Re: [新聞] 扁要美國負起「佔領台」義務 要求重新 … - 法律
By Dora
at 2009-09-23T07:14
at 2009-09-23T07:14
Table of Contents
※ [本文轉錄自 Gossiping 看板]
作者: timbear (提姆熊) 看板: Gossiping
標題: Re: [新聞] 扁要美國負起「佔領台」義務 要求重新 …
時間: Tue Sep 22 20:56:25 2009
舊金山和約固然很重要, 日本也在舊金山和約中說明放棄對台澎金馬的管轄權
舊金山和約生效前的幾小時, 作為戰敗國的日本,
也和中華民國簽了一份中日和約, 這是所謂台獨人士故意忽略的
中日和約第十條, 說明台澎人民的主權由ROC取得
http://www.taiwandocuments.org/taipei01.htm
For the purposes of the present Treaty, nationals of the Republic of
China shall be deemed to include all the inhabitants and former inhabitants
of Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) and their descendents who are
of the Chinese nationality in accordance with the laws and regulations which
have been or may hereafter be enforced by the Republic of China in Taiwan
(Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores); and juridical persons of the Republic
of China shall be deemed to include all those registered under the laws and
regulations which have been or may hereafter be enforced by the Republic of
China in Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores).
(wiki翻譯: 台灣澎湖等地人民均成為中華民國國民。如果台灣主權屬於台灣人民,那麼台灣主權屬於
中華民國所有。)
控美案只是單挑舊金山和約來說, 不論美國法院如何判決, ROC的法人地位都不會動搖
民進黨的邏輯總是習慣想抹掉歷史, 也許ROC現在被承認的國家數目很少
但不代表這個法人地位不曾存在
如果說ROC的法人地位消失
那麼1954年12月3日美國與ROC簽署的中美共同防禦條約
其中第六款中指出, ROC所指的領域包含台灣及澎湖
http://usinfo.org/sino/dtreaty_e.htm
For the purposes of Articles II and V, the terms "territorial" and
"territories" shall mean in respect of the Republic of China, Taiwan and the
Pescadores: and in respect of the United States of America, the island
territories in the West Pacific under its jurisdiction. The provisions of
Articles II and V will be applicable to such other territories as may be
determined by mutual agreement.
(wiki翻譯: 第二條及第五條所規定的適用上,所謂「領土」及「領域」,中華民國是指 台灣及澎湖
諸島 ,北美合眾國是指在其管轄下的西太平洋屬領諸島。第二條及第五條的規定,也適
用於互相同意所決定的其他領域。)
※ 引述《smartnick (司馬特尼克)》之銘言:
: : 林志昇跟何瑞元控美案上訴到最高法院,
: : 大概在這個月29號就要決定是否開庭審理,
: : 前兩次是敗訴,
: : 但也確定一件事情,
: : 就是福爾摩莎人無國籍,
: : 原東森新聞寫的名詞也不正確,
: : 正確是美國是二戰後根據舊金山條約,
: : 第23條a項美國為主要佔領國,
: : 且對福爾摩莎而言,
: : 美國有主要佔領國的權力跟義務,
: : 過去60多年來卻刻意忽視這項權力,
: : 造成1952年後福爾摩莎人的後代無國籍,
: : 這都在過去的國際都有相關的案例,
: : http://www.oceantaiwan.com/society/20031009.htm
: : http://www.oceantaiwan.com/society/20031207.htm
: : http://www.oceantaiwan.com/society/20040130.htm
: : 上面三個網址明確詳述福爾摩莎的正確歷史地位.
: : 陳水扁最大的錯誤就是擔任總統期間,
: : 明知道福爾摩莎法理主權扔在美國的手中,
: : 卻沒有走正確的法律道路向美國爭取福爾摩莎人應該有的權力,
: : 就是現在林跟何向美國國務院要求美國未合併領土美國國民護照.
: 看了上篇的推文眼都花了
: 所以稍微統整一下結論
: 我得到的結論是
: 29日開庭 結果=>1.美國承認判決有效=>中華民國存在=>兩個中國
: 2.美國承認判決無效=>中華民國不存在=>台灣屬於美國
: 是這個意思嗎??
: 煩請大家解釋了 謝
: 至於什麼國際法的...依照對歷史的經驗...國際法根本只是給大國家戰爭用的藉口
--
作者: timbear (提姆熊) 看板: Gossiping
標題: Re: [新聞] 扁要美國負起「佔領台」義務 要求重新 …
時間: Tue Sep 22 20:56:25 2009
舊金山和約固然很重要, 日本也在舊金山和約中說明放棄對台澎金馬的管轄權
舊金山和約生效前的幾小時, 作為戰敗國的日本,
也和中華民國簽了一份中日和約, 這是所謂台獨人士故意忽略的
中日和約第十條, 說明台澎人民的主權由ROC取得
http://www.taiwandocuments.org/taipei01.htm
For the purposes of the present Treaty, nationals of the Republic of
China shall be deemed to include all the inhabitants and former inhabitants
of Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores) and their descendents who are
of the Chinese nationality in accordance with the laws and regulations which
have been or may hereafter be enforced by the Republic of China in Taiwan
(Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores); and juridical persons of the Republic
of China shall be deemed to include all those registered under the laws and
regulations which have been or may hereafter be enforced by the Republic of
China in Taiwan (Formosa) and Penghu (the Pescadores).
(wiki翻譯: 台灣澎湖等地人民均成為中華民國國民。如果台灣主權屬於台灣人民,那麼台灣主權屬於
中華民國所有。)
控美案只是單挑舊金山和約來說, 不論美國法院如何判決, ROC的法人地位都不會動搖
民進黨的邏輯總是習慣想抹掉歷史, 也許ROC現在被承認的國家數目很少
但不代表這個法人地位不曾存在
如果說ROC的法人地位消失
那麼1954年12月3日美國與ROC簽署的中美共同防禦條約
其中第六款中指出, ROC所指的領域包含台灣及澎湖
http://usinfo.org/sino/dtreaty_e.htm
For the purposes of Articles II and V, the terms "territorial" and
"territories" shall mean in respect of the Republic of China, Taiwan and the
Pescadores: and in respect of the United States of America, the island
territories in the West Pacific under its jurisdiction. The provisions of
Articles II and V will be applicable to such other territories as may be
determined by mutual agreement.
(wiki翻譯: 第二條及第五條所規定的適用上,所謂「領土」及「領域」,中華民國是指 台灣及澎湖
諸島 ,北美合眾國是指在其管轄下的西太平洋屬領諸島。第二條及第五條的規定,也適
用於互相同意所決定的其他領域。)
※ 引述《smartnick (司馬特尼克)》之銘言:
: : 林志昇跟何瑞元控美案上訴到最高法院,
: : 大概在這個月29號就要決定是否開庭審理,
: : 前兩次是敗訴,
: : 但也確定一件事情,
: : 就是福爾摩莎人無國籍,
: : 原東森新聞寫的名詞也不正確,
: : 正確是美國是二戰後根據舊金山條約,
: : 第23條a項美國為主要佔領國,
: : 且對福爾摩莎而言,
: : 美國有主要佔領國的權力跟義務,
: : 過去60多年來卻刻意忽視這項權力,
: : 造成1952年後福爾摩莎人的後代無國籍,
: : 這都在過去的國際都有相關的案例,
: : http://www.oceantaiwan.com/society/20031009.htm
: : http://www.oceantaiwan.com/society/20031207.htm
: : http://www.oceantaiwan.com/society/20040130.htm
: : 上面三個網址明確詳述福爾摩莎的正確歷史地位.
: : 陳水扁最大的錯誤就是擔任總統期間,
: : 明知道福爾摩莎法理主權扔在美國的手中,
: : 卻沒有走正確的法律道路向美國爭取福爾摩莎人應該有的權力,
: : 就是現在林跟何向美國國務院要求美國未合併領土美國國民護照.
: 看了上篇的推文眼都花了
: 所以稍微統整一下結論
: 我得到的結論是
: 29日開庭 結果=>1.美國承認判決有效=>中華民國存在=>兩個中國
: 2.美國承認判決無效=>中華民國不存在=>台灣屬於美國
: 是這個意思嗎??
: 煩請大家解釋了 謝
: 至於什麼國際法的...依照對歷史的經驗...國際法根本只是給大國家戰爭用的藉口
--
Tags:
法律
All Comments
By David
at 2009-09-23T08:25
at 2009-09-23T08:25
By Ivy
at 2009-09-26T16:43
at 2009-09-26T16:43
By Regina
at 2009-09-30T23:26
at 2009-09-30T23:26
By Skylar DavisLinda
at 2009-10-04T18:24
at 2009-10-04T18:24
By Anthony
at 2009-10-08T02:56
at 2009-10-08T02:56
By Emma
at 2009-10-10T02:15
at 2009-10-10T02:15
By Thomas
at 2009-10-14T09:27
at 2009-10-14T09:27
By Iris
at 2009-10-14T17:40
at 2009-10-14T17:40
By Tracy
at 2009-10-15T03:06
at 2009-10-15T03:06
By Kyle
at 2009-10-16T12:38
at 2009-10-16T12:38
By Joseph
at 2009-10-19T02:25
at 2009-10-19T02:25
By Iris
at 2009-10-21T08:48
at 2009-10-21T08:48
By Harry
at 2009-10-23T14:28
at 2009-10-23T14:28
By Agnes
at 2009-10-28T04:00
at 2009-10-28T04:00
By Jake
at 2009-10-31T03:39
at 2009-10-31T03:39
By Olive
at 2009-11-05T00:07
at 2009-11-05T00:07
By Bethany
at 2009-11-08T06:27
at 2009-11-08T06:27
By Ingrid
at 2009-11-11T14:13
at 2009-11-11T14:13
By Annie
at 2009-11-12T16:19
at 2009-11-12T16:19
By Emily
at 2009-11-15T22:52
at 2009-11-15T22:52
By Tom
at 2009-11-20T02:44
at 2009-11-20T02:44
By Bethany
at 2009-11-23T01:49
at 2009-11-23T01:49
By Aaliyah
at 2009-11-26T04:49
at 2009-11-26T04:49
By Isla
at 2009-11-30T17:53
at 2009-11-30T17:53
By Leila
at 2009-12-03T17:12
at 2009-12-03T17:12
By Edward Lewis
at 2009-12-06T04:23
at 2009-12-06T04:23
By Edwina
at 2009-12-09T11:17
at 2009-12-09T11:17
By Steve
at 2009-12-10T17:16
at 2009-12-10T17:16
By Charlotte
at 2009-12-14T21:37
at 2009-12-14T21:37
By Dinah
at 2009-12-19T00:08
at 2009-12-19T00:08
By Damian
at 2009-12-20T18:35
at 2009-12-20T18:35
By Brianna
at 2009-12-20T23:59
at 2009-12-20T23:59
By Lydia
at 2009-12-23T15:30
at 2009-12-23T15:30
By Doris
at 2009-12-24T07:48
at 2009-12-24T07:48
By Dinah
at 2009-12-27T18:38
at 2009-12-27T18:38
By Irma
at 2009-12-30T16:07
at 2009-12-30T16:07
By Belly
at 2010-01-02T23:23
at 2010-01-02T23:23
By Yedda
at 2010-01-03T18:11
at 2010-01-03T18:11
By Olivia
at 2010-01-06T23:32
at 2010-01-06T23:32
By Enid
at 2010-01-09T04:55
at 2010-01-09T04:55
By Sarah
at 2010-01-12T21:29
at 2010-01-12T21:29
By Rachel
at 2010-01-13T15:55
at 2010-01-13T15:55
By Elma
at 2010-01-17T16:41
at 2010-01-17T16:41
By Joe
at 2010-01-21T00:18
at 2010-01-21T00:18
By Olive
at 2010-01-23T00:45
at 2010-01-23T00:45
By Rachel
at 2010-01-27T19:42
at 2010-01-27T19:42
By Daniel
at 2010-01-28T11:54
at 2010-01-28T11:54
By Zanna
at 2010-01-29T17:23
at 2010-01-29T17:23
By Kama
at 2010-02-01T08:22
at 2010-02-01T08:22
By Noah
at 2010-02-05T15:13
at 2010-02-05T15:13
By Necoo
at 2010-02-08T21:19
at 2010-02-08T21:19
By Andrew
at 2010-02-12T14:31
at 2010-02-12T14:31
By Mason
at 2010-02-15T02:45
at 2010-02-15T02:45
By Dorothy
at 2010-02-18T22:29
at 2010-02-18T22:29
By Candice
at 2010-02-23T04:14
at 2010-02-23T04:14
By Quanna
at 2010-02-26T17:57
at 2010-02-26T17:57
By Erin
at 2010-03-02T20:57
at 2010-03-02T20:57
By Erin
at 2010-03-07T18:51
at 2010-03-07T18:51
By Hazel
at 2010-03-08T07:52
at 2010-03-08T07:52
By Anthony
at 2010-03-09T19:11
at 2010-03-09T19:11
By Jacob
at 2010-03-13T14:57
at 2010-03-13T14:57
By Xanthe
at 2010-03-17T02:08
at 2010-03-17T02:08
By Edward Lewis
at 2010-03-17T19:30
at 2010-03-17T19:30
By Leila
at 2010-03-21T12:21
at 2010-03-21T12:21
By Hamiltion
at 2010-03-21T16:08
at 2010-03-21T16:08
By Delia
at 2010-03-25T14:12
at 2010-03-25T14:12
By Agatha
at 2010-03-27T06:41
at 2010-03-27T06:41
By Audriana
at 2010-03-28T05:03
at 2010-03-28T05:03
By Audriana
at 2010-03-28T09:44
at 2010-03-28T09:44
By Poppy
at 2010-04-01T07:49
at 2010-04-01T07:49
By Bethany
at 2010-04-02T17:52
at 2010-04-02T17:52
By John
at 2010-04-05T21:32
at 2010-04-05T21:32
By Wallis
at 2010-04-10T20:44
at 2010-04-10T20:44
By Olga
at 2010-04-15T10:24
at 2010-04-15T10:24
By Kelly
at 2010-04-18T18:42
at 2010-04-18T18:42
By Quintina
at 2010-04-19T18:17
at 2010-04-19T18:17
By Erin
at 2010-04-20T03:57
at 2010-04-20T03:57
By Kyle
at 2010-04-21T01:52
at 2010-04-21T01:52
By Thomas
at 2010-04-24T01:24
at 2010-04-24T01:24
By Carol
at 2010-04-25T22:26
at 2010-04-25T22:26
By Quanna
at 2010-04-30T20:01
at 2010-04-30T20:01
By Rae
at 2010-05-05T05:32
at 2010-05-05T05:32
By Kristin
at 2010-05-07T00:35
at 2010-05-07T00:35
By Xanthe
at 2010-05-11T13:22
at 2010-05-11T13:22
By Isla
at 2010-05-14T15:41
at 2010-05-14T15:41
By Franklin
at 2010-05-15T10:29
at 2010-05-15T10:29
By Kama
at 2010-05-20T10:00
at 2010-05-20T10:00
By Olive
at 2010-05-24T12:38
at 2010-05-24T12:38
By Margaret
at 2010-05-29T09:56
at 2010-05-29T09:56
By Sarah
at 2010-06-02T01:56
at 2010-06-02T01:56
By Puput
at 2010-06-05T04:32
at 2010-06-05T04:32
By Ethan
at 2010-06-07T05:20
at 2010-06-07T05:20
By William
at 2010-06-09T07:05
at 2010-06-09T07:05
By Isabella
at 2010-06-13T23:48
at 2010-06-13T23:48
By Rae
at 2010-06-16T23:38
at 2010-06-16T23:38
By Faithe
at 2010-06-19T19:11
at 2010-06-19T19:11
By Lily
at 2010-06-22T06:56
at 2010-06-22T06:56
By Adele
at 2010-06-24T07:19
at 2010-06-24T07:19
By Tom
at 2010-06-27T01:29
at 2010-06-27T01:29
By Kumar
at 2010-07-01T20:58
at 2010-07-01T20:58
By Dorothy
at 2010-07-04T20:54
at 2010-07-04T20:54
By Audriana
at 2010-07-07T21:49
at 2010-07-07T21:49
By Zenobia
at 2010-07-10T09:25
at 2010-07-10T09:25
By Connor
at 2010-07-11T18:48
at 2010-07-11T18:48
By Gilbert
at 2010-07-12T13:09
at 2010-07-12T13:09
By Necoo
at 2010-07-15T14:37
at 2010-07-15T14:37
By Adele
at 2010-07-20T13:16
at 2010-07-20T13:16
By Emily
at 2010-07-24T03:41
at 2010-07-24T03:41
By Ursula
at 2010-07-26T10:55
at 2010-07-26T10:55
By Hedwig
at 2010-07-30T13:54
at 2010-07-30T13:54
Related Posts
不作為犯與間接故意的差異?
By Audriana
at 2009-09-23T01:01
at 2009-09-23T01:01
未簽契約的租屋 搬走卻不退我押金
By Carolina Franco
at 2009-09-22T23:06
at 2009-09-22T23:06
請問補習班沒立案的問題
By Caroline
at 2009-09-22T22:03
at 2009-09-22T22:03
昨天的小車禍
By Brianna
at 2009-09-22T21:47
at 2009-09-22T21:47
車禍和解一問
By Lauren
at 2009-09-22T21:27
at 2009-09-22T21:27