Air America breaking news: "USA to fingerprint ALL visitors !!!"

AJC wrote:

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 04:07:10 -0500, (Richard
Steiner) wrote:


Here in rec.travel.air,
"Marie Lewis" spake unto us, saying:


The Frenc have a word for it: chauvinism. That is what we are seeing
in the USA now: "my leader right or wrong!"

The majority of people that I know in my area of the US are simply not
in agreement with many of the current administration's policies, and
some are in very strong disagreement.

I find it somewhat shocking that citizens of the US are being portrayed
as all lining up behind their leadership. That simply isn't happening.

It is the impression that one gets. Maybe in other democracies people
express their dissatisfaction with their governments more
vociferously.

Oh the comments on Shrub's idiocy are pretty vociferous. Just not in
the streets. FFM

The Reids wrote:

Following up to Richard Steiner


The majority of people that I know in my area of the US are simply not
in agreement with many of the current administration's policies, and
some are in very strong disagreement.

I find it somewhat shocking that citizens of the US are being portrayed
as all lining up behind their leadership. That simply isn't happening.

the news we get is the election race is 50-50

This far out any projections are silly. There are vast numbers of folks
who are working hard to elect anyone but shrub. Unfortunately some of
them support Nader which may let him slip into a tie. FFM

"Tim Kroesen" schreef in bericht
link.net...

Should I then subsequently be singled out for additional scrutiny as I
cross other European borders if my passport was stamped; possibly; but
that goes with traveling to a well known drug liberal country and
culture, now doesn't it...

I am *from* that "well known drug liberal country and culture " and I can't
even remember when was the last time I even had to open my suitcase at
customs - let alone I had any "additional scrutiny" (and I do about 75
border crossings per year, most of which outside Europe). So I can only
conclude that your prejudices have replaced your brain again.

Sjoerd

"devil" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 10:01:28 +0100, Marie Lewis wrote:


"devil" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 23:27:54 +0200, AJC wrote:

Patriotism can be a great force for good and bad. Throughout history
extremists on the left and the right have used it to their advantage.

Excitation of nationalist feelings is always bad. "Patriotism" is just
a
convenient word to make it sound otherwise.

No matter what, it's an "us vs. them" thing.



The Frenc have a word for it: chauvinism. That is what we are seeing in
the
USA now: "my leader right or wrong!"

That's not really what chauvinism is though.

Chauvinism is more like a grassroot feeling that "we" are the center of
the universe..


Chauvinism derives from one Nicolas Chauvin, a devoted admirer of Napoleon,
right or wrong.

ML

Stephen Harding wrote:

George Z. Bush wrote:

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message

Sjoerd wrote:

"Stephen Harding" schreef in bericht

One less anti-American Euro in line at the airport
is fine with me.

I am not an anti-American. I am an anti-American-current-government. And I
won't stay home, there are 100's of beautiful countries in the world to
discover where they won't fingerprint me. And should I miss typical American
stuff, I can always visit Canada. :-)

You may have just insulted some Canadians with that
comment ya know!

OTOH, they might just be flattered. Why don't we let the Canadians speak for
themselves....I'm sure they can handle it without our help.

Hey George, you're back!

Hope all is well and look forward to arguing
with you in the future!


SMH

I echo Stephen's sentiment George and as to the other matter
above, I don't see a great deal of difference between us 'people
wise', our gov'ts handle some things differently but in general I
think we think pretty much alike...
--

-Gord.

S. Harding wrote:

no American blood or treasure to keep
some government in power or feeling secure; that means S.
Korea, Taiwan, Japan or even UK if it came to such a thing.

It means no NATO, WTF, IMF, World Bank or whatever.

UN is OK
for debating practice.

Back to good old George Washington's admonition, "no entangling
foreign alliances".

The attraction of making the US a large, economy size Sweden or Switzerland is
certainly powerful.
But you must consider that the withdrawal of the US from the world
political/military scene would leave a power vacuum. This would be filled by
another power--and not without serious disruptions and violence. A comparison
might be to what happened with the demise of Ottoman and Austria-Hungary power.
It's very likely the US would be drawn back onto the world military stage by
threats to its own security.
Right now, we are the 800 pound gorilla doing pretty much what we want to
preserve our own civilization, our leaders only worried about what we Americans
think about what they are doing. Bush worries about American voters turning
him out---not the UN or EU.
Also keep in mind the old rule that he who complains is without power. People
with power who don't like something don't bitch about it, they change it.
And remember that everybody carps about the boss.
The US is the boss of the world and has the power to change things it doesn't
like, should it choose to (remarkably, the US is such a benign boss that it
suffers quite a bit it doesn't like and could change--the US is no Soviet
Union, Nazi Germany, or even British Empire).
It's a nuisance being the top dog, endlessly having to go out and fight wolves
and coyotes to keep the sheep safe. But it's a lot better than being the cur
hiding under the porch and barking at every noise it hears, worrying that the
top dog is antagonizing monsters but also terrified that the top dog might get
sick of the whole business and leave it in charge, a responsibility it really
doen't want and can't handle.

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 17:19:21 GMT, "Frank F. Matthews" wrote:

Marie Lewis wrote:

"devil" wrote in message
news
On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 23:27:54 +0200, AJC wrote:

Patriotism can be a great force for good and bad. Throughout history
extremists on the left and the right have used it to their advantage.

Excitation of nationalist feelings is always bad. "Patriotism" is just a
convenient word to make it sound otherwise.

No matter what, it's an "us vs. them" thing.

The Frenc have a word for it: chauvinism. That is what we are seeing in the
USA now: "my leader right or wrong!" ML

You see that mostly in the minority who supported him prior to his
selection. Those who opposed his selection are still pretty ****ed. FFM

The president of the US was fairly elected in accordance with US laws.
Get over it. The fact that the french dislike us because of our economic,
military, and cultural "power" greatly exceeds theirs is a problem for
the french, not the US.

Al Minyard

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 20:39:44 -0400, Peter Kemp wrote:

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 15:00:29 -0500, Alan Minyard
wrote:

Exactly. If you enter my home without my permission or other legal authorization
(Police, Fire Dept) you WILL be shot. And I am not stupid enough to "shoot to
wound". You will get a "double tap" at your center of mass, and I will "repeat as
necessary".

Remind me not to visit you at home Al :-)

Personally, I own 3 pistols, and yet my home defence plan is a
baseball bat, with which I shall smash the bedroom window and leg it.
I don;t know if a burglar is armed, so why the hell should I take the
risk that he's a better shot than me? Call me a coward, but I don't
like guns pointed in my direction.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster

Well, I have shot all of my life, and competed in the US Practical
Shooting Association, so my aim is at least fair :-).

Al Minyard

It's not a matter of what you have to do to own a firearm (personal choice,
most would say) being compared with entering a country (a substantial amount
is done by business travellers with no choice...).

It's a matter of how much this will slow down the process, how the govt
intends to guarantee the security of the personal information, etc. etc.

Osama is getting exactly what he wanted, the US is seemingly clutching at
straws. How would fingerprints have stopped atta and his friends I wonder.



"Stephen Harding" wrote in message
...
Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
James Robinson wrote:

How do you feel about the registration of firearm?

I don't approve of it.

Note that over the last couple of years, firearms laws have been
*relaxing* across most of the US, with one of the sillier ones going
away this September (the Assault Weapons Ban).

I live in Massachusetts, a state with some of the most
strict gun laws in the country.

I've had a pistol permit for years, and to get one, I've
undergone background checks from local, state police and
FBI. My picture and fingerprints are on file at all those
locations. I have to repeat the procedure every 5 years
to renew it (now at a cost of $100).

I am automatically considered such a potential danger to
society because of my interest in "plinking" with a hand
gun, that even civil libertarians seem to have no problem
with the procedure.

Yet to filter potential terrorists from entry to the country
via a 15 second on average, scan of finger prints is thought
to represent a serious breach of civil liberty.

I think anyone coming from Europe or the rest of the world,
who truly feels this represents "big brother" or "police
state America" best just stay home. I don't have much
sympathy for them.


SMH

Richard Steiner wrote:
I find it somewhat shocking that citizens of the US are being portrayed
as all lining up behind their leadership. That simply isn't happening.

Why then are the media continuing the impression that there is a solid support
for the invasion of Iraq and all of the measures taken with the pretense that
they are to combat terrorism ?

If there were a significant portion of americans who are against the current
government, why then did the democrats support that government instead of
pointing out all the lies and mistakes/errors prior to the war beginning ?


When both the media and the opposition fail to challenge a government, it is
because there is solid support from the population. (and it is a self feeding
loop because the polutaion is then fed stuff the media choose to feed them,
and the media think that they reflect what the people think).