TRANS-ATLANTIC 9'4'to 9/14/03

Asya,
I don't need a spelling or grammar lesson from you or anyone else. So my
spelling is not perfect, deal with it. It seems you understood perfectly
the points I was trying to get across.

Your sole intent seems an attempt to discredit my post based on spelling
errors. I think you can do better then that.

Yes I meant "vulnerability", but thank you for pointing it out. And no, I
did NOT mean "denigrade" (is this a word? - not according to Webster's), I
meant degrade. Look it up. Possibly you meant "denigrate", but then you
don't make mistakes, do you? I will try not to play teacher like you did
and with withhold "correcting" the rest of your post.

I don't know about you Asya, but I have worked onboard ship as a Purser for
a few years, and spent several years working in the head office for two
major cruise lines. I know the procedures of how crew are hired, screened,
etc. What credentials do you have in this regard? I have also traveled the
world extensively (including all those third world countries I was
mentioning), have you? When I stated many of "these", yes I said "these"
countries do not have the capability for background checks on every citizen,
it was not something I made up. It is fact.

You feel once a crew member is hired, let them do their job. Well, that is
exactly what is happening now with basically little regard to security. If
proper pre-screenings were able to be accomplished, this might not be such a
bad idea. Of course this is not a perfect world and these screenings are
just not possible, and also are too expensive. So we are left with the
notion of the crew going through the same screenings as passengers when
embarking and disembarking the ship. What is so wrong with this, and how
does it keep them from "doing their job". Passengers are actually
pre-screened to a much higher degree then crew, and must still endure the
routine security checks when getting on and off the ship. Why not the crew?

And please Asya, please refrain from correcting any spelling or grammar
errors in this post, frankly I'm not interested in your teaching skills.
Save it for your children or students, and besides which, you didn't do a
very good job.

Ernie






"Asya Kamsky" wrote in message
...
In article ,
E.k.R. wrote:
about the crew. This is certainly the largest venerability concerning

I think you mean "vulnerability".

Crew on the other hand endure very little security. Unlike airline
employees, which are fingerprinted and have an extensive background
check,
none of this is required for cruise ship crews. In fact even if it were,
it
would be rather difficult. Many of the crew come from 3rd world
countries
where things like background checks are unheard of. Frankly, many are
lucky

Okay, I'm not sure where you get this information. Most every country
in the world has police and court systems that have things like criminal
records on file.

to have a record of berth. They are hired by recruiting agencies
employed

Birth. And that's rather presumptuous of you. This crew isn't hired
from the jungles, third world countries aren't as backward as you seem
to think they are.

Recruiting agencies
resorted to areas of the world they never considered before,

You mean, like Eastern Europe where literacy rates are much higher than
they are in this country?

still venerable. I'm also not trying to degrade the crew or make them
out
to be the bad guy.

Do you mean denigrade?

I don't know if there is one, but a start would be a more
thorough inspection of all crew members embarking and disembarking the
ship
at every port of call. I think it's impossible to perform background
checks
(they just don't exist in many of these countries),

I disagree. Many of "these" countries have background checks just like
this country does.

Once someone is screened and hired, they should be allowed to do
their job.
--
Asya Kamsky

"To forgive is an act of compassion. It is not done because
people deserve it, it's done because they need it." -- Rupert Giles.

Karen, coming back only a few days later than you and Hans, we agree
thoroughly. It is not fun having to wait in line, but it beats being
ballast for a weapons system. And yes, British Airways did an
excellent job of getting us home. They lost a lot of buisness because
by the Friday after the Norway docked (9/21) the New York bound flight
was half filled. And, yes, seeing the pile where the WTC omce stood
really hurt.

Unless we want more airplanes used as building demolition material,
then we will need to put up with these "German Gestapo" tactics at airports.
Frankly I feel it is a small price to pay!

I feel the same way. Having to fly home from Europe days after
9-11-01, the only thing I wanted was a secure feeling when I got on
that plane. BA out of Heathrow did an excellent job.

All I ask is to be safe.

Karen

__ /7__/7__/7__
\::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.cupcaked.com/reviews
(...and leave off the "potatoes" to e-mail)

Bob Gow
"Experience is what you get when
you expected something else."

In article ,
E.k.R. wrote:
I don't know about you Asya, but I have worked onboard ship as a Purser for
a few years, and spent several years working in the head office for two
major cruise lines. I know the procedures of how crew are hired, screened,
etc. What credentials do you have in this regard? I have also traveled the
world extensively (including all those third world countries I was
mentioning), have you?

Yeah, I've also actually lived in some of those countries. And you know
what? They keep records. They have criminals and tend to know who they
are. Many of these countries even have something we in the US don't have,
a national ID card or a passport, mandatory for adults.

Btw, in *this* country, a background check for a job is usually a
fairly meaningless driving record search. Occassionally it would
be a criminal record search (in the state you're in, only!)

I don't see how that provides much security some people seek.

pre-screened to a much higher degree then crew, and must still endure the
routine security checks when getting on and off the ship. Why not the crew?

Because the impression I've gotten while getting on and off the ship is
that they were a lot more interested in looking for liquor to confiscate
than, say, explosives. I suppose if they saw a gun on the xray they'd
stop me, but many dangerous substances would not show up with the screening
methods they use.

Honestly, I'm not worried about terrorists getting a *job* on a cruiseship
to do damage when it's much easier to get on the ship as a passenger and
takes much less time. And last I checked ships can't be crashed into
skyscrapers or the White House...

--
Asya Kamsky

"To forgive is an act of compassion. It is not done because
people deserve it, it's done because they need it." -- Rupert Giles.

Before I went to work for the Fed Govt they had investigators going to
my neighbours asking quite personel questions.

SUNNY.........wonders if this is still carried out

S'nd I

JASON: Still no reason to be out & out rude to people,if they had done
this before there would not have been a 9/11,they can still do their
job,and not be storm troopers,they were so beligerent,that their
supervisor told us he was sorry ,and had a talk with them,have traveled
many airports since 9/11,and never met any like at logan,and hope never
to meet them again,if so we will stop flying,aliens get away with much
more than a law abiding american citizen
Annie

"Asya Kamsky" wrote in message
...

Yeah, I've also actually lived in some of those countries. And you know
what? They keep records. They have criminals and tend to know who they
are. Many of these countries even have something we in the US don't have,
a national ID card or a passport, mandatory for adults.


Yes, although a National ID card does not necessarily mean you are not a
criminal. The US is also considering a National ID card.




Btw, in *this* country, a background check for a job is usually a
fairly meaningless driving record search. Occassionally it would
be a criminal record search (in the state you're in, only!)

I don't see how that provides much security some people seek.


I agree, which is why security is necessary at the source, be it an airplane
or cruise ship. The background check would only be one of several layers of
security.




Because the impression I've gotten while getting on and off the ship is
that they were a lot more interested in looking for liquor to confiscate
than, say, explosives. I suppose if they saw a gun on the xray they'd
stop me, but many dangerous substances would not show up with the
screening
methods they use.


This is probably true, but at least there is some deterrent. There is none
for the crew.




Honestly, I'm not worried about terrorists getting a *job* on a cruiseship
to do damage when it's much easier to get on the ship as a passenger and
takes much less time. And last I checked ships can't be crashed into
skyscrapers or the White House...


Actually, I think it would be easier and more effective for a terrorist to
get a job on a cruise ship then to come aboard as passengers. Less
suspicion, and there could be several working together onboard in different
parts of the ship. By being part of the crew, they have access to almost
all areas of the ship without suspicion. They can figure out which areas of
the ship are most vulnerable, and where they can do the most damage. This
would probably take more time then just being a passenger on a ship for a
week. Also, it's easy to get hired on as crew, and virtually no skill or
training is required.. It's not like they would have to learn how to fly an
airplane.

As you mentioned, a ship can't be crashed into the White House, but the
White House is not my major concern. It's more a symbol then anything.
Blowing up 3000 mostly US passengers on a cruise ship would have quite an
impact, with possibly more casualties then 9/11. It would also devastate
the entire industry.

Chances are something like this will never happen, at least I pray that it
doesn't, but who could have ever imagined 9/11 either? The cruise industry
is only one of thousands of possible easy targets, and there *will* be
another terrorist act, that is a given.

Ernie - who has no intention to discontinue cruises, or flying for that
matter. Just making note of a lapse in security that would be easy to
rectify.

I recently heard from a friend that cruises quite a bit (5-6 cruises a
year). He called Celebrity about six months ago to enquire about some
details regarding some cruises he was planning. The reservation agent
answered his questions and he went on to sail on CONSTELLATION on a
transatlantic sailing. A couple days ago, he received a visit from the FBI.
As it turns out, the reservation agent at Celebrity felt he was asking too
many "specific and detailed" questions, and turned him into the FBI as a
possible terrorist. He was dubbed an "anonymous caller", and Celebrity's
phone records were searched for his number. He actually remembers the
agent, and recalls she could barely speak English like so many in South
Florida. His words were "she spoke like she was just off the boat from
Cuba". Ironic!

What else is really ironic, or should I say pathetic, is that my friend
already sailed on CONSTELLATION well before the FBI got around to
questioning him! The damage would have already been done were there any
intent! Also, he is a flight attendant for a major US airline and has had a
thorough background check and has been fingerprinted as required by the
FAA/TSA. Also, he has sailed on Celebrity some 60+ days over the years and
is well established within Celebrity's database.

Needless to say, he was furious about this ridiculous intrusion and has
since written Celebrity and RCI protesting.

Of course the reply will be something along the line of, "it's for your own
protection and security". What a joke. Once again everything is justified
in the name of "security". It's such a farce. I'm all for security, but
again, effective security that actually accomplishes something. More and
more rights are being given up in the name of security.

Ernie - who recommends being very careful what you ask when calling a cruise
line!




"villa deauville" wrote in message
...
Before I went to work for the Fed Govt they had investigators going to
my neighbours asking quite personel questions.

SUNNY.........wonders if this is still carried out

S'nd I

villa deauville wrote:

Before I went to work for the Fed Govt they had investigators going to
my neighbours asking quite personel questions.

SUNNY.........wonders if this is still carried out

When you go for a Dept. of Defense Security Clearance, they do talk to
neighbours and interview your friends. Yes, they still do it.

sue

I remember circling Newark Airport on our way in and not wanting to
look out the window at what I knew I would see . . . or what I
woul;dn't see any more. It was as if I didn't look, it wouldn't be
true. What a whole weird trip that was.

On another more cheerful note: 'Coming to the WSS (previously the
Ocean Liner Museum) Holiday Bazaar this December, Bob? :-)

Karen

Bob Gow wrote:

Karen, coming back only a few days later than you and Hans, we agree
thoroughly. It is not fun having to wait in line, but it beats being
ballast for a weapons system. And yes, British Airways did an
excellent job of getting us home. They lost a lot of buisness because
by the Friday after the Norway docked (9/21) the New York bound flight
was half filled. And, yes, seeing the pile where the WTC omce stood
really hurt.

Unless we want more airplanes used as building demolition material,
then we will need to put up with these "German Gestapo" tactics at airports.
Frankly I feel it is a small price to pay!

I feel the same way. Having to fly home from Europe days after
9-11-01, the only thing I wanted was a secure feeling when I got on
that plane. BA out of Heathrow did an excellent job.

All I ask is to be safe.

Karen

__ /7__/7__/7__
\::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.cupcaked.com/reviews
(...and leave off the "potatoes" to e-mail)

Bob Gow
"Experience is what you get when
you expected something else."


__ /7__/7__/7__
\::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

http://www.cupcaked.com/reviews
(...and leave off the "potatoes" to e-mail)

Without saying anymore, I think you can read between the lines. What is the
solution?

Before you look for a "solution", you need to identify a "problem". So
far, I don't see that you've done that. All you've done is spread what
is called "FUD" in the Defense Contracting business. You've cited no
actual instance of being endangered by the Cruise Industry.

"FUD" = "Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt"


Gary