Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

To: 1rudeboy; SmoothTalker; Extremely Extreme Extremist; COEXERJ145; microgood; liberallarry; cmsgop; ..
As for a commercial air carrier being the sovereign territory of its home country, that's simply false. A Mexican Air Force C-130, maybe.

You are absolutely wrong. Mexicana is a "flag carrier" for Mexico. It is every bit as soveriegn as a private flagged ship.

137 posted on 12/11/2006 12:28:08 AM PST by Paleo Conservative (Karl Rove isn't magnificent.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies ]


To: Paleo Conservative
You are absolutely correct.

Under International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) regulations, of which Mexico and the US are signatories of course, the aircraft was Mexican "territory" even if it had already landed.

This woman was just 20 minutes shy of dropping her anchor baby where she wanted to.

Since the US has no fortitude, the mother and child will stay and soon be collecting thousands of dollars of your property tax money.

138 posted on 12/11/2006 3:42:33 AM PST by SkyPilot
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

To: Paleo Conservative
False again. A military aircraft or ship is considered to be sovereign territory. A commercial aircraft or vessel is subject to the jurisdiction of whatever country it is passing through or over.

Think about it. What is this story truly about, then? Paleo, I know you keep the aviation ping list. Are you a pilot? From a pilot's perspective, a pilot of a U.S. flag carrier is most likely expected to enforce his or her version of U.S. law onboard (one couldn't expect otherwise). But in the eyes of the law, that does not make the carrier sovereign territory.

139 posted on 12/11/2006 3:49:28 AM PST by 1rudeboy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 137 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson