tho the philippines do claim several of the spratly islands
& tho all 6 bncnmyphtwvn countries claim at least 1 spratly each
the philippines dont claim louisa reef as the bncnmytwvn 5 do
moreover
since none of the other individual spratlys is claimed by more
than 4 of the 6 spratly countries
& since no other place in the world is claimed by more than 3
countries
louisa reef stands alone as the hottest real estate on earth
&or under the sea
for the basis of my arithmetic
please refer again to message 14049
& especially to the color coded annotated map in the link there
--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, Michael Kaufman
<mikekaufman79@y...> wrote:
> Why not 6 country with Philippines?
>
> --- aletheiak <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
>
> > yes we have had this report at least since message
> > 14049
> > when i still imagined she was only a 4country reef
> >
> > see under louisa in alphabetical list of spratlys in
> > the middlebury
> > link there
> >
> > only later did it dawn on me that the bruneian claim
> > to her was
> > just as real as the 4 others
> > despite its being unique in not acknowledging the
> > reef as dry
> > land but only as maritime territory
> >
> > but i generally prefer my theories as spare & lean
> > as possible
> >
> > --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G.
> > McManus"
> > <mcmanus71496@m...> wrote:
> > > Each theory is as good as the other.
> > >
> > > Do we know for fact that the lighthouse or
> > navigation beacon
> > was Malaysian, or
> > > is that theory too?
> > >
> > > Lowell G. McManus
> > > Leesville, Louisiana, USA
> > >
> > >
> > > ----- Original Message -----
> > > From: "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...>
> > > To: <BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com>
> > > Sent: Monday, September 06, 2004 1:47 PM
> > > Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: Possible BNCNMYTWVN
> > 5-Country Reef and Obelisk
> > >
> > >
> > > > well no need to postulate a greater mystery in
> > order to solve
> > a
> > > > lesser one
> > > >
> > > > & i think a single 5country obelisk in the sea
> > is plenty for the
> > time
> > > > being
> > > >
> > > > the so called lighthouse or beacon
> > > > whether it was mounted atop the obelisk or not
> > > > could easily have just been a small reflector or
> > glow type
> > > >
> > > > the lawn of my estate here on cream hill is
> > littered with solar
> > > > powered night lights comprised of 6inch plastic
> > cubes that
> > just
> > > > stick into the ground
> > > >
> > > > & the 2 blocklike forms you have spotted on the
> > reef could
> > easily
> > > > have come from the top of the single known
> > obelisk
> > > > the height of which does indeed appear to have
> > been
> > reduced
> > > > as detailed below
> > > > by the necessary 15 or 20 percent to account for
> > them
> > > > give or take a beacon
> > > > & were perhaps shot down by the same chinese
> > gunboat
> > that
> > > > perhaps shot out the light
> > > >
> > > > leaving stone markers to claim sovereignty over
> > islets
> > > > &or destroying such markers to deny it
> > > > has been a fixture thruout the china seas since
> > 1895
> > > >
> > > > after malaysia destroyed the chinese marker here
> > > > it seems to me
> > > > the least china could have done was destroy the
> > malaysian
> > light
> > > >
> > > > anyway so little for my theory
> >
> >
>
>
>
>
> __________________________________
> Do you Yahoo!?
> Yahoo! Mail - You care about security. So do we.
> http://promotions.yahoo.com/new_mail