**** Incoming transmission ****
From: Johnathan Sanders
To: DHC Board of Directors
CC: Channel Participants
Encryption: Standard
Subject: Hessians
Gentlemen,
To my knowledge this treaty is aimed at defining the relations between our respective organizations and the division of resources within the Omega-7 system, for the benefit of all involved. Not the relations between ourselves and third parties. I see a veiled attempt by Daumann to draw us into their conflict with what is in essence a violent revolutionary movement, that for the most part, has no quarrel with us. Let me be frank. The IMG has no intention of taking the role of the Federal Police out in the borderworlds. We have neither the inclination nor the intention to fight your battles with the Hessians for you. Rheinland has assumed political control over the system, thus it should be up to it's law enforcement to provide stability and order in this region - if Rheinland is unable to do so, then I fail to see why the nation has claimed Omega-7 as part of it's house in the first place.
As to the capital vessel's presence, the only real place such ships can be of use are in defense of a base perimiter, in our case that of Freistadt and the adjacent lanes. Considering the occasional arrival of craft that are quite difficult to deal with (Corsair capital ships, infested Rheinland forces) it does warrant the presence of a heavier defense. The vast Walker fields do not favor large ships. Yanagi should serve as a good reminder of why this is. To my knowledge, the Rheinland Military has tasked a cruiser or two of their own to the defense of Elbich Station - we've observed them coming from that general vicinity on multiple occasions.
Mr Voss' claims that these mercenaries are on our payroll is absurd: The Mandelorians have most likely attacked our vessels more often then his own. They are well known to be on the payroll of the Outcasts.
I suggest we get back to the matter at hand gentlemen, which is to clearly define the distribution of resources and how to handle those who think they can profit from not adhering to this division. I can see one clause that may have been missed, although it's implied: How are parties not affiliated between our three companies handled? I'm speaking of the occasional Libertonian with DSE equipment deciding to try it's fortune, or even a Bretonian Mining and Metals employee. My personal advise is to have those escorted out of the system after confiscation of cargo. Forcefully if need be.
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.
ID:Kruger Board Of Directors To:Rheinland Bundestag, Rheinland Military, Rheinland Federal Police, Kruger, DHC, IMG
Quote:The IMG thinks that given the history of Kruger's rather offensive stance, it would be a mistake to open up any possibility of the use of violence in direct interaction. Demanding fines in the field, threatening violence and removing perpetrators forcefully would lead doubtlessly to violence.
Well then it's too bad. There should be no difference between the treatment of official representatives and unoffical representatives, and if you believe otherwise, I am afraid we cannot sign the treaty.
Quote:The IMG does not like this change, but can accept it in case the following addition is made: In case the treaty is voided, it remains vaild for another 14 days before it is terminated.
There needs to be a high fine in case that 14 day period is not met. The IMG suggests between 250 and 500 million per group that drops out of the treaty without granting the others the 14 days to adapt to the change.
Kruger agrees with the first point, but does not see the relevance of the second. We are all high end producers of raw materials, I believe no amount of credits will be any substantial discouraging to anyone.
Quote:Article §4 rules out any of these activities. There is no need for further clarification, but your intention was understood. Just be advised that the same clause could and would be used to deal with Kruger's vigilante groups and other covert tools.
Kruger would still require article 4 to be altered to specifically rule out any such activities, denying anyone the possibility of abusing the fact that it is not specifically stated.
Quote:The IMG thinks that the IFF is a good marker about where the loyality of a person lies.
The IMG does not interfere when additional other means of identification are added.
The IMG wants the IFF to remain in the trety, as it is the only way to address e.g. Freelancers and Mercenaries working for Kruger as Kruger employees.
Should any freelancers and mercenaries be acting as kruger employees, they will bear the kruger official transponder indicator (// Kruger|). The IFF transponders are easily changed, and does not prevent anyone to perform malicious acts in the name of a corporation, however, Identification papers are more difficult to obtain, and are likely not obtained without also agreeing to a specific code of conduct (// ID limitations).
Quote:In general, the Kruger changes seem to be aimed at keeping ways for an escalation of direct conflict open, something the IMG cannot accept. We feel bound by the Bundestag demand that this treaty should make violent clashes between the three mining entities impossible or as hard as possible. Seeing Kruger already now trying to dilate the content of the treaty, reaffirms the IMG in its decision to not agree to the changes that were not explicitly stated as acceptable.
Kruger will not sign the treaty unless the changes we have requested are added and or modified to reflect our suggestions. IMG seems to be aiming to distance unofficial representatives from official ones in terms of punishment, something kruger cannot accept. We would also like to retain the ability, as per the treaty, to evict any individual that is unlawfully utilizing our corporations property, not just take pictures and report them to the bundestag. This will of course be done with peaceful intentions, and in such a way as peaceful as possible.
Mika Koenig
Public Relations advisor
Kruger Minerals Management Department
**** SENDER: [color=#FFCC99]Veronica Ryan, Secretary of Mr. Henderson ****
**** TO: [color=#FFCC99]Rheinland Bundestag, Rheinland Military, Rheinland Federal Police, Kruger, DHC, IMG ****
**** ENCRYPTION: HIGH *****
**** VOICE ENABLED ****
**** VIDEO UPLINK ENABLED ****
** C O N N E C T I N G ** ** ** ** C O N N E C T I N G ** ** ** ** C O N N E C T I N G **
** CONNECTION ESTABLISHED SUCCESSFULLY **
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode]
Dear Sirs and Madams,
the IMG thinks it would be best if Kruger| submitted a draft of §3 , §4 and §5, as their side knows best what their aim is. Putting the two versions next to each other might help in finding a compromise or at least realizing where the problems are and how to fix them.
[color=#FFCCCC]OLD VERSION 1:
§6: Reaffirmation of the Treaty
§6.1: Periodical Reaffirmation: The treaty needs to be reaffirmed by all signing parties every year by the end of January.
§6.2: Adaption to Change of Mining Locations: Reaffirmation of the treaty by all signing parties becomes necessary if the mining locations change and the zones defined in §1 are not valid any more.
[color=#66FF99]UPDATED VERSION 2:
§6: Reaffirmation of the Treaty
§6.1: Periodical Reaffirmation: The treaty needs to be reaffirmed by all signing parties every three months, starting by the end of January.
§6.2: Adaption to Change of Mining Locations: Reaffirmation of the treaty by all signing parties becomes necessary if the mining locations change and the zones defined in §1 are not valid any more.
Also the Kruger| change to the "escort them out" part has been included in the original document:
[color=#FF6666]OLD VERSION 1:
b) provided a devoted escort to the nearest holding** of their employers (as defined in §5)
Has been changed to:
VERSION 2:
b) provided a devoted escort out of the respective faction's property.
The IMG| also worded article 7 that includes the cancellation as requested by Kruger. The IMG can agree to not include the proposed fines.
[color=#33FF33]NEW ARTICLE:
§7: Cancelling the Treaty
§7.1: The treaty can be cancelled by any signing party by a written statement to all signing parties. The notification must name the reason for the withdrawal.
§7.2: After the cancellation, the treaty remains in effect for another 14 days before it is terminated.
The IMG encourages Kruger| to word the articles that are being hotly discussed at the moment and to submit them.
Yours sincerely,
Veronica Ryan
Spokesperson of the IMG
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode][color=#CCFFFF]*** TRANSMISSION STANDBY FOR ANSWER ***
ID:Kruger Board Of Directors To: [color=#FFFFFF]Rheinland Bundestag, Rheinland Military, Rheinland Federal Police, Kruger, DHC, IMG
Omega - 7 - Treaty
Kruger Mineral -Draft
Kruger Minerals are submitting a draft for omega 7 treaty. This form is edited and updated form of previous IMG version wich will include all parties involved in this treaty to have more participation and freedom in resolving problems and conflicts.
[color=#33CC00]§1: Resource Distribution
Every mining Corporation (DHC, Kruger, IMG) limits their activities to the fields that are defined as their property in §2. Failure to do so results in consequences defined in §3.
§2: Definition of Property Distribution
The mining locations for different ore types are defined in the map.
§2.1: DHC Property: The ore-rich fields southwest of Briesen in the coordinates: Echo/Foxtrott 7
§2.2: Kruger Property: The ore-rich fields northeast of Elbich in the coordinates: Foxtrott/Golf 2/3
§2.3: IMG Property: The ore-rich fields northwest of Freistadt in the coordinates: Charly/Delta 2/3
§3: Failure to obey the Resource Distribution (§1)
There following consequences apply for parties who fail to comply with §1. These consequences are agreed on by all signing parties. These measures aim at discouraging ore theft and other forms of provocation that endanger the premises set by the Bundestag.
§3.1: Treatment of Official Representatives of DHC-, Kruger|, IMG| including non official and non-union employes in case any of these mentioned parties breaks §1 the following instruction's have to be meet.
Obligatory Clause:
a) they must be informed of the treaty and all consequences violating this pact.
b1) they may be ordered to drop the illegally mined ore.
b2) they may be offered to keep the illegally mined ore but compensate the owner. The height of the compensation payment depends on the amount and type of ore.
c) they must be offered a devoted escort out of the respective faction's property. This is not a requirement if the employee does not comply with b1 or b2, if they ask.
§3.2: Nonverbal Measures
Non verbal method's are considered as use of deadly force against violator's of this pact and it's clauses.
§3.3:Nonverbal methods of defending against intrusions by official (IMG| DHC- Kruger|) or unaffiliated and non-union employees may be aplied only when folow conditions are met, in the following order:
a) they were informed of the treaty and all consequences violating this pact.
b) they refused to drop illegaly mined ore or they refused to pay compensation to the owner for possesion of illegaly mined ore.
c) they were offered a devoted escort out of the respective faction's property.
d) they refuse to give any respond to the communication signal's by any of involved parties DHC-, IMG| or Kruger|.
§4: Determining Employment
The term employer, as used in this document, refers to the organization that any given vessel uses the IFF transponder and (ID)identification card of the involved party.
§4.1: Official employes of the folowing parties DHC-, IMG|, Kruger| are defined as such:
a)All vessels with the following codes in identification transponders
a1) IMG|
a2) Kruger|
a3) DHC-
b) (ID)identification card and registration of the vessel in the involved party rooster ownership list.
§4.2: Unaffiliated and non-union employees are defined as such:
a) All vessels lacking the following codes in their identification transponders:
a1) IMG|
a2) Kruger|
a3) DHC-
§4.3: In case of any violation's comitted by the non official or non-union employes, administration of the official parties will not be considered as responsible.
§5: No fly zone. Each party has at minimum two no fly zones, one at their mining facility in the system and one at the respective party's mining field.
§5.1: Under no fly zone is considered space 10k around the involving parties bases Elbich Mining Facility, Briesen Mining Facility, Freistadt and the mining zones of each party. An employee of a rival corporation may not fly within the owning corporations no fly zone. This is to minimize the chance of hostile encounters.
§5.2: No fly zone Exceptions are:
a) Using areas with the goal of reaching the certain installations. For example Omega 3 jump gate.
§5.3: To resort to non-verbal measures, as defined in §3, the following conditions have to be met, in the following order:
a) they were informed of §5 and all consequences violating this article.
b) they were offered a devoted escort out of the respective faction's no-fly zone.
c) they have still not left the corporations no-fly zone.
§6: Reaffirmation of the Treaty
§6.1: Periodical Reaffirmation: The treaty needs to be reaffirmed by all signing parties every three months, starting by the end of January.
§6.2: Adaption to Change of Mining Locations: Reaffirmation of the treaty by all signing parties becomes necessary if the mining locations change and the zones defined in §1 are no longer valid.
§7: Cancelling the Treaty
§7.1: The treaty can be cancelled by any signing party by a written statement to all signing parties. The notification must name the reason for the withdrawal.
§7.2: After cancellation of the treaty, the treaty remains in effect for another 14 days before it is terminated.
Mika Koenig
Public Relations advisor
Kruger Minerals Management Department
**** SENDER: Stephen Schwerdtfeger, IMG Guildmaster ****
**** TO: [color=#FFCC99]Channel Participants ****
**** ENCRYPTION: HIGH *****
**** VOICE ENABLED ****
**** VIDEO UPLINK ENABLED ****
** C O N N E C T I N G ** ** ** ** C O N N E C T I N G ** ** ** ** C O N N E C T I N G **
** CONNECTION ESTABLISHED SUCCESSFULLY **
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode]
[color=#FFFFFF]
Dear Sir of Madam,
Let me quickly introduce myself, as we have not yet talked to each other: my name is Stephen Schwerdtfeger, I am one of the IMG Guildmasters and I have taken the opportunity to make the successful completion of this treaty my goal.
The IMG has accepted the Kruger| draft of §3 but demands the inclusion of the IMG draft §4 in the opening sentence of §3 (marked in red). The IMG lacks the vow to show an effort in keeping the peace in O7 in the Kruger| statement, so this passage is important to the IMG.
Quote:§3: Failure to obey the Resource Distribution (§1) - [color=#33FF33]Version 2
The following consequences apply for parties who fail to comply with §1. These consequences are agreed on by all signing parties. These measures aim at discouraging ore theft and other forms of provocation.
[color=#FF9966]All signing parties agree to the use of diplomacy as the perferred means of solving disputes. The use of violence is only acceptable, when non-violent measures have failed.
§3.1: Treatment of Official Representatives of DHC-, Kruger|, IMG|, also including non official and non-union employes
In case any of the mentioned parties break §1 the following instructions have to be met:
a) they must be informed of the treaty and all consequences violating this pact.
b1) they may be ordered to drop the illegally mined ore.
b2) they may be offered to keep the illegally mined ore but compensate the owner. The height of the compensation payment depends on the amount and type of ore.
c) they must be offered a devoted escort out of the respective faction's property. This is not a requirement if the employee does not comply with b1 or b2, if they ask.
§3.2: Nonverbal Measures
Non verbal method's are considered as use of deadly force against violators of this pact and its clauses.
§3.3: Nonverbal methods of defending against intrusions by official (IMG| DHC- Kruger|) or unaffiliated and non-union employees may be applied only when the follow conditions are met, and in the following order:
a) they were informed of the treaty and all consequences that come with violating this pact.
b) they refused to drop illegally mined ore or they refused to pay compensation to the owner for possesion of illegally mined ore.
c) they were offered a devoted escort out of the respective faction's property.
d) they refuse to give any response to the communication signals by any of involved parties DHC-, IMG| or Kruger|.
Furthermore the IMG accepts §4 largely but needs the addition of §4.2 b, as we strongly feel that non-official third parties have a strong influence on the interactions in Omega 7. The IMG has sufficient proof that freelancers and other third party members play a significant role in the competition and thus demands the combinations named in §4.2 b to be treated as unofficial employees.
Quote:§4: Determining Employment - Version 2
The term employer, as used in this document, refers to the organization that any given vessel uses the IFF transponder and (ID) identification card of the involved party, or belongs to the exceptions mentioned: - Version 3
§4.1: Official employes of the folowing parties DHC-, IMG|, Kruger| are defined as such:
a)All vessels with the following codes in identification transponders
a1) IMG|
a2) Kruger|
a3) DHC-
b) (ID) identification card and registration of the vessel in the involved corporation's roster lists.
§4.2: Unaffiliated and non-union employees are defined as such:
a) All vessels lacking the following codes in their identification transponders:
a1) IMG|
a2) Kruger|
a3) DHC-
b) Ships that have the IFF-transponder of the signing parties followed by [color=#33FF33]- Version 3
b1) Freelancer ID
b2) Freelancer Mercenary ID
b3) Freelancer Miner ID
b4) Vigilante ID
b5) Freelancer Researcher ID
§4.3: In case of any violation's comitted by the non official or non-union employes, the administration of the official parties will not be considered as responsible.
The IMG rejects §5 of the Kruger| draft and will not discuss no fly zones. We fully expect these zones to be abused by criminals in order to hide from being brought to justice. The IMG will chase any criminal into any part of Omega 7 and will not interfere with DHC or Kruger doing the same. There cannot be a safe haven for criminals to hide. As combat operations against criminals do not endanger the resource distribution and as these hunts cannot target the signing parties, there is no danger involved in entering any part of Omega 7 when hunting criminal elements.
There needs to be another paragraph on how the signing parties act if there are foreign miners (DSE, BMM, or other foreign miners) are spotted in the Omega 7 fields. I suggest they should be forced to drop their ore and should be guided out of the system. In case of resistance, non-verbal means can be applied.
I am curious in your opinion and hope for a cooperative effort to make this treaty a success.
Yours sincerely,
Stephen Schwertfeger
Guildmaster of the IMG
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode][color=#CCFFFF]*** TRANSMISSION STANDBY FOR ANSWER ***
ID:Kruger Board Of Directors To:Rheinland Bundestag, Rheinland Military, Rheinland Federal Police, Kruger, DHC, IMG
*sighs* It appears as if negotiations are closing onto a stalemate here. Firstly, kruger agrees with the change in article §3, namely to add the following to the opening statement: All signing parties agree to the use of diplomacy as the perferred means of solving disputes. The use of violence is only acceptable, when non-violent measures have failed.
We see the change in §5 to be necessary and non-negotiary. We see it as a way to drastically reduce encounters between the different corporations, and as such decrease hostile encounters. We are not willing to remove this point.
And last but not least, kruger does not and will not accept the change in article §4, and let me tell you, I realize what you are trying to do, and of course, I disagree with the purpose.
I will make it as clear as I possibly can to you; I have told you before, one of the previous chairmen of Kruger have told you the same thing and I will tell you again. Kruger does not recognize the vigilantes as part of our organization, and will not sign any document that would force us to do so, or pave the way for similiar organizations to arise.
I hope that is clear for you now.
In addition, kruger will consider any further attempt at louring this into the treaty to be an attempt at slandering kruger, and will not participate in further negotiations should that be the case.
Mika Koenig
Public Relations advisor
Kruger Minerals Management Department
**** ENCRYPTION: HIGH *****
**** VOICE ENABLED ****
**** VIDEO UPLINK ENABLED ****
** C O N N E C T I N G ** ** ** ** C O N N E C T I N G ** ** ** ** C O N N E C T I N G **
** CONNECTION ESTABLISHED SUCCESSFULLY **
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode]
[color=#FFFFFF]
Dear Sir of Madam,
I am sorry to reaffirm that Kruger's §5 "Establishment of No Fly Zones" is inacceptable and that this article will not be debated with the IMG.
The IMG will not grant those who have been hitting IMG in the name of Kruger any place to run to and hide. It is obvious what would happen, sooner or later:
Kruger Vigilantes of the Copper or Silver Brigades would engage IMG, IMG defense drives them off, they would run into the Kruger No Fly Zone. Kruger| vessels would undock and request IMG| to leave in an aggressive tone. The IMG would not leave and take out the criminal. Kruger| would assist the criminal ( > see Offenbach; File #3 & Kruger|SvK-040 incidents; #11 of open support of Kruger| to proven criminals against IMG Defense). An international incident would be the result, as Kruger| has always been fast to use guns (> Kruger| shooting at IMG| miner and trader). Please note that it is Kruger who has pushed hard to leave room for violence in the treaty.
If you do not believe that there is a history of Kruger's involvement with third parties, just study the history of the initiation and the consequent escalation of this conflict and where it comes from:
Taking into account these facts, the IMG will not discuss any restrictions to our ability to defend ourselves and actively hunt down any threat, be it directly, indirectly or not at all linked to Kruger. Thus we will not agree to any safe zone that IMG Defense vessels cannot enter.
The changes to Article §4 to include the IFF are mandatory because the IMG sees it as proven that Kruger uses third parties in their fighting against IMG (> Fahrenheit, Offenbach, Elbich Docking incidents). Consequently we want these third parties to be included in the treaty. We have yet to see Kruger act against the Vigilantes as up to now there have only been words. Sadly, the history of Kruger actions does not allow for much trust to be placed in words only.
Also the IMG addition of § 4.2b would include IMG-affiliated Mercenaries and Freelancers. I bet Kruger would like to have those included in the treaty, if they existed on our side and not solely on theirs.
The only way the IMG might consider dropping the addition to §4.2 b is the complete deletion of Kruger's §5 suggestion from the treaty.
The IMG will wait for the response of DHC before disputing the articles in question further.
Yours sincerely,
Stephen Schwertfeger
Guildmaster of the IMG
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode][color=#CCFFFF]*** TRANSMISSION STANDBY FOR ANSWER ***
From: DHC Board of Directors, The Ring. To: Rheinland Bundestag, Rheinland Military, Rheinland Federal Police, Kruger, IMG.
Guten tag again!
We have been following the discussion of the treaty, we have refrained from further comments due to Kruger and IMG being the main protagonists.
Regarding the last clauses being discussed we have the following propositions
First we agree with IMG on the section b) of Clause 4.2. Perhpas there has been some misunderstanding from Kruger, but as it reads now we understand as the listed identifications cards are classified as non-union, and following with 4.3, no vessel of said list should be considered part of the employer and the signing parties will not be held responsible.
Second, we agree with Kruger on the No-fly zone clause, as it discourages any attempt of provocation, or framing from any of the parties involved, however we propose to add the following:
Quote:§5.2: No fly zone Exceptions are:
a) Using areas with the goal of reaching the certain installations. For example Omega 3 jump gate.
[color=#FF6600]b) In pursuit of known activist or unlawful groups.
We propose and annex to the treaty with a list of known illegal groups. It seems that the IMG still links the activities of the group known as ''Kruger vigilantes" to the corporation, despite the fact that Kruger continues to deny any affiliation to them and even placed a bounty on the group. As a sign of good faith Kruger would agree to declare the group as illegal, and added to the annex.
Quote:Omega 7 Treaty Annex A
Known Illegal Groups.
The following groups have been declared as threats to the Omega 7 treaty, due to either their political alignment towards one or another party included in the treaty, their legal status according to Rheinland law, or current activism considered as a danger to the peace in the Omega 7 system and the treaty.
In compliance with exception b) of clause §5.2 of the Omega 7 treaty; none of the parties shall enforce a No-fly zone, if another party is in pursuit of a vessel affiliated to, or working with the following groups or individuals:
-Group/Individual 1
-Group/Individual 2
We were expecting the treaty to stay as simple as possible; however it seems that we are now arguing about hypothetical scenarios and ''what if X or Y happens''. We still abide keeping it that way, but in light of the complexity of this treaty, even though the board considers it pretty obvious, another clause might need to be put in place,
Quote:§. No signing party may cooperate with any group listed in Annex A against the interests of another party, to damage the property of another, to further any of the illegal groups agendas against another, or any cooperative activity that could endanger the relations and stability of the system, the parties involved, or the validity of the treaty.
Note that working together with any of the groups for reasons not concerning any of the parties involved, is not included, and should not be used as means to void the treaty.
Last but not least, in order to add a group to the annex, there should be clear evidence of the group's activities, and before accusing a party of cooperation with an illegal group there should be enough evidence as well.
**** ENCRYPTION: HIGH *****
**** VOICE ENABLED ****
**** VIDEO UPLINK ENABLED ****
** C O N N E C T I N G ** ** ** ** C O N N E C T I N G ** ** ** ** C O N N E C T I N G **
** CONNECTION ESTABLISHED SUCCESSFULLY **
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode]
[color=#FFFFFF]
Dear Sirs of Madams,
as Daumann and Kruger seem to believe that the establishment of No Fly Zones (§5) is a good idea, let me just ask you some basic questions:
How often will the Freistadt No Fly Zone be violated per day, as it is directly at the lane and located in the very center of Omega 7? Almost all traffic passes our base and the IMG will not start interrupting lanes 10 k before the base to force Rheinland company shippers to cruise around Freistadt in a circle.
The same problem will occur for DHC base Briesen perimeter that will be constantly violated by traffic that enters the Stuttgart gate or traffic coming from or going to the Omega 11 jumphole.
Only the Kruger base is located in the periphery without any major traffic passing by, which is likely why Kruger suggested the No Fly Zone in the first place, as there wouldn't have to be any exceptions that would seriously weaken the protective function of the NFZ for their installation.
Adding to that, the clauses that would have to be added to make the No Fly Zones work, would take away any protective effect for the IMG installation and would on the contrary trigger constant conflict with passing traders. The exceptions from the No Fly Zones would require a very complex listing that will run contrary to the goal that we set forward: a treaty that is easy to follow.
The IMG realizes that the aim of the DHC suggestion §5.2 and Appendix are meant to solve the Kruger and IMG disagreement. We however think that it is counterproductive, as §5.2 and the Appendix "Known illegal groups" would require a constant listing and updating of the criminal parties. Furthermore defense pilots would have to learn that list by heart or check their flight manuals every time they encounter a hostile and want to give chase. This would doubtlessly lead to reduced efficiency and also bad decisions and thus conflict, and might also endanger the lives of the Defense pilots.
I hope you see that even though the whole No Fly Zone concept may be alluring in theory, however this paragraph is impossible to implement in reality.
That is why the IMG vetos it.
Yours sincerely,
Stephen Schwertfeger
Guildmaster of the IMG
[font=Lucida Sans Unicode][color=#CCFFFF]*** TRANSMISSION STANDBY FOR ANSWER ***
ID:Kruger Board Of Directors To:Rheinland Bundestag, Rheinland Military, Rheinland Federal Police, Kruger, DHC, IMG
Listen IMG, unlike you, I do not want to hurt anyone. But of course, if you like, we can always talk about who has cooperated with who. There is some quite fun history here, which I am not sure if daumann is aware of. I wont play all my cards, so I'll give you one, allright?
File transfer complete.
Now this was right after we noticed an increase in activity from the reaver mercenary group that was specifically targeting Reavers.
IMG, I suggest, if you want to be welcome -anywhere- in sirius any more, possibly except gallia, I understand you have some sort of agreement with them? I suggest you don't play these cards. You stacked the deck quite poorly.
Quote:Taking into account these facts, the IMG will not discuss any restrictions to our ability to defend ourselves and actively hunt down any threat, be it directly, indirectly or not at all linked to Kruger. Thus we will not agree to any safe zone that IMG Defense vessels cannot enter.
Now as far as I understand, Daumann has already sorted this by appending 5.2b, allowing IMG "defense" vessels to enter NFZ's when following known criminals.
Quote:The only way the IMG might consider dropping the addition to §4.2 b is the complete deletion of Kruger's §5 suggestion from the treaty.
I'm sorry. Kruger will not accept either §5 beeing removed from the treaty, and we will not accept §4.2 b remaining in the treaty.
Quote:How often will the Freistadt No Fly Zone be violated per day, as it is directly at the lane and located in the very center of Omega 7? Almost all traffic passes our base and the IMG will not start interrupting lanes 10 k before the base to force Rheinland company shippers to cruise around Freistadt in a circle.
This confusion is of course acceptable. Kruger only intended the different parties who sign the treaty to have to abide by the NFZ. After all, we cannot, as it seems you intend, force parties who did not sign the treaty to abide by it.
Of course, the IMG may see a criminal, as you suggest, and want to give chase. I believe the only thing you would need to do then would be to make sure you have evidence to back up that it is a criminal. If you do give chase and do not have this of course, it is at your own risk.
However, I suggest the IMG do as kruger. Do not attack criminals unless it is necessary. Why waste the fuel?
Mika Koenig
Public Relations advisor
Kruger Minerals Management Department