"Massport extending fee for fliers; Surcharge covers work on runways, terminals" by Casey Ross, Globe Staff | March 19, 2009
The Massachusetts Port Authority yesterday extended by six years a $4.50 fee on passengers to help pay for improvements to runways and terminals at Logan International Airport.
What, Obama's stimulus not covering it?
See: Look What Made the State Stimulus Wish List
The passenger fee, which has been in place since 1993, will be extended into 2024 to pay for hundreds of millions of dollars in upgrades at the airport. Massport already had approval to levy the fee through 2018, officials said.
Money raised from the fee will pay for rehabilitation of several runways, upgrades to terminals, and construction of an expanded safety area to protect airplanes landing on runway 33L, which must be extended to comply with federal regulations.
"This is the right thing to do from a safety standpoint," Massport chief executive Thomas Kinton said. "This will make us whole as far as having all of our runways in compliance."
The improvements to 33L, which was the site of the 1982 World Airways crash that killed two people, will include construction of a 600-foot pier into Boston Harbor. The project is estimated to cost $72 million and is scheduled for completion by the end of 2013.
Unlike the fees airlines have been charging passengers for everything from checked luggage to earphones, the extension of the passenger fee must still be approved by the Federal Aviation Administration. The FAA allows airports to charge passenger fees to pay for safety and security enhancements. In 2005, federal officials approved an increase in the fee airports can charge to $4.50 from $3.
Massport officials said the fee is levied specifically to pay for airfield and terminal upgrades; it does not pay for salaries and other operating expenses. Massport directors also approved fee increases on airlines to pay for landing operations and baggage screening.
That's what they say.
The baggage screening fee will be increased to $1.38 from $1.26, and the landing fee, which is based on weight, will rise to $4.82 per 1,000 pounds from $4.56. Those increases will take effect April 1. Officials said the fees will not be passed on to travelers.
That's what they SAY!!
--more--"
And here is an example of how the AUTHORITIES KNOW that "terrorism" is bullshit; otherwise,we would have had another 'terror" attack by now, huh?
"Airlines may struggle with cargo screening" by Bloomberg News | March 19, 2009
WASHINGTON - Passenger airlines such as American Airlines and Delta Air Lines Inc., along with freight shippers, will be hard-pressed to meet a deadline requiring all air cargo to be screened for security by mid-2010, industry officials say.
Nice to keep paying for that abominable lie of 9/11, huh?
About half of the electronics, fish, flowers, and other goods riding on US passenger carriers is inspected by airlines or freight handlers, the minimum under a rule that went into effect last month. By August of next year, all of the 10,000 tons of freight carried daily by airliners must be inspected.
The industry-run program remains a security hole even as government screening of passengers has been beefed up after the terrorist attacks in September 2001, said Representative Edward Markey, a Massachusetts Democrat who introduced legislation requiring cargo inspections in 2003.
Well, if that doesn't clue you in to the next false-flag attack, huh?
"Screening 100 percent of cargo on passenger planes has never been a matter of technology, but a matter of will," Markey said in an e-mail. "The loophole that enabled cargo to be loaded on passenger planes without first being screened was a major security gap."
And if you know "terrorists" are GOVERNMENT CREATED, FUNDED and DIRECTED entities, well.... that explains the lack of will (and attacks) the last eight years! GOVERNMENT and INDUSTRY KNOW that 9/11 was an INSIDE JOB!!!
Markey said he will "vigorously oppose" any attempt to "water down" the mandate. The state of air cargo security was the subject of a hearing yesterday by the House transportation security subcommittee.
Wake up and smell the fart mist, Markey!
--more--"
Update:
More proof the GOVERNMENT KNOWS that "terrorism" is a FRAUD FOOLEY!!!
The world's third-largest shipping company will begin service to Boston on Monday, connecting New England shippers with more than 50 new trade destinations around the globe.
Not too concerned about "terror" when the $$$ is at stake, huh? Think about it: WHERE are the "terrorists" these last eight years (please DISREGARD all the GOVERNMENT CREATED, FUNDED and DIRECTED OPERATIONS)?
Why are you holding an empty hand? Surely, the booga-boogas would have gotten through, right?
The service by CMA CGM LLC will stop at the Conley container terminal in South Boston every two weeks, bringing new activity to Boston Harbor at a time when few other ports are generating new business. The shipping route, dubbed the "Black Pearl," will also include New York and Halifax, Nova Scotia.
"The addition of the new trading destinations makes the port more competitive, which will benefit New England businesses looking to engage in global commerce," said Thomas Kinton, chief executive of the Massachusetts Port Authority, which signed the deal.
But, but, but, what about the "terrorists" that gloss the pages of my war paper each and every day?
The new route will be sailed by the containership Stadt Berlin. It will connect Boston businesses with ports around the world via a shipping hub in Kingston, Jamaica, where cargo will be transferred to and from vessels sailing to countries in the Caribbean, Central America, South America, Europe, the Middle East, and other destinations.
BOOM!
The MSM SETTING UP a FALSE-FLAG SCENARIO with this TELEGRAPH?
The addition of the service also supports trucking and longshoreman jobs in Boston, which last year handled more than 15 million metric tons of cargo. CMA CGM's service is designed to cater to oversize cargo and perishable shipments such as produce and seafood. The port of Boston supports more than 34,000 jobs.
And what of the "terrorists?"
--more--"
