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 |
#41
|
|||
|
|||
C J Campbell wrote:
However, you sound dangerous to me. Perhaps the government should make you wear an ankle bracelet or something so that your movements can be tracked 24 hours a day. Maybe you should even be confined to your house. I have said nothing at all about "thought control". I've been speaking strictly about the enforcement of EXISTING US immigration laws. You are diverting from the relevant subject and trying to make it sound as if I am FOR additional "Big Brother" type security measures. If you will read my posts carefully you will see that I am totally against having additional burdens placed upon America citizens.... who's only crime appears to be that of being licensed pilot post 9-11. |
#42
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 24 Sep 2004 18:31:38 GMT, "G.R. Patterson III"
wrote: Betcha they just link it to the medical certificate. Oh no....As if they don't already have enough "non-medical" related ways to pull your medical. Now they'll be able to revoke you if you're not photogenic enough! Time for some plastic surgery to get ready for this one! z |
#43
|
|||
|
|||
C J Campbell wrote: Actually, you need at least three shifts, so 500,000 soldiers just watching the border. For every soldier on the front lines, you need at least seven others in support, so three and a half million soldiers just to watch the Canadian border. That still does not stop people coming through legitimate checkpoints with falsified documents or whatever. Nor does it account for aircraft or boats. Neither does it count up the cost of the enormously long lines at the border while confiscate everybody's fingernail clippers. You have succeeded in taking my original comments so completely out of context that the discussion now bears no relevance to my original post. I will quote two sentences from my original posts and would ask you to find anything in them that would tend to indicate I was advocating what you say above. Words in caps are emphasis I have added assist in comprehension of the meaning of the sentences as they were written. "I submit that a reasonable person would conclude that a good use of a PERCENTAGE of US forces might be to ASISTS the Border Patrol monitor and secure these borders to a greater extent than they are today." "I believe that a legitimate use of our military forces (and their associated technology) would be to HELP safeguard our borders." The military has some exclusive technology capabilities which could be used to assist the border patrol do their jobs. This same position has been advocated by a number of congressman and senators. I happen to agree. |
#44
|
|||
|
|||
I don't have any opinion on who takes the photo. It's a
once-in-a-lifetime hassle. My FSDO is 60 miles away, reasonable trip fo rme. I suppose it's different in Idaho? If big brother would actually have his way, that trip to the FSDO to get your picture taken might also turn into: Bring all your logbooks, submit a blood sample, submit a hair sample, and please step into the polygraph room before we can even permit you to step in front of the camera. |
#45
|
|||
|
|||
C J Campbell wrote:
Most of the 9/11 terrorists were here legally. Yes, initially. but at least half of them were subsequently found to be in violation of the terms of their Visas. But with the INS not enforcing anything what did it matter? |
#46
|
|||
|
|||
Martin Hotze wrote:
Blanche wrote: Why can't we use the same approach for the new FAA ID? Same process only now you add the existing FAA cert. not to long ago everybody was fighting the new FAA *foto* ID. Now it seems that everybody is OK with this and we are only discussing the way it can be handled. Exactly. We've all pretty much given in. Now we can get ready for the next round of additional "security" measures. It seems Mr. Weiner already has some ideas. |
#47
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message m... "G.R. Patterson III" wrote in message ... Blanche wrote: The visa expired? The school is responsible for a) expelling the student and b) immediately informing INS. A visa allows one to enter the country. You do not have to leave when it expires. Once you're in the country, the INS tells you how long you can stay. Further, a student visa doesn't expire as long as the student is enrolled and making progress towards their course of study. They've got 60 days after they finish to get out (or make other arrangements). So it's not that you can be studying and have a student visa expire, it's because you stop studying that the terms of your entry under that visa becomes invalid. It's actually the schools completion of the "certificate of eligibility" that lets you be in the country on the visa. Yes, and I'm sure we can depend on all the university administrators in Cambridge, Massachusetts, to duly notify John Ashcroft's Department of Justice of every such event. Best, -cwk. |
#48
|
|||
|
|||
"Ron Natalie" wrote in message m... "C J Campbell" wrote in message ... "Blanche" wrote in message 3) Here for tourist reasons? When I visit a foreign country, even the hotel wants my passport. Why not here? What do these hotels do for their own citizens? And how do you tell a foreigner from a citizen in this country? Actually, it's an anachronism. I haven't been asked for my passport of late even at the borders (and sometimes not even then). The last time I had to show my passport to a hotel was over 15 years ago and that was in Japan. True. But if Mr. Kontiki walks in the door, be sure to demand his passport. |
#49
|
|||
|
|||
"kontiki" wrote in message ... C J Campbell wrote: Most of the 9/11 terrorists were here legally. Yes, initially. but at least half of them were subsequently found to be in violation of the terms of their Visas. But with the INS not enforcing anything what did it matter? OK, a visa expires. The INS is notified. They go out to the alien's last known address and he has apparently moved and left no forwarding address. Now what? |
#50
|
|||
|
|||
Martin Hotze writes:
"marcelfrancisci" wrote: the medical examiner is the only person that represents the FAA in all the major countries. the local FAA designated examiner here in our area is an Austrian citizen. Do you think this beeing a good idea having him making the fotos and clearing them? Our state (California) governor is also from Austria. THEY ARE TAKING OVER! -jav |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Sport Pilot inconsistency | frustrated flier | Piloting | 19 | September 10th 04 04:53 PM |
Diamond DA-40 with G-1000 pirep | C J Campbell | Piloting | 114 | July 22nd 04 05:40 PM |
Student as PIC in IMC? | Geo. Anderson | Instrument Flight Rules | 40 | May 29th 04 05:09 PM |
definition of "dual controls" | Lee Elson | Instrument Flight Rules | 4 | April 24th 04 02:58 PM |