Chebby
Guest
MSilvia, where do you spear for flounder? I've seen very little this year, mostly at Folly, are there any better places?
sorry for this post
- Thread starter MadisonK
- Start date
Please register or login
Welcome to ScubaBoard, the world's largest scuba diving community. Registration is not required to read the forums, but we encourage you to join. Joining has its benefits and enables you to participate in the discussions.
Benefits of registering include
- Ability to post and comment on topics and discussions.
- A Free photo gallery to share your dive photos with the world.
- You can make this box go away
- Status
You guys know more about spearfishing than I do. I have seen plenty of small pollock, stripers, bluefish, dogfish, flounder, lobsters up here on Cape Ann but I have yet to see a Cod. Doesn't mean they aren't there though.
I got out of this discourse what I wanted without hassling law enforcement and more importantly without hassling these guys. I look at this entire conversation as a sum of its parts not a specific discussion on what they were fishing for, what temp it was, what they looked like etc. When I added it all up I found it "out of the ordinary" enough that I wanted a second opinion.
No harm no foul.
Let's let this one die - I have to get back to work
I got out of this discourse what I wanted without hassling law enforcement and more importantly without hassling these guys. I look at this entire conversation as a sum of its parts not a specific discussion on what they were fishing for, what temp it was, what they looked like etc. When I added it all up I found it "out of the ordinary" enough that I wanted a second opinion.
No harm no foul.
Let's let this one die - I have to get back to work
I saw a very interesting documentary called "the control room". A very interesting look at how the US media is in a lot of ways, worse than al-jazeera, at creating and feeding propaganda to the public to gobble up as though it were McDonalds.
Just as the original poster was suspicious, he was also suspicious that he was guilty of racial profiling. If the only thing that sets off an alarm bell is race...come to Canada, where it's way colder, and you'll see all sorts of wetsuit divers in the middle of winter.
America has to realize that their government is using terrror as a very effective media campaign. Really, the rest of the world can't be wrong...
Just as the original poster was suspicious, he was also suspicious that he was guilty of racial profiling. If the only thing that sets off an alarm bell is race...come to Canada, where it's way colder, and you'll see all sorts of wetsuit divers in the middle of winter.
America has to realize that their government is using terrror as a very effective media campaign. Really, the rest of the world can't be wrong...
MSilvia
Contributor
I'll take it up in a new thread.Chebby:
I would have to agree with this. You need to use your judgement before you decide to report something. So far I believe you have been trying to. That's why to posted here in the first place.RIOceanographer:
However, if you had given it more thought you probably would have found that unnecessary. Your main concerns seem to be the cold and the types of fish they were spearing.
I don't think you have enough information to be suspicious about either. I was out diving wet a few weeks ago when both the air and water temperatures were in the mid thirties. Does that make me a terrorist, a hardcore diver or just plain stupid? You don't have enough information to know.
Secondly, why is diving wet in poor conditions suspect? Aren't terrorist allowed to buy dry suits? The 9/11 bombers didn't seem to have a problem financing their operations. Just because you're going on a suicide mission doesn't mean you need to do so poorly equipped.
You state that you have lived in the area along time and the fish they were looking for aren't in the area. Fine, but have the two brothers lived in the area long. Maybe they don't know any better. If they were foreigners it's not hard to imagine that they are misinformed about local fauna and flora. The same is true about whether it is legal for them to be spearing the fish. They may not be aware of the restrictions or they simply may not have cared and were spearing illegally. In which case, it should be the DNR that is informed.
From the information you have given I think you should not be worried about it and stop second quessing yourself.
ranger979:
Maybe, but I CAN form an opinion.
Let me just say, two out of three.
I did a wetsuit dive in Antarctica.
What does that say about me?
Mostly it says that I was very lucky to be in the right place at the right time to do a dive with humpback whales.
I would have used a drysuit but didn't have one with me. I was after all there to repair and operate radios and electroncis on RV Hero, not to dive.
MadisonK:
Threads never die.... they just go off on tangents.....
MASS-Diver
Contributor
What is counts as suspect these day, espically in the light of the front page of the Boston Globe today (showing the blask zone of the LNG tankers)?
Rebreathers? Diving near shipping zones? Diving at night near shipping zones? Observing tankers with cameras and field glasses? Diving with large bags with you? Buy a ton of gear from a local shop with cash? Diving in all black (like me)?
I don't know.....but I do know that if you live near Boston you are sitting right near a prime target. Security is supposed to heavy around the tankers, watching for suicide small boats (Like the hit the Cole with), but why not use a few divers strapped with explosives? It would certainly kill a lot of people in a symbolic city (the cradle of the american revolution).
Was it last year that Hamas used SCUBA gear to infiltrate a Israel resort? I belive both terrorist were killed, but it was pretty slick plan.
In Boston, why build a huge bomb when one already exists? These HUGE tanks crawl right to next densely populated areas - swim out on the surface with scuba gear and you are in buisness.
And of course, we know these guys would love to hit us again around the Holidays.
As divers, I think it's best to keep our eyes open, at least for blantant stuff.
Rebreathers? Diving near shipping zones? Diving at night near shipping zones? Observing tankers with cameras and field glasses? Diving with large bags with you? Buy a ton of gear from a local shop with cash? Diving in all black (like me)?
I don't know.....but I do know that if you live near Boston you are sitting right near a prime target. Security is supposed to heavy around the tankers, watching for suicide small boats (Like the hit the Cole with), but why not use a few divers strapped with explosives? It would certainly kill a lot of people in a symbolic city (the cradle of the american revolution).
Was it last year that Hamas used SCUBA gear to infiltrate a Israel resort? I belive both terrorist were killed, but it was pretty slick plan.
In Boston, why build a huge bomb when one already exists? These HUGE tanks crawl right to next densely populated areas - swim out on the surface with scuba gear and you are in buisness.
And of course, we know these guys would love to hit us again around the Holidays.
As divers, I think it's best to keep our eyes open, at least for blantant stuff.
MASS-Diver
Contributor
From the front Page of Todays "Boston Herald"
Feds: Tanker attack would destroy Hub
By Jay Fitzgerald
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
A new government report commissioned to allay fears about LNG shipments confirms the nightmare scenario that a terrorist attack against a tanker in Boston Harbor could ignite an inferno that would scorch humans and damage buildings for nearly a mile around.
The study by the Sandia National Laboratory, a government nuclear weapons lab, was commissioned a year ago by the Department of Energy in reaction to a Herald report about yet another study that said an LNG tanker mishap could devastate neighborhoods in Boston, Charlestown and Everett with pulsating heat waves shot from a damaged tanker.
The Associated Press yesterday said it had obtained a 160-page unclassified version of the Sandia report. The AP said the study concludes that the probability of a terrorist attack on an LNG ship remains low, due to tight security.
But if a successful attack were to occur, it would be a ``high consequence event'' that could produce massive injuries and property damage, the AP reported.
That's all local officials had to hear.
``It reinforces what I have been saying over the years about what a terrorist attack in Boston Harbor could mean to the safety of our citizens,'' said U.S. Rep. Edward Markey (D-Malden), who authored legislation to limit future LNG facility construction.
A spokesman for Mayor Thomas M. Menino, a longtime critic of LNG shipments through the harbor to a Distrigas facility in Everett, said the new study shows a terrorist attack could have a ``catastrophic'' impact on Boston.
Seth Gitell said the mayor is adamant that a way should be found to offload liquefied natural gas without huge tankers going through Boston Harbor.
A spokesman for Distrigas could not be reached for comment last night.
But an Energy Department official said there should not be some sort of ``no ship zone.''
``What we've learned is that we can significantly reduce the likelihood of a terrorist attack occurring with security planning and mitigation,'' Mark Maddox, a deputy assistant secretary at the Energy Department, told AP.
The Sandia study is yet the latest report that debunks official explanations for reopening Boston Harbor to LNG shipments after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001. Using what many critics consider now discredited reports, federal officials minimized the potential impact of an LNG incident in Boston Harbor to justify renewed LNG shipments.
Feds: Tanker attack would destroy Hub
By Jay Fitzgerald
Tuesday, December 21, 2004
A new government report commissioned to allay fears about LNG shipments confirms the nightmare scenario that a terrorist attack against a tanker in Boston Harbor could ignite an inferno that would scorch humans and damage buildings for nearly a mile around.
The study by the Sandia National Laboratory, a government nuclear weapons lab, was commissioned a year ago by the Department of Energy in reaction to a Herald report about yet another study that said an LNG tanker mishap could devastate neighborhoods in Boston, Charlestown and Everett with pulsating heat waves shot from a damaged tanker.
The Associated Press yesterday said it had obtained a 160-page unclassified version of the Sandia report. The AP said the study concludes that the probability of a terrorist attack on an LNG ship remains low, due to tight security.
But if a successful attack were to occur, it would be a ``high consequence event'' that could produce massive injuries and property damage, the AP reported.
That's all local officials had to hear.
``It reinforces what I have been saying over the years about what a terrorist attack in Boston Harbor could mean to the safety of our citizens,'' said U.S. Rep. Edward Markey (D-Malden), who authored legislation to limit future LNG facility construction.
A spokesman for Mayor Thomas M. Menino, a longtime critic of LNG shipments through the harbor to a Distrigas facility in Everett, said the new study shows a terrorist attack could have a ``catastrophic'' impact on Boston.
Seth Gitell said the mayor is adamant that a way should be found to offload liquefied natural gas without huge tankers going through Boston Harbor.
A spokesman for Distrigas could not be reached for comment last night.
But an Energy Department official said there should not be some sort of ``no ship zone.''
``What we've learned is that we can significantly reduce the likelihood of a terrorist attack occurring with security planning and mitigation,'' Mark Maddox, a deputy assistant secretary at the Energy Department, told AP.
The Sandia study is yet the latest report that debunks official explanations for reopening Boston Harbor to LNG shipments after the 9/11 terrorist attacks in 2001. Using what many critics consider now discredited reports, federal officials minimized the potential impact of an LNG incident in Boston Harbor to justify renewed LNG shipments.
Scott Riemer
Contributor
No offense, you believe what you want. But, the rest of the world didn't experience 9/11 the same way the U.S. did. About a week ago Osama Bin Laden praised his followers for attacking the US Consulate in Saudi Arabia. It's not about the US vs. the rest of the world. It's about fighting terrorism that is directed at a nation for what it symbolizes.opiniongirl:
- Status
Similar threads
