-Caveat Lector-
Your analogy fails to reflect this situation, since the debris is not suspended up in the atmosphere (which would be equivalent to your law of the sea 'internation waters' argument) and being salvaged from there.
 
In this case the battleship washed ashore (albeit in pieces) and thus salvage rights under any maritime precedent are not applicable.
 
 
----- Original Message -----
From: RevCOAL
Sent: Monday, February 03, 2003 6:09 AM
Subject: Re: [CTRL] [ctrl] IS AMERICA ABOUT TO BE PULSED?

-Caveat Lector-


>US Code Title 18 Sec. 641
>(http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/18/641.html)
>
>"Whoever embezzles, steals, purloins, or knowingly converts to his use or
>the use of another, or without authority, sells,
>conveys or disposes of any record, voucher, money, or thing of value of the
>United States or of any department or
>agency thereof, or any property made or being made under contract for the
>United States or any department or agency thereof; or..."
>
>The reason being according to Space.com is that:
>
>"As NASA never relinquished ownership of the spacecraft, possession of
>Challenger debris translates to theft of government property.
 
Okay, so there's a US Code covering recovering debris of 'government property', but this is at odds with the historical 'law of the sea' (which should have set precedent, especially in the recovery of the Challenger debris which all fell in the ocean) that any 'wreck' or portion thereof becomes the property of either whomever expends the time and effort to recover it, or it becomes the property of the owner of any land it happens to wash up on...but what the hell, since the PTB no longer care about the Constitution and Bill of Rights, why should International Law cause them any concern?
 
It seems to me that above a certain height, space should become 'international waters' -- or does the U.S. government claim ownership of ALL space that happens to lie above any U.S. land?
 
If a U.S. battleship sank out in the open sea, would the U.S. government prosecute anyone who dived to the site of the sunken ship and recovered any items?  Would they do so even though international law has historically allowed such operations, stating that those who recover the property become the new owners of such property?  If 'transfer of ownership' applies to something that sinks in the open ocean, it should also apply to something in space (altho where 'space' begins would have to be defined, just as 'international waters' are defined)...
 
It would have been interesting to see what would have occured if Columbia fell apart over Libya or Cuba or the interior of China or over some other country not particularly friendly with the U.S....how would the U.S. go about prosecuting locals who gathered up debris and decided to either keep it or sell it to the highest bidder...?
 
 
June
 

.

____________________________________________________
<A HREF="">www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply.

Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="">Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A>

http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="">ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Om

Reply via email to