US government charges for evacuation

source

Well, if this doesn't just beat it all. Wonder if other countries are charging their citizens money to get them out safely?

The White House defended asking Americans to reimburse the estimated $150 cost of their passage, and the ambassador said the evacuation's slow start was intended to safeguard Americans.

To get on board, Americans must sign a note pledging to reimburse the U.S. government. They will be charged the price of a single commercial flight from Beirut to Cyprus - usually $150-$200, although officials refused to specify.

This was an unexpected occurance. I could almost see being charged if you ignored a safety warning of immienent danger(hurricane or the like) but an act or war.

Funny, how it works, I show the worthlessness of the US government, and they say they will now waive the fees.

No link yet, just showing as breaking news on CNN.

Evacuation fees for Americans being helped to leave Lebanon will be waived, aides to two Republican senators tell CNN.

[edit on 18-7-2006 by valkeryie]

I hope so to!

How low can a goverment stoop to? charging for evacuation in time of war? you can imagine the roof top of saigon....

"sign here mate, 100 dollars and your all sorted!..."

"No money? well lets hope charlies feeling good towards you.... Cya!"



How low can they go?? really thats nasty.

Wouldn't edit properly for me.

source

The announcement came after stranded Americans, along with politicians and their families back home, expressed anger with the situation.

Some complained about the process and what they saw as the slow pace at which the State Department is evacuating Americans from Lebanon. Others were outraged that the evacuees were going to have to pay for the ride.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the government would have charged evacuees commercial rates to take them out by plane or boat.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi criticized the billing policy, accusing the government of "quibbling over payment" rather than finding the most expeditious means of getting Americans out of harm's way.

"A nation that can provide more than $300 billion for a war in Iraq can provide the money to get its people out of Lebanon," the California Democrat said in a statement earlier Tuesday.

Originally posted by valkeryie
Wouldn't edit properly for me.

source

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi criticized the billing policy, accusing the government of "quibbling over payment" rather than finding the most expeditious means of getting Americans out of harm's way.

"A nation that can provide more than $300 billion for a war in Iraq can provide the money to get its people out of Lebanon," the California Democrat said in a statement earlier Tuesday.

My God, for once, me and Nancy Pelosi agree on something. That is it, this truly is the end of the world! LOL

Nancy Pelosi's comments were unwarranted and purely political. The law's been in effect since 1956.

Regardless its a RIDICULOUS LAW.

SO by my recolecting, if a families poor broke,has no relatives would the US government of DENIED them safe passage out of the war zone?

Who's the sick low life who's making a minimal profit?

Wow, sick man, real sick. Making people pay to get out?

Also, again, why did it take so long? Why are the Republicans slower then a three legged turtle? Katrina? 6 days. War? 7 days.

WTF! "Mr. President, there is an Asteroid headed for the planet, it will hit in three days." Astroid hits, everyone is dead. Then three weeks later Bush rises from the ashes. "I have a plan to stop the Astroid and save us all!"

150.00 to take them out while right in the country next door thats attacking they recieve 15million a day. Its not the Lebanese that have been threatening their lives so far.

And rightfully so!

Hundreds of Americans and Europeans fled Lebanon aboard ships, and hundreds of other foreigners prepared to evacuate in coming days. Many Americans complained over what they saw as a slow U.S. response. And after criticism from Congress, the State Department dropped plans to ask Americans to pay for their evacuations on commercial vessels.

Source

And rightly bloody so.
honestly, how can a man sleep at night demanding PAYMENT to free his citizens from WAR?

Its Pathetic, and I would be ASHAMED to stand near that man.

Why arent the powers that be stepping him down and totally blasting his administration for even CONTEMPLATING charging americans.

while i understand where you all are coming from i do somewhat disagree. if you choose to go on vacation somewhere especially in the middle east with all that has been happening i think it should be the peoples responsibility to pay. i would pay. i dont think it is fair for those people to expect others to pay because they decided to go over to a country that is surrounded by so much conflict. it should however not be something that is required for them to get to safety, but people should be accountable for their choices. i think the fair way to go about it would possibly be to maybe let the person/ family know of the fees and they can have the choice to send in the money. and they could give the people the option to send it to the united states government or choose from a list of charities or something.

Its one thing if people are over there because they are immigrants and they want to visit their families, especially in these trying times. its another thing if you chose to just go on vacation somewhere where you know that it is ruled by hezzbolah, and surrounded by other countries in conflict. there have been messages for months that americans need to be cautious and think hard about traveling to that part of the world at the moment. people who can contribute to the expense that it took to get them out should contribute something.


Kind regards,
Digitalgrl

[edit on 10/01/2004 by DigitalGrl]

[edit on 10/01/2004 by DigitalGrl]

I'm largely going with the majority on this one, but a tiny part with digitagirl.

These are exceptional circumstances and the goverment should not be charging for helping with evacuation. However, and please correct me if i'm wriong as i have not personally ever been in these circumstances before.....

1. If these people were not being rescued by the government, they would have the choice, possibly die in a war zone or get there own ticket out of there. Even before the airport was put out of use it would have cost them more than $150, but when suddenly faced with no other option to save them and thier familes lives, and a ship is all they have......$150 suddenly seems like a small price to pay. I know i'd pay it to get me out of that place right now and be gratefull that i was rescued. I wonder how many countries have citzens there who are'nt able to rescue them?

2. In other emergency situations such as mountain rescue where there is no other way of being rescued except specialist methods (rescue teams/heli's etc) people are often billed for the medical and rescue treatment. I would pretty much expect this fee to be a lot more than $150.

Then again, with a budget of billions per year for defence, surely some of that must be allocated to freeing hostages, POW's and innocent civillians caught up in conflict?

CX.

hmm. $200 seems to be a fair price to live another day. I wonder if they will accept ATS points for the board in lieu of cash?

Unless these people were "assigned" there by the government, then they made a decision to go there and take a "risk".... Pay Up.

yep but the war is result of lack of american foreign policy to fix the situation. so your americna people have a right to get out free.

man how rich is america and asking for people to pay to get of out a situation, that only has happened becasue the only real super power does not want to fix the situation, and we are where we are today.

Air France is charging $3,221 one way from DC to Beruit. I imagine it is more expensive to come the other way.

Instead of complaints by people stupid enough to go to such an unstable area in the first place, they should say "Thank you, American taxpayers, for such a cheap ticket home." My God. The govt finally does something to offset the cost of something, and people whine. If you don't have a spare $150 then you shouldn't travel out of state, let alone out of the country.

Originally posted by hogtie
Air France is charging $3,221 one way from DC to Beruit. I imagine it is more expensive to come the other way.

Instead of complaints by people stupid enough to go to such an unstable area in the first place, they should say "Thank you, American taxpayers, for such a cheap ticket home." My God. The govt finally does something to offset the cost of something, and people whine. If you don't have a spare $150 then you shouldn't travel out of state, let alone out of the country.

My mistake. That was a round-trip price. Still, what a bargain!

Originally posted by hogtie
Air France is charging $3,221 one way from DC to Beruit. I imagine it is more expensive to come the other way.

Instead of complaints by people stupid enough to go to such an unstable area in the first place, they should say "Thank you, American taxpayers, for such a cheap ticket home." My God. The govt finally does something to offset the cost of something, and people whine. If you don't have a spare $150 then you shouldn't travel out of state, let alone out of the country.

What a stupid and ignorant statement. It's not even worth responding too, to be honest, I just though I would highlight you pathetic accusations and ill thought out comments for everyone else to see.

Originally posted by stumason

What a stupid and ignorant statement. It's not even worth responding too, to be honest, I just though I would highlight you pathetic accusations and ill thought out comments for everyone else to see.

Which part did you think was stupid?
The cost of airfare? Blame the airlines, not me.

That people choose to vacation/expatriate themselves to a country that has been unstable since the 80's? I didn't make them go. I didn't pay for them to go. I am not responsible for them.

That the US govt was doing something financially responsible? I knew it couldn't last. Makes too much sense.

That you shouldn't travel without the financial wherewithal to take care of yourself?
That's just common sense, unless you plan on thumbing your way across borders.

Its called self reliance. You can have independance, or you can have the govt as your nanny, but you can't have both.

[edit on 19-7-2006 by hogtie]