hmm
2 weeks now
& i still think it was a good idea you asked
even if just to gauge the possible degree of bewilderment caused by the question
& when i checked back at their website today just to see if they have reacted to you yet
http://www.doi.gov/oia/Islandpages/disputedpage.htm
i noticed if i point the mouse to
united states
at the bottom of the tabulated list under sovereignty on the left side of the page
there is a dysfunctional link still indicated there expressly for serranilla
http://www.doi.gov/oia/Islandpages/disputedpage.htm#Serranilla%20Bank:
i also noticed that the word
none
which appears under
remaining united states claims
is not in the original font
suggesting someone may have quietly monkeyed with this text after the fact
possibly the same party who enlarged upon kiribati in paragraph 1 in the wrong font too
but whoever & whatever caused this could well have been in conjunction or in parallel with
the similar change at the cia site
which you mention in message 17391
& yikes
now look at this other oia page too
which the revisionists must have overlooked
http://www.doi.gov/oia/Islandpages/acquisition_process.htm
& which came from here
http://www.doi.gov/oia/Firstpginfo/islandfactsheet.htm
which is dated today at top right
tho actually not so freshly updated at lower left
& i also noticed in the meantime this interesting footnote to appendix 2
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/gov.us.fed.congress.gao.reports/browse_thread/
thread/c77a97955d7a1d0/5860e0a1590eabd6?
q=serranilla+bajo+nuevo&rnum=15&hl=en#5860e0a1590eabd6
which at least postdates all the purported cessions of the 1980s
but dont you think all these oia jokers are really too insulated anyway
or just out island hopping or having affairs or something
& that we really do need to hail the chief himself in this case
i know they sometimes do answer pointed queries over there at the oval office
especially if no one else can
as appears to be the case here
not to mention the likely political sensitivity again
so how about redirecting your original inquiry at this point
to the place where you have already determined the buck really does stop in this case
--- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "aletheiak" <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
>
> good thinking
> since why bother bush
> when this may suffice to settle it
>
> & will be fun in any case
> as i think we may well have stumbled on at least 1 quadribanger miniarchipelago here
> which might at least equal the greatest number of known national claims to any
naturally
> dry land in the world that we are aware of
> on several of the individual spratly islands
> even if we dont any longer have
> or never had
> a true quintibanger
>
>
> but doesnt the situation feel eerily similar to the way china dropped her claim to sikkim
> by quietly modifying a map & or list on a government web page one night in 2003
>
> except that that occurred rather poignantly in the midst of a cnin negotiation iirc
>
> whereas in this case
> there would not appear to have been any specific discussions between the usa & any of
the
> 4 other putative claimants sufficient to have driven such definitive events
> or at least i dont recall being aware of any
> while there would appear to be some political factors to inhibit dropping the claims
> out loud anyway
>
> & so the question may well boil down to exactly how & when do claims such as these
> cease to have legal effect
>
> --- In BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Lowell G. McManus" <mcmanus71496@m...>
> wrote:
> > Mike D. wrote:
> >
> > > & i like your subsequent truly original finding
> > > as well as your laying it at the feet of bush where it apparently actually now
> > > belongs
> > > as we scribble
> > > but are you then just going to stop there
> > > or are you going to ask freakin bush
> > > hahaha
> >
> > > or am i supposed to take responsibility for your extravagance & ask him myself
> > > hahahaha
> >
> > Before receiving your question above, I have just sent an e-mail inquiry to
> > Nikolau Pula, Director of the Office of Insular affairs. After setting out the
> > inconsistencies on the OIA web site concerning the two places in question, I
> > asked him:
> >
> > > What is the current position, if any, of the US government on the status of
> > > these islands? Has there been any official determination, or is it the policy
> > > just to ignore them? If there has been any official renunciation of the US
> > > claims, I would appreciate knowing when and to whom.
> >
> > Lowell G. McManus
> > Leesville, Louisiana, USA