated many times by OME's pumpers inside Yahoo Finance. OME has never disclaimed these pumpers, with their continual lies and misinformation. Yes, some must be just plain stupid - the illiteratti - but those few (masquerading as a crowd) who run the campaign, they know what they are about."

An "outright lie"? Yes Solomon, Spain was merely waiting for Odyssey to come out and play. Perhaps share some tapas and sangria. This is the most idiotic thing you've written yet, and you've an impressive body of work, friend. Spain illegally seized Odyssey's vessels, with a secret warrant that has yet to be produced, then arrested and imprisoned Odyssey's captain for daring to protest Spain's actions in international waters. And we suppose the official UK and US protests regarding these actions don't matter, right? (Well, surely they're also on Odyssey's payroll too, just like the international media.)

This claim is stupid enough on its face, but Solomon goes even further. He turns his unholy wrath on those on the Yahoo board, and takes Odyssey to task for failing to disclaim supposed lies and mistruths posted by anonymous individuals. Never mind the rich irony in this -- should Solomon have disclaimed Doc's habit of regularly calling Yahoo posters "pedophiles," as it clearly reflected poorly on HHI? That's different, we suppose. What's more, if a publicly traded company had to dispel every rumor, lie or mistruth, posted by supporters and opponents alike in a public Internet chat room, they'd never be able to run their business.

Once again, Solomon displays his utter ignorance about how the real world operates, which is what happens when you frolic about in a one-dimensional, criticism-free bubble of bitterness.

And, now, drum roll please (this is very exciting): We believe HH Watch received its first actual disdainful nod from Solomon. We're so proud and excited!

Not to worry, sir, there's nothing to be ashamed of...we know you're one of our most avid readers. We know you gobble up our content as excitedly as you do Doc's nonsensical ramblings, and we suspect you secretly dig our slaps at old "nauticalresearch" (he's a bit of an easy target, though, no?). We especially love that you felt it necessary to say out loud that we're masquerading as something we're not. You'd like to know for sure though, huh? Regardless, thanks for the props, Solomon.

Solomon: "OME has nothing. It is nothing but an irritant. Yes, I think the end days are approaching."

We're sure that's what you think. But, take note of our new poll. And since you like to say we're intimately connected with Odyssey (we've said clearly from the outset we're not, so be careful, meat), we're hoping you're right and they'll take our advice and hold you, and your cast of clowns, personally accountable for the words and actions against a publicly traded company. Just like Doc, in other words.

Cheerio mate!