American dollars is plunging: NO MORE TRAVEL!

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 10:37:57 +0100, Jeremy Henderson
wrote:

On 28/12/03 1:45 am, in article ,
"Sjoerd" wrote:


"lh" schreef in bericht
...

And manageable size. With the exception of gay rights and legalized
drugs,
people in Singapore have similar quality of life as the Dutch

Very different quality of life. I don't say better or worse, (I don't
believe in the concept of "best country in the world") but very different
indeed.

and yet they
are neither liberal nor under the delussion that thier **** doesn't stink.

Just in case that you are suggesting here that I am under the delusion that
"dutch **** doesn't stink", let me tell you it does and also, that we have
more than enough problems here and this isn't paradise. I am just getting
sick and tired of Vitaly, alohacyberian, jbk and their friends who always
claim that everything is better in the USA. I am just trying to teach them
some realism.

Sjoerd

Why waste your time? They have nothing stimulating to add to the discussion.
Just killfile them like everyone else has done.

J;

Here comes Mr. Completely Factless again. His idea of a stimulating
idea is some posting complete factless nonsense. That's all he can
understand.

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:06:36 +0000,
(David Horne) wrote:

lh wrote:

I wonder if you would have the same
immigation problem if you were trying to get a residence permit for a woman
to whom you were not married.

The couple would have exactly the same problem, unless they were
planning to get married. But, at least in that case they _could_ get a
legally recognised marriage, from the US standpoint. At the moment, the
US will not recognise any kind of union, whether legally sanctioned by
another country of not, if it involves a same sex relationship.

David

That's because there is no such thing as a US marriage or same sex
one. If you knew what you are talking about, you would know that
these are state issues. They decide not the Federal government.

On Sun, 28 Dec 2003 11:06:38 +0000,
(David Horne) wrote:

wrote:

Don't forget euthansia, drugg selling and abandoning previously
oppressed colonies like Indonesia while you're doing your admiring.
Very mature alright.

I'll stay out of the Indonesia thing, but many people think that the
Dutch policies on drugs and euthanasia _are_ mature. I certainly do.

David

Good for you. This simply makes the vast majority of the world
immature (read they don't agree with whatever nonsense some group
other than yours thinks) then because virtually none of them legalize
drugs or legalize euthanasia. The Nazis did the latter, however, so I
guess that makes them mature in your view? Probably why the worse
members of the SS were Dutch.

wrote:

The Nazis []

Godwin's Law. Fabulous! I love it when threads implode as quickly as
that!

David

--
David Horne- (website under reconstruction)
davidhorne (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

wrote:

If you knew what you are talking about, you would know that
these are state issues. They decide not the Federal government.

Sorry m8, you're the moron here. Immigration policy is controlled at
_federal_, not state level, and it's _federal_ understanding of what
consitutes a marriage, _not_ state, which dictates how this affects
immigration. If states like Vermont or Massachussetts did go the full
hog and grant same-sex couples the full rights of marriage, it would not
for one minute mean that same-sex couples from another country would be
recognised for immigration purposes.

Don't take my word for it- educate yourself on US immigration policy,
then come back and start talking. At the moment, you're looking like a
fool.

David

--
David Horne- (website under reconstruction)
davidhorne (at) davidhorne (dot) co (dot) uk

wrote in message ...

in reply to " who wrote:

I would surmise it is the result of a good education system.

( snip )

akia


Hey! We haven't yet heard from


or

or

....

Could ANY of these folks be the product of a good educational system?

-- Bob.

"alohacyberian" wrote in message ...
The war is againt terrorism, dearie.
Does the expression, "War on Terrorism" ring a bell?

Well... To define "terrorism" is like this, "terrorism" is a way that
a "terrorist" do, a "terrorist" is someone that "terrorize" a.k.a.
someone that invokes fear.

He/she doesn't necessary to do a BIG THING physically, it could be
something else and relatively quite minor, like screaming "Fire! Fire!
Fire!" eventhough there's no fire or is it only a small bicycle on
fire or even he/she set up a small firecracker.

Hmmm... Sounded more like the mass media. Or governments that shout
"Travel warning! Travel warning! Travel warning!" Or movie makers
making horror movies.

Well... You get the idea.

9-11 was probably the work of Al Qaeda.

Hmmm... Does this mean that Al-Qaeda (a name that only got very
popular after 9/11) managed to disable the USoA's air defense that has
the ability to intercept any stray aircraft on its airspace within a
matter of minutes?

Er... how did Al-Qaeda managed to do that anyway? Did they use the
same trick as the 'attack' on Pearl Harbour?

Their primary headquarters was in Afghanistan.

Afghanistan is one of the hosting countries for Al-Qaeda. Of course,
Osama bin Laden (not the leader of AL-Qaeda, just quite a famous
member) came from Saudi Arabia and has a LOT of friendy contacts with
the USoA government.

Now, let me think, did the United States look into Afghanistan? KM

Of course, it look afters Afghanistan, it even provide plenty of
support that make Afghanistan into its pre-US-invasion state.

"Sjoerd" wrote in message ...
My employer asked the US consulate here.
Short version of the answer "forget it".

Sjoerd

Marriage is about repopulating, or at least a good chance of
repopulating. The formula is... Man + Woman = Children = Citizens =
Workhorse... er, I mean Domestic Worforce.

Homosexual marriage has less chance (even to the point of nil in some
cases) of repopulating. Unless of course you wish to pursue artificial
way of repopulating (not as good as the real thing though).

http://www.savethemales.ca/


People generally don't promote homosexuality, since that they know it
could mean extinction.

Fox, BBC, CNN, Al-Jazeera, and so on all obey their sponsors who gived
them financial support, political support, and so on.

If their sponsors says to defame a certain country (even if it's the
one that hosting them), or a certain organization, or a certain
company, or a certain person, and so on, you bet that they will do it.

Could it be their sponsors are in the same group?



"lh" wrote in message ...
people tend to think that the news is being presentented
neutrally when they happen to agree with the presenter's point of view.

Could be true.

But... could it be that someone's opinion could be formed?

An opinion former could be the following:

- News reporting

- Education

- 'Expert'

- Honored person


Now.... How do you formed an opinion? First you need to the person's
trust. For a news report, it first by telling the truth, then once the
trust is earned, then a slight of false information is inserted, if
the person is still trusting, more dose can be added according to your
target audience and the current situation.

What if the person reject a particular news dispenser? Easy, build an
'alternate' news dispenser. If the person reject the first news
dispenser, build an 'alternate' news dispenser that totally against
the first one, then after trudt is gained, redirect the news according
to the target audience and the current situation. And what if the
person is a little bit conservation, he surely will be quite cautious
of any news dispenser that goes totally against the first one? Then
built an conservative 'alternate' news dispenser.

More choices doesn't mean more chances to get the truth.

Mike wrote in message ...
What if the US dollar was
over-valued, and is coming back to reality?
This is good news for exporters and the US tourist industry.

Yes, the US Dollar is overvalued. Devaluing it might bring good things
toward USoA citizens.

The problem is that... unless it's drastically devalued, it will be
still overvalued. Devaluing it to till it's around 25% or even lower
of its current value might be some stability in the chaotic USoA
markets.

Overseas travel is still cheap for Americans. Of course,
finding places where people still like them is getting
harder.

To be more precise, finding places that aren't having any travel ban
.... ahem, travel 'warning', 'advisory', or what ever is getting
harder.

What if the people in a certain place don't mind USoA citizens or any
other foreigners for that matter (other than the foreignly controlled
radical local groups who claimed to represent the local voice but are
actually doing the will of a foreign organization)? But the government
(whether it's the USoA or any kind of country) banned/warned their
citizens to travel there.

The problem these days might not be the natives are restless, but the
tourist are restless. Of course, even if the tourist are not restless,
they would still have a hard time going to a place where they have
been banned to travel.