Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Practical Travel Safety and Security Issues
Reload this Page >

President proposes increasing taxes on air tickets to pay for security

President proposes increasing taxes on air tickets to pay for security

Old Jan 30, 05, 3:12 pm
  #76  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 61,966
Originally Posted by Dangling_Participle
Ohright. Since NEVER. Ergo, the United States Coast Guard being the primary agency charged with maritime immigration interdiction duties.
As you have decided to be so childish as to attack Mikesilv's typing/spelling errors, and your user name indicates an interest in grammar, do you mind if I join in the game?

Ohright. This should be two words, separated by a comma.

Since NEVER. Do you truly consider this to be a complete sentence? If you want to contend that parts of it are implied, then at least place "never" in quotation marks.

Ergo, the United States Coast Guard being the primary agency charged with maritime immigration interdiction duties. "Ergo", being a word from a foreign language, should be placed in italics.

"Being" is incorrect; you should have used "is". (By using "being" you have not created a complete sentence and need to continue it.)

Correct: The United States Coast Guard is the primary agency charged with maritime immigration interdicion duties.

Correct: The United States Coast Guard, being the primary agency charged with maritime immigration interdiction duties, does this job on a routine basis.

Incorrect: Exactly what you wrote.

Now, perhaps we can drop this game and go back to discussing what Mike wrote and not his typos/errors in doing so.
Dovster is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:15 pm
  #77  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Alameda, CA
Programs: 1 month free at curves,Subway Sub Club, Alameda Library
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by Dangling_Participle

I find it interesting to see so many ignorant folks blathering on ad nauseum, when they don't even have the most basic facts correct.


Speaking of comprehension problems, there's a stellar example. Since when does the INS have maritime jurisdiction? Ohright. Since NEVER. Ergo, the United States Coast Guard being the primary agency charged with maritime immigration interdiction duties.
Originally Posted by dovster
In fact, I seem to know as little about the Coast Guard as you do about, well, almost anything.
Did ya miss the part about where I taught History and Social Studies..or were ya busy dreaming of me getting felt up in the Airport in Tel Aviv on your personal say so….

Here are more pearls of your own wisdom you need to heed....

Originally Posted by dovster
Harry Truman once said, "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen." We're not asking you to get out of the kitchen, but if you can't stand the heat I suggest not throwing lit matches onto kindling.
trixievictoria is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:16 pm
  #78  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Alameda, CA
Programs: 1 month free at curves,Subway Sub Club, Alameda Library
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by Dovster
Correct: The United States Coast Guard is the primary agency charged with maritime immigration interdicion duties.

Correct: The United States Coast Guard, being the primary agency charged with maritime immigration interdiction duties, does this job on a routine basis.
Oh wait didn't I say that too!
trixievictoria is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:18 pm
  #79  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Tampa, Florida, U.S.A.
Posts: 7,665
Taking about lack of knowledge:

Fact: a) Every foreign vessel docking at a US port is visited by the DHS-INS officer, the officers still perform their original/former functions ie former customs officers still take of the "customs inspection", former INS officers check passports etc and validate visas. If even one crew member does not have a valid visa - armed guards are posted, 24/7 untill the vessel sails.
b) Very often upon sailing the DHS-INS officers will return and match the crew to the number of passports etc.
c) If a stowaway is found on board the master is required to lock him up on board and to return him ONLY to the country of origin which might take years.
( Some captains have been know to sail close to the country, say Haiti and literally shove the stowaway overboard)
d) If the stowaways are too numerous to handle safely the Border Patrol in conjunction with the DHS will remove them and send then to a detention centre.

E) WHEN THE SHIP IS IN PORT THE CONTROL OF ALL CREW IS UNDER THE DEPT OF HOMELAND SECURITY, THE CG ONLY SETS THE MATRIX AS TO THE NUMBER OF GUARDS, THE 96 HOUR ENTRY WINDOW AND IF THERE IS A POLLUTION ISSUE.

F) THE COAST BOARDS ONLY A PERCENTAGE ( MY GUESS 20%) OF ALL VESSEL COMING INTO PORT AND THAT INCLUDES VESSELS CARRYING DANGEROUS CARGOES.
THE STORY ABOUT THEM BOARDING AND ESCORTING ALL HAZARDOUS CARGO VESSEL INTO PORT IS PURE HOGWASH.

mike

mike

Last edited by MIKESILV; Jan 30, 05 at 3:53 pm
MIKESILV is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:18 pm
  #80  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Programs: Alaska Airlines, Delta, UA Premier 1K, Hawaiian Air
Posts: 112
Originally Posted by Dovster
Now, perhaps we can drop this game and go back to discussing what Mike wrote and not his typos/errors in doing so.
Amen brother.
MMA95D is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:20 pm
  #81  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 61,966
Originally Posted by trixievictoria
Did ya miss the part about where I taught History and Social Studies.
Not only did I not miss it, but the thought of you imparting your "knowledge" to innocent young children still makes me shudder.

Originally Posted by trixievictoria
.or were ya busy dreaming of me getting felt up in the Airport in Tel Aviv on your personal say so….
Trixie, please keep in mind that you are the one with dreams of being a TSA screener so I would imagine that of the two of us, you are the one more interested in "feeling up" scenarios.
Dovster is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:27 pm
  #82  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Alameda, CA
Programs: 1 month free at curves,Subway Sub Club, Alameda Library
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by dovster
Trixie, please keep in mind that you are the one with dreams of being a TSA screener so I would imagine that of the two of us, you are the one more interested in "feeling up" scenarios

Ok.... again will tell you I am a housewife....

...and if ya do a search of my posts.... I never posted anything about personal searches on my "Whispering" falsehoods to agents at an airport....are ya gonna make me post that quote again?...

....and just when you were impressing these Coast Guard folks with your spelling and grammar usage.... Oh by the way, thank a teacher for that ....or not....
trixievictoria is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:31 pm
  #83  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Tampa, Florida, U.S.A.
Posts: 7,665
Originally Posted by BluesClue
Um actually Mike, I personally know THREE private marine surveyers, who are all either retired Coast Guard or in 1 case, a CG reservist. I know several other MSO types who plan to go into Marine survey upon retirement. I bet if you were to google it, you'd fine USCG experience in the background of many in your trade. It's a natural progression from the "M" field.
Not to beat a dead horse, but I specialize in displacement draft surveys a sub-field in the marine surveying field.
The reason why there are not many CG in that area is that most of the initial experience is garnered in being the chief officer on a bulk cargo vessel.
( container vessels grant you pitifully little such experience)
But since the US merchant marine is non-existent there are very, very few native born/raised US officers moving into that field.

I bet that in surveying well over 300 ships per year I have not worked a single US flagged or manned vessel in 12 years.

mike

Last edited by MIKESILV; Jan 30, 05 at 3:36 pm
MIKESILV is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:34 pm
  #84  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Programs: Alaska Airlines, Delta, UA Premier 1K, Hawaiian Air
Posts: 112
Originally Posted by MIKESILV
Fact:
F) THE COAST BOARDS ONLY A PERCENTAGE ( MY GUESS 20%) OF ALL VESSEL COMING INTO PORT AND THAT INCLUDES VESSELS CARRYING DANGEROUS CARGOES.
THE STORY ABOUT THEM BOARDING AND ESCORTING ALL HAZARDOUS CARGO VESSEL INTO PORT IS PURE HOGWASH.

mike
There is a greater chance of a vessel having a steering casualty and hitting the rocks than terrorist action. If the local Captain of the Port determines a vessel to be high interest shipping, it receives an escort.

I'm gathering from your posts that you think the number of boardings should be around 100%. What a waste of time and money for a threat that isn't there to begin with. Who do you think is going to pay for all of this nonsense?
MMA95D is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:35 pm
  #85  
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 61,966
Originally Posted by trixievictoria
....and just when you were impressing these Coast Guard folks with your spelling and grammar usage.... Oh by the way, thank a teacher for that ....or not....
I have been very fortunate in having some excellent teachers. Unfortunately, it seems that your students did not have the same luck that I did.
Dovster is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:41 pm
  #86  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: BWI
Programs: AA Gold, HH Silver, National Emerald Executive, TSA Disparager Gold
Posts: 15,122
Originally Posted by Dangling_Participle
Yes, the word "interdiction" is actually a word. Not that I would expect you to know it, but there you have it. Do you want me to post a definition?

Shall we take a trip into the world of Mike the Spelling Monkey? Let's go, kids!

acquire = aquire
Not to nitpick, but it IS acquire, not aquire.
Superguy is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:43 pm
  #87  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Alameda, CA
Programs: 1 month free at curves,Subway Sub Club, Alameda Library
Posts: 87
Originally Posted by Dovster
I have been very fortunate in having some excellent teachers. Unfortunately, it seems that your students did not have the same luck that I did.
Hey! I never said thank me....
trixievictoria is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 3:45 pm
  #88  
Suspended
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Tampa, Florida, U.S.A.
Posts: 7,665
Originally Posted by bstrickmma
There is a greater chance of a vessel having a steering casualty and hitting the rocks than terrorist action. If the local Captain of the Port determines a vessel to be high interest shipping, it receives an escort.

I'm gathering from your posts that you think the number of boardings should be around 100%. What a waste of time and money for a threat that isn't there to begin with. Who do you think is going to pay for all of this nonsense?
No, actually you misunderstand my position ( which actually is much closer to yours than you think) nowhere here did I ever say 100% boardings should be carried out, far from it. I am of the firm opinion that CG often seems to barking up the wrong tree(s) when they actually do board the vessels.

Gotta cut this short, I have a ship to go survey.

mike

Last edited by MIKESILV; Jan 30, 05 at 3:48 pm
MIKESILV is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 4:04 pm
  #89  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Programs: AA, NWA
Posts: 6
Talking Trained monkeys and the people who love them... Live, on the next Geraldo.

Introducing Dovster, who never wastes an opportunity to open his mouth and confirm his ignorance, when merely by staying silent others would only have suspected it!

As you have decided to be so childish as to attack Mikesilv's typing/spelling errors
Actually, he started it with his post confusing the words "indiction" (which, incidentally, is a word) and "interdiction". Or, did you miss that? I'm guessing you conveniently overlooked it in your haste to broadcast your own ignorance.

The fact is, Mike is staking his credibility in this discussion upon his own personal brilliance. Thus, his failure to grasp even the simplest concepts of English grammar, spelling and usage should clearly reflect upon the weight to be assigned to his words. Why? Because this is a text-based environment. My assumption (be it right, wrong or indifferent) is that Mike's statements are somewhat as important as the senseless babbling of an infant, largely because he has about the same competency level in his English mechanics as an infant. Perhaps he just has some deficiency in the area of attention to detail, or maybe he sincerely IS a moron. I don't know. What I -do- know is that in a text-based forum, if you present your "wisdom" in a hodgepodge of typographical, spelling, grammar and punctuation errors, it's really your own fault if others incorrectly are led by your sloppiness to believe that you're an idiot.

Ohright. This should be two words, separated by a comma
Not at all, I'm using this as a nonsense interjection, indicating my utter disbelief that anyone could be as ignorant as to post what was posted.

Do you truly consider this to be a complete sentence?
It doesn't need to be a complete sentence - it's solely the answer to the question immediately previous. The context is clear, and wholly grammatically acceptable.

"Ergo", being a word from a foreign language, should be placed in italics.
Perhaps you've been spending far too much time in Mike The Trained Monkey Land. You should have consulted a dictionary before you made this statement. The etymology of the word "ergo" is clearly from the Latin; however, it has been adopted into the English language along with countless other words of foreign origin, and now claims its place within the bounds of the English language.

According to Webster's:
Main Entry: er·go
Pronunciation: 'er-(")gO, '&r-
Function: adverb
Etymology: Middle English, from Latin, from Old Latin, because of, from (assumed) Old Latin e rogo from the direction (of)
: THEREFORE, HENCE
I realize I used some multisyllabic words in my explanation so, by all means, please do let me know if I need to break it down for you into short words with concrete examples. In simplest terms, italics are unneeded for words which, despite their foreign origins, have been adopted into standard English.

"Being" is incorrect; you should have used "is"
I bet your English teacher spent a small fortune on red pens when she corrected your papers, didn't she? The complete sentence is:
Ergo, the United States Coast Guard being the primary agency charged with maritime immigration interdiction duties.
The simple subject of the sentence is "United States Coast Guard". The simple predicate is the verb "charged". In order to be a complete sentence, all that is required is a subject and a predicate. This sentence has both and, despite your own ignorant bleating, is a complete sentence.

Honestly. You'd think if someone were going to give a lecture about something, he or she would at least attempt to educate him or herself about the subject at hand BEFORE he/she started typing. But, then again, thanks to Dovster, Mike and the internet, we now have absolute proof of the Infinite Monkey theorem!
Dangling_Participle is offline  
Old Jan 30, 05, 4:17 pm
  #90  
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Programs: Alaska Airlines, Delta, UA Premier 1K, Hawaiian Air
Posts: 112
D_P

Welcome to Flyer Talk. As you can see, we have lively discussions here that, more often than not, stray off topic. I suggest you be careful about getting wrapped up in the emotion of the moment though. Name calling detracts from you dignity.
MMA95D is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread