 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieee org> wrote:
>> You know I'm going to be question any article that begins with:
>
>> "Europeans and other potential enemies of the US..."
>
> That expression just sounded like sarcasm to me. I would be surprised
> if the author wrote it seriously.
I agree - which is why I don't expect it to objective. Since I don't
know him, I'll assume the author is trying to make a case, and is
willing to use any tactic that he can to get the message across -
including ignoring data points to the contrary (i.e. selective data).
If he had provided links to more background information (that was a bit
more on the descriptive rather than opinionated side), then I may be
interested.
If I already knew something about the subject of the article, then I
may actually read it - but I don't, and I don't want to find out through
him.
A very casual glance at the article suggests the article is of use only
to those who already know what he's talking about and agree with him.
Why bother?
--
On a clear disk you can seek forever.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Warp wrote:
> I think it's rather telling that the people who performed the London
> bombings were not foreign terrorists who had entered the country
> illegally. They were British citizens. I believe that has had at least
> some effect on the foreign policies of the US with respect to Europe.
> (That is, it's no longer just "ah, an European citizen, thus not a
> terrorist, welcome" as it may have been in the past, because nowadays
> even European citizens can be muslim radical terrorists thanks to these
> immigration policies.)
What I don't understand is why not just simply have a visa requirement
regardless of where you're from? As you yourself pointed out,
nationality is not a good indication of anything from a security
standpoint.
--
On a clear disk you can seek forever.
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 14:58:00 -0600, somebody wrote:
> "Jim Henderson" <nos### [at] nospamcom> wrote in message
> news:4845a7d2$1@news.povray.org...
>> On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 14:52:32 -0400, Warp wrote:
>
>> > Call me nationalistic or whatever you want, but IMO the main
>> > responsibility of a government is to protect its own people.
>
>> You don't protect the people of a nation by pissing off the rest of the
>> world, though.
>
> Ideally, and I am sure the goal of the authorities was not to piss off
> other nations, but often it's not possible to not compromise.
It's nearly always possible to compromise. What it takes is a reasonable
point of view to start from. The attitude "we're the USA and we can do
anything we damned well please" is what leads to this type of behaviour.
> On the
> face of it, electronic registration, if it can save any checkpoint
> congestions, even sounds reasonable.
On the face of it, yes. But then you get into privacy issues and who has
access to the information. With our government's demonstrated inability
to keep secure data secure, I don't trust them with my SSN, and *they
issued it to me*.
> FWIW, I was throroughly pissed last
> time I flew through Heathrow too, but I doubt that the intent of the
> British was to piss off flyers. Air and cross border travel has become a
> PITA in general.
Yes, but in some places it's more of a PITA than others. Not just in
Terminal 5. But hey, at least you weren't wearing a Transformers shirt
where the robot was holding a gun. Someone was detained in Terminal 5 at
Heathrow for that (though I wonder if there's more to that story than
we're hearing).
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Jim Henderson wrote:
> Yes, but in some places it's more of a PITA than others. Not just in
> Terminal 5. But hey, at least you weren't wearing a Transformers shirt
> where the robot was holding a gun. Someone was detained in Terminal 5 at
> Heathrow for that (though I wonder if there's more to that story than
> we're hearing).
In the article I read, they either declined to comment or did not give
a better explanation.
To an extent, I think the claims about that incident were a bit off.
The BBC article title implied he was not allowed on due to a security
concern. However, the end of the article suggested that it was not to
offend other passengers (put in the same category as having a shirt with
expletives).
--
How many of you believe in telekinesis? Raise MY hand!
/\ /\ /\ /
/ \/ \ u e e n / \/ a w a z
>>>>>>mue### [at] nawazorg<<<<<<
anl
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:26:00 -0500, Mueen Nawaz wrote:
> In the article I read, they either declined to comment or did not
give
> a better explanation.
>
> To an extent, I think the claims about that incident were a bit
off.
> The BBC article title implied he was not allowed on due to a security
> concern. However, the end of the article suggested that it was not to
> offend other passengers (put in the same category as having a shirt with
> expletives).
We must've read the same article - bbc.co.uk? I do think that there's
more to the story than was there. The scary thing is that even as
written, it's believable.
Jim
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
In article <48456963$1@news.povray.org>, doc### [at] gmailcom says...
> Invisible wrote:
> > You know your PC is too slow when...
> >
> >> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/03/us_visa_scheme/comments/
> >
> > ....clicking on a link causes Firefox to lock up. :-/
> >
> What're you running Firefox on? (Hardware info pls)
>
> John
Could just be the page. Some stuff that is very IE friendly makes
Firefox barf. GMail, for example, at least on my system, will hang
Firefox (2.0, not sure about the 3.0beta) when attempting to check
"any" mail folder other than the inbox, and that will too, if you manage
to get to some other folder, then return to it. Its also slower than
Hotmail was while using Dialup. No idea why, and it bugs the hell out of
me. It works blindingly fast and error free under IE though, again, no
fracking clue why...
--
void main () {
if version = "Vista" {
call slow_by_half();
call DRM_everything();
}
call functional_code();
}
else
call crash_windows();
}
<A HREF='http://www.daz3d.com/index.php?refid=16130551'>Get 3D Models,
3D Content, and 3D Software at DAZ3D!</A>
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
>> You know your PC is too slow when...
>>
>>> http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/03/us_visa_scheme/comments/
>> ....clicking on a link causes Firefox to lock up. :-/
>>
> What're you running Firefox on? (Hardware info pls)
AMD Athlon XP 1700+, 256 MB RAM, Windoze XP SP2, Firefox 2.0.0.9.
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Mueen Nawaz <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> However, the end of the article suggested that it was not to
> offend other passengers (put in the same category as having a shirt with
> expletives).
In a country where something like 80% of the population has a protected
minority group status it's probably *impossible* to not to offend anyone,
no matter what you do. You would probably have to live excluded from
society if you want to avoid offending anyone (and even that probably
would offend someone if he finds out).
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
"Invisible" <voi### [at] devnull> wrote in message
news:484649d4@news.povray.org...
> 256 MB RAM
You're kidding, right?
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Invisible <voi### [at] devnull> wrote:
> AMD Athlon XP 1700+, 256 MB RAM, Windoze XP SP2, Firefox 2.0.0.9.
Terrific state-of-art specs for a gamer and computer programmer?-)
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
