please look for several insertions
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Ernst Stavro Blofeld
<blofeld_es@y...> wrote:
> > this resulting tongue of territory is depicted as
> > belonging to the holy see
> > & as being open to the public
> > just like st peters square
>
> Thank you for this thorough translation.
>
> Is the matter settled now? I wish I was certain.
youre welcome
& i believe we can be certain that
whatever the ultimate truth of the many still unresolved details
the vatican is already clearly the preeminent de jurcto border
state in all the world
& will remain so whether we ultimately believe in the gospels of
tullio or of vito or of the holy throne herself
moreover i believe
when all is said & done
even all the de jurcto borders of israel & the sudan combined
still wont hold a candle to these of the vatican
> It seems that Dr Aebischer and Dr la Colla disagree
> on the nationality of the sickle. This morning I
> received a letter from Dr la Colla, which i quote
> below for all to evaluate.
>
> On my question whether or not there is a sickle that
> belongs to Italy, Dr la Colla says:
>
> 'The "sickle shaped area" near the north side of
> colonnade was called by myself "Ricciolo d'Italia", in
> a chapter of my book about SCV. Rìcciolo is a CURL, a
> curl of hair- Italy's Curl is my name of this narrow
> territory, which belong to Italy.
> But this subject is rather complicate!
> The Vatican-Italian Commission, in 1929, settled on
> this little strip (3 meters wide, which ends, in
> eastern side, in a little breadth, a very little
> square, near the entrance in Via di Porta Angelica -
> Angels' Door street), as a new territory of newborn
> Vatican City State. A territory which had to be
> cosidered as St. Peter's Square, then normally
> subjected to power of italian Police. As an appendix
> of the famous Square.
> But this decision of Commission was never ratified by
> Parliament or Government of Italy. Therefore, today
> this territory yet belong to italian State.
> In fact, ths little area was clearly awarded to Italy,
> in official map of Vatican City State, official
> enclosed to Treaty of Lateran.
so the official vatican map is vindicated on at least this much de
jure detail
yet de facto
this sickle or irregular wedge or whatever its actual shape is
is fuzzy or neutral or condo territory to an even greater degree
than st peters square
or the uffizio area
or the passetto gate proruption
etc
etc
> Strangly, today this Rìcciolo d'Italia is considered
> as a vatican territory; perhaps for practical reasons.
> People cannot demonstrate in this area, as in St.
> Peter's Square (I think). The blue vatican postal
> boxes are placed in this narrow strip, as it should be
> vatican territory. The newsparer kiosk put near the
> arch and near the red line in Aebischer's map, is
> normally considered as kiosk in vatican State: then,
> no taxes of Italy for the owner!
> The italian Police guards, questioned by myself, 15
> years ago, told to me "Is vatican territory!!"
>
> A very confused argoment...
> Italy and Vatican do not want to settle this question,
> "in italian way", "all'italiana". The sickle is
> italian but appears vatican soil!
> The red line in Aebischer map is only for to establish
> the presumed border, also signed on the ground with a
> "travertino" strip.'
>
> And he goes on to quote the decision of the boundary
> commission (english additions by Dr la Colla):
>
> 'ASD AP 1931-1945 S. Sede b. 12 -- 331106
>
> Ministero degli Affari Esteri Ufficio Affari S. Sede
> [A matita] Visto da S.E. il Capo del Governo
> (Mussolini) 7-11-XII * (7-11-1934) *: (fascist date)
>
> Per quanto invece concerne la striscia di suolo
> aderente al colonnato berniniano, sebbene si tratti,
> anche in questo caso, di zona di superficie limitata,
> questa Direzione Generale sarebbe d'avviso di fermarsi
> sulla questione di principio di non estendere i limiti
> del territorio vaticano (do not extent the borders of
> vatican territory).
translating from the beginning of the sentence
on the contrary
as far as the strip of land adjoining the bernini colonnade is
concerned
tho in this case it too involves only a small surface area
this commission duly advises that its position on the principled
question of not extending the limits of vatican territory is
reaffirmed
translators note
interesting that the vatican apparently wants to actually control &
have responsibility for as little territory as necessary
> Nella fattispecie conforta questa tesi anche la
> circostanza che l'ultimo capoverso dell'art. 3 del
> Trattato Lateranense dispone quanto segue: "Quando la
> S. Sede, in vista di particolari funzioni, credesse di
> sottrarre temporaneamente la Piazza di S. Pietro al
> libero transito del pubblico, le Autorità Italiane,
> almeno che non fossero invitate dall'Autorità
> competente a rimanere, si ritireranno al di là delle
> linee esterne del colonnato berniniano e del loro
> prolungamento."'
& vito continues
in the present case it is also circumstantially supportive of this
thesis that the final paragraph of article 3 of the lateran treaty
states as follows
should the holy see consider it necessary
for the purpose of special ceremonies
to temporarily prohibit the public from free access to saint peters
square
the italian authorites shall
unless specially requested to do otherwise
withdraw to beyond the outer lines of berninis colonnade & the
extension thereof
tho i would add that his piling this on is just a further confusion of
apples & oranges
& thus still more icing on our de jurcto cake