--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, aletheia kallos <aletheiak@y...> wrote:
> thanx
> nice
> please see inserts
>
> > Our monument is definitively a tripoint monument
> > since it has the three
> > flags, but could still be symbolic
>
> right
> & i agree it is still unclear if the true tripoint is
> on the new 3flag marker
> just as it was unclear if the true tripoint was on the
> old 3flag marker it replaces
>
> also unclear btw if the new tall thin monument
> which was installed in july
> even survived the great flood in august
> haha
>
> > The three flags are painted on trees on each side of
> > countries territories
> >
> (http://www.vasa.abo.fi/users/rpalmber/BordersBGT.htm).
> > Would BG allow
> > painting of GR flag on BG tree?
>
> well if they are all determined to make the island
> into a friendship park
> then yes of course anything is possible
> regardless of where the true boundaries may fall
>
> but this skirts the greater question of
> did bulgaria actually cede half of her half of the
> island to greece
> & does the east west vista on the island really carry
> bggr within it
>
> as the ibs studies suggest
> the
> protocole des conclusions de la commission de
> delimitation de la frontiere greco turque
> with detail maps
> issued in athens on 3 nov 1926
> pursuant to the 1923 treaty of lausanne
> may yield the needed clue to this extraordinary border
> & tripoint displacement
>
> i mean
> if they really did move
>
> > GR & TR are not the best play mates, and so I am
> > sure TR would not approve
> > GR flag if only BGTR marker
>
> i agree it may be hard to imagine
> yet it is not on the turkish half of the island
> nor on the turkish half of the marker
> so not unthinkable
> & they are at least making a show of trying to be
> friendly here
>
> > Our TR hosts did not want to be photographed on GR
> > side
> >
> >
> >
> > Cons:
> >
> > If No1 is the tp, why does BG put 320?
>
> the 320 series is from the 1921 bgtr demarcation
> & we recall perhaps half a dozen of these
> including various letter suffixes
> on both banks & both islands
> but all in a north south line
> & all directly marking 1921 bgtr except for 320a on
> the south bank
>
> & grtr marker number 1
> on the south side of the so called island a
> was inserted into that line in 1926
> to complement 320a in indirect demarcation of the
> midstream tripoint
>
> but some of your maps show this indirect grtr number 1
>
> & others show a different marker number 1
> of an unknown series & in any case not the same marker
>
> apparently marking the tripoint directly on kavak
> island itself
>
> so lets not confuse these 2 different number ones
> neither one of which we have necessarily even seen btw
> & lets also not conclude that either one holds the
> true tripoint
>
> (local
> > ignorance?)
>
> it could be
> & we cant rule it out that whatever has occurred may
> only be extralegal
> while it is widely believed to be legal
> at least until we find some real legal basis for the
> change
>
> granted
> 80 years of habitual bulgarian acquiescence alone
> could suffice
> & we may be thrown back upon that explanation in the
> end
> but i am not yet ready to acquiesce in it myself
>
> , see
> > http://www.geocities.com/jesniel/tp_mon.jpg, the
> > photo is taken from GR by
> > the way (if true tp). The "320 BG" inscription was
> > gone in May 2005.
> >
> > Monument does not look like an official marker
>
> right
> & even the new one is a little unusual & therefore
> perhaps suspicious
>
> >
> > Like on satellite photo, there is clear vista along
> > what should be BGGR
> > (http://www.geocities.com/jesniel/bggrtr.jpg)
> >
> > When copying the maps showing "Iceland Kavak" on
> > http://www.geocities.com/jesniel/, the TR officials
> > tried to tell us somehow
> > they were no good. I got the impression they meant
> > not to scale, or
> > non-official maps or something like that
> >
> > We were shown the spot where GRTR enters the river.
> >
> > The photographed marker appeared to be 320CT. Then
> > what happened to 320 Biz
>
> it could have been redesignated replaced destroyed etc
>
>
> but i say
> onward to athens
>
> if only we knew where to look for this protocole
> hahaha
14th item here
http://www.livre-rare-book.com/Matieres/dd/1616n.html
not that i would pay the 45 euros
but it means theres hope of finding one in a library too
er
i probably would pay to see the actual treaty of cession from bulgaria to greece tho
if any