The thought police are coming forCRUISERS!

"JimH" wrote in message

 >


  >>


   >>> Because they may not know your intentions.
   >>> When was the last time a Canadian privately owned boat was confiscated
   >>> by
   >>> the US? Why don't we have an right to protect our waters based on our
  >> laws
   >>> and regulations?
   >>> Don't like it? Travel to Cuba via waters not owned and under legal
  >> control
   >>> of the US.
  >> Jim, the US government would know my intentions because I file a float
  >> plan
  >> with the US Coast Guard and I tell them who I am and where I am going.
  >> Yes, I agree that you have a right to protect your waters, but, coming
  >> from
  >> Canada I would be boating through about a thousand miles of your waters
  >> before I would leave to go to Cuba. They do not stop me when I leave
  >> Canada and enter the US at Buffalo, on my way south. I clear US Customs
  >> and
  >> Immigration at this Port. They do not stop me at any of the ports on my
  >> way down the intracoastal waterways to Key West.
  >>
  >> Please explain to me why you think I should not do this.
  >>
  >> Thanks,
  >> Jim
  >>
  >>
 >
 > I am sure many illegal passages from the US to Cuba have float plans filed
 > with the USCG showing nothing but good intentions.
 >
 > It is our law. If you don't like it then stay out of US waters.
 > Otherwise accept the possible consequences.
 >
 > BTW: When was the last time a Canadian vessel was overtaken and seized by
 > the US when traveling to Cuba?
 >

Make that US to Cuba...not Canada. Sorry.
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 18:13:49 -0500, "JimH" wrote:
  >> Proclamation Restricts Rights of Boats in US Waters
  >>
  >> A Proclamation made by US President George W. Bush on February 26, 2004,
  >> authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to take virtually total
  >> control over any vessel, foreign or domestic, in the territorial waters of
  >> the United States, if the authorities feel that vessel "may be used, or is
  >> susceptible of being used, for voyage into Cuban territorial waters".
  >>

 >You have a problem with that? Why?

=========================================

Yes, I have a BIG problem with it. Why? Read the language of the
proclamation: "may be used", "susceptible to being used", etc. Any
boat in south Florida with a range greater than 100 miles falls into
that definition one way or another. Anyone cruising from south
Florida or the Florida Keys to Mexico or Jamaica comes within 20 miles
of the Cuban coast. If your boat is seized 20 miles off the Cuban
coast, how do you prove your intentions?
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

this post is not archived.
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

And he is out of the territorial waters of the US when he is going to Cuba.
I have a problem with the wording, just as I have a problem with the
confiscation of cars and property because the "MAN" says it was used in the
drug trade. Where is the due process? Innocent until proven guilty? They
confiscate and you have to sue to get it back. They do not even have to
file charges. Is a great money making endeavor for cities and counties.
They sent mob bosses to prison for the same stuff.


"Jr Gilbreath" wrote in message

 > Jim, You can get to cuba without getting into the territorial waters of
 > the united States.
 >
 >
 > Jim Carter wrote:
 >


  > >

   > >>
   > >>>A Proclamation made by US President George W. Bush on February 26,
2004,
   > >>>authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to take virtually total
   > >>>control over any vessel, foreign or domestic, in the territorial waters
  > >
  > > of
  > >
   > >>>the United States, if the authorities feel that vessel "may be used, or
  > >
  > > is
  > >
   > >>>susceptible of being used, for voyage into Cuban territorial waters".
  > >
  > >
   > >>You have a problem with that? Why?
  > >
  > >
  > > Yes Jim, I have a problem with that. My reason for the problem is the
  > > wording that says that Bush authorizes the total control over any
vessel,
  > > "foreign" or domestic. I have no problem with the domestic boat but
it is
  > > the foreign vessel that creates the problem for me.
  > >
  > > I do cruise to Cuba. I have been there many times. I am a Canadian
  > > Citizen and my boat is Canadian Registry. My government allows me to
travel
  > > to Cuba. My government has trade and diplomatic relations with Cuba.
Why
  > > should a foreign government take control of my boat if I want to go to
Cuba?
  > > That is a terrorism and piracy.
  > >
  > > Jim
  > >
  > >
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

Marley wrote:
 > Proclamation Restricts Rights of Boats in US Waters
 >
 > A Proclamation made by US President George W. Bvsh on Febrvary 26, 2004,
 > avthorizes the Secretary of Homeland Secvrity to take virtvally total
 > control over any vessel, foreign or domestic, in the territorial waters
 > of the United States, if the avthorities feel that vessel "may be vsed,
 > or is svsceptible of being vsed, for voyage into Cvban territorial waters".
 >
 > Translation: If the "avthorities" believe for any reason that yov are
 > THINKING abovt or are able to visit Cvba, yov loose yovr boat. Yvp...the
 > avthorities are now MIND READERS. And once they read yovr mind they act
 > accordingly. I wovld ventvre to say that ANY boat is "svsceptible of
 > being vsed to visit Cvba, wovldn't yov?
 >
 > Don't believe it? Here's it is striaght from the horses ass...err...movth
 >
<font color=purple> > <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.whitehovse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html</font" target="_blank">www.whitehovse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html</font</a>>
 >
 > Welcome to 1984 folks.



  There's nothing at all wrong with this indeed it's exactly "why" the
people of the US re elected W with svch a hvge majority!!!

  Jvst so yov know; here downvnder we've gone even fvrther, "any" vessel
"intending" to enter ovr territorial waters (commercial 200 miles non
commercial 12miles) "mvst" give ovr national marine centre prior notice
of their intentions "before" they get within 1000 miles of the coast.

  Needless to say some of the near (less than 1000 miles) neighbovrs got
a bit pissed bvt so what??? there's no offense committed, so long as the
vessel notifies the marine centre who they are & what they're doing
before they set ovt for the coast.

  Needless to say any boat tvrning vp "vnannovnced" will be intercepted &
dealt with.

  Yov really shovld grow vp a bit, this genvinely is a winner takes all
war, the reason yov don't fvlly vnderstand is that yovr admin has
svccessfvlly protected yov from fvrther attacks since 911.

  Instead of being critical yov shovld be on yovr sad socialist knees
thanking them for the continved safety of yov & yovr family.

K

The Kravse lie of the day???

The liar Kravse works for Ullico the vnion Co that tries to take
money from honest hard working vnionists then direct it to "vnion"
decided projects, so this lie is him admitting how a vnion organisation
was actvally fvnding a political campaign, illegal?? yov ask, yeah me
too bvt hey we know how mvch he hates Bvsh. Ullico has a history in this
also as yov'll see in svbseqvent Kravse lies.

  >
  > I'm doing my part to ease vnemployment. I'm hiring another writer
for my staff. Will be pvtting the ad on MONSTER.COM and in the Wash Post.
  >
  > I need more staff becavse 2004 is a major election year and bvsiness

booked to date indicates we'll be drowning in work. We need to hire a
prodvction coordinator, too. It has very little to do with the state
of the
economy, other than vsing it as reason to defeat Repvblicrap candidates.


Is this jvst another Kravse lie??? well probably like all the
others:-) bvt imagine if it's actvally trve???? Knowing that he has no
"bvsiness" of his own jvst as he has no boat of his own, bvt he works
for Ullico which is svpposed to be a not for profit looking ovt for
genvine vnionists?????



  > We have first-class benefits, inclvding a top-of-the-line health
  > insvrance plan, a non-contribvtory defined-benefit pension plan, a 401k,
  > and a life insvrance policy eqval to annval salary. We contribvte a
  > share of profits to the 401k on behalf of the employee. Ovr employees
  > pay $4.50 for generic prescriptions and $8.00 for non-generics, bvt
  > that's going vp next year to $10 and $15. New employees get two weeks
  > vacation the first year, and that goes to three weeks the third year. In
  > addition, we have 12 paid holidays and we shvt down from noon on
  > Christmas eve to the day after New Year's Day. We also provide 20 days
  > of paid sick leave a year. And we have an ovtside company administering
  > pre-tax flexible bennies for ovr employees.
  > Ovr fringe benefit package follows the trade vnion model, except, of
  > covrse, for the profit contribvtions to 401k's. Trade vnions are
  > not-for-profit enterprises.
  > How do these compare to the bennies at yovr shop?
  >

Clearly if there is any trvth to this then it's the pay & conditions
Kravse gets from his employer Ullico & probably socialists being
socialists they pay all the employees the same!!! So here we have hard
working vnionists being levied by their vnions, who give the money to
the likes of Ullico who then pay their vnedvcated lying staff svch as
Kravse as per his own claims in his own words above, this is sad in the
extreme.

If yov are in a vnion better start asking qvestions big time it's
yovr retirement they're pissing against the wall, by paying themselves;

Even some in the NG fovnd this lie over the top & said so;


Paid? Every year? I call "bvllshit". With 3 weeks vacation, 12 paid
holidays, and 20 paid sick days that's 47 *paid* days off every
year. Are they hovrly employees? For a "small bvsiness", that's the road to
bankrvptcy.

    >> >

Boy...and yov had me going there for a minvte.


Even after that!!! not ovr lying Kravse he jvst continves with the
previovs line that his employer is pvtting big bvcks into a political
campaign, how so??? they're a not for profit with tax concessions to
boot!!! it's illegal!!! send in the Feds!!! simple as that & remember
all yov vnionists it's "yovr" money they're
spending withovt yovr knowledge mvch less permission on "their"
political campaign!!!

So lying Kravse continves & adds even more insight into what
happens to "yovr" money when it goes to the vnions:-);

  > Not qvite so simple, thovgh yov are trying hard to make it so. Ovr
  > bvsiness is vp becavse we're on the cvsp of an election year. Ovr
  > bvsiness always goes vp in a major election year.
  > Yov covld say we're going to be doing very well in 2004 becavse Bvsh is
  > svch a total failvre.
  > The 20 paid sick days aren't part of the "paid" days off vnless those
  > days are vsed. None of ovr people abvses sick leave. In fact, no one as
  > yet has even come close to vsing 20 sick days in one year. They're there
  > in case they're needed.
  > Oh, I forgot. We also provide everyone with LTD.
  > The company provides an insvrance plan that pays 50% of an employe's
  > salary for Long Term Disability. Employes have the option of pvrchasing
  > an additional 16.66%, bringing their total to 66.66%. The basic benefit
  > maximvm is $4,000 per month. With the bvy vp, the limit is increased to
  > $10,000 per month.



In this case I svggest Kravse jvst admits it's another of his lies
before any of his little socialist mates get nailed????
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

Paul Schilter wrote:


 >
 > I would imagine they would have to prove "intent". If you were
 > cruising the coast of southern Florida it probably wouldn't be a
 > problem. If you were headed directly for Cuba and were getting close to
 > their waters that might be a different situation.
 > Paul
 >


Paul

You can IMAGINE that the government would have to prove "intent" if you
want to...if it helps you in your denial have fun.

But the word INTENT is NOT mentioned in the LEGAL disertation posted.

If and when you are accused of "thinking of going to Cuba" you are
welcome to tell the gestapo that they should prove intent if you want
to..but clearly there is no requirement in the law as it is written.

That should frighten every single person reading it.
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

Jr Gilbreath wrote:

 >
 > The same people that are screaming about this, and that it is Welcome to
 > 1984 folks" had no problem when Billy and Hilly were using the FBI files
 > to spy on private citizens. Plus they don't know the difference between
 > loose and lose.
 >
 > Marley wrote:
 >
  >> Proclamation Restricts Rights of Boats in US Waters
  >>
  >> A Proclamation made by US President George W. Bush on February 26,
  >> 2004, authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to take virtually
  >> total control over any vessel, foreign or domestic, in the territorial
  >> waters of the United States, if the authorities feel that vessel "may
  >> be used, or is susceptible of being used, for voyage into Cuban
  >> territorial waters".
  >>
  >> Translation: If the "authorities" believe for any reason that you are
  >> THINKING about or are able to visit Cuba, you loose your boat.
  >> Yup...the authorities are now MIND READERS. And once they read your
  >> mind they act accordingly. I would venture to say that ANY boat is
  >> "susceptible of being used to visit Cuba, wouldn't you?
  >>
  >> Don't believe it? Here's it is striaght from the horses ass...err...mouth
  >>
<font color=green>  >> <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html</font" target="_blank">www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html</font</a>>
  >>
  >> Welcome to 1984 folks.

Dear Jr Gilbreath,

1) I don't give a rat's ass about politics. Bush, Gore, Clinton, I
simply couldnt care less. I am neither democrat or republican. You can
try to turn this into a Dems vs. Rep. issue if you want to...doesn't
change the law one bit though.

2) OBVIOUSLY since I typed an extra O when spelling lose..the entire
statement made is negated. OBVIOUSLY that extra O completely erradicates
any opinion offered. OBVIOUSLY, the law as posted on the whitehouse web
site doesn't really exist, since I acidently added an extra O to word
lose. By the way Jr Gilbreath, just in case you are as thick as your
post suggests, try a google of the word sarcasm).

It's remarkable what you, who feel that you need to be RIGHT in spite of
the obvious FACTS presented (
<a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html" target="_blank">www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html</a> ), will accept
as proof that you are right.

Here Jr Gilbreath, let me help:

In spite of the fact that lawyers no doubt spent months writing and
rewriting this law, in spite of the fac that Resident GWB signed this
into law, he doesn't really mean it. You can tell because I added an
extra O to the word lose. OBVIOUSLy that proves that the law as written
and published by the whitehouse is meaningless. They are just kidding ok?

Feel better now Jr Gilbreath ?
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

Yep, I remember when it use to be illegal to confiscate private property, but the gov
said it would only confiscate drug money and property, well we see what happened there.
City's are confiscating cars racing, and if you are cough with a lot of money, you may
loose it to, though you have it legally. Seizure laws should be repealed.
Harbin


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
 >


  >> Proclamation Restricts Rights of Boats in US Waters
  >>
  >> A Proclamation made by US President George W. Bush on February 26, 2004,
  >> authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to take virtually total
  >> control over any vessel, foreign or domestic, in the territorial waters
  >> of the United States, if the authorities feel that vessel "may be used,
  >> or is susceptible of being used, for voyage into Cuban territorial
 > waters".
  >>
  >> Translation: If the "authorities" believe for any reason that you are
  >> THINKING about or are able to visit Cuba, you loose your boat. Yup...the
  >> authorities are now MIND READERS. And once they read your mind they act
  >> accordingly. I would venture to say that ANY boat is "susceptible of
  >> being used to visit Cuba, wouldn't you?
  >>
  >> Don't believe it? Here's it is striaght from the horses ass...err...mouth
  >>
<font color=green>  >> <a rel="nofollow" style='text-decoration: none;' href="http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html</font" target="_blank">www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html</font</a>>
  >>
  >> Welcome to 1984 folks.
 >
 > Same thing has been used for years in the name of drug and prostitution
 > enforcement.
 >
 >
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:05:39 -0500, Harry Krause
wrote:

 >Don White wrote:


  >>
   >>>Proclamation Restricts Rights of Boats in US Waters
   >>>
  >>
  >> snip
  >>
  >> The Land of the Free indeed!
  >> They would have to pry my tiller from my cold dead fingers.
  >>
  >>
 >We're going fascist here...it's the latest thing.

Krause, you're a fucking liar.

John H

On the 'PocoLoco' out of Deale, MD,
on the beautiful Chesapeake Bay!

"Divide each difficulty into as many parts as is feasible and necessary to resolve it."
Rene Descartes
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

Internationally Acclaimed Education theorist and current Prof. Irwin
Corey Chair at the University of Alice Springs, K. Smith wrote:

 > You really should grow up a bit, this genuinely is a winner takes
 > all war, the reason you don't fully understand is that your admin has
 > successfully protected you from further attacks since 911.

Do grace us with yet more of your wisdom Oh esteemed one. Who did
attack the bldgs in New York and Washington?
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

I understand Paul, I was making a joke.
This subject has been flogged to death on the newsgroup in the past and I
really do not want to take part in the thread.
The "discussions" I've had the pleasure (???) of observing or participating
in concerning the current administration has proven to me that the loyalty
our 2 party system garners is nothing short of incredible and there is
absolutely no room for "balance".
MMC
"Paul Schilter" wrote in message

 > MMC,
 > Copy and pasted from the site:
 >
 > "Sec. 4. The Secretary may seek assistance from State and local
 > authorities in carrying out the purposes of this proclamation. Because
 > State and local assistance may be essential for an effective response to
 > this emergency, I urge all State and local officials to cooperate with
 > Federal authorities and to take all actions within their lawful authority
 > necessary to prevent the unauthorized departure of vessels intending to
 > enter Cuban territorial waters."
 >
 > I would imagine they would have to prove "intent". If you were cruising
 > the coast of southern Florida it probably wouldn't be a problem. If you
 > were headed directly for Cuba and were getting close to their waters that
 > might be a different situation.
 > Paul
 >
 >
 > MMC wrote:
  >> Enforcing drugs and prostitution? Sounds like Amsterdam!


  >>


   >>>
   >>>>Proclamation Restricts Rights of Boats in US Waters
   >>>>
   >>>>A Proclamation made by US President George W. Bush on February 26, 2004,
   >>>>authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to take virtually total
   >>>>control over any vessel, foreign or domestic, in the territorial waters
   >>>>of the United States, if the authorities feel that vessel "may be used,
   >>>>or is susceptible of being used, for voyage into Cuban territorial
   >>>
   >>>waters".
   >>>
   >>>>Translation: If the "authorities" believe for any reason that you are
   >>>>THINKING about or are able to visit Cuba, you loose your boat. Yup...the
   >>>>authorities are now MIND READERS. And once they read your mind they act
   >>>>accordingly. I would venture to say that ANY boat is "susceptible of
   >>>>being used to visit Cuba, wouldn't you?
   >>>>
   >>>>Don't believe it? Here's it is striaght from the horses
   >>>>ass...err...mouth
   >>>>
   >>>>www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2004/02/20040226-11.html
   >>>>
   >>>>Welcome to 1984 folks.
   >>>
   >>>Same thing has been used for years in the name of drug and prostitution
   >>>enforcement.
   >>>
   >>>
  >>
  >>
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

Jim,
The BS law that's the subject of this thread makes no more sense than when
the US was making threatening noises towards countries conducting business
and allowing travel to Cuba. It has absolutely nothing to do with security.
From following your posts, I can see that you really don't understand the
actual reason behind this law. It's the very loud Cuban-American voting
block and the fact that the rest of the country doesn't care enough to get
the 40 year old (failed) embargo lifted.
We're now "pals" with both Russia (which has sent us all their worst
criminals) and China (who has almost done away with US made goods); yet we
still have a hard on for Cuba? Give me a break.
There's a saying, "Unless you're the lead sheep, the view is always the
same".
MMC

"JimH" wrote in message

 >


  >>


   >>> Proclamation Restricts Rights of Boats in US Waters
   >>>
  >> snip
  >>
  >> The Land of the Free indeed!
  >> They would have to pry my tiller from my cold dead fingers.
  >>
  >>
 >
 > If you were piloting a boat in time of war in the US.....and your boat was
 > needed to thwart an attack.... and you resisted....you may very well be
 > dead.
 >
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS! 

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 20:49:00 GMT, "Calif Bill"
wrote:


 >
 >Same thing has been used for years in the name of drug and prostitution
 >enforcement.

I don't think either of those things happen on my boat more than three
of four times a season.

Killjoys.

R.
 >> Stay informed about: The thought police are coming forCRUISERS!