# \[BosAc\] Proclamation of Avalon **URL:** \ **Category:** Intergalactic Summit\ **Created:** [December 1, 2020, 5:28am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001 "2020-12-01T05:28:21Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Galm\_Eskola-Fae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/galm_eskola-fae/32/511580_2.png) [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Galm_Eskola-Fae)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 5:28am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/1 "2020-12-01T05:28:22Z")
ALCON, The following serves as a public press release regarding the legal status of existing warclone holdings present in Skarkon. As per CONCORD policy via the Directive Enforcement Department’s Mercenary Infomorph Act of YC115 all warclones are entitled to the right to fight as independents on behalf of sovereign militias. Furthermore, it entitles warclones to privileged legal status as sovereign independent political entities similar to capsuleers. The Bosena Accords, just as CONCORD-sanctioned corporations and alliances, can therefore be broadly defined collectively as a free-association confederacy of independent sovereign entities and has the same inalienable right to uphold the independence of its constituent clans and their respective holdings. By this ruling planetary districts held by warclones [at the invitation of the Thukker Tribe](https://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/thukker-tribe-invites-cloned-mercenaries-to-police-molden-heath/) and the approval of the Tribal Assembly _([“The Tribal Assembly supports the rights of the Thukker Tribe to do with their territories as they please. We are currently satisfied with the situation in Molden Heath."](https://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/angel-cartel-feels-pressure-in-molden-heath/))_ should rightfully be considered free territory leased indefinitely to an independent political entity at the discretion of the Thukker Tribe. As the Thukker Tribe has yet to revoke these claims issued to the warclone community and deemed the situation on Skarkon [“not a matter for Great Caravans”](https://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/celes-aguard-wins-gallente-presidency-at-third-try-in-narrow-victory-over-shaileen-ramnev/) the current status of the five planetary districts of Skarkon II relinquished for warclone settlement must continue to be considered under lease by right of gift under tacit acceptance procedure _qui tacet consentire videtur_ in accordance with international law. We assert that the Bosena Accords remains the sole apparent successor to the warclone clans of Molden Heath capable of inheriting the mantle of these planetary districts. Therefore we lay rightful claim to the five planetary warclone districts of Skarkon II. Should any warclone clans arise that can prove a legitimate claim to these districts we would be happy to compensate you for the territory, or seek independent arbitration upon your return to Skarkon. Beyond Right of Gift the Bosena Accords cites the following claims to the territory in accordance with international law: - Right of Conquest-- Warclone Territory on Skarkon previously occupied by criminal warlord clans have been eliminated and their facilities garrisoned in the early stages of Operation Galatine by Bosena Accords pathfinder units or absorbed into the Bosena Accords under the Round Table Assembly trade union congress. _(Note: Right of Conquest is a commonly accepted and valid method of conflict resolution internally within the warclone community.)_ - Right of Lost, Mislaid, and Abandoned Property—Before Bosena Accords garrison of these districts, several remained abandoned in a state of disrepair following the removal of the original warclone occupants after the end of the Warlord Uprising. Since their discovery, this territory has remained occupied and maintained by the Bosena Accords. By common law, possessor of a piece of abandoned property is generally considered the rightful owner without evidence to the contrary by another party. By comparison the Thukker have long since abandoned the territory (with much of the land prior to warclone settlement remaining undeveloped and unoccupied) and are incapable of reasonably reclaiming this land following Skarkon’s assimilation into Krai Svarog. - Right of Adverse Possession—While the Thukker clan originally held claim to the land and we hope to continue to maintain positive relations with the Great Caravans, in the event of legal arbitration over the ownership of these districts it is our firmly held belief that we are capable of meeting the requirements of **continuous, hostile, open and notorious, actual, and exclusive** ownership of the property to prove de jure claim under adverse possession doctrine. - Right of Accession—As the original settlers of the uninhabited districts across Molden Heath gifted by the Thukker clan, the warclone clans of the Bosena Accords hold indisputable right to the land due to the value present in the territory built through their labour, as well as the vast raw materials surveyed by warclone pioneers. Furthermore, I wish to affirm that all orbital structures including the five orbital customs offices, orbital dockyard, production facility, and warclone refuge citadel within Skarkon are _by right_ integral core Bosena Accords territory similar to capsuleer starships and empire-affiliated capital ship vessels under naval law. We the warclone clans of Skarkon maintain clear and irrefutable de jure claim to this property, and hereby collectively designate the Round Table Assembly of the Bosena Accords as the central government to represent the interest of all independent, sovereign warclone entities present here. In accordance, the Grand Litigation / Administration Team of the Bosena Accords hereby proclaims that all Bosena Accords affiliated orbital structures as well as the five warclone districts of Skarkon II shall hereby stand as the independent and free confederacy of **“Avalon”** administered by the Round Table Assembly. Rikaato. ---
**Author:** ![Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lauralite_anne_brezia/32/380065_2.png) [@Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lauralite_Anne_Brezia)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 5:36am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/2 "2020-12-01T05:36:12Z")
You know, you probably could have saved us all a lot of trouble if you’d assembled this sooner. Well, not all the trouble, but a fair bit. You know, _before_ the triglavians showed up, and before the situation in Skarkon turned into a full on ground war beyond just smacking some gangs. That said, the UNF supports the Bosena Accord’s proclamation and claim herein, as we have in the past when it was more nebulous. In this capacity, I speak both for the capsuleer cadre, and the baseline governances within the UNF proper. Likely won’t gain us many friends, but its not like we had many to begin with its seeming. ---
**Author:** ![Galm\_Eskola-Fae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/galm_eskola-fae/32/511580_2.png) [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Galm_Eskola-Fae)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 6:01am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/3 "2020-12-01T06:01:20Z")
I recognize that previously the Bosena Accords may have benefited from more concrete claims and justification to our presence in Molden Heath and Skarkon. To be absolutely clear however, these claims did not factor into our initial intervention in Skarkon and our invasion of Skarkon had nothing to do with our claims to the territory there. Claims to territory were explicitly avoided in an effort to keep the focus squarely on the removal of Seykal-Krullefor influence and investigation into the Efrit regime. With the ultimate fate of Skarkon II very much in question however and the conflict escalating from a rebellion to a conventional war I felt it necessary to state the above in order to protect our holdings and ensure that we are treated in accordance with international law. Having said that, I deeply appreciate UNF’s continued support and friendship. ---
**Author:** ![Valerie\_Valate](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/valerie_valate/32/386231_2.png) [@Valerie\_Valate](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Valerie_Valate)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 6:13am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/4 "2020-12-01T06:13:08Z")
So basically, you’re saying “We have this, therefore it’s ours” ? A sort of “might makes right” kind of deal ? I see. You’re still against the Triggie mutants, right ? ---
**Author:** ![Attn\_Thaddeus\_Reynolds](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/attn_thaddeus_reynolds/32/377671_2.png) [@Attn\_Thaddeus\_Reynolds](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Attn_Thaddeus_Reynolds)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 6:33am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/5 "2020-12-01T06:33:31Z")
Since the Thukker tribe left the administration of certain planetary districts to the warclones, right of conquest has been a traditionally observed way for transfer between entities, with what typically amounts to clashes between immortal forces within the core areas of the districts. Our forces had effectively conquered, reactivated, or traded for the districts in question from either an abandoned state or from occupying forces in order to shorten supply lines and support our ongoing operations in defense of the populace of the Skarkon system generally and of the planetary populace of Skarkon II specifically. ---
**Author:** ![Bravo\_Atruin](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/bravo_atruin/32/256799_2.png) [@Bravo\_Atruin](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Bravo_Atruin)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 7:07am UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/6 "2020-12-01T07:07:59Z")
Question for the knowledgeable. Seeing as the Bosena Accords seem to have a legitimate claim to these territories, would this make them Matari? ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 3:05pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/7 "2020-12-01T15:05:25Z")
> [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](#): > > As the Thukker Tribe has yet to revoke these claims issued to the warclone community and deemed the situation on Skarkon [“not a matter for Great Caravans”](https://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/celes-aguard-wins-gallente-presidency-at-third-try-in-narrow-victory-over-shaileen-ramnev/) This is a misrepresentation. > [@](#): > > - Thukker Tribe Council of Caravans Declines Petition on Krullefor Organization Links to Seykal Clan; “Not a Matter for Great Caravans” The Thukkers’ determination was about the Seykal Clan, not cloned mercenaries. Also, if you’re going to cite a ‘silence is consent’ justification, you have to take into account the later determination by the representative appointed by the Tribal Council to oversee the system, one Kril Efrit. He was neither silent, nor consented. Skarkon has _one_ temperate planet. You were not invited to the other four worlds in the system. Nor does any number of _districts_ on Skarkon II grant you _de jure_ claim to the orbital infrastructure supporting the _entire planet_, let alone _all five_ orbital customs offices in the system. > [@Bravo\_Atruin](#): > > Question for the knowledgeable. Seeing as the Bosena Accords seem to have a legitimate claim to these territories, would this make them Matari? Their claim is not so legitimate, considering the events of the last eighteen months, as they would have you believe. And even if it were, no, that does not make them Matari. Some of them, doubtless, are of the Tribes, but unless the Thukkers _adopted_ the rest… ---
**Author:** ![Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/callisto_menkalinan/32/343540_2.png) [@Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Callisto_Menkalinan)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 5:38pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/9 "2020-12-01T17:38:23Z")
I am struggling to reconcile BoSAc citing CONCORD legislation to support its legitimacy, like this: > [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](#): > > As per CONCORD policy via the Directive Enforcement Department’s Mercenary Infomorph Act of YC115 all warclones are entitled to the right to fight as independents on behalf of sovereign militias. Furthermore, it entitles warclones to privileged legal status as sovereign independent political entities similar to capsuleers. The Bosena Accords, just as CONCORD-sanctioned corporations and alliances, can therefore be broadly defined collectively as a free-association confederacy of independent sovereign entities and has the same inalienable right to uphold the independence of its constituent clans and their respective holdings. … with BosAc’s previously stated position regarding CONCORD agencies, like this: > [@Round Table Assembly Skarkon Emergency Session Results](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/round-table-assembly-skarkon-emergency-session-results/268288/1): > > **DISCUSSION II – FUTURE OF THE SKARKON WAR** > > SARO Red Troop remains the single greatest threat to the warclone community. A specialized unit trained in hunting warclones, they remain chiefly responsible for multiple purges of of a large number of warlord enclave holdouts in and around YC118. As of this afternoon Sanmatar Shakor has extended unconditional support to draconian rule of the Khumatariat of Skarkon to carry out the fortification of planet under the authority of EDENCOM under martial law. Since this announcement, Khumatar Kril Efrit has authorized the services Red Troop alongside AEGIS commandos to operate “freely” on Skarkon II. > > Regardless of our intentions or hope for a peaceful solution, conflict with AEGIS and Red Troop is now likely inevitable. How shall we respond to this crisis? ---
**Author:** ![Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lauralite_anne_brezia/32/380065_2.png) [@Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lauralite_Anne_Brezia)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 6:01pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/10 "2020-12-01T18:01:29Z")
I’d say about as reconcilable as any given capsuleer working around CONCORD’s legislations regarding security statuses or who have come into conflict with CONCORD agents in outer regions but still move fairly freely in empire space, or have had dealings with any given pirate organization in assorted capacities. Which is to say, as a capsuleer, surprisingly reconcilable, as many do it constatly. As it stands, you can be critical of longstanding issues of a legislative entity and still use its precedents to your advantage or for the purposes they exist for. ---
**Author:** ![Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/callisto_menkalinan/32/343540_2.png) [@Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Callisto_Menkalinan)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 6:42pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/11 "2020-12-01T18:42:31Z")
There is a big difference between being a critic of CONCORD and being outlawed by it. If BosAc wants to benefit from the status afforded by CONCORD legislation, it should submit its membership to CONCORD’s jurisdiction over infomorphs. ---
**Author:** ![Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lauralite_anne_brezia/32/380065_2.png) [@Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lauralite_Anne_Brezia)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 6:51pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/12 "2020-12-01T18:51:41Z")
while groups like Red Troop exist, I don’t remember there ever being a direct _outlawing_ of warclones. a silent shift in how they are dealt with, yes, but I was a capsuleer at the time of the tactical net shutdowns, and while that was the ‘end of the independent warclone,’ it was, to my knowledge, not legally legitimized as such and mostly used by media to gather attention and fit the trend, and now we are seeing a steady re-emergence. ---
**Author:** ![Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/callisto_menkalinan/32/343540_2.png) [@Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Callisto_Menkalinan)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 7:06pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/13 "2020-12-01T19:06:36Z")
My point is that SARO was deployed on Skarkon and BosAc responded by throwing its lot in with the Collective instead of surrendering to SARO and encouraging its members to submit to the reprogramming necessary to integrate them with regulated PMCs employing clone soldiers at present. Having done that, it seems bizarre to turn around and assert their rights under CONCORD legislation. ---
**Author:** ![Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lauralite_anne_brezia/32/380065_2.png) [@Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lauralite_Anne_Brezia)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 7:34pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/14 "2020-12-01T19:34:26Z")
Interesting choice of words my dear. Tell me, where is the line drawn then? Because even at a basic level, reprogramming people, regardless of their origin starts to sound a bit like a certain former Caldari arms dealer’s idea of utopia. ---
**Author:** ![Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/callisto_menkalinan/32/343540_2.png) [@Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Callisto_Menkalinan)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 7:37pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/15 "2020-12-01T19:37:15Z")
That’s for the Inner Circle to decide. It’s the whole _point_ of CONCORD, to regulate infomorphs. ---
**Author:** ![Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/lauralite_anne_brezia/32/380065_2.png) [@Lauralite\_Anne\_Brezia](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Lauralite_Anne_Brezia)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 7:46pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/16 "2020-12-01T19:46:19Z")
Actually not, the point of CONCORD at a base level is to regulate interstellar affairs. Infomorph regulation is newer, and from the past twenty years, and not an intrinsic facet that makes up its entirety, but this is starting to get off-topic of the specific discussion at hand. ---
**Author:** ![Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/callisto_menkalinan/32/343540_2.png) [@Callisto\_Menkalinan](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Callisto_Menkalinan)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 7:52pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/17 "2020-12-01T19:52:29Z")
‘A’ point not ‘the’ pointed, granted. It’s not really off the topic, though. It goes to BosAc’s position to claim the rights it is claiming. The right of conquest would have been a better argument, except their allies have rather trumped that card now! ---
**Author:** ![Attn\_Thaddeus\_Reynolds](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/attn_thaddeus_reynolds/32/377671_2.png) [@Attn\_Thaddeus\_Reynolds](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Attn_Thaddeus_Reynolds)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 8:26pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/18 "2020-12-01T20:26:24Z")
> [@Callisto\_Menkalinan](#): > > My point is that SARO was deployed on Skarkon and BosAc responded by throwing its lot in with the Collective instead of surrendering to SARO and encouraging its members to submit to the reprogramming necessary to integrate them with regulated PMCs employing clone soldiers at present. Having done that, it seems bizarre to turn around and assert their rights under CONCORD legislation. SARO Red Troop arrived on-world at the invitation of Kril Efrit, and promptly did nothing with regards to The Bosena Accords forces. Bosena Accords Forces had no military contact or engagement with SARO forces during the course of the conflict and had standing orders to cooperate with SARO wherever possible. AEGIS commando units had direct military engagements with Accords forces near Anti-Aircraft and Anti-Orbital stations; however, as their missions was pressing and no mortal life was lost in them we bear them no ill-will but we would like to officially request they call first next time they need usage of an installation, or attempt to ask the holding forces who did not fire upon them during their approach. As at that time we were attempting to broker a ceasefire in our conflict specifically to support the evacuation and make that and defense of the evacuation our number one priority, diplomatic channels were open for this. Considering our previous cooperation and efforts in Muttokon against Triglavian forces, we were not expecting any conflict with AEGIS at the time. Red Troop took their typical route of Diplomatic Silence as well, and did not contact us for surrender, nor did they directly participate in any actions against us in cooperation with Kril Efrit’s PMC Forces, RSS Forces, Warlords, and certainly not the Svarog Forces we have had clashes with. ---
**Author:** ![Galm\_Eskola-Fae](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/galm_eskola-fae/32/511580_2.png) [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Galm_Eskola-Fae)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 8:38pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/19 "2020-12-01T20:38:49Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > The Thukkers’ determination was about the Seykal Clan, not cloned mercenaries. I feel as though there’s a disconnect here, or perhaps an underestimation of our understanding of the law. Yes. I am aware that the statement made by the Thukker Tribe was in relation to Seykal Clan activity. Yes, I am aware that this does not make any specific mention regarding warclones. What matters, however, is that these statements were in response to [multiple well documented attempts](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/molden-heath-krullefor-inquest/179884) by ourselves and our allies to request that the Thukker Tribe answer for Seykal-Krullefor activity at a time when our forces were actively involved in the Skarkon conflict. Even if the statement were not specifically made in reference to _our_ request but an unmentioned Republic Justice Department indictment, the underlying implication is the same; **the Thukker clan were aware of our activity in the region being conducted on land issued to warclones to investigate Seykal-Krulefor activity but did not make any statements or policy to reflect that which would alter the prior agreement between the Thukker and the warclone community.** _Vis-a-vis_ by way of _qui tacet consentire videtur_ we continue to operate on Skarkon under the consent of the Thukker. Some might call that a jump in logic, but when dealing with matters of international politics the onus is on state actors to be informed of ongoing activity when driving policy, particularly when you are issuing public statements denying your involvement in a massive smuggling enterprise. It doesn’t change or effect that the Thukker never adjusted their stance on warclone settlement. You can point to Kril Efrit’s actions reflecting the opinion of the Tribal Council at the time, but at that point your getting into arguments of Tribal Jurisdiction that has been argue ad nauseum since the RSS and the Circle for Cooperation began is latest trend of vast political overreach. This is just one piece in the case that makes up our claims to the land. If you don’t find that argument particularly compelling I’d direct you to instead focus on the Right of Gift, Conquest, Abandoned Property, Adverse Possession, and Accession previously mentioned. > [@Arrendis](#): > > Nor does any number of _districts_ on Skarkon II grant you _de jure_ claim to the orbital infrastructure supporting the _entire planet_, let alone _all five_ orbital customs offices in the system. This one is actually very straightforward. As the lawful owners of the planetary orbital customs offices, we have perfectly legitimate claim to them by Right of Deed. I doubt anyone would seriously argue otherwise. > [@Arrendis](#): > > Their claim is not so legitimate I maintain that these claims are legitimate based on international law outlined above. _Disputed_ however? Perhaps. But that’s a different matter entirely, and still leaves us in a better position than having no claims at all. > [@Callisto\_Menkalinan](#): > > My point is that SARO was deployed on Skarkon and BosAc responded by throwing its lot in with the Collective instead of surrendering to SARO and encouraging its members to submit to the reprogramming necessary to integrate them with regulated PMCs I was preparing myself to discuss some of the points you have mentioned, but you’ll have to forgive me if I’m not at all keen to interact with this train of conversation if this is the point you are arguing from. I will argue many things but I will absolutely not debate the _personhood_ and right to bodily autonomy of our comrades. Both those things should be self-evident and inalienable, and interacting with any form of argument questioning that feels like it adds unfounded legitimacy to the contrary. I do wonder how many of the warclones in your sister organization, including those that are Round Table union members, feel to hear of you arguing against their right to self-determination. ---
**Author:** ![Arrendis](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/arrendis/32/432594_2.png) [@Arrendis](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Arrendis)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 8:59pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/20 "2020-12-01T20:59:58Z")
> [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](#): > > What matters, however, is that these statements were in response to [multiple well documented attempts](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/molden-heath-krullefor-inquest/179884) by ourselves and our allies to request that the Thukker Tribe answer for Seykal-Krullefor activity at a time when our forces were actively involved in the Skarkon conflict. No. What matters _here_ is that you are making a claim to territory, and basing part of that claim on the Thukker Tribe deeming > [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](#): > > the situation on Skarkon [“not a matter for Great Caravans”](https://community.eveonline.com/news/news-channels/world-news/celes-aguard-wins-gallente-presidency-at-third-try-in-narrow-victory-over-shaileen-ramnev/) Which is _not_ what happened. Their determination was limited _only_ to the Seykal Clan’s connections to the Krullefor Organization. Nothing more. If I tell CONCORD that what color my socks are isn’t their business, that isn’t the same thing as claiming they have no jurisdiction over me. But that’s what you’re trying to do, here, which puts everything you’re saying on a foundation of lies and misrepresentation. As usual. > [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](#): > > the Thukker clan were aware of our activity in the region being conducted on land issued to warclones to investigate Seykal-Krulefor activity but did not make any statements or policy to reflect that which would alter the prior agreement between the Thukker and the warclone community. The Thukker _Tribe_ also made no statements contradicting those of the Khumatar when he declared your organization outlaws and enemies of the Republic. > [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](#): > > As the lawful owners of the planetary orbital customs offices Yeah, no ■■■■. But that’s a _very_ different issue than your claim that _any_ of that is by virtue of the Thukker Tribe’s open invite to _all_ clone mercenaries. > [@Galm\_Eskola-Fae](#): > > If you don’t find that argument particularly compelling I’d direct you to instead focus on the Right of Gift, Conquest, Abandoned Property, Adverse Possession, and Accession previously mentioned. If you claim Tribal lands by ‘Right of Conquest’, outsider, then you label _yourself_ an invader. And not to steal over-much from @Elsebeth_Rhiannon, but more and more, I find the only sane response to that is a simple one: All Invaders Must Die. ---
**Author:** ![Attn\_Thaddeus\_Reynolds](https://sea1.discourse-cdn.com/eveonline/user_avatar/forums.eveonline.com/attn_thaddeus_reynolds/32/377671_2.png) [@Attn\_Thaddeus\_Reynolds](https://forums.eveonline.com/u/Attn_Thaddeus_Reynolds)\ **Post date:** [December 1, 2020, 9:01pm UTC](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001/21 "2020-12-01T21:01:18Z")
> [@Arrendis](#): > > If you claim Tribal lands by ‘Right of Conquest’, outsider, then you label _yourself_ an invader. And not to steal over-much from @Elsebeth_Rhiannon, but more and more, I find the only sane response to that is a simple one: As outlined earlier, Right of Conquest was the Traditional manner in which the districts given by the Thukker Tribe were exchanged between Warclone Entities. The same districts that were offered and given by the Thukker tribe “free of any strings” [Next page](https://forums.eveonline.com/t/bosac-proclamation-of-avalon/283001.md?page=2)