Land reclaim from the sea
James Harding
as has happened in Hong Kong's Victoria harbour?
jim.gm4dhj
"James Harding" <nos...@nospam.thanks> wrote in message
news:coe9ao$24g$1...@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...
> If space is so tight and property so expensive why is there no land
reclaim
> as has happened in Hong Kong's Victoria harbour?
>
be plenty fill........
Jim Watt
There have been a extensive programmes of land reclaim
since 1704, and there is a big new one on the East side
upcoming. In the eighties this amounted to an increase
of usable land area of around 30% mostly the Europort
financial buildings (now full) and the adjoining housing estates.
Interestingly enough the Spanish MAE claim that only the
land ceeded under the 1713 ToU is valid British territory
and thus any land reclaimed from the sea is 'Spanish
soil' there is a map on their website showing this, which
gives an idea of how the territory has grown.
For instance the entire Eastern beach area is reclaimed,
and Laguna is so named because it was underwater.
There is even a plan to build an island inside the harbour
area.
--
Jim Watt
http://www.gibnet.com
jim.gm4dhj
>
> There is even a plan to build an island inside the harbour
> area.
>
>
> --
> Jim Watt
Why do all this just to hand it to The Spanish I don't know.......
Ken
"Jim Watt" <jim...@aol.no_way> wrote in message
news:npnlq0hfaqog459qo...@4ax.com...
It's amazing how the Sp read things into the treaty that were never there.
Nowhere does it state for instance that land which did not exist in 1704/13
and which might at some future time exist would not be included in the
Treaty!
They claim Gibraltar is theirs because (variously) it has always been
theirs - manifestly not so. Also because they were there first. Well, that
depends on when you start counting from. Also that they have held it the
longest (see the "always" bit above) which is manifestly incorrect. Now they
also state that land which has NEVER been theirs IS theirs simply because
they never agreed that in the event of suh land arising, it would NOT be
theirs!
I mean, you have to admire their bare-faced cheek!
K
Jim Watt
wrote:
To admire it even more take a look at
http://www.mae.es/documento/0/000/000/508/MAPA.PDF
And note that the red lines indicate the amount of reclamation
As Mr Bossano joked, it may come as a surprise to the people
living in Glacis that they are in what is allegedly Spain.
James Harding
James Harding
complete waste of time!
Ken
"James Harding" <nos...@nospam.thanks> wrote in message
> Having viewed that map I can't believe they are actual serious. What a
> complete waste of time!
YOU know that and I know that, but for those whose minds are occupied with
charging at windmills it may make some sort of sense.
Ken
jim.gm4dhj
> To admire it even more take a look at
>
> http://www.mae.es/documento/0/000/000/508/MAPA.PDF
>
> And note that the red lines indicate the amount of reclamation
>
> As Mr Bossano joked, it may come as a surprise to the people
> living in Glacis that they are in what is allegedly Spain.
>
>
>
> --
> Jim Watt
Doesn't leave you lot much then...but you will be OK when the sea level
rises......
Jim Watt
The MAE is the Spanish Foreign Office, so its official !
What is even more perverse is that they talk in the United Nations
about the principle of 'territorial integrity' which precludes
dividing up an existing territory and then claim Gibraltar is
partly theirs because we reclaimed some land from the sea !
For a legal opnion on that matter see:
http://www.gibnet.com/fish/waters.htm
Almogaver
Charging at windmills ? Very Quixotically appropriate.
Ken
"Jim Watt" <jim...@aol.no_way> wrote in message
Of course, as with the recalimd land that SP states is hers in as much as
they were not included in the ToU (no surprise really, as the land was not
in existance at the time of the ToU) the same argument can be applied to the
water.
Spain claims that sa territorial waters were not included in the ToU,
Gibraltar has no waters to call her own. Of course, the reason that no
waters were mentioned is for the same reason that the reclaimed land was not
mentioned. At the time of the ToU, the concept of territorial watrers did
not exist. From which comes the realisation that another reason they were
not mentioned in the ToU is that they were not Spain's to give! No nation at
that time had any "territorial waters".
What most certainly holds no water at all is Spain's argument.
K
luc...@eternal-flames.gov
paused briefly between playing with his doll's house, to write:
>It's amazing how the Sp read things into the treaty that were never there.
>Nowhere does it state for instance that land which did not exist in 1704/13
>and which might at some future time exist would not be included in the
>Treaty!
The same as those bleedin' Argentinians did in the Falklands.
Their claim was upped from the islands themselves, to include South
Georgia and the B.A.T. etc.
"Damned Dago's... Should horse-whip the lot of them"
(Arthur Conan-Doyle)
>They claim Gibraltar is theirs because (variously) it has always been
>theirs - manifestly not so. Also because they were there first.
Ceuta ?
>Well, that
>depends on when you start counting from. Also that they have held it the
>longest (see the "always" bit above) which is manifestly incorrect. Now they
>also state that land which has NEVER been theirs IS theirs simply because
>they never agreed that in the event of suh land arising, it would NOT be
>theirs!
The obvious solution is to nuke southern Spain and turn the whole
place into a hole/car-park
Old Nick - Just telling it as it is.
jim.gm4dhj
<luc...@eternal-flames.gov> wrote in message
news:khr0r0popug5rvp0g...@4ax.com...
Good man....sorry good entity.....