Draconian vacation policies for US slave workers

The Reid wrote:
Following up to Frank F. Matthews

Give up Dave. Of course Europeans travel abroad more. Pretty much
every significant trip is abroad there.

Depends what significant means? If it means "long distance" then
clearly true. I think its also true that those trips will go into
"significantly" different cultures. but I'm told that the
existence of Creole restaurants and Philly cheese steaks
(whatever they are) all over the US means that effect is
neutralised in favour of the "US is best for all things" lobby.
Or perhaps I just don't understand?

Finally you said something that makes sense.

Clearly you don't understand much of any of these conversations.

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.

The Reid wrote:
Following up to Frank F. Matthews


Give up Dave. Of course Europeans travel abroad more. Pretty much
every significant trip is abroad there.


Depends what significant means? If it means "long distance" then
clearly true. I think its also true that those trips will go into
"significantly" different cultures. but I'm told that the
existence of Creole restaurants and Philly cheese steaks
(whatever they are) all over the US means that effect is
neutralised in favour of the "US is best for all things" lobby.
Or perhaps I just don't understand?

My point is that the concept of 'abroad' is relatively useless when
talking about travel. For me it takes many hundreds of miles to travel
abroad. I can get to a pretty different culture in 200 miles or so.
That trip wouldn't be 'abroad' though. Except going east it pretty much
takes a days driving to even get out of state.

While there are Cajun restaurants pretty much everywhere there are none
that I know of more than a days drive from Lafayette, LA. Creole
restaurants are very uncommon outside of Louisiana. As to Philly cheese
steaks they aren't usually very good at any distance from Philly.

The proportion of trips 'abroad' will be significantly affected by the
number of national boundaries that you cut an area up into.

mrtravel wrote:

Hatunen wrote:

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 16:37:31 GMT, mrtravel
wrote:


Hatunen wrote:


It looks more to me like a subdued threat to the Maltese that
Randall is a US citizen so don't try any funny stuff. It was only
a couple of decades after the US went after the barbary Pirates.
Interesting that it's a printed form.


It's a passport. Passports back then didn't come in a little book.



Why is it a passport? How do you define passport?



Why not do a bit of research yourself?
Passports have existed for a very long time.


From: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:

An official government document that certifies one's identity and
citizenship and permits a citizen to travel abroad

[French passeport, from Old French : passer, to pass; see pass + port,
port; see port1.]

(This is logical. What languages is your passport written in?)


I'm surprised to see such a sloppy definition from them. The possession
of a passport is not necessarily required to travel abroad not does it
grant permission to do so. In my case I can for a while travel abroad
to some countries without a passport and am forbidden to do some travel
abroad despite having a passport.

On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:35:54 +0100, The Reid
wrote:

Following up to Hatunen

Ah, back to the "if you're educated and successful you're not part of
the culture".

You ar e a twit, aren't you. That's not what I said. There are
many educated people in Kansas and Iowa.

why are you all bothering?

I have given up. Life is more pleasnt without him.

The mans clearly either a troll or a
total idiot.

I vote the latter.

He's told that mostly only educated people speak
English as a second language, He then accuses you of saying
educated people are not part of the culture. He does this sort of
thing all the time. You can not make progress arguing with
someone who does not apply logic and honesty.

What's that old saw? Don't assume malice if it can be explained
by stupidity.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 08:35:52 GMT, mrtravel
wrote:

Jim Ley wrote:
On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 20:42:04 GMT, mrtravel
wrote:


From: The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language:

An official government document that certifies one's identity and
citizenship and permits a citizen to travel abroad


Then you're struggling with the "permits" as he could most definately
have travelled without the document, but dictionary's are never very
helpful in English.

It doesn't mean the issuer is permitting the person to travel, it means
having the document permits the person to travel to other abroad.

You logic escapes me: if the document permits the person to
travel who is doing the permitting?

In fact, Americans do not need passports to travel abroad (with
certain rare exceptions); they need passports to enter the
country they are traveling to, and possibly visas.

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.



************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

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?

Well, there's George W Bush...

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 16:18:11 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews"
wrote:



The Reid wrote:
Following up to Frank F. Matthews


Give up Dave. Of course Europeans travel abroad more. Pretty much
every significant trip is abroad there.


Depends what significant means? If it means "long distance" then
clearly true. I think its also true that those trips will go into
"significantly" different cultures. but I'm told that the
existence of Creole restaurants and Philly cheese steaks
(whatever they are) all over the US means that effect is
neutralised in favour of the "US is best for all things" lobby.
Or perhaps I just don't understand?

My point is that the concept of 'abroad' is relatively useless when
talking about travel. For me it takes many hundreds of miles to travel
abroad. I can get to a pretty different culture in 200 miles or so.
That trip wouldn't be 'abroad' though.

Further up the thread we pretty much agreed tht Amrican trvel
into Mexico and Canada is travelling "abroad". This is os, e.g.,
Belgians can say they have traveled "abroad" when the visit the
Netherlands.

Except going east it pretty much
takes a days driving to even get out of state.

While there are Cajun restaurants pretty much everywhere there are none
that I know of more than a days drive from Lafayette, LA. Creole
restaurants are very uncommon outside of Louisiana. As to Philly cheese
steaks they aren't usually very good at any distance from Philly.

I don't think "good" was a criterion.

The proportion of trips 'abroad' will be significantly affected by the
number of national boundaries that you cut an area up into.

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. In America, each state has its own
government with many functions independent of the central
government; in the EU each state has its own government with many
functions independent of the central government. In fact, the EU
central government now seems to have more power in some areas of
jurisdiction than the American government has in the states.

So what now constitutes a "country"?

And let's not even get into the question of Flnders v Wallonia or
England v Scotland. Or maybe we should.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Fri, 18 Aug 2006 09:35:54 +0100, The Reid
wrote:

Following up to Hatunen

that's usually a feature of mountains away from over hot areas
and adds vastly to the beauty and fascination.

I think tht's what I was implying.

Oh, it didnt read that way, but never mind.

I have no idea what "away from over hot areas" means.

It means not in areas where its hot where climbing hills becomes
a sweaty, wearying experience, without the benefit of clouds and
cool winds and the colours of the landscape are bleached dry, the
air is hazy and the sun beats down. Spain in summer, for example.

Uh. Thanks for clearing that up for me.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *

On Thu, 17 Aug 2006 22:59:04 +0000 (UTC), BB
wrote:

On Wed, 16 Aug 2006 23:08:28 -0700, Hatunen wrote:

Be sure to be ready on the one day a year when the drizzle and
clouds have lifted enough to actually see them.

That's our favorite misconception, which we do our best to keep alive. :-)

As a former resident of the state of Washington, but of the part
which - despite the state's license plates - is rarely green, I
fully understand.

************* DAVE HATUNEN ) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *