**Incoming Transmision**
To: The Zoner Council
From Samuel Nichols of Omicron Supply Industries.
Mesage reads:
I vote Yes on the temp ban on all Corsairs from Freeport 1. As of late they have been abusing that station and our NFZ. They need to understand that if they are going to do so there will be repercussions .
There will be fall out from this, but I suspect it will be alot of blustering and chest thumping on their end.
Samuel Nichols
CEO - OSI
**End of Transmission**
Incoming transmission
Comm ID: Aurelia Silvan
Recipient(s): Zoner Council
I think everyone here knows my stance by now. I vote Yes on the motion to temporarily ban all Corsair ships from the vicinity of Freeport 1.
-Aurelia Silvan
<div align="right]
End Transmission
Comm ID: Commander Matok
To: The Council
Although I am not a voting member of the council, I would like to forward a recommendation for an amendment on the Cap ship ban around FP1. You may want to extend this to the Bounty Hunters as well. In my time guarding FP1, I have seen a few of their cap ships too. It seems that one group incites the other.
Commander Matok
Commander, I.K.S. Vor'cha
from: the persephone II
to: the council
"yes - lets extend it to the guild as well - and the outcasts, i suspect the navy of shady experiments, too - and i never trusted mercenaries or freelancers. hessians are quite nasty, too... and i don t even want to start with the bretonians that have an eye on omega-49. - mollys, don t get me started - and the xeno half wits.
and there goes our grand idea of a port for everyone.
it is sad to see the foundation of our vision go down. - what is freeport 1 now? - port 1?
no, i really see the reasons for these actions - i even see how political ways failed, - but i also see the downfall of the idea of a freeport. - now the station was really target of suspicious actions. - but i daresay - the tolerance will go down once we started restricting. - next time, its only cause someone pirated a zoner trader, then it is cause someone made a nasty comment, - you mark my word
there are always - and there have always been - conflicts around the stations, but while many factions never understood how we managed to open our freeports to everyone while at the same time maintaining relative peace, - they still appreciated it. - and such gratitude goes far.
from me - it is again a "nay" cause i do not like the path it goes. - for me, it is a betrayel of the very idea of a freeport.
.... but of course... freeport 1 is several lightyears away from me... .
E. Tate."
Comm ID: Malaclypse, for the TAZ
The TAZ will vote yea on a blanket Corsair ban at Freeport 1; but I wish to clarify our position.
We see this decision not as a "military" move; but as an economic and diplomatic tool to bring the Corsair Council of Elders "to the Table" regarding this matter. I would have amended the motion to suspend ALL relations with the Corsairs until they formally address this matter in concert with us; but this will serve. By restricting both military and trade vessels, we are sending the message that it is not "business as usual" between the Zoners and Corsairs.
Now, we will hear about our past "biased" treatment.. claims that the Hunters have been given favorable treatment. Perhaps there is some merit to these claims, but they are not at issue here. We have to start somewhere in securing the safety of our citizens and facilities.
If this motion is ratified, I urge an immediate invitation to the Corsair Council to "meet" with this body, so that our decision may be put in context and emphasized. I would also recommend Sister Aurelia to draft the Diplomatic invitation, and to present it to the Council for approval.
And, Madam Tate, as I seem to have "talked over you", I have only one response. Your irony did not go unnoticed, but I ask you in all candor, What of our "vision" if we can not secure our own safety and sovereignty. What vision do we fulfill if our own freedoms and way of life are threatened, and our bases are in shambles? I will mark your words, Madam Tate. And yes, you are a long way from Freeport 1, and perhaps from the stark and ugly reality of this situation as well.
Comm ID: Lucky LeRoux
To: Zoner Council
Well, this has been a long time coming. I say yes to the entire Corsair Ban, the destructive effect the Corsairs are creating at FP1 is not acceptable.
I appreciate Madam Tate's viewpoint.... But I'm no longer prepared to tolerate having to pay for the Corsairs direct and indirect cause of damage to our property and local business. We are firstly and most importantly a trading affilliation of Zoners and the Corsairs are currently causing us lost revenues with their aggressive attitude. Not good at all.
LeRoux
Incoming Transmission
Federation Juggernaut Nautilus, Freeport 11
Grand Admiral Marvin Orphelia
Yes, well, Now that I see the reasons for this, I vote Yes on Proposition #2.
The corsairs cannot threaten our neutrallity without consequence.
In addition, I shall be moving my Juggernaut and any availible Federation fighters to Freeport One.
GA Marvin
**Incoming Transmision**
To: The Zoner Council
From Samuel Nichols of Omicron Supply Industries.
Mesage reads:
Well I am sure some of you have seen this
IMG to Zoner council reguarding Omega-49
So I know that O-49 used to be patrolled by the corsairs, not sure where that stands now. Is Omega-49 a zoner system? Zoner only? I know the Corsairs and hessians have bases in the next system, do they have any bases in O-49. If not then they have no rights to anyhting that goes on there. The Brotherhood is taking steps that are outside their bounds and I loved the threats they gave the IMG about the Phantoms. It was almost like they were saying they would inform them of the IMG's location.
This new and interesting development does not bode well for Zoner - Corsair relations. I think this new development needs to be brought to the fore front as we try to decide what we are going to do about the Corsairs.
Samuel Nichols
CEO - OSI
**End of Transmission**
**Incoming Transmission**
Comm ID: Captain Trogdor
I initially vote 'Yea' for this second motion. However, I would like to see the motion further defined to include the length of the ordinance, and the possibility of early abolishment if the Corsairs can present convincing evidence that
1. they'll tighten the leash on their practices
2. They hold sufficient respect among at least their capital ship commanders as to have their commands obeyed.
On the issue of O-49, the only bases in that system are Zoner. However, I do believe we reached some sort of agreement with the Corsairs in the past that involved them patrolling that system. That was before I was a member of this council, however, so I'm unaware of the details..
**Transmission ends**
Comm ID: Malaclypse
Fellow Delegates,
I had a lengthy conversation with Elder Sephardi of The Brotherhood today. He presented some very telling reasons why the "total ban" motion for Freeport 1 should be defeated and/or amended. Bear with me.
The Brotherhood has removed itself from the Corsair Council. They have distanced themselves by moving operations to Mindelo in Omega 50. Elder Sephardi maintains that not only do they have no sway over the actions of OPG and assorted independents regarding these recent NFZ violations, but that we are endangering relationships with the TBH by including them in this "total ban".
Now, I contend that excluding the TBH, and perhaps the Benitez family as well, from the Freeport 1 ban, will protect these relations, and will also give us more credence in promoting some sort of compromise regarding the IMG/TBH issue in Omega 49.
I have been assured by Elder Sephardi that if we do this, The Brotherhood will not interfere with this Council's response to OPG and other "errant" independent Corsairs. However, if we lump The Brotherhood together with the actual perpetrators of these Freeport violations, they will have no choice but to be "lumpy" in return, and defend their fellow Corsairs, regardless of their guilt in these incidents.
Therefore, the TAZ will change its vote to "Nay" on the total ban motion until such time as it is amended to exclude the Brotherhood and the Benitez family; and we encourage the amendment.