Only one comment and one question.
Well informed, well documented and lot gutted patriotism.
As to my question, it's been known that quite many diverging conventions as to the very definion of what constitutes element of sovereignty, can you explain on whom...
I mean what governing body is reponsible for exacting these points of contention...
and if so does a specific ruling establish some sort of precedent in terms of future legald binding.
B'cause I would be interested to know how the American approach to this would eventually run ammock their presnt contention that the Antartic would belong to them and not Canada or Norway since Russia went underground and planted their flag.
I could not say that the Russians raised their flag but rather they burried it litterally under the ocean...
the antartica..
Is there some ressemblance, some analogy or just wishful thinking.?
Reply to: Msg 6876
Posted by Bernard Valcourt on 3/24/08 10:05 PM
REPLY to Bernard Valcourt,
REPLY to topic,
or start a
NEW Topic
Bookmark it via:
Digg,
del.icio.us,
StumbleUpon,
Google
