Rare Copper10-8 Posted June 28, 2006 Author #51 Share Posted June 28, 2006 Port Waneemee;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jhannah Posted June 28, 2006 #52 Share Posted June 28, 2006 I did have to laugh at some on the newcasters trying to pronounce it. It is newscasters, but doubt that spell check would have caught it. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Cruiser78 Posted June 29, 2006 #53 Share Posted June 29, 2006 It has been spuced up and is acceptable. Not the best, not the worse, but is adequate. On par with SD or San Pedro or Honolulu Aloha piers... Glad to hear it! I haven't been to Pier 35 since my Mercury cruise in '03 and it while it looked okay on the outside then, inside it resembled a delapidated warehouse. I was under the impression that nothing was going be done to it since a brand-new terminal is in the works. Apparently I misspoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Cruiser78 Posted June 29, 2006 #54 Share Posted June 29, 2006 Port Waneemee;) Cahuenga is another good tongue-twister for tourists! (For those of you not familiar with L.A., Cahuenga is a mountain pass that runs near the Hollywood Bowl). It is pronounced cow-enga, more or less. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ekerr19 Posted June 29, 2006 #55 Share Posted June 29, 2006 This issue may turn out to be ancillary to a much bigger one. A report came out this week from the Public Policy Instute that finds the entire (freight) Port of LA is extremely vulnerable to terrorism and major changes are needed. That report includes all freight handling activities at Long Beach, San Pedro and other parts of the LA Ports system. (Port Huaneme, a military/freight port about 75 miles north of the Port of LA was just closed down because of a security threat.) Stay tuned. Passenger terminals will likely be part of any changes that are made. Interesting information, thanks Walt. Having just returned from an RCI cruise to San Pedro in May, I also support the opinion that changes need to be made. The port has the Port Authority agents/staff on hand, no doubt about that and I'll be interested to see what changes are made - how they are currently using those individuals (and resources) leaves much to be desired, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
newmexicoNita Posted June 29, 2006 #56 Share Posted June 29, 2006 We sailed out of San Pedro about 7 years ago and it was a pit then; now we add the security factor: Until something is done we will forget saiing anywhere out of LA. NMNita Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Cruiser78 Posted June 29, 2006 #57 Share Posted June 29, 2006 This issue may turn out to be ancillary to a much bigger one. A report came out this week from the Public Policy Instute that finds the entire (freight) Port of LA is extremely vulnerable to terrorism and major changes are needed. That report includes all freight handling activities at Long Beach, San Pedro and other parts of the LA Ports system. (Port Huaneme, a military/freight port about 75 miles north of the Port of LA was just closed down because of a security threat.) Stay tuned. Passenger terminals will likely be part of any changes that are made. It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out. Up here in the (S.F.) Bay Area, our major ports were seen by either this or a similar report to be quite vulnerable as well. However some of the policy makers here are saying that adequately securing our ports is virtually impossible given the freight volume and that the money would be better spent on developing better means to deal with the aftermath of an attack. Scary stuff... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Copper10-8 Posted June 30, 2006 Author #58 Share Posted June 30, 2006 It will be interesting to see how this all shakes out. Up here in the (S.F.) Bay Area, our major ports were seen by either this or a similar report to be quite vulnerable as well. However some of the policy makers here are saying that adequately securing our ports is virtually impossible given the freight volume and that the money would be better spent on developing better means to deal with the aftermath of an attack. Scary stuff... Hate to say it but all large/very large cargo/pax ports are vulnerable due to the shear volume of stuff coming in. Won't be easy to solve! Kahunga;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Cruiser78 Posted June 30, 2006 #59 Share Posted June 30, 2006 Kahunga;) I stand corrected by a true Angeleno (I just visit now and then). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cands Posted July 1, 2006 #60 Share Posted July 1, 2006 I have just read this whole thread, and as a foreiger am a little confused. I understand the machinations of what it means to cruising in the USA, but does it serve any useful purpose? It seams quaint and antiquated - not something you would expect from the superpower of the world. Has anyone thought of changing the law? Just curious. BTW, we arrived in San Francisco from Hawaii in 2002 on P&O's Oriana. The warehouse like terminal had a big faded sign saying 'Matson Line'. We felt like we had been transported back to the 1950s - it was cool:) Steve. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCal Cruiser78 Posted July 1, 2006 #61 Share Posted July 1, 2006 I have just read this whole thread, and as a foreiger am a little confused.I understand the machinations of what it means to cruising in the USA, but does it serve any useful purpose? It seams quaint and antiquated - not something you would expect from the superpower of the world. Has anyone thought of changing the law? Just curious... The law IS antiquated and has outlived its usefulness, in my opinion. I read that Senator John McCain was involved with an effort to repeal it shortly before 9/11. I have heard nothing more about it since then. My guess is that it was put on the back burner after the terrorist attacks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rare Copper10-8 Posted July 1, 2006 Author #62 Share Posted July 1, 2006 The law IS antiquated and has outlived its usefulness, in my opinion. I read that Senator John McCain was involved with an effort to repeal it shortly before 9/11. I have heard nothing more about it since then. My guess is that it was put on the back burner after the terrorist attacks. I'm with you! Get rid of it as it has outlived it's usefullness. I hope Senator McCain picks up where he left off! BTW, no native/true Angeleno here, just learned to adapt, overcome, improvise;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hunzabunz Posted July 1, 2006 #63 Share Posted July 1, 2006 Back to the west coast stops. I think that would be so great!!!! I live in Lompoc, CA which is just 40 miles north of Santa Barbara right by Vandenberg AirForce Base. Heck a stop in SB and we could hit my house to have the good ole Santa Maria Style BBQ!!!!! By the way, Princess just had a stop in May at SB. If SB and the local wine country had any brains they would work on this being a prime shipping stop. The local news said that the area made a lot of tourist money just on that 1 stop and those PAX interviewed were quite impressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.