Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Bilow who wrote (61457)	12/13/2002 5:04:33 AM
From: zonder	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

But since in the past you've shown yourself to be on the wrong side of at least one legal argument ------------------------------------------ CB: "Indian reservations are self-governing sovereign nations" Message 18151855 Refuted: "No they are semi-autonomous reservations. As that web link you posted points out the US Congress can pass legislation overriding Indian law i.e. they do not have independent government therefore they are NOT sovereign within the true meaning of that term. Nor do they have power to enter into relations with foreign states, this right having been ceded to the US government. They are, therefore, not states. Independent government and capacity to enter into relations with other states being necessary criteria here." Message 18152009 ---------------------------------------------

To: Bilow who wrote (61457)	12/13/2002 8:12:41 AM
From: Ilaine	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Good morning, Carl - I am using Black's Law Dictionary, 5th Edition (1979). It defines signatory thus: A term used in diplomacy to indicate a nation which is a party to a treaty. In general, a person who signs a document personally or through his agent and who becomes a party thereto. Thus, according to Black's Law Dictionary (which is what lawyers use, whether they are in front of a low IQ judge in Texas or anywhere else) a signatory is a party to the thing signed. I don't think you can access Black's Law Dictionary online without access to Westlaw, but most libraries have a copy. Call up your local librarian and ask her/him to read you the definition over the phone. If you don't know that Black's Law Dictionary is what lawyers use, maybe you know a lawyer and can ask him/her. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ As for using non-US flag vessels to haul war materiel, what I was really wrong about was thinking that Maersk Line Ltd. was foreign flag. Message 18007327 It's not. It's a wholly US owned subsidiary of Maersk, formed for the specific purpose of hauling the type of cargo that the parent (originally Danish - multinational, now) corporation can't generally haul, and contracting with the US government for the kind of contracts the parent corporation can't generally become (ahem) a signatory to. maersklinelimited.com So your explanation as to why Maersk was carrying US war materiel was ingenious, but wrong. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ I know you're smart and all that, but there really is a limit to what you can learn in a couple of hours using google.