Pomerania/Talk

If Germany SIGNED an agreement with Poland recognizing something that de facto existed, doesn't that ipso facto make it de jure QED? J Hofmann Kemp, having fun with language...

---

If you are on vacation or out of the country for a while and a transient breaks in your house and lives there. He lives de facto in your house . But does he de jure live in your house ???? H. Jonat

---

He is if you sign something that says he can live there. That's the definition of de jure. Duh! -- Paul Drye

Was just going to say that, Paul -- although, to complete the analogy, it's more like you found out someone was illegally living in your house, and then agreed in writing not to press charges -- this not only makes it de jure, but would set a precedent for future legal occupation...JHK

First : funny thing: "transient breaks in your house and lives there", so may be we should write on the page History/Germany? that "Polish general Rydz-Smigly on 1 September 1939 attacked Germany, then burnt Berlin, built concentration camps in Germany and murdered best sons of German homeland (in the first place teachers, priests, doctors). The second, more important thing: Article 2 of treaty signed in 1990 by Kohl and ratified by Bundestag states that: "Agreeing Parties declare that existing between them border is infrangible now and in the future (...)", Article 1 states that "Agreeing Parties confirm existing between them border [here description of border] (...)", Article 3 states that: "Agreeing Parties declare that they do not have any territorial claims and that they will not have any claims of this kind in the future". Treaty states nothing about "de jure" or "de facto". Kohl didn't tell nothing about this strange distinction when he signed this document in Poland, so how is it ?

Kazik