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

Following up to Marie Lewis

Not showing off: there is nothing particularly remarkable about speaking
French.

Millions of people do that.

this is an english language ng.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Walk-Photo-Wasdale-Thames- Walk-eat-drink-London "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Eat-walk-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

The Reids wrote:
Following up to Marie Lewis


Not showing off: there is nothing particularly remarkable about speaking
French.

Millions of people do that.


this is an english language ng.

Nonsense. This is a multi-lingual newsgroup. Use
whatever language you like. Or in your case, Marie,
feel free to make pedantic grammar corrections
followed by egregious grammatical errors in any
language you almost understand.

In rec.travel.usa-canada Magda wrote:
On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 01:36:48 GMT, in rec.travel.europe, devil
arranged some electrons, so they looked like this :

... On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 17:55:36 +0000, Chad Irby wrote:
...
... In article ,
... AJC wrote:
...
... On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 13:57:38 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:
...
... ...and even with that, it's still going to be faster than most customs
... checks in 99% of the countries in the world.
...
... You don't get out very much do you?
...
... I'm sure *you* don't, if you think US Customs and Immigration is bad,
... compared to most places. Try any of the African nations, for example.
... Or Russia.
...
... If that's the sort of company you feel the US should be compared with,
... well OK then.

Qui se ressemble s'assemble. ;-))


Fait gaffe! Le clown a ta gauche commence a attacker le clown a ta droite! Nex

On Tue, 06 Apr 2004 23:04:15 +0000, Kid E. Poole wrote:

The Reids wrote:
Following up to Marie Lewis


Not showing off: there is nothing particularly remarkable about speaking
French.

Millions of people do that.


this is an english language ng.

Nonsense. This is a multi-lingual newsgroup. Use
whatever language you like. Or in your case, Marie,
feel free to make pedantic grammar corrections
followed by egregious grammatical errors in any
language you almost understand.

Which newsgroup are we specifically talking about here?

Chad Irby wrote:

"Marie Lewis" wrote:

"Chad Irby" wrote in message
om...

Still waiting for the high speed trains of USA...

The distances are too long. Air travel is cheaper for that sort of
range,

And pollutes the planet in the usual US way.

Actually, while a lot of people try to claim that, very few trains are
that efficient. Most UK trains, for example, are *more* polluting, when
you take electrical generation and coal use into account.

In comparison to aircraft, trains are significantly more efficient. UK
statistics show that aircraft use about 6000 BTU per passenger-mile,
while long distance trains use about 1550 BTU per passenger-mile. Those
are the actual numbers, not claims, and include electric generation
losses.

All most trains do is *move* the pollution to places outside of the
cities.

Given that trains are relatively efficient, and move pollution away from
populated areas, is that really so bad?

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

Well this is basicly "the redistrubition of post WWII accumulated wealth" game
but accelerated because of scientific and technological advances.
If you and your potential adversaries have ability today to use HPM weapons as
tectonic and climatic weapons and if you know today that they (HPM) going to
render nuclear weapons useless,then must do something and very fast.
The Martialization of society might be one of the answers to face HPM weapon
threats and natural disasters.

Stephen Harding wrote:

wrote:

"Marie Lewis" wrote:

I did not write this: I would not have put an apostrophe in "its."

Of course you didn't Marie, you should learn how to decipher the
'right wedges' to tell who said what on usenet. If you care to
learn you'll find that a persons speech will have one more right
wedge () than his name does.

You're correct about the 'its', that was my error.

So are you a "lay at one's feet" or a "lie at one's feet"
kind o' guy, Gord?

(Assuming you caught the exchange of course. If you didn't
it really doesn't matter.)


SMH

Yes Stephen, I remember reading where she "corrected" you about
that but I don't remember the context now and I don't see the
post upstream to check it out...
--

-Gord.

Quantum Foam Guy wrote:

A very important point seems to be left out of this discussion: America is
at war with an enemy that has attacked us on our soil.

So what does that have to do with Iraq? They never attacked the US, and
there was never any evidence to link them with Al Queda.

During wartime, certain rules are established in order ensure our
security as much as possible.

Let's round up all Arabs and put them in camps in Colorado. After all,
you can never be too sure.

Once the war is over, those rules are lifted. If we didn't have
moslem psychopaths trying to kill as many of our citizens as
possible and we were still putting these security measures in
place, I would agree that we shouldn't be doing so. But that's
not the world we live in.

Ahh, that explains why I have to show my photo ID and boarding pass
three times just to get through the security line at Cleveland airport,
and why I have to show them to a TSA flunky in Houston just 20 feet
after I have passed through a computer check at Customs and Immigration
when I connect to a domestic flight. The process isn't out of control,
it's simply that a psychopath might cut into line ahead of me, and by
reading a name on a boarding pass and comparing it to the name on a
photo ID, he won't get away with it.

Stephen Harding wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

Stephen Harding wrote:

There are many policy differences between the US and Europe.
When you become an American citizen you can indeed ask that
question, and use your freedoms to promote your ideas of
what government should do. Until then, its an internal matter
for the US to decide. Tough luck for you.

Kind of like how the US left countries like Cuba, Iran, Honduras, Chile,
Argentina, Grenada, Egypt, and many others, to chart their own course
when they were democracies?

Not certain when most of these listed countries were actual democracies,
but never mind.

They were. In many cases, the newly-elected government was either
hostile to US economic interests, so the US arranged to get rid of them,
or supported US economic interests, so the US helped keep them in
office, even though they were thoroughly corrupt, and the population
wanted to boot them out. The US couldn't help but meddle in other
countries' political systems when it suited the government's purpose.

The policies of the Bush government have only increased that likelihood,
by acting unilaterally, and in continuing the biased treatment of Arab
countries in the region. At one time the US had a moral standing in the
world that was envied. It was the belief that diplomacy was the most
important approach to a problem, and violence was only the last resort,
when all other peaceful avenues had been exhausted. The attack on Iraq
has eliminated that unique position, and lowered the US to the ranks of
other bullies around the world. It was so unnecessary, and it will take
many years to regain the confidence of the rest of the world.

How could this be given "Cuba, Iran, Honduras, Chile, ..." listed above?

There was a shift in policy over the last 40 years, where the US
intervened less an less on its own, instead working as part of NATO or
the UN. The attack on Afghanistan is a case in point.

The attack on Iraq, being essentially unilateral, without UN sanction,
is a step away from the more global strategy.

Chad Irby wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

High speed trains are effective in the range
of 200 to 500 miles. There are lots of large cities within that
distance. Just draw a circle around Chicago or Washington, and see how
many cities are enclosed. For that distance, trains have a lower
operating cost and aircraft. Don't just think of transcontinental
service, where aircraft have the advantage.

But for the 200 to 500 mile range, people over here have *cars*, which
gives them much more flexibility. And the continental US is 3000 miles
across.

Nobody seriously suggests that trains would be competitive with aircraft
for 3000 miles.

In the 300 to 500 mile range, people won't necessarily want to drive
their cars if a train can make the trip in two or three hours, and at a
cost of say $50 each way. Europeans also have access to cars, and often
choose to take the train because of the convenience and speed. Between
Lyon and Paris, a distance of about 300 miles, the train has about 70%
of all traffic, including autos and air, even though there is a good
autoroute between the two cities, and ten daily non-stop flights.

Any moron with a chunk of steel can knock a train off the tracks.

... and as we've found out, trains are far too prone to sabotage.

The terrorists just picked trains for their latest attack. Trains are
no more at risk than any other place where people congregate.

But for transportation, they're insanely easier to target.

Insanely? If they are so easy, why didn't the IRA, Basques, Red Army
Brigade, or Bader Meinhof take more advantage of that weakness?

The next attack might be in the lineup for tickets for Disney World,
at a shopping center during Christmas shopping, on a ferry boat, and
so on.

Small areas, compared to even *one* short-distance train track.

Have you been on the Staten Island ferry lately?