![](/i/fill.gif) |
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Gail Shaw wrote:
> "Doctor John" <doc### [at] gmail com> wrote in message
> news:48459a58$1@news.povray.org...
>
>>Gail Shaw wrote:
>>
>>>Never? Have you ever had the pleasure of a chat with the Border
>
> Protection
>
>>>people at a US airport?
>>
>>Yup. Several times and don't ask ...
>
>
> Twice for me. I found the guys in Seattle OK, and even willing to joke a
> bit. The 'person' in Denver on the other hand...
> Let's just say I don't like interregations at (for me) 2am after I've been
> travelling for 28 hours
>
>
>>You'll have to offer me serious money to get me to visit again
>
>
> There's a conference I would like to attend in Seattle in November. At least
> it's before the registration becomes compulsary.
>
> Hmmm. Anyone know what the Canadian border's like on that side of the
> continent?
>
>
Recently when RETURNING to Canada, (that would be the country of my
citizenship,) from the US, I had to endure a close screening by a crew
of smarmy homeland security agents. My mistake was that I was riding on
a bus rather than in a car. Now, while I consider it invasive, I can
understand that these freaks feel the need to monitor who is crossing
the border in either direction. But the complexion of the 'interview'
was that I somehow had to meet the approval of these American agents,
before I would be allowed to return to my own country.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Jim Charter <jrc### [at] msn com> wrote:
> Recently when RETURNING to Canada, (that would be the country of my
> citizenship,) from the US, I had to endure a close screening by a crew
> of smarmy homeland security agents. My mistake was that I was riding on
> a bus rather than in a car. Now, while I consider it invasive, I can
> understand that these freaks feel the need to monitor who is crossing
> the border in either direction. But the complexion of the 'interview'
> was that I somehow had to meet the approval of these American agents,
> before I would be allowed to return to my own country.
Well, it makes sense. We can never know what those Canadians are up to.
Ever seen the South Park movie?
--
- Warp
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp wrote:
> Doctor John <doc### [at] gmail com> wrote:
>> ...That this is not a good way to win friends and influence people?
>
> Call me nationalistic or whatever you want, but IMO the main
> responsibility of a government is to protect its own people. The
> intricacies of foreign relationships is always second to that (at
> least when it doesn't directly affect the first responsibility).
>
> Europe has dug somewhat of a hole for itself with its generally
> lenient immigration policy, and some people, such as the US, are
> wary of that.
>
> 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.)
It's not as if the recent spate of terrorism was the first time that a
European citizen harbored wishes of blowing up Americans. During the
80's the Soviet Union sponsored quite a few terrorist groups in Europe,
and it was European citizens who took the cash and blew up Americans
where they could.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Warp a écrit :
> Vincent Le Chevalier <gal### [at] libertyallsurfsp amfr> wrote:
>> You can take some comfort in the idea that within a few years kerosen
>> will be so costly that all the problems of air travel will disappear :-p
>
> In a way it might be a blessing that the ending of fossil fuels and
> global warming problems are coincidentally happening at the same time,
> as the former will help alleviate the latter.
>
Sadly even if fossil fuels were abruptly out of use, the effects on
climate could last for some time. There will probably be a length of
time where we'll have the inconvenience from climate change while not
having the benefits of fossil fuels any longer...
--
Vincent
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Jim Henderson wrote:
> 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.
And you don't protect them by letting your policies be limited by the
opinions foreigners have about those policies.
Let's be frank. Every nation on the planet that is run by anyone with
any brains at all makes protection of its own interests the first
priority of its foreign policy. The French government does what it
thinks is best for France, and if the Americans don't like it, the
French really don't care. Same goes for the Spaniards with regard to
Spain, the British with regard to the UK, the Germans with regard to
Germany, the Russians with regard to Russia, and so on.
The only real difference is that much of the world has this notion that
the US, and another nation I will not name here, are somehow not
entitled to place their own interests first, but must, for reasons that
never bear close scrutiny, place other nations first.
Regards,
John
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
On Tue, 03 Jun 2008 20:24:43 +0100, Doctor John <doc### [at] gmail com>
wrote:
>
>You'll have to offer me serious money to get me to visit again
Me too.
--
Regards
Stephen
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
4845fdf0$1@news.povray.org...
> 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.
Here's the pic of the guy.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1023560/Man-threatened-arrest-Heathrow-wearing-Transformers-T-shirt.html
Note that he has a sri lankan name. Since Sri Lanka is home to one of the
most ferocious terrorist organisations (they had cornered the whole "suicide
bombing" market until Al Qaeda came along, and they have tried to claim the
title back since) I wouldn't be surprised that people with this background
are special targets for the authorities. Perhaps this works like some spam
filters.
X-Terror-Report:
* 0.4 M_30 Young male below thirty
* 2.5 DK_SKIN Person with dark skin
* 4.5 FROM_TRR_CTRY From: country with lots of terrorists
* 4.3 CLTH_OFFENS Clothes: wearing potentially offensive message
* 8.1 BNN_IMG Image: contains banned images including guns, bombs
and nail clippers
X-Terror-Status: Yes, score=19.8 required=4.0 tests=BAYES_99,M_30 ,DK_SKIN,
FROM_TRR_CTRY ,CLTH_OFFENS,BNN_IMG
G.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Invisible wrote:
>
> AMD Athlon XP 1700+, 256 MB RAM, Windoze XP SP2, Firefox 2.0.0.9.
>
Gordon Bennett! My spare laptop's more powerful than that
:-)
John
--
I will be brief but not nearly so brief as Salvador Dali, who gave the
world's shortest speech. He said, "I will be so brief I am already
finished," then he sat down.
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
>> 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?-)
This is the PC I have *at work*. :-P
The PC I have *at home* is an AMD Athlon64 X2 4200+ with 3 GB RAM and an
nVidia GeForce 7900GT. And it works very nicely too. :-D
[It *was* a pretty good system back when I bought it. Obviously several
years on it's been superceeded by better things...]
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
Gail Shaw wrote:
> You're kidding, right?
Why would the people I work for bother spending money on the guy who
swaps the backup tapes?
Put simply: I am not considered important.
I should perhaps point out that I only got *this* PC because somebody
else got a better one, so I had their old one. My previous machine was
an AMD Duron 800 MHz with 128 MB RAM. (Running Windows NT, obviously.)
--
http://blog.orphi.me.uk/
http://www.zazzle.com/MathematicalOrchid*
Post a reply to this message
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
|
![](/i/fill.gif) |
| ![](/i/fill.gif) |