If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1241
|
|||
|
|||
Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 23:45:02 GMT, mrtravel
wrote: Hatunen wrote: On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 17:29:14 GMT, mrtravel wrote: Hatunen wrote: The question is, is a passport required to do the traveling? In the case of the 200 year old Randall document, I suspect not. The Randall document isnot a passport in the modern sense of that word. I also note that the document is issued by the US consul at Malta requesting the courtesy of the island for Mr Randall, who seems to have already arrived there. Do a bit of research on passports and then get back to us. Passports are NOT something newly created in the 20th century. In my original post I admit I misspoke: I meant not that passports came into being after WW1 but that the requirement for passports in Europe came into being after WW1. There were standardizations of passports after WW1, that is correct. However, the purpose of the passports were still similar. After WW1 passports became a requirement of the destination countries; this was not true before WW1. If passports were not an absolute requirement for entry into other countries, they do not meet the current meaning of passport. ************* DAVE HATUNEN ) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |
#1242
|
|||
|
|||
Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
Dave Frightens Me wrote: On 18 Aug 2006 08:23:05 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote: Dave Frightens Me wrote: On 17 Aug 2006 18:49:47 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote: Bias by definition. No where in that article did anyone post any actual government figures as you claimed they did. All you are saying is that the BBC and the attorney would have to be biased. No, I'm saying that the BBC has been proven to be biased on this issue and that the lawyer is paid to be biased. I am waiting for you to demonstrate what that bias is in this case. ???? What more do you need? Both the BBC and the lawyer have a specific bias to oppose the war and the incarceration of the prisoners of war. And all the article did is to quote biased sources. Thus the bias is demonstrated. And since you are the one supporting their claim then the burden of proof is on you to justify that support. Go ahead. And, again, you claimed that the figures came from government sources yet that is proven to be untrue. So quote the government sources. Go ahead. Would there be a point? You refuse to believe anything except the party line. All you have to do is to come up with one single *fact*. Probably time for you to drop out like the others did after they couldn't provide any facts either. Common tactic: proven wrong, claim the other guy is a troll and say you won't talk to him, duck out so you don't have to be caught being wrong yet again. One single *fact*, that's all I've asked for. You asked for the bias and I gave you 3 very specific facts. You insist that there are government sources involved, I'm asking for the source. Go ahead. If you can. You said: "As it always is with prisoners of war. The fact that they were captured on a battleground is all that it takes." I have read that sentence 3 more times, played it backwards, rearranged the letters, translated it into about 47 languages. Can't find anywhere where I said anyone was *guilty* of anything. Oh, so you still stand by this statement, even after it has been demonstrated wrong? Demonstrated wrong when? From the biased article that made a claim? That's not demonstrating that it's wrong. So tell me where it was demonstrated wrong. Go ahead. Most of those collected were not necessarily Taliban, but anyone they could have found. According to your super secret un-named "government sources"? Sadly, no one is willing to allow them to defend themselves. In fact a significant number have been found to not have been active combatants and sent home. But you wouldn't want to talk about that, would you? |
#1243
|
|||
|
|||
Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
Dave Frightens Me wrote: On 18 Aug 2006 08:24:55 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote: Dave Frightens Me wrote: On 17 Aug 2006 21:12:55 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote: Carole Allen wrote: On 17 Aug 2006 08:09:52 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote: That would be the phantoms that knocked down the Twin Towers and killed 3,000 people? The phantoms that bombed the Madrid subway? The phantoms that bombed the UK transit system? The phantoms that were just stopped from bombing 10 trans-Atlantic flights? *Those* phantoms? The guys who did the Twin Towers were not Iraqi and had nothing to do with Iraq. Which has what to do with what I was talking about???? Absolutely everything given that's where the majority of the US anti-terror funds are going. What a raging success that's been. Nonsense. I'll say one thing for you, you have developed quite a complex fantasy world for yourself to live in. Again you can't communicate properly. Nonsense - Iraq has been a disaster? Well, since that wasn't one of the statements that couldn't be it, could it? Nonsense - it's using most of the money? Most of the "US aniti-terror funds". Yes, that's nonsense. It isn't using *any* of the "anti-terror funds". |
#1244
|
|||
|
|||
Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
Dave Frightens Me wrote: On 18 Aug 2006 08:52:17 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote: Dave Frightens Me wrote: On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:35:54 +0100, The Reid wrote: Following up to Carole Allen The guys who did the Twin Towers were not Iraqi and had nothing to do with Iraq. are there still a lot of Americans who don't realise that? Yes. I have met quite a few that are convinced of this, and various other bits of bull****, like Saddam being in league with Osama and preparing to offer him sanctuary. I suppose this means that I now have to look up the 9/11 commission report which says that Saddam in fact offered sanctuary to Osama. Not was "preparing to offer" it but actually did according to the testimony they received. Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 but Saddam was, in fact, trying to create an alliance with Osama to fight their common enemy. OK. Here it is. I'm betting you won't bother to read it because you obviously have an aversion to facts and learning. But I'll try anyway. http://www.9-11commission.gov/report...0commission%22 Be careful. This is full of facts and knowledge. Dangerous things for people like you who don't want their precious private fantasy world disrupted. And you have the gall to claim the BBC is biased! And no, I am not going to read 585 pages to try to prove you right, believe it or not. *EXACTLY* as I expected. Here was a bi-partisan commission set up to investigate 9/11. The document is loaded with lots of facts and the documented references behind them. But you, as most with a similar political bent, aren't interested in taking the time to actually learn something. You don't want your little fantasy world rocked, do you? You called the idea that Saddam had offered Osama sanctuary "bull ****". But went presented with documentation to the contrary you won't even read it. And that's why you refuse, right? You want the ability to keep spouting opinions based on political bias and if you read the report you might just be honest enough where you can't spout that claim any more. Wouldn't want that. Any one here want to put a little wager on how long it will be before DFM refers to another of the facts in the report as "bull ****"? This thread has been kind of interesting. Claims that Europe's economy is as good as the US were countered with facts. People dropped out. (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) Claims that Americans don't get enough vacation were countered with facts. People dropped out. (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) Claims that work is a bad thing were countered with facts. People dropped out. (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) Claims that countries with a mandatory 4 week vacation don't have unemployment problems were countered with facts. People dropped out. (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) Claims that the BBC article wasn't biased were countered with facts. People dropped out. (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) Claims that Saddam never tried to form an alliance with Osama were countered with facts. People dropped out. (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) Claims that the US has little diversity were countered with facts. People dropped out. (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) "How dare you not believe what I tell you when all you have are facts but I can present you with personal opinions and biased sources?" (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) Kind of humorous to observe. |
#1245
|
|||
|
|||
Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
On 19 Aug 2006 17:11:28 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote:
Any one here want to put a little wager on how long it will be before DFM refers to another of the facts in the report as "bull ****"? This thread has been kind of interesting. "How dare you not believe what I tell you when all you have are facts but I can present you with personal opinions and biased sources?" (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) You are really, really sad. *plonk* -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- |
#1246
|
|||
|
|||
Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:08:43 +0200, Dave Frightens Me
wrote: On 19 Aug 2006 17:11:28 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote: Any one here want to put a little wager on how long it will be before DFM refers to another of the facts in the report as "bull ****"? This thread has been kind of interesting. "How dare you not believe what I tell you when all you have are facts but I can present you with personal opinions and biased sources?" (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) You are really, really sad. *plonk* About bloody time. ************* DAVE HATUNEN ) ************* * Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow * * My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps * |
#1247
|
|||
|
|||
Travel Abroad
On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, Hatunen wrote:
To confuse matters even more, each of us Americans are citizens of the state in which we reside, as well as citizens of the United States of America. In the EU each person is a citizen of the his or her state (to use the more general meaning) as well as a citizen of the EU. I believe we Europeans fail to see US "states" (or even brazilian or mexican "states") to be of the same rank as European states. Canadians call similar entities "provinces" which is more up to our feeling. So what now constitutes a "country"? And a "nation" ? And let's not even get into the question of Flnders v Wallonia or England v Scotland. Or maybe we should. The impression is that for us a state or nation has something to do first with a language, then with the "rule" or "rulers" (in the past I'd said with "a king", now I say "either a republican ordering or a king"), and perhaps with religion (remember also the "cuius regio eius religio"). Where the 3 things do not coincide, it is likely there are troubles (or there have been at some time in history). -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------- is a newsreading account used by more persons to avoid unwanted spam. Any mail returning to this address will be rejected. Users can disclose their e-mail address in the article if they wish so. |
#1248
|
|||
|
|||
Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
Following up to Hatunen
are there still a lot of Americans who don't realise that? Well, there's George W Bush... surely he knows its not true! But doesn't say so. -- Mike Reid I will agree bendybuses are a good idea when they build bungalows on Mayfair Walk-eat-photos UK "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site Walk-eat-photos Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" |
#1249
|
|||
|
|||
Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 20:01:56 -0700, Hatunen wrote:
On Sun, 20 Aug 2006 10:08:43 +0200, Dave Frightens Me wrote: On 19 Aug 2006 17:11:28 -0700, "Tchiowa" wrote: Any one here want to put a little wager on how long it will be before DFM refers to another of the facts in the report as "bull ****"? This thread has been kind of interesting. "How dare you not believe what I tell you when all you have are facts but I can present you with personal opinions and biased sources?" (Kill file! Kill file! Troll!) You are really, really sad. *plonk* About bloody time. We thank you for your patience in these matters. ;o) -- --- DFM - http://www.deepfriedmars.com --- -- |
#1250
|
|||
|
|||
Travel Abroad
"Giovanni Drogo" wrote in message zoengr.vans.vg... On Fri, 18 Aug 2006, Hatunen wrote: To confuse matters even more, each of us Americans are citizens of the state in which we reside, as well as citizens of the United States of America. In the EU each person is a citizen of the his or her state (to use the more general meaning) as well as a citizen of the EU. I believe we Europeans fail to see US "states" (or even brazilian or mexican "states") to be of the same rank as European states. Canadians call similar entities "provinces" which is more up to our feeling. So what now constitutes a "country"? And a "nation" ? And let's not even get into the question of Flnders v Wallonia or England v Scotland. Or maybe we should. The impression is that for us a state or nation has something to do first with a language, then with the "rule" or "rulers" (in the past I'd said with "a king", now I say "either a republican ordering or a king"), and perhaps with religion (remember also the "cuius regio eius religio"). Where the 3 things do not coincide, it is likely there are troubles (or there have been at some time in history). From the social science point of view, a "country" is a political entity with boundaries, while a "nation" is made up of those bound by religion, ethnicity, etc. Thus the problem in the former Yugoslavia -- too many nations in one country, and as you said, many troubles :-) |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Delta Insider Articles List in Atlanta Journal-Constitution | Robert Cohen | Air travel | 6 | June 7th, 2006 02:43 PM |
DAL to become World's largest TransAtlantic carrier | A Guy Called Tyketto | Air travel | 14 | October 27th, 2005 02:43 PM |
Airline Biz Crisis: Not Difficult To Predict | Robert Cohen | Air travel | 28 | October 19th, 2005 01:42 PM |
Delta Halfing Their $100 Fee For Ticket Changing | Robert Cohen | Air travel | 1 | December 18th, 2004 10:33 PM |
Many Delta Articles In Major Atlanta Newspaper | Robert Cohen | Air travel | 3 | October 29th, 2004 10:30 PM |