La Vagabonde - I don't understand

[smj]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Must be a us citizen to have the vessel documented . iirc the vessel has to be USA manufactured for commercial fishing in American economic zone

I thought so as well, until I read this. Section under corporations.

https://www.marlinmag.com/foreign-ci...g-boats-in-us/

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by smj

I thought so as well, until I read this. Section under corporations.

https://www.marlinmag.com/foreign-ci...g-boats-in-us/

Non citizen allowed for non commercial purposes and can not be USCG documented without American citizens in majority on board of directors

[smj]

Originally Posted by newhaul

Non citizen allowed for non commercial purposes and can not be USCG documented without American citizens in majority on board of directors

Yes, but it states non citizens are able to have full ownership of a US documented vessel

[newhaul]

Originally Posted by smj

Yes, but it states non citizens are able to have full ownership of a US documented vessel

I can not find that in the rules anywhere any USCG documented vessel must be majority American citizens owned.

[dfelsent]

46 CFR 1 G

§67.5 Vessels eligible for documentation.
Any vessel of at least five net tons wholly owned by a citizen or citizens of the United States is eligible for documentation under this part. This includes, but is not limited to, vessels used exclusively for recreational purposes and vessels used in foreign trade.

[Rjstutch]

Originally Posted by newhaul

And all of those fires were human caused either by negligence or intent.

BTW you should read miss thunbergs Twitter feed it is a bit eye opening . Not to mention one of her aunts is a Rothschild.

The point about the fires was that Elayna and Riley were visiting where posible east coast family and friends.
The fires of 2019/20 in Australia some could well have been started by arsonists or negligence but in enquiries since many were started by natural causes like lightning. The reason they were the worst on record was that it didn't rain for over 6 months and once started these fires were impossible to stop. Have a look at an image where people drove into a shallow saltwater lake to get away from these fires. I was just crazy and didn't stop until we got flooded with all the rain we should have got in the 6 months.
I dont look at twitter but all these conspiracies against Greta Thunberg have been dispelled and the links provided in this article.
https://www.poynter.org/fact-checking/2019/hoaxes-about-greta-thunberg-go-after-her-family-image-and-activism-but-why/

[Creedence]

Originally Posted by Rjstutch

The point about the fires was that Elayna and Riley were visiting where posible east coast family and friends.
The fires of 2019/20 in Australia some could well have been started by arsonists or negligence but in enquiries since many were started by natural causes like lightning. The reason they were the worst on record was that it didn't rain for over 6 months and once started these fires were impossible to stop. Have a look at an image where people drove into a shallow saltwater lake to get away from these fires. I was just crazy and didn't stop until we got flooded with all the rain we should have got in the 6 months.
I dont look at twitter but all these conspiracies against Greta Thunberg have been dispelled and the links provided in this article.
https://www.poynter.org/fact-checkin...ivism-but-why/

Are there still people in this world who believe objectivity exists in these sources? Liberal/conservative, my tribe/your tribe, blah blah blah.

You’ll see what you want to see, and those who hold opposing views will do the same. It’s no effort at all to source a fact-checker who opposes your points, and I think that’s where the resistance of this individual stems from. She’s a brand. You love it or you hate it. But she isn’t some organically driven youth fighting the good fight without support. Nor are the people who carry the opposing message.

This girl’s handlers play the same algorithm game that the Vagabond couple are riding. There’s really nothing to “get” about it. Marketing and PR firms do this professionally. They’re professionally good at making it seem like this is all organic interest in whatever they’re flogging.

[Davy J]

Originally Posted by Davy J

I guess you missed the post where I showed a video of that environmental hypocrite talking about sailing the juvenile climate expert across the Atlantic, then flying and dropping off his wife and future environmental hack in Perth, then on to Sydney. (thanks Factor for the correct spelling.....)

Originally Posted by Chili Palmer

Link?

Right back here, on page 14:

Originally Posted by Davy J

Here's video of the environmental idiot, opps, sorry, champion describing his flights across the world to be there:

Good thing they didn't use a drop of jet fuel on the mental midget

[Mapoz]

Originally Posted by jojolimited

Canada does not have first amendment protections. You say something that is politically unpopular and considered insulting against a protected group, you can be prosecuted.

You are mistaken. Canada has a Charter of Rights, and section 2 protects freedom of thought, belief, expression and opinion. It does, however, have different hate speech laws than the USA - and that’s IMHO a good thing. Apologies for this on a thread about two Aussies’ sailing channel, but BS needs to be corrected.

[jojolimited]

Originally Posted by Mapoz

You are mistaken. Canada has a Charter of Rights, and section 2 protects freedom of thought, belief, expression and opinion. It does, however, have different hate speech laws than the USA - and that’s IMHO a good thing. Apologies for this on a thread about two Aussies’ sailing channel, but BS needs to be corrected.

Not BS. Your laws would not be legal in the USA, hence you don't have first amendment protections. Unlike Canadians, USA citizens don't need a nanny govt to handle obnoxious offensive jerks. So your hate speech laws are onerous and tyrannical.

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by jojolimited

Not BS. Your laws would not be legal in the USA, hence you don't have first amendment protections. Unlike Canadians, USA citizens don't need a nanny govt to handle obnoxious offensive jerks. So your hate speech laws are onerous and tyrannical.

ROTFLMAO!!!

[jojolimited]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

ROTFLMAO!!!

We aim to please. Especially when I'm correct. I don't expect a Canadian to get my point. No problems though.

[Macblaze]

Originally Posted by jojolimited

We aim to please. Especially when I'm correct. I don't expect a Canadian to get my point. No problems though.

ROTFLMAO!!!

[jojolimited]

Originally Posted by Macblaze

ROTFLMAO!!!

You've agreed with me twice. No need to. But thanks anyway. Contrary to what most people think, USA and Canada are very different cultures. Only sharing a common language. You really don't understand our bill of rights in context, nor do I expect you to. You're repeating "ROTFLMAO" is cute though. Thanks for reading. Can I get a 3rd one from you now? Pretty please?

[belizesailor]

Originally Posted by jojolimited

Not BS. Your laws would not be legal in the USA, hence you don't have first amendment protections. Unlike Canadians, USA citizens don't need a nanny govt to handle obnoxious offensive jerks. So your hate speech laws are onerous and tyrannical.

Speaking of obnoxious offensive jerks.