Incoming Transmission
Comm ID: Baroness Evyn Hunter
Origin: HMS Craven's Nest
Recipients: Kim Allen
I'm glad to see you modified your previous transmission* and made it more.. Acceptable publicly. What we are saying, is that while yuo deliberate, keep in mind that unless three of the four parties involved with this treaty agree to its cancellation, this treaty is still in effect within the systems and bases of Magellan and Cortez, and recognized and respected as international law. You can't simply claim you withdraw from it and expect for everyone to just go along with it. We'll still adhere to it, and we'll still enforce the terms listed in this treaty.
-Baroness Snowdown Admiral of the Norfolk Great Fleet, Bretonia Armed Forces
To: Idiots: Baroness Evyn Hunter and Sir Jack Fraser
The Message I gave was that MY EMPLOYER NOT I is reviewing the treaty. I have not said that MY EMPLOYER WILL break from the treaty.
If it is decided that Orbital Spa & Cruise wish's to break from the treaty, we at Orbital Spa and Cruise will no longer consider it valid.
Do not attack me or Orbital Spa and Cruise when I am just saying that my employer is just REVIEWING it. So stop acting like whining babies about something that was not said. Or are you blind!?
Now stop making up stupid things and calm the hell down you blind and complete utter idiots. As obviously you can't read this, "This is a notification that we are reviewing the treaty only." I seriously have no clue what drugs you two are taking, but it is very clear you are high.
I'm sorry. But I think that you have lost something in translation. The train of thought I hold is the train of thought of myself. It does not repersent my employer's in anyway so please stop in that manner.
It also seems that your persons have lost in translation of what Review means. I will explain. My employer is reviewing it to see how it effects Orbital Spa & Cruise for future reference. Not for any out right plan as would be hinted by yourself.
Then as you have stated, I have lost my train of thought in your own opinion. Still makes it my own opinion does it not. I am just as entitled to it as you are no matter what it is.
I must confess I find the above line of communication confusing. I would like to offer some clarifications. Clarity in communication is important.
Firstly, it is not traditional protocol for a secondary-tier functionary to provide informal notice of possibly "breaking from" a treaty of this significance. The treaty has many signatories, and their interests are bound within it. It should not be taken so lightly. Moreover the Treaty is structured to preclude unilateral withdrawal, as Baroness Hunter has noted.
Secondly, (and it pains me to state the obvious in this way), but Treaties are Treaties, and though they are sometimes imperfectly observed, or even broken on occasion, that is usually justifiable only for sound and specific reasons. The Treaty of Curacao is less than three years old, but you seem to indicate that this age is beyond its useful life. If this had been the historical life expectancy of formal treaties, humankind would have never known peace. Serious reasons would need to be given to warrant invalidation or even renegotiation of the Treaty.
Thirdly, I would suggest that Orbital Spa and Cruise lacks the sovereign power to unilaterally declare a decision of such importance to the signing powers. If OSC did exercise such power (which would make your exercise of fiat law in Cortez feasible), then the Treaty would never have been needed. And unless I am unaware of a massive shipbuilding program on your part, nothing has changed in this regard.
Baroness Hunter has drawn your attention to many other pertinant points of fact. I am merely trying to lay out the general concerns of the Crown in this matter.
I am merely just stating that Officially Orbital Spa & Cruise is looking at the Treaty over the next few days or weeks so that the current structures of Orbital Spa & Cruise understands what it means to them, as well as bringing any issues that are brought up after looking at it. All the CEO will be doing will be to see what needs updating, or does it continue to serve its purpose for Orbital Spa & Cruise.
Lest me say that I have not seen any requirements personnally that would require Orbital to keep the treaty acting fully as it is. Why that is, is because there is barely any trade activity in Cortez along it's trade lanes, let alone activities seen that are illegal by both Liberty or Bretonia with in the system of Cortez itself.
My personel belief of why you are confusing the Informal and the Formal is because you cannot indifferent the two, as well as scared of losing a part of that treaty which is understandable.
Furthermore my opinion of which that it is out dated is based on history. Those that are not reviewed upon a regular basis are typically taken aside and removed. History also shows that reviews of treaties typically happen between either 6 to 12 months after creation and reviews. As this treaty has got barely had any reviews I therefor view it personnally myself as being outdated.
I hope that makes it easier to understand my opinions that I hold, as well as understanding how and why Orbital is reviewing the treaty.
**** Incoming Transmission **** From: Johnathan Sanders
To: Channel participants
Subject: Communication on OS&C intent
Encryption: Light/Civilian
Gentlemen and women,
I do not find miss Allen's communication confusing at all. It strikes me as an intent by OS&C executives to gauge the reaction of the remaining parties when OS&C would withdraw from the accord. Clearly, that reaction is negative. Miss Allen repeatedly stated she does not have the authority to make this decision herself, and is, in effect, no more then a spokesperson.
I suggest to miss Allen to convey to her superiors, to make their own intent clear, personally. I cannot tally the traffic along the Cortez system, but Magellan sees plenty of transports moving from and to the neighbouring houses. I suspect the jumphole into the Leeds system is the cause most traffic comes through Magellan - it is a well known shortcut into Bretonia.
If OS&C is concerned about the lack of traffic passing by Curacao, perhaps it should offer incentives for traffic to pass by there? Perhaps a few trade subsidies to goods being moved to the planet? It is just a suggestion. If OS&C is concerned with the lack of communication on this treaty, then perhaps it would be wise to add a clause that at a semi-annual basis, this treaty gets evaluated and actions resulting from it, reviewed? We can only learn to work together more efficiently, that way.
Be aware that without the backing of the Liberty Navy and Bretonian Armed Forces, your own position at Curacao becomes quite vulnerable, miss Allen. While I am sure you have private security down on the planet, there are some situations that simply require the backing of military forces. I name for instance the appearance of a rogue capital vessel. The terrorist vessel "Necrosis" comes to mind, but there have been others. Or the presence of alien lifeforms, commonly referred to as the "Nomads", which I wager your garrisons would be ill-equipped to deal with. These instances are rare, I'll grant that, but they do happen. In short, OS&C does benefit from this treaty, in that it can call upon both Liberty and Bretonia in case of a military emergency that it cannot solve alone. The same holds true for Freeport 4.
Regards,
- Johnathan Sanders, on behalf of the Independent Miners Guild
**** Transmission Closed
Wide awake in a world that sleeps, enduring thoughts, enduring scenes. The knowledge of what is yet to come.
From a time when all seems lost, from a dead man to a world, without restraint, unafraid and free.
Mostly retired Discovery member. May still visit from time to time.
**********
**INCOM** ID: Sir Jack Fraser, Duke of Norfolk Arundel Castle - New London
**********
I remind you of the Ministry of Ban as well, those terrorists paralyzed Curacao recently. It took the combined efforts of the Liberty Navy and the Bretonian Armed Forces to defeat that threat and protect OSC interests.
Thank Mr Sanders, however I have tried to explain the intent of what and how we are reviewing it. I will like to explain it again but as I fear before it will not be understood or heard. I do not know which. However I will try again.
We at Orbital Spa & Cruise are looking at the treaty to see how it affects us. By that I mean what items are required of us to perform in the area of effect with in the treaty. Then compare these to what Orbital Spa & Cruise values and it's own policies. If we there then see something that we wish to be added, removed or edited to suit our needs then my employer Andrew Bellingham will make that clear, and move to discuss it with you all. Untill then it is to do nothing with making any edits or adding or removing something that Orbital Spa & Cruise feels that it needs that adjustment.
I will also continue to say this, as it seems apperant to me that there is alot of confusion of what 'review' means. A 'review' means one is to look at something and compare it to its original cause, the current needs of one, being of Orbital Spa & Cruise, and how each effects one, being of Orbital Spa & Cruise. It is not to say that you are wanting to make an edit or removal or adjustment to what is being reviewed.
So I ask you please to understand that we obviously understand fully the term of 'review' more properly then one, than your impression of it made by your statements so far.
Sir Jack Fraser I have no knowledge of this Ministry of Ban. If you would kindly show me proof of their operations and intent in their operations please. Otherwise I can only say that it is something that you are making up as not one Orbital Spa & Cruise personnel even knows of those that you have claimed to have been fighting.
So may your persons stop thinking that one, being of Orbital Spa & Cruise is going to revoke anything. The closest things that I have said is of that Orbital may wish to revoke Orbital Spa & Cruises attendant duties of the treaty if we feel that after making the review that it neither benefits Orbital Spa & Cruise or is unfair. But that needs to be fleshed out before making any such action. I will also remind you that in history where a qaurtet is in effect ,as the sense of the word, the qaurtet does not control whom can leave.
Now thank you for all your information. The next time you hear from Orbital Spa & Cruise will be after we have reviewed the treaty. That will be to either ask and discuss additions, removals or edits, or to resign the treaty as would need be as it is not currently signed by any Orbital Spa & Cruise employee, repersentative nor our CEO. It would make sense for us to review it so that we can be sure that we wish to resign it, and thus re-affirming the treaty with a known signatury for Orbital Spa & Cruise.
I extend a special thank you to Mr Sanders who has been very logical, very open and understanding of what we at Orbital Spa & Cruise are trying to do.[color=#FFFFFF]Signed[/b][/indent]
![[Image: DFinal.png]](http://i22.photobucket.com/albums/b328/Luciaden/DFinal.png)
![[Image: NikashaJinkoOC1byInty.png]](http://i832.photobucket.com/albums/zz249/Natdhyde/NikashaJinkoOC1byInty.png)
![[Image: James_Layton_Ralston.jpg]](http://i217.photobucket.com/albums/cc267/dietersmeep/James_Layton_Ralston.jpg)
![[Image: siggy.jpg]](https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/668638083616342047/668993104837083156/siggy.jpg)
![[Image: norfolkciv.png]](http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/ad103/cplydon/norfolkciv.png)
![[Image: Norfolk.png]](http://i926.photobucket.com/albums/ad103/cplydon/Norfolk.png)
![[Image: 5438_s.png]](http://signavatar.com/5438_s.png)
