Pirates Seize Ship Carrying 2,300 Hyundai's

The Business Insider ^ | 1-7-2010 | Graham Winfrey

[blam]

Pirates Seize Ship Carrying 2,300 Hyundai's

Graham Winfrey
Jan. 7, 2010, 9:29 AM

A ship carrying 2,300 Hyundai's and Kia's was captured by Somali pirates about 600 miles off the coast of Somalia late Friday, The Car Connection reports.

Not to make light of something as serious as a pirate attack, but Hyundai's own public relations man Dan Bedore's tweeted that: "Even Pirates seem to be switching to Hyundai."

[snip]

[Eric in the Ozarks]

I didn’t know this either...

[DocH]

Pirates Seize Ship Carrying 2,300 Hyundai's

Let me know when they capture a shipload of TaTa's.

Now THAT, will be a story worth looking at.

[GonzoGOP]

You say “world lets this rag-tag operation continue.” like t is a simple thing to locate a small boat 600 miles out to sea.

You don't have to search the whole ocean, just convoy the merchies. You don't need a carrier task force to protect a merchant convoy, a Oliver Hazard Perry class will be able to take on anything the Somalis have. And we have a bunch of them laid up in reserve. No need for expensive new equipment.

You say its hard to find them, well it is much harder to find a U-Boat manned by a crack crew that can submerge and shoot back. But we manage to get the merchies past those and inflict the highest casualties of any service in WWII on the U-Boat crews. And yes that includes the Kamikaze. You had a better chance of surviving as a Kamikaze pilot (since most never got a chance to fly) than as a member of a U-Boat crew.

Bottom line: it aint simple and they are really trying to get a handle on it.

It is that simple, they just don't want to put up with the inconvenience of a convoy. It is like when people say it isn't easy to loose weight. Sure it is eat less and exercise more. Now carrying through on the simple theory takes willpower. It is not complexity, but a lack of will that allows the pirates to thrive.

[Pan_Yan]

"It was written in their Koran, that all nations which had not acknowledged the Prophet were sinners, whom it was the right and duty of the faithful to plunder and enslave; and that every muslim who was slain in this warfare was sure to go to paradise. He said, also, that the man who was the first to board a vessel had one slave over and above his share, and that when they sprang to the deck of an enemy's ship, every sailor held a dagger in each hand and a third in his mouth; which usually struck such terror into the foe that they cried out for quarter at once."

-Ambassador Sidi Haji Abdrahaman of Tripoli to Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, 1785.

And then we paid tribute for 15 years until we could build a navy.

[GonzoGOP]

Betcha there's no pirate problems where my Hyundai Sonata was built.

At least until the UAW shows up. Or is that more of a barbarian hoard that a pirate?

[Sertorius]

That is why you attack the ports where they take the big ships.

[newfreep]

Last pic...

[Vermont Lt]

They are probably waiting outside the gates with their cards, just waiting for the law to change. Then SWOOP—we have 50% of the people. We are a union.

[rjohnb]

The article should have been about Hyundais and Kias. The apostrophes as used to show plurals are incorrect. I hope you don’t mind me pointing this out.

[bvw]

You are wrong. Use of apostrophes to show plurals in such cases, family names and brand names, is an editorial judgment call, and in that judgment most would go with the apostrophes.

[Red Badger]

Why me?...................

[Past Your Eyes]

"Use of apostrophes to show plurals in such cases, family names and brand names, is a (poor) editorial judgment call, and in that judgment most would go with the apostrophes."

That's ridiculous. It's unnecessary and perpetuates ignorance. I tried to fix it for you.

[bvw]

What ignorance is it perpetuating?

[Past Your Eyes]

Enough people are already putting apostophes where they don’t belong. I’m not sure if they think it makes them look smart or just why it is that they do it but you see that kind of ignorance everywhere. Would you write “a boatload of Chevies” or would you say “a boatload of Chevy’s”? It’s just plain stupid to do the latter but you seem to think it’s a matter of “editorial judgment”.

[LaMudBug]

Pirates Seize Ship Carrying 2,300 Hyundai’s

The picture of the ship carrying these vehicles has about 125 vehicles on the top deck. Where are the other 2,175 vehicles on this ship?

[LaMudBug]

Pirates Seize Ship Carrying 2,300 Hyundai’s

The picture of the ship carrying these vehicles has about 125 vehicles on the top deck. Where are the other 2,175 vehicles on this ship?

[ConservativeMan55]

bttt

[bvw]

Me? No, but a trademark lawyer might be writing you if you are not clearly distinguishing trademarks. Is it iPods or iPod's? Androids or Android's?

Here's one take I found via Google's search:

Subject: Re: Plural Apostrophe usage - please clarify when it's appropriate
From: snsh-ga on 09 Oct 2003 15:54 PDT

It depends on your audience. If your audience is english teachers, then you have to follow the "rules" (where english teachers decide what the rules are). On the other hand, if you're mass-marketing to the general population, you can use apostrophes liberally, because they increase readability. The point of writing is to get an idea across. If you have to invent some words or punctuation, go ahead and do it. Communicating with people is not like writing code on a computer -- you have to convey concepts, not meticulous instructions.

One question I have about your apples quote:
"Apple's sold by the bushel here"
is whether that was for computers or fruits? If you were talking about fruits the apostrophe should definitely go. But if you were talking about computers, I would leave the apostrophe in, not just for legibility, but because "Apple" as a servicemark is not supposed to be used by itself or else it becomes generic and looses its trademark status (like "Thermos" should have been called "Thermos containers"). You're supposed to say "Apple computers" with Apple describing a type of computer. In that case, "Apple's" is more or less a contraction of "Apple computers" and the apostrophe should stay. And "Apple's" helps the "Apple" as a brandname stand out.

Personally I prefer a wedding invite with "The Anders's" to "The Anderses" for the same reason -- to make the actual family name perfectly clear. It happens I have friends whose family name is Lander, and another whose family name is Anders, and we all know of the advice columnists whose family nom-de-plum is Landers. I also know a Roberts family and think "The Roberts's" is far preferred to "The Roberts" -- which implies that the family name is Robert -- or to "The Robertses".

In any case my own opinion is just one among many. For a number of reasons -- all related to clarity and accuracy of reading the message -- the apostrophe is in play.

[bvw]

Link to cited quote above: http://answers.google.com/answers/threadview/id/264619.html

[Past Your Eyes]