Armond Perretta wrote:

Marley wrote:

Armond Perretta wrote:

Jim Carter wrote:


... read the law again ... I have interpreted it to mean that I, a
Canadian
citizen, and my boat, which is Canadain registered, will be
seized by the US Govermnet Agencies empowered by this law, if
they perceive that I will be travelling in US waters and my
"intent" is to travel from US waters to Cuba.


... Try:

http://www.treas.gov/offices/enforce...uide-cuba.html

... There is no provision in the referenced regulations
that affects these "laws of the sea" ...
... If it can be demonstrated that provisions
exist in the regulations that authorize US government agencies to
interfere with non-US vessels on the high seas (barring
extraordinary circumstances), I would certainly like to learn
about it.

Wrong Armond.

JUST WRONG


Thanks for the elaborate clarification.

It is true now, and has been so for some time, that _all_ vessels operating
in US territorial waters are subject to regulation by US authorities. It
is also true that non-US vessels in international waters are not subject to
US authorities.

The referenced document states:

"The Secretary may make rules and regulations governing the anchorage and
movement of any vessel, foreign or domestic, in the territorial waters of
the United States, which may be used, or is susceptible of being used, for
voyage into Cuban territorial waters and that may create unsafe conditions,
or result in unauthorized transactions, and thereby threaten a disturbance
of international relations."

Nothing in this portion of the statement addresses, either directly or
indirectly, the _seizure_ of foreign vessels in US waters capable of going
offshore.

The referenced document further states:

"The Secretary is authorized to inspect any vessel, foreign or domestic, in
the territorial waters of the United States, at any time; to place guards on
any such vessel; and, with my consent expressly hereby granted, take full
possession and control of any such vessel and remove the officers and crew
and all other persons not specifically authorized by the Secretary to go or
remain on board the vessel when necessary to secure the rights and
obligations of the United States."

Once again there is no mention of Cuba in this portion of the statement. In
fact this proclamation is not different in degree or kind from the then
existing regulations.

If a vessel, US or otherwise, waves a "red flag" in front of the
authorities, it is quite likely that those authorities will react. This is
not news. A careful reading of the referenced document does not agree with
the vessel seizure interpretation proposed elsewhere in this thread.

It is hard enough dealing with patently absurd regulations as things stand.
There is no need to go the "urban legend" route.


Seriously Armond,

How in HELL can you even post this position Armond.

You read the ENTIRE proclamation, and then decide all by your self that
part A is somehow not connected to part B. The entire procamation is
about Cuba. You can NOT arbitrarily decide that one part applies to Cuba
and the rest doesn't. That just smacks of denial.

Frankly Armond, that is quite probably the most pathetic attempt at
avoiding responsibility for posting in error that I have ever seen.

In fact, in doing that it appears so pathetic that I would have expected
it from the likes of JaxAshby! (Low blow, I know).

Nice to see that you can read an official proclamation DIRECTLY FROM the
White House web site and arbitrarily declare that it's "urban legend".
Remarably impressive display of denial Armond!