So how much does Cuban Air Traffic Control charge for U2 overflight support?
1960 - 2001, with some reasonable interest rates for late payments
At 07:53 PM 07/12/2001 -1000, Reese wrote:
>At 10:43 PM 7/11/01, Tim May wrote:
>
> >>One real world example of such.
> >
> >Learn to use a search
nd subject only
to an (expensive and normally futile) appeal to the U.S. Tax Court.
Bad move.
- Original Message -
From: "Bill Stewart" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 18, 2001 1:47 PM
Subject: Re: Who can tax a satellite?
> >At
>At 02:30 PM 7/11/01 -0700, Black Unicorn wrote:
> >No, the real question is who can knock down or render inoperable the OWNER
> >of the satellite.
But ownership is easily fixed - a few magic words from a lawyer
(ok, with a lot of expensive research into tax and accounting issues first),
and the
At 11:45 PM -0700 7/12/01, Matt Beland wrote:
>It's a moot point anyway, but for the record, the Outer Space Treaty of 1967
>states that no nation may claim jurisdiction or territory beyond the limits
>of Earth's atmosphere, which is spelled out in a separate treaty as being
>100km altitude ab
On Fri, 13 Jul 2001, Reese wrote:
> How quaint. Do let us know when you move beyond strict technical
> definitions.
>
> At 05:48 AM 7/13/01, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> >Yes. Clearly killfiling is a concept coterminous with censorship. I urge
> >Reese to expand this campaign to people who chan
On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 07:53:09PM -1000, Reese wrote:
> At 10:43 PM 7/11/01, Tim May wrote:
>
> >>One real world example of such.
> >
> >Learn to use a search engine. Search on the obvious terms, like
> >"airlines overflight payments."
> >
> >Is this enough for the "one real world example
At 7:53 PM -1000 7/12/01, Reese wrote:
>At 10:43 PM 7/11/01, Tim May wrote:
>
>>>One real world example of such.
>>
>>Learn to use a search engine. Search on the obvious terms, like
>>"airlines overflight payments."
>>
>>The first such hit you will find in Google, one of hundreds, is:
>>Or, like
Yes. Clearly killfiling is a concept coterminous with censorship. I urge
Reese to expand this campaign to people who change the channel too.
-Declan
At 05:37 AM 7/13/01 -1000, Reese wrote:
>At 04:40 AM 7/13/01, Declan McCullagh wrote:
> >It doesn't bother me either way, so I have no real prefe
The infallible archives show that the top users here of "fuck off"
are ... well, not to provoke additional applications of the highly
acceptable use term, check the archives yourself. Reese is no
where near the top user, except at sea.
This is not to suggest that heavy users of the term have no
It doesn't bother me either way, so I have no real preference. (If such
juvenalia did bother me, I would have resigned from cpunx 6 years ago.)
But you should know that it does make everyone feel a strong urge
to killfile you. Consider this a fair warning.
-Declan
On Thu, Jul 12, 2001 at 07:56
On Wed, Jul 11, 2001 at 10:19:51PM -1000, Reese wrote:
>
> I nub you too. Do the letters "F O" mean anything to you?
Now this is certainly a new high point in cypherpunklian discourse.
-Declan
At 02:30 PM 7/11/01 -0700, Black Unicorn wrote:
>No, the real question is who can knock down or render inoperable the OWNER
>of the satellite.
>
Cable landfalls... satellite control centers.. MAE... ESS.. same thing.
I suppose that is a plug for a fully distributed system like
pipe/black/whatev
At 08:58 AM 7/11/01 -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I suppose, as with any racket, whoever has the ability to knock the
>satellites down or render them inoperable could levy a "tax" on them.
Heh, right on. But some dingleberry in LA is not about to violate an
international
space treaty without
he real question is who can knock down or render inoperable the OWNER
> of the satellite.
>
They're first cousins, I suppose.
> - Original Message -
> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 8:58 AM
> Subje
No, the real question is who can knock down or render inoperable the OWNER
of the satellite.
- Original Message -
From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 11, 2001 8:58 AM
Subject: Who can tax a satellite?
> > ``I'm neutral on the
> Auerbach insisted that he was not pushing for a tax on the satellites but
> was simply doing his job and trying to determine whether they should be
> taxed.
>
> ``I'm neutral on the whole thing,'' he said. ``My job is to make sure all
> property that's taxable gets assessed and I'm going to fol
16 matches
Mail list logo