Subject: Re: another gysr gusher<br/>
Date: Apr 04, 2001 @ 09:04<br/>
Author: peter.smaardijk@and.com (peter.smaardijk@...)<br/>
<a href="2007.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Topic&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="2019.htm">Next</a>&emsp;[<a href="topic2007.htm">All</a> Posts]<br/>
<a href="2007.htm">Prev</a>&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Post in Time&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;<a href="2009.htm">Next</a><br/>
<br/><br/>
<div id="ygrps-yiv-1552264795">I have actually taken the trouble to read through all this, and <br/>
although it is informative in some ways, I find it ridiculous to see <br/>
Surinamese and Guyanan/-ese (another **hot** item, ha ha) wallowing <br/>
in the geopolitical game they inherited from their former European <br/>
masters. I think the links to maps and web sites provided are <br/>
worthwile, though, but I have yet to encounter a web side that is <br/>
both comprehensive and (more or less) impartial in this issue. Now <br/>
for the tripoint, Guyana has a strong case, because apparently the <br/>
cemented monument _was_ placed there in 1936, and one Dutch admiral <br/>
Kayser, as the representative of the Netherlands, put his signature <br/>
to the document that goes with it (this is also mentioned on a <br/>
Surinamese site I can&#39;t find the url of now; anyway, it was in <br/>
Dutch). It is arguable that it is only a border marker on the brsr <br/>
border, but what were the British doing there in that case?<br/>
<br/>
Peter S.<br/>
<br/>
<blockquote><span title="qreply"> --- In BoundaryPoint@y..., michael donner &lt;m@d...&gt; wrote:<br/>
&gt; the guyana suriname boundary dispute has been under discussion in <br/>
english<br/>
&gt; for some months now<br/>
&gt; at <a rel="nofollow" target="_blank" href="http://www.surinamenet.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000023.html">http://www.surinamenet.com/ubb/Forum2/HTML/000023.html</a> etc<br/>
&gt; by  local informants  from both sides of the courentyne<br/>
&gt; & other likeable characters from around the world<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; the several accumulated pages of it may fill in the blanks somewhat <br/>
for<br/>
&gt; anyone who couldnt follow the previous instalment of this in dutch<br/>
&gt; & they run a pretty fair gamut from the slapstick to the ridiculous<br/>
&gt; with a few really good laughs thrown in<br/>
&gt; if you can stick with it long enough<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; the allegedly trilateral 1936 brazil guyana suriname tripoint<br/>
&gt;   howsoever much disputed by suriname<br/>
&gt; is said at one point here to be occupied by a cement object<br/>
&gt; our first substantive word of the marker<br/>
&gt;   if it can be believed  that is<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; however i have yet to find a mention anywhere of any mark at the <br/>
surinamese<br/>
&gt; version of the tripoint position<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; insights into underlying & prevailing realities<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; also a few good links to interesting maps etc<br/>
&gt; <br/>
&gt; m </span></blockquote></div>