Us To Fingerprint & Photograph All Visa Travellers

[100%]

I find this ridiculous
and totally agree with Brazils Move

BBC today



From 5 January, travellers from all countries which need a visa to enter the US will undergo the same checks.


A Brazilian judge has announced that US citizens will be fingerprinted and photographed on entering the country

Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva was reacting to US plans to do the same to Brazilians entering the United States

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.

Washington's new rules are part of increased anti-terrorism measures.

They aim to identify people who have violated immigration controls, have a criminal record or belong to groups that WAshington has on its list of "terrorist" organisations.


SOURCE (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3358627.stm)

[billyfridge]

I agree with any measures that will catch or stop terr'sts from entering countries to do their slimy deeds. let them stay in their own shitholes and blow themselves up. :angry:

[Evil Gemini]

I think its a good idea.

[Busyman]

What if we use Mastercard? :D

[vidcc]

you have to remember that despite what is said the USA isn't the "land of the free" and that they are not paranoid as the world really is out to get them.
i have lived here for some time now and i have to say that the American people are wonderful friendly people that are always interested in hearing about the world beyond their lands.
please don't think that the new laws for outsiders are the wishes of every US citizen...blame the political arena...

incidentally, did you know that if you are from a country that doesn't require a visa to enter the USA but you have ever been arrested..not charged, just arrested...you need a visa to enter

[J'Pol]

They can photgraph me, take my fingerprints and a DNA sample if they want.

I have no problem with it and think that saying

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.
"
is idiotic.

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by J'Pol@2 January 2004 - 09:53
They can photgraph me, take my fingerprints and a DNA sample if they want.

I have no problem with it and think that saying

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.
"
is idiotic.
why?

that may be ok to u but it's not ok with me.

I am an upstanding citizen and why should I be treated like a criminal?

[clocker]

Why shouldn't the US ( or any other state, for that matter) have the right to know who is coming into the country?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez+2 January 2004 - 20:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (james_bond_rulez &#064; 2 January 2004 - 20:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@2 January 2004 - 09:53
They can photgraph me, take my fingerprints and a DNA sample if they want.

I have no problem with it and think that saying

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.
"
is idiotic.
why?

that may be ok to u but it&#39;s not ok with me.

I am an upstanding citizen and why should I be treated like a criminal?[/b][/quote]
You really agree that taking photographs and fingerprints is " .... worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis,"

So attempted genocide, concentration camps, the murder of millions of civilians equates to taking your photograph and or fingerprints.

I say again, it is idiotic to suggest such a thing. I will go further it is deeply offensive. It seems that the American authorities can do no right in some people&#39;s eyes. They try to protect their citizens and become "Nazis". If they do nothing they are reckless.

Give it a feckin rest.

[chinook_apache]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@2 January 2004 - 18:53
They can photgraph me, take my fingerprints and a DNA sample if they want.

I have no problem with it and think that saying

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.
"
is idiotic.
yep i have no problem with them doing that at customs.

[billyfridge]

Originally posted by Busyman@2 January 2004 - 16:58
What if we use Mastercard? :D
Don&#39;t u think terrorrists have mastercards like us nice people :D :D

[bigdawgfoxx]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez+2 January 2004 - 13:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (james_bond_rulez @ 2 January 2004 - 13:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@2 January 2004 - 09:53
They can photgraph me, take my fingerprints and a DNA sample if they want.

I have no problem with it and think that saying

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.
"
is idiotic.
why?

that may be ok to u but it&#39;s not ok with me.

I am an upstanding citizen and why should I be treated like a criminal? [/b][/quote]
Why is it that people act like this? Give them yourfinger print and whatever else they ask...its to save your ass in the end. Why do you have such a problem...its for your protection...i hate it when people take stuff so personally like.."im being treated like a criminal"...no your not get over it.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by Zedaxax@2 January 2004 - 12:07
I find this ridiculous&nbsp;
and totally agree with Brazils Move

BBC today



From 5 January, travellers from all countries which need a visa to enter the US will undergo the same checks.


A Brazilian judge has announced that US citizens will be fingerprinted and photographed on entering the country

Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva was reacting to US plans to do the same to Brazilians entering the United States

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.

Washington&#39;s new rules are part of increased anti-terrorism measures.

They aim to identify people who have violated immigration controls, have a criminal record or belong to groups that WAshington has on its list of "terrorist" organisations.


SOURCE (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/3358627.stm)
"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.



This guy is a judge?


Zedaxax-

Will you, for our edification, define clearly just what about this policy you would deem "ridiculous"?

Do you support the above commentary?

[james_bond_rulez]

well this may work well with u US folks but this kind of crap can never be pulled in Canada.

fingerprints and dna are considered personal information and are protected in Canada

you just just ASK for them, it&#39;s illegal unless you have a criminal record. and it&#39;s CERTAINLY not OK with Canadians having to expose their personal info like that.

just ask any canadians they&#39;ll tell u that.


and dont give me that "oh it&#39;ll protect u" crap, it&#39;s BS

[bigdawgfoxx]

Why do you care if they have your fingerprints...??? Or your DNA...?? big deal...if they want it im sure they have a good plan for it...

[james_bond_rulez]

well i dont think i&#39;ll be fingerprinted and dna tested when i enter the US (which i rarely do anyway)

since Canadian citizens can enter the US without a visa right? :lol:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@3 January 2004 - 03:07
well i dont think i&#39;ll be fingerprinted and dna tested when i enter the US (which i rarely do anyway)

since Canadian citizens can enter the US without a visa right? :lol:
JBR-

Let&#39;s assume, just for a moment, you submit to fingerprinting or DNA testing at the border.

What ill do you imagine would then befall you?

Serious question.

[MagicNakor]

It depends what you&#39;re trying to enter the US for. You may need a visa.

Personally, I wouldn&#39;t submit to DNA testing or fingerprinting. It&#39;s certainly none of their business, no matter how much the US government would like to make it so.

:ninja:

[Pitbul]

remember people its the US goverment that sucks not the people, and remember kids its down the road no across the street :smilie4:

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by j2k4+2 January 2004 - 22:17--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4 @ 2 January 2004 - 22:17)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-james_bond_rulez@3 January 2004 - 03:07
well i dont think i&#39;ll be fingerprinted and dna tested when i enter the US (which i rarely do anyway)

since Canadian citizens can enter the US without a visa right? :lol:
JBR-

Let&#39;s assume, just for a moment, you submit to fingerprinting or DNA testing at the border.

What ill do you imagine would then befall you?

Serious question. [/b][/quote]
wow protection personal information is something u can&#39;t understand?

i dont know about u US folks but i&#39;d like the US gov to keep its nose out of my biological information such as my fingerprints and dns molecules

u guys dont mind having ur genitle exposed and being examined, I DO&#33;&#33;&#33;

[junkyardking]

I dont know where DNA came into as the article says nothing about it, as for taking photographs and figerprints, dont you know this is all part of globalisation where money can go anywhere with no borders while humans will have there rights more and more infringed under the guise of security. ;)

The edge of the wedge is thin but the more you push the bigger it gets ;)

[Rat Faced]

As long as it works both ways i have no problem with it....except fingerprinting is nowhere near foolproof...i&#39;d RATHER it was DNA.

[james_bond_rulez]

yeah fingerprints can be fakes and so can the rentinal scans be faked :lol:

[clocker]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@3 January 2004 - 01:05


i dont know about u US folks but i&#39;d like the US gov to keep its nose out of my biological information such as my fingerprints and dns molecules

u guys dont mind having ur genitle exposed and being examined, I DO&#33;&#33;&#33;
We aren&#39;t interested in your "biological information", just trying to prove that you are who you say you are.

Exposing genitals?
I&#39;m sure there are aberrant border guards around, but you must have run into more than your fair share....

[james_bond_rulez]

ROFLMAO yeah those female boarder ossifers are really hot......

[hobbes]

In the United States, I applied for a professional license. Part of the application process was to send a recent passport-type photo AND a copy of my fingerprints. I had to go to the local police station and PAY them to fingerprint me. I threw in an extra 10 bucks to be beaten with a nightstick and stunned by a tazzer.

After spending the night in jail (and acquiring a new best friend, BTW), I submitted my application.

The licensing body just wants to sure that I am who I say I and can prove it if a doubt arises. It helps to preserve the integrity of the field.

It seems that only those who have a less than upstanding history would balk at such a measure. I am willing to reciprocate a photo and fingerprints to any country that I visit. Whatever they deem necessary to make ensure safety. If I think the measures are extreme or demeaning, I&#39;ll take my business elsewhere.

I only let people into my house that I both know and trust, the same should be true of my country. So if you want to come to my country, it very much is my business who you are.

So next time I go to Canada, I will enter your houses, which are never locked, and start drinking beer in front of your TV. Please do not ask me for identification of any kind, as you have no right to know this.

[james_bond_rulez]

you will still need proper ids entering Canada, we just dont have strip searches for boys and girls alike ;)

and we do lock ur doors just to clear that up :lol:

[clocker]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@3 January 2004 - 10:48
you will still need proper ids entering Canada, we just dont have strip searches for boys and girls alike&nbsp; ;)

and we do lock ur doors just to clear that up&nbsp; :lol:
Where did the "strip searches" data come from?
The same weirdo who insisted on inspecting your "genitles", no doubt.

You really should try a different border crossing.

Edit: Of course you lock your doors up there, but, like most things Canadien, they are only 86% as effective as American locks and we can outwit them easily.

[james_bond_rulez]

on a completely unrelated note

i dunno if you guys have seen "air force one", i know it&#39;s hollywood and all but i think there is some truths into this movie

in the movie the loyalists of a soviet general, who got imprisoned by the US for terrorists activities, got onto air force one posing as media crew. Just before they boarded the air plane they were id&#39;ed by fingerprints and got clearence.

any organized crime, terriorists or not, can get around the system and still pose danger to the American public.

[<TROUBLE^MAKER>]

Your photographed by hundreds of security cameras every day and don&#39;t even realize it.

[clocker]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez@3 January 2004 - 10:55
on a completely unrelated note

i dunno if you guys have seen "air force one", i know it&#39;s hollywood and all but i think there is some truths into this movie


I think that any truths that can be gleaned from that movie end with the fact that yes Virginia, there really is such a thing as Air Force One.

Oh...and George Bush does look exactly like Harrison Ford. :lol:

[james_bond_rulez]

yes i know but i am talking about the plot in the movie not air force one itself or the president lol

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by hobbes@3 January 2004 - 07:32
In the United States, I applied for a professional license.
what license is that?

[hobbes]

License to kill, Mr. Bond, a license... to kill. You, of course, know about this application process, ....correct?

Read above with a British accent, "process" should be pronounced "Pro cess", not "pra-cess"

[james_bond_rulez]

Originally posted by hobbes@3 January 2004 - 09:37
License to kill, Mr. Bond, a license... to kill. You
very nicely put hobbes <_<

:lol:

[Busyman]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez+2 January 2004 - 20:14--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (james_bond_rulez @ 2 January 2004 - 20:14)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@2 January 2004 - 09:53
They can photgraph me, take my fingerprints and a DNA sample if they want.

I have no problem with it and think that saying

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," Federal Judge Julier Sebastiao da Silva said in the court order.
"
is idiotic.
why?

that may be ok to u but it&#39;s not ok with me.

I am an upstanding citizen and why should I be treated like a criminal? [/b][/quote]
I agree with you james_bond. If these measures are quite abhorent to you I recommend that you........
STFO OF OUR COUNTRY&#33;&#33;&#33;

quite simple really

If I go to Brazil or Canada and they want to "identify" me via fingerprints or photographs, big friggin&#39; deal. I&#39;m not any less free.


On another note,

I work for Verizon as a technician in Washington DC. We do work for different government agencies. In order to do work for the FBI I need to get fingerprinted. There are some techs that have criminal records so they didn&#39;t even bother to try get clearance.

[Monkster]

Edit: Of course you lock your doors up there, but, like most things Canadien, they are only 86% as effective as American locks and we can outwit them easily. Ah, yes, but you, like most Americans, are only 86% as intellegent as the average Canadian. Co-incidentally, there hasn&#39;t been a break in in Canada for over 50 years.


STFO OF OUR COUNTRY&#33;&#33;&#33;Gladly&#33; I actually value my life.

[Arm]

Originally posted by Zedaxax@2 January 2004 - 16:07
Washington&#39;s new rules are part of increased anti-terrorism measures.
:angry: Anti-terrorist my ass. Pure fascism.

[Busyman]

What cracks me up is the fact that multiple breaches in OUR security triggered one of the worst acts of terrorism in OUR country&#39;s history and YOU foreigners think it&#39;s wrong to merely fingerprint and photograph you when and if you decide to come to OUR country.

STFU and get a life.

[bigdawgfoxx]

:stupid: ...sept change stupid to smart :)

[j2k4]

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez+3 January 2004 - 04:05--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (james_bond_rulez &#064; 3 January 2004 - 04:05)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by j2k4@2 January 2004 - 22:17
<!--QuoteBegin-james_bond_rulez@3 January 2004 - 03:07
well i dont think i&#39;ll be fingerprinted and dna tested when i enter the US (which i rarely do anyway)

since Canadian citizens can enter the US without a visa right? :lol:
JBR-

Let&#39;s assume, just for a moment, you submit to fingerprinting or DNA testing at the border.

What ill do you imagine would then befall you?

Serious question.
wow protection personal information is something u can&#39;t understand?

i dont know about u US folks but i&#39;d like the US gov to keep its nose out of my biological information such as my fingerprints and dns molecules

u guys dont mind having ur genitle exposed and being examined, I DO&#33;&#33;&#33;[/b][/quote]
Are you a risk?

Then I suppose you&#39;d want to keep your fingerprints private.

You don&#39;t want to come here anyway, but if you did, we&#39;d be onto you-and unless you&#39;re going to bomb something, no harm, no foul, yes?

But if your intentions were otherwise?

Also-

I assume instead of "dns molecules", you meant INS molecules? :lol:

Only Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton are subject to the, um...genitle search. ;)


BTW-bigdawgfoxx-

That last was a very concise post. ;)

[james_bond_rulez]

wow so much flame so lil love

sometimes i wonder why i hang around here

i post one opinion and everybody flames me

great forum this is

[Nexus UK]

the actual solution to all these arguments is very simple :D

@ All Americans

"next time dont put it off or complain. VOTE" :angry:

then the world will see a real POTUS in the white house.


thankyou and goodnight from a country that has had to put up with terrorism for a lot longer than the last few years. and still lets anyone in &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

[vidcc]

what i don&#39;t understand is why they think that fingerprints and photos will stop the suicidal terrorist...after all surely they don&#39;t know the identity of every terrorist and new recruits will be used....once they have blown themselves up how is the fingerprint record going to help?
When i moved here i was photographed and fingerprinted beyond belief but i accepted it even though it didn&#39;t exactly make me feel welcome. i accepted it because my wife is American and we decided to live here. However i can see tourism fading fast as more and more honest law abiding people from around the world are put through the humiliation of being treated like a criminal the moment they step off the plane, and that is the whole point of the objections. Fingerprinting and photographing is viewed as something that only happens to criminals and it&#39;s not just humiliating it&#39;s kind of insulting to many
yes we do live in troubled times and yes security is important but is this really necessary? and does anyone think it will endear us to the rest of the world

[james_bond_rulez]

finally somebody who understands....

[Busyman]

Originally posted by vidcc@4 January 2004 - 06:46
what i don&#39;t understand is why they think that fingerprints and photos will stop the suicidal terrorist...after all surely they don&#39;t know the identity of every terrorist and new recruits will be used....once they have blown themselves up how is the fingerprint record going to help?
When i moved here i was photographed and fingerprinted beyond belief but i accepted it even though it didn&#39;t exactly make me feel welcome. i accepted it because my wife is American and we decided to live here. However i can see tourism fading fast as more and more honest law abiding people from around the world are put through the humiliation of being treated like a criminal the moment they step off the plane, and that is the whole point of the objections. Fingerprinting and photographing is viewed as something that only happens to criminals and it&#39;s not just humiliating it&#39;s kind of insulting to many
yes we do live in troubled times and yes security is important but is this really necessary? and does anyone think it will endear us to the rest of the world
Uh yeah...but you forget that the reason the WTC got flattened was because of attitudes like yours that were ubiquitous in our security.

After 9-11 I, as a Verizon telephone technician, still don&#39;t like having to go through more security measures by any given customer to do work FOR THEM. It is an inconvenience. It was much easier when I just showed my work badge and got the main telephone room key and went to do my work.....

..but there are levels of free. It seems that when people are used to going anywhere without anyone asking questions it feels very "relaxed". In fact it is also unregulated.

Realize that everyone does not have the good intentions for the US like you do. :lol: ;) <_<

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Busyman+4 January 2004 - 06:16--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Busyman @ 4 January 2004 - 06:16)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-vidcc@4 January 2004 - 06:46
what i don&#39;t understand is why they think that fingerprints and photos will stop the suicidal terrorist...after all surely they don&#39;t know the identity of every terrorist and&nbsp; new recruits will be used....once they have blown themselves up how is the fingerprint record going to help?
When i moved here i was photographed and fingerprinted beyond belief but i accepted it even though it didn&#39;t exactly make me feel welcome. i accepted it because my wife is American and we decided to live here. However i can see tourism fading fast as more and more honest law abiding people from around the world are put through the humiliation of being treated like a criminal the moment they step off the plane, and that is the whole point of the objections. Fingerprinting and photographing is viewed as something that only happens to criminals and it&#39;s not just humiliating it&#39;s kind of insulting to many
yes we do live in troubled times and yes security is important but is this really necessary? and does anyone think it will endear us to the rest of the world
Uh yeah...but you forget that the reason the WTC got flattened was because of attitudes like yours that were ubiquitous in our security.

After 9-11 I, as a Verizon telephone technician, still don&#39;t like having to go through more security measures by any given customer to do work FOR THEM. It is an inconvenience. It was much easier when I just showed my work badge and got the main telephone room key and went to do my work.....

..but there are levels of free. It seems that when people are used to going anywhere without anyone asking questions it feels very "relaxed". In fact it is also unregulated.

Realize that everyone does not have the good intentions for the US like you do. :lol: ;) <_< [/b][/quote]
so please explain just how it will stop 9/11 hapening again...as i said we don&#39;t know the identity of every terrorist and and never will and new recruits with no record would be used.
there was debate in congress about ending the visa waiver program but it was decided that it would not be to America&#39;s financial benefit to do so. is this not a loophole in security ?
i just feel that this particular action would cause more alienation than benefit.
if you work in a sensitive area then security should be tight after all that&#39;s where a terrorist could gain information....a very real threat
if the government decreed that all US citizens be fingerprinted and photographed after Mcveigh did his deed (internal terrorism) would you see it as just?

if it does or doesn&#39;t help security i am just putting a point of view and am not attacking your view, and i do realise that not everyone has my good intentions..i just don&#39;t see how this will help

[hobbes]

Only American citizens have the rights of freedom our people have.

The rest are here as visitors and we would like to know who you are. To make things simple, we could just close our doors period. You are not needed here for any reason. 9/11 would never have happened at all.

By letting the foreigners in, all we do is expose ourselves to risk without any possible benefit.

Perhaps had we known more about those we were training to fly, maybe they would never have been given access to their lessons.

Didn&#39;t one fellow tell his teacher that he did not care how to land, only take off?

Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US. Not as an invasion of privacy, but to preserve the integrity of that field.

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by hobbes@4 January 2004 - 07:59
...Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US...
Which is slightly different than the British family of four taking their kids to see Disneyland for the first time.

:ninja:

[hobbes]

Originally posted by MagicNakor+4 January 2004 - 10:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MagicNakor &#064; 4 January 2004 - 10:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@4 January 2004 - 07:59
...Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US...
Which is slightly different than the British family of four taking their kids to see Disneyland for the first time.

:ninja:[/b][/quote]


British citizens are part of the Visa Waver Program:

Andorra (MRP) Iceland Norway
Australia Ireland Portugal
Austria Italy San Marino
Belgium (MRP) Japan Singapore
Brunei (MRP) Liechtenstein (MRP) Slovenia (MRP)
Denmark Luxembourg Spain
Finland Monaco Sweden
France the Netherlands Switzerland
Germany New Zealand United Kingdom


No need to worry, little Paddington and Chelsea will be ok.

Canadians are not part of this program but Citizens of Canada generally do not require a visa.

Though some do routinely request to be strip searched ;)

I am a bit concerned that Scotland is part of this and I am writing my Senator about this issue. I think the Scottish should require a photo, fingerprints, and a police-artist sketch of what they are wearing under their kilts.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by hobbes@4 January 2004 - 06:59
Only American citizens have the rights of freedom our people have.

The rest are here as visitors and we would like to know who you are.&nbsp; To make things simple, we could just close our doors period. You are not needed here for any reason. 9/11 would never have happened at all.

By letting the foreigners in, all we do is expose ourselves to risk without any possible benefit.

Perhaps had we known more about those we were training to fly, maybe they would never have been given access to their lessons.

Didn&#39;t one fellow tell his teacher that he did not care how to land, only take off?

Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US.&nbsp; Not as an invasion of privacy, but to preserve the integrity of that field.


i still don&#39;t see how having the fingerprints of the 9/11 hijackers would have stopped it happening. perhaps it had more to do with the security for internal flights at the time ..we would just have known how many callouses they had.
the one saying he had no interest in take off or landing should have raised alarms but again his fingerprints would have helped none unless they had intelligence on him in the first place...as i said they will use unknown new recruits.

as for non Americans not bringing any benefits..well it was estimated in congress that America would lose (i read this in some newspaper) &#036;28 billion generated by tourism from countries on the visa waiver program should they decide to end it (people put off if they need visas).......technology.........blah blah..etc.etc.

as pointed out there is a difference between a family of british tourists going to see mickey mouse and a vocational license...however i must point out that british tourists won&#39;t be fingerprinted as they are in the visa waiver program.
regardless of all the debate it&#39;s going to happen. i just hope it serves its purpose and doesn&#39;t alienate the USA from the rest of the world at a time when it needs friends.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by hobbes+4 January 2004 - 16:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 4 January 2004 - 16:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by MagicNakor@4 January 2004 - 10:09
<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@4 January 2004 - 07:59
...Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US...
Which is slightly different than the British family of four taking their kids to see Disneyland for the first time.

:ninja:


British citizens are part of the Visa Waver Program:

Andorra (MRP) Iceland Norway
Australia Ireland Portugal
Austria Italy San Marino
Belgium (MRP) Japan Singapore
Brunei (MRP) Liechtenstein (MRP) Slovenia (MRP)
Denmark Luxembourg Spain
Finland Monaco Sweden
France the Netherlands Switzerland
Germany New Zealand United Kingdom


No need to worry, little Paddington and Chelsea will be ok.

Canadians are not part of this program but Citizens of Canada generally do not require a visa.

Though some do routinely request to be strip searched ;)

I am a bit concerned that Scotland is part of this and I am writing my Senator about this issue. I think the Scottish should require a photo, fingerprints, and a police-artist sketch of what they are wearing under their kilts. [/b][/quote]
ok you posted the british citizen s on the visa waiver before me...but in my defence i have 3 kids all competing to see who can drive me insane first so it takes me longer to type :lol: :lol: :lol:

[J'Pol]

It really is quite simple, if you do not wish to follow the rules of Any country, simply do not go there.

That way your precious photograph and fingerprints are safe. There will be no invasion of your civil liberties and the concomitant return to the worst excesses of Nazism.

I believe the new UK passport is to contain a fingerpring (tho&#39; I am not sure) so it&#39;s not really a problem here. If you want a passport you have to give the intensely private details of photograph and possibly fingerprints anyway.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@4 January 2004 - 18:26

I believe the new UK passport is to contain a fingerpring (tho&#39; I am not sure) so it&#39;s not really a problem here. If you want a passport you have to give the intensely private details of photograph and possibly fingerprints anyway.
i&#39;m not sure if the new passport will have the fingerprint either , however i think that as a british subject you will have to have one of the new machine readable passports to be able to enter the USA..not sure of the date for this. your old style passport even if still valid won&#39;t be allowed, and i have no doubt that the cost will be bourne by the passport holder..as was planned for the national ID scheme.

[Nexus UK]

ALL U.K passports will be Biometric by 2006-7 then as older ones are renewed/run out - like the u.k driving licence which has photo on it.

oh and as for closing the door on visitors, will that keep your government officials from going on selling trips to dictators in Iraq/libya/afghanistan.

do not misunderstand me, hell i have just come back from the u.s and love going back (NOT DISNEY) but until a "fair and balanced view" is in the white house, please excuse us

any policy/law changes MAY be needed but,

would you have listened to Stalin lecture on freedom at the u.n.??????

even if he was 100% right

Now think how many people would have raised a complaint if Clinton was still there?

almost none for my money.

[Arm]

Originally posted by Nexus UK@4 January 2004 - 05:32
the actual solution to all these arguments is very simple :D

@ All Americans

"next time dont put it off or complain. VOTE" :angry:
:rolleyes: The elections were rigged and all the politicians who have any chance of getting into office are fucking crooks.

[leftism]

Lets apply a little logic.

The 9/11 terrorists didnt use false ID&#39;s. Even if they had been fingerprinted and had their DNA taken it wouldnt have changed a thing.

These measures wont guarantee your safety, they will however guarantee an illusion of safety. Surprisingly, this seems to be more than adequate for many people.

[MagicNakor]

I suppose it could have changed something if the United States had a huge database of 6,340,613,474 fingerprints and possible political and religious associations.

But it doesn&#39;t.

:ninja:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by leftism@6 January 2004 - 22:31
Lets apply a little logic.

The 9/11 terrorists didnt use false ID&#39;s. Even if they had been fingerprinted and had their DNA taken it wouldnt have changed a thing.

These measures wont guarantee your safety, they will however guarantee an illusion of safety. Surprisingly, this seems to be more than adequate for many people.
Your post does have, as you say, "little logic".

In case you missed it, we are living in the "post-9-11" world, where an effort is afoot to plug some of the holes previously extant in our incredibly leaky boat.

Is it your position that, since you deem steps currently being implemented are inadequate, or illogical, we should do nothing?

You strike me as a bright individual-you must, therefore, have a brilliant idea or two-let&#39;s hear them.

:)

[j2k4]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 00:00
I suppose it could have changed something if the United States had a huge database of 6,340,613,474 fingerprints and possible political and religious associations.

But it doesn&#39;t.

:ninja:
Geez, MN-

Do we really need all 6,340,613,474 of them?

Can&#39;t we even leave you off the list?

:)

[MagicNakor]

Obviously not - I&#39;ve had my trunk lining ripped apart by an overzealous marine. No explanation as to why, either. And, of course, no compensation for getting it fixed, when (oddly enough) the bare wood and metal was shown.

Contrary to what seems to be the popular rhetoric, the world did not change on September 11th, 2002. The United States is, frankly, overreacting. Quite a few other countries have had, and continue to have, acts of terrorism. The only thing that was brand-spanking-new was the use of fully-fueled airplanes flown into buildings and blowing said buildings up.

Of course, an irritated elephant is far more dangerous than a terrier, which is why, to an extent, certain governments are more willing to placate it.

:ninja:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 02:13
Of course, an irritated elephant is far more dangerous than a terrier, which is why, to an extent, certain governments are more willing to placate it.

:ninja:
True enough.

But, as you say, other countries have suffered and continue to suffer acts of terrorism, despite their best efforts to forestall them.

The Elephant is arrogant enough to attempt to shoot for zero-tolerance of terrorist acts.

I suppose we&#39;ll be keel-hauled for being intolerant. ;)

[MagicNakor]

However, forcing other governments to adopt your procedures and restrictions (when they aren&#39;t even implemented in the United States) is completely ridiculous.

Force them into your own government practices first. Lead by example. And for Pete&#39;s sake stop blaming Canada for everything. :frusty:

:ninja:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 02:38
However, forcing other governments to adopt your procedures and restrictions (when they aren&#39;t even implemented in the United States) is completely ridiculous.

Force them into your own government practices first. Lead by example. And for Pete&#39;s sake stop blaming Canada for everything. :frusty:

:ninja:
What?

Now you want us to stop blaming you?

No way....you&#39;re just too handy. :D


I will reiterate my sentiment:

I love Canada, and everyone in it-always have, and always will.

Except Jean Chretien.

I like France and it&#39;s citizens, too.

Except Jacques Chirac.

All clear now? :)

[leftism]

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Your post does have, as you say, "little logic".[/b]

:sleeping:


Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>In case you missed it, we are living in the "post-9-11" world, where an effort is afoot to plug some of the holes previously extant in our incredibly leaky boat.[/b]

This isnt going to plug any holes. You honestly think known international terrorists are going to board a plane, allow themselves to be identified and get caught by this system? If you believe that you must think the terrorists are as stupid as yourself which, unfortunately for the US, they aren&#39;t.

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@

Is it your position that, since you deem steps currently being implemented are inadequate, or illogical, we should do nothing?
[/quote]

No. Is it your position that implementing completely useless &#39;steps&#39; is a good strategy?

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4

You strike me as a bright individual-you must, therefore, have a brilliant idea or two-let&#39;s hear them.[/quote]

Sure.

I suggest you do something. Preferably an expensive and inconvenient something. Don&#39;t worry about whether it&#39;ll work or not. Thats irrelevant.

The important thing is that when the job is done you can stand back and loudly proclaim "WE DID SOMETHING&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;"

Then you can live in a fantasy world of illusional safety.. then when you get attacked again you can stand back and say...

"I DONT UNDERSTAND.. IT HAPPENED AGAIN&#33;&#33; BUT THIS TIME WE DID SOMETHING&#33;&#33;"

I&#39;m not sure about the next steps after that, its a little hazy, but I&#39;m fairly certain they will involve doing &#39;something&#39;.

[hobbes]

And the harm done is what?

As I have said, whatever your country deems necessary I will gladly comply. If it is a bit too much, I simply won&#39;t visit.

[leftism]

Originally posted by hobbes
And the harm done is what?

Apart from wasting money, manpower, time and inconveniencing thousands of people to achieve nothing more than a false sense of security its not going to be drastically harmful.

I just think that security measures should be judged primarily on their effectiveness.

[j2k4]

Originally posted by leftism+7 January 2004 - 03:55--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism @ 7 January 2004 - 03:55)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Your post does have, as you say, "little logic".[/b]

:sleeping:


Originally posted by j2k4
In case you missed it, we are living in the "post-9-11" world, where an effort is afoot to plug some of the holes previously extant in our incredibly leaky boat.

This isnt going to plug any holes. You honestly think known international terrorists are going to board a plane, allow themselves to be identified and get caught by this system? If you believe that you must think the terrorists are as stupid as yourself which, unfortunately for the US, they aren&#39;t.

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@

Is it your position that, since you deem steps currently being implemented are inadequate, or illogical, we should do nothing?


No. Is it your position that implementing completely useless &#39;steps&#39; is a good strategy?

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4

You strike me as a bright individual-you must, therefore, have a brilliant idea or two-let&#39;s hear them.[/quote]

Sure.

I suggest you do something. Preferably an expensive and inconvenient something. Don&#39;t worry about whether it&#39;ll work or not. Thats irrelevant.

The important thing is that when the job is done you can stand back and loudly proclaim "WE DID SOMETHING&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;"

Then you can live in a fantasy world of illusional safety.. then when you get attacked again you can stand back and say...

"I DONT UNDERSTAND.. IT HAPPENED AGAIN&#33;&#33; BUT THIS TIME WE DID SOMETHING&#33;&#33;"

I&#39;m not sure about the next steps after that, its a little hazy, but I&#39;m fairly certain they will involve doing &#39;something&#39;. [/b][/quote]
Spoken like a true terrorist.

Or simple provocateur.

I can&#39;t decide which. :huh:

[hobbes]

Originally posted by leftism+7 January 2004 - 09:44--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 7 January 2004 - 09:44)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
And the harm done is what?

Apart from wasting money, manpower, time and inconveniencing thousands of people to achieve nothing more than a false sense of security its not going to be drastically harmful.

I just think that security measures should be judged primarily on their effectiveness. [/b][/quote]
Critcism is for the uninspired.

What do you offer?

BTW, in planning a trip or relocation to another country, the additional effort of a photograph and fingerprinting is a pittance.

Certainly this a far cry from the holocaust decried by the Brazilian judge, no? A "xenophobic policy, worthy of the worst horrors commited by the Nazi&#39;s"

So you may find the policy ineffective, but that has no bearing on the original post. And how do you deal with my response that I am willing to comply with whatever policy a host country employs. After all, if I visit them, I should play by their rules.

[MagicNakor]

Jean Chretien ceased to be Prime Minister in December. Paul Martin&#39;s the "new" guy now. And, unfortunately for us, he&#39;s more American-friendly.

We&#39;re used to being the United States&#39; scapegoat. But four major blame-sessions in a year is a little much.

:ninja:

[j2k4]

Originally posted by leftism@7 January 2004 - 03:55
If you believe that you must think the terrorists are as stupid as yourself which, unfortunately for the US, they aren&#39;t.


I do believe I&#39;m being attacked. :)

Ouch.

(Hope thats the correct response&#33;)

[j2k4]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 04:56
Jean Chretien ceased to be Prime Minister in December. Paul Martin&#39;s the "new" guy now. And, unfortunately for us, he&#39;s more American-friendly.

We&#39;re used to being the United States&#39; scapegoat. But four major blame-sessions in a year is a little much.

:ninja:
I&#39;ll see what I can do. :)

[leftism]

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Spoken like a true terrorist.[/b]

"True terrorists" think the US ought to have effective security? Strange concept...


Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I do believe I&#39;m being attacked[/b]

You mean counter-attacked. We&#39;ll have no martyrs here thank you very much :)


Originally posted by hobbes
Critcism is for the uninspired.

What do you offer?


Ahh that old chestnut :) . Any criticism given must always be accompanied by an alternative solution. Do you apply that standard to yourself at all times? Of course not. Its a desperate point to make.


Originally posted by hobbes
BTW, in planning a trip or relocation to another country, the additional effort of a photograph and fingerprinting is a pittance

In your opinion perhaps but many people say they feel like criminals in that situation. They may be right or wrong to feel that way but it is a common perception.


Originally posted by hobbes
Certainly this a far cry from the holocaust decried by the Brazilian judge, no? A "xenophobic policy, worthy of the worst horrors commited by the Nazi&#39;s

Agreed, that comment is utter BS.

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@
So you may find the policy ineffective, but that has no bearing on the original post.[/quote]

The original post was "I find this ridiculous and totally agree with Brazils Move". I took that to mean discuss what you think of this plan and whether Brazil is doing the right thing. Tacking an OT sign on the effectiveness of such a strategy seems to be an odd decision. Surely the effectiveness of the scheme is THE main issue here?

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
And how do you deal with my response that I am willing to comply with whatever policy a host country employs. After all, if I visit them, I should play by their rules. [/quote]

Of course but everyone has their limits. I take it there are certain things you would not accept and which would persuade you not to visit the country in question? Well thats whats going to happen in the US too.

And while you may think that "By letting the foreigners in, all we do is expose ourselves to risk without any possible benefit." you seem to be ignoring the millions of &#036;&#036;&#39;s the US makes from tourism.

Its give and take. You lose a few tourists maybe a few jobs but you gain some security. If you are going to go to all this trouble then at least make sure you really get the security you&#39;ve been promised not an expensive PR exercise so the politicians can say they did "something" when the inevitable happens.

[ilw]

Imo i&#39;d just like to say to the US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/tv/chewinthe...unds/toofar.wav (http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/tv/chewinthefat/media/download_sounds/toofar.wav)


That said if i was planning on spending all that money & time to go to america it probably wouldn&#39;t put me off, just piss me off.

[j4y3m]

What If You&#39;re Allergic To Ink?

[vidcc]

Originally posted by stupidguy@7 January 2004 - 11:40
What If You&#39;re Allergic To Ink?
:lol: :lol: :lol:
but they have fingerprinting machines that are more like photocopiers now..no ink involved..providing the airport pays up the money for the machine

[hobbes]

Originally posted by leftism+7 January 2004 - 11:38--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 7 January 2004 - 11:38)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
Critcism is for the uninspired.

What do you offer?


Ahh that old chestnut :) . Any criticism given must always be accompanied by an alternative solution. Do you apply that standard to yourself at all times? Of course not. Its a desperate point to make.

Since the comment bears nothing on my ultimate conclusion, how is it "desperate", tactics boy?

Any earnest discussion begins with addressing the issue (Homeland security- necessary or not?) It then progresses to your opinion on how it is being implemented including the factors which formed that opinion (experience, research, etc) and an alternative solution, if possible. Sometimes you cannot offer an alternative, this is fair, but you should make this admission. Why would any honest person not follow this simple etiquette, always?

"I understand that the US has concerns about homeland security. I think that fingerprinting will be an ineffective screening tool for x,y,z, and may, in fact, drive a wedge in international relationships by placing the criminal stigmata of fingerprinting on upstanding foreign citizens.

It is a complex situation, to be sure, and I see no easy solution. At least the US attempted to start simply and they didn&#39;t expel all foreign nationals living in the US on Visas. These people are not tourists, and they don&#39;t come from the 27 countries that have Visa exemptions, they are resource leeches, who want to learn a skill and take it back home. We clearly don&#39;t need them or their money. They pose nothing but a security risk.


If you are going to go to all this trouble then at least make sure you really get the security you&#39;ve been promised not an expensive PR exercise so the politicians can say they did "something" when the inevitable happens.

That is your bottom line, you suspect that this is a political ploy, a ruse. You may be correct, but you don&#39;t think that people are going to go to some happy place over this policy. Do you think Americans will all say, "well that terrorism issue is sorted, we got fingerprints now"? Or will people just look at this policy as a tiny piece in a very big puzzle. That&#39;s how I view it. If Tom Ridge thinks that he can point back at this as the pinnacle of anti-terrorism and seek absolution of all guilt if terrorists strike again, he is seriously deluded.

[/b][/quote]

[vidcc]

here is something to consider....Richard reed, the attempted shoe bomber on the flight from Paris to the USA held a British passport and therefore did not require a visa and thus would not have been fingerprinted, however it wouldn&#39;t be of financial benefit to the USA to end the visa waiver program.
there is the point that he had a criminal record and wouldn&#39;t have qualified for visa free travel but the point is that a terrorist could come from any one of the 27 (i think) countries in the visa waiver program.
a person is not a threat purely by his nationality, it is a believed fact that there is an Al quada group active in the USA...American citizens &#33;&#33;&#33;
the granting of visa waiver isn&#39;t just because a country is considered a threat, it&#39;s also based on the countries economic situation to stop entry of financial migrants..Argentina was withdrawn from the scheme when it&#39;s economy collasped (correct me if i am wrong...i know someone will :lol: )

[Busyman]

Originally posted by vidcc@7 January 2004 - 19:23
here is something to consider....Richard reed, the attempted shoe bomber on the flight from Paris to the USA held a British passport and therefore did not require a visa and thus would not have been fingerprinted, however it wouldn&#39;t be of financial benefit to the USA to end the visa waiver program.
there is the point that he had a criminal record and wouldn&#39;t have qualified for visa free travel but the point is that a terrorist could come from any one of the 27 (i think) countries in the visa waiver program.
a person is not a threat purely by his nationality, it is a believed fact that there is an Al quada group active in the USA...American citizens &#33;&#33;&#33;
the granting of visa waiver isn&#39;t just because a country is considered a threat, it&#39;s also based on the countries economic situation to stop entry of financial migrants..Argentina was withdrawn from the scheme when it&#39;s economy collasped (correct me if i am wrong...i know someone will :lol: )
So what&#33;&#33;&#33;

Timothy Mcveigh was a white American citizen and committed the worst act of terrorism at the time (in the US).
What&#39;s the relation to the original point?

The 9-11 terrorists were not from Britain.

[DreamWeaver]

if u come in to the u.s.a the only right u have is to do wtf the gov says ........
Now many peeps that know me now i have a lot of complaints bout the us gov.
but this is not one of them........ since i would have no problem being finger printed and pic taken .... what&#39;s the harm in that? As a citizen of the u.s.a i back this fully, and whatever else it takes to keep ppl from killing thousands of ppl for no reason........
i also think ppl need to get a grip ..... i say if u come in to the USA u obey the law or stay the fuck home ......& also if u dont like the law Stay The Fuck Home.... &
to compare this to the nazi&#39;s shows how stupid and lil minded you are&#33; And my suggestion would be to anyone that says this law is like the nazis to really get sum help cause u need it ........ or get a life&#33;

that&#39;s my two cents&#33;

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Busyman@7 January 2004 - 18:57
So what&#33;&#33;&#33;

Timothy Mcveigh was a white American citizen and committed the worst act of terrorism at the time (in the US).
What&#39;s the relation to the original point?

The 9-11 terrorists were not from Britain.
the relation to the original point is that fingerprinting is only being done to residents of countries that need visas under the heading of "security" but terrorist could come from anywhere so why just do it to those countries?
what is the point of bringing in a security measure if it has holes as big as the atlantic?
by definition security should be secure.

i made a point in an earlier post about Mcveigh.
Yes the 9/11 terroist didn&#39;t come from Britain...but richard ried did and it was only because the passengers on the plane stopped him that he didn&#39;t suceed.
i used him as an example because he is an actual attempted terrorist..he could have come from any one of the visa waiver countries but he happened to be a british citizen. i am not suggesting that britain is a threat because of one man, but individuals from anywhere can be

[vidcc]

Originally posted by DreamWeaver@7 January 2004 - 19:14
to compare this to the nazi&#39;s shows how stupid and lil minded you are&#33; And my suggestion would be to anyone that says this law is like the nazis to really get sum help cause u need it ........ or get a life&#33;

that&#39;s my two cents&#33;
nobody on this post has compared the USA to the Nazis...a Brazillian judge did that

[Busyman]

Originally posted by vidcc+7 January 2004 - 20:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc &#064; 7 January 2004 - 20:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@7 January 2004 - 18:57
So what&#33;&#33;&#33;

Timothy Mcveigh was a white American citizen and committed the worst act of terrorism at the time (in the US).
What&#39;s the relation to the original point?

The 9-11 terrorists were not from Britain.
the relation to the original point is that fingerprinting is only being done to residents of countries that need visas under the heading of "security" but terrorist could come from anywhere so why just do it to those countries?
what is the point of bringing in a security measure if it has holes as big as the atlantic?
by definition security should be secure.

i made a point in an earlier post about Mcveigh.
Yes the 9/11 terroist didn&#39;t come from Britain...but richard ried did and it was only because the passengers on the plane stopped him that he didn&#39;t suceed.
i used him as an example because he is an actual attempted terrorist..he could have come from any one of the visa waiver countries but he happened to be a british citizen. i am not suggesting that britain is a threat because of one man, but individuals from anywhere can be [/b][/quote]
And again the reason I said SO WHAT is because terrorists CAN come from anywhere including Canada and the US itself.

So because we want to try to close certain security holes you have this "Well THEY don&#39;t need a visa" argument.

Pretty pointless.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Busyman@7 January 2004 - 19:32
And again the reason I said SO WHAT is because terrorists CAN come from anywhere including Canada and the US itself.

So because we want to try to close certain security holes you have this "Well THEY don&#39;t need a visa" argument.

Pretty pointless.
are you not getting what i am saying ? because it seems you are arguing for my point but telling me i am wrong.

my point is to clarify...if you are trying to close holes in security why leave fresh holes open?
do you only want to close "certain security holes" and not others.
any security measure is only as good as its weakest point

[Busyman]

Originally posted by vidcc+7 January 2004 - 20:47--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 7 January 2004 - 20:47)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@7 January 2004 - 19:32
And again the reason I said SO WHAT is because terrorists CAN come from anywhere including Canada and the US itself.

So because we want to try to close certain security holes you have this "Well THEY don&#39;t need a visa" argument.

Pretty pointless.
are you not getting what i am saying ? because it seems you are arguing for my point but telling me i am wrong.

my point is to clarify...if you are trying to close holes in security why leave fresh holes open?
do you only want to close "certain security holes" and not others.
any security measure is only as good as its weakest point [/b][/quote]
Are you dense?

I GOT IT I GOT IT DAMN&#33;&#33;&#33;

Your asking why on a very broad question.

There are tons of security holes STILL OPEN&#33;&#33;

Are you suggesting an all-or-nothing approach?

Are you suggesting we would be &#39;less&#39; secure by just closing 1 security hole?

To be honest the US in some respects is &#39;too free&#39; which is our strength and weakness.

It seems foreigners like our freeness and criticize us more than we criticize ourselves.

In the US we consider some of the new measures introduced after 9-11 "inconvenient" but we gladly submit because it ultimately helps save lives. I guess I see why foreigners are whining.

There&#39;s no immediate benefit to them. <_<

(unless you&#39;re caught in a terrorist&#39;s blast)

[100%]

I woke up laughing to BBC news
when i heard that US citizens will be fingerprinted
and photographed on entering Brazil, as a form of
payback to the USs policy.

I agreed to this and thought all
non US Visacountries(non EU)-should do likewise -
just to see how US citizens feel when it happens to them - to be treated with suspicion.

although
this is an eye for an eye attitude....not very good.......very childish.....
that is why Brazils action was funny, at the time

These US security actions enhance paranoia and suspicion towards
the Hundreds of countries and citizens in :
Africa, South America, Asia, Russia, Midde East etc

Since all travellers from these nations will be "documented" as a result of

"Washington&#39;s new rules are part of increased anti-terrorism measures" -

Does this not mean that the US government hereby regards these countries as

"belonging to groups that Washington has on its list of "terrorist" organisations"?

-hence Africa, South America, Asia, Russia, Midde East etc, all pose as terrorist threats?

Does this mean that all immigrants, from these countries
who have lived in the USA,
lets say, three generations - will also be photographed and fingerprinted....?
Hasnt this happened in the states before concerning a certain Mcarthy&#092;er&#092;ur?

What Rights does someone have who is
"under the suspicion as a possible threat to National Security"?

Xenophobia : having abnormal fear or hatred of the strange or foreign.
"abnormal"- as in,
when did Brazil pose as a Terrorist Threat
other than;
-immigration threat?
-taking jobs threat?
-maybe drugs threat?
-borrow cash threat ?
-scientific,economic, resource and yes - military threat?
-opinion threat?
-Kickass football players threat?
-Sinfull G-string beach Carnaval threat?
shit man, even their groovy music?

Even this is an exaggerated naive stigmatisation of All Brazilians.
Whatever did the Senegalese do to the US?
(I can already hear some politician saying - its not what they have done - its what they might do...)



By letting the foreigners in, all we do is expose ourselves to risk without any possible benefit. It is statements like these that give me the chills.

All this further divides the North from the South and East from the West.....progress...evolution...humanity

There&#39;s not much to be done other,
than to,
Avoid behaving in a paranoid, suspicious or rascist manner.

Please refer to
the French minister Le Pen and the Austrian prime minister
for further advice on "Love of Foreigners".

And, Yes

We have Anti-Immigration politics in Europe,
Except its not labelled under
"terrorist threat".....





Peace

[hobbes]

What does this have to do with immigration, at all?

Why are you taking my statement from it&#39;s proper context and making it look like I was talking about immigration. I was talking about a very specific group of temporary visitors here on Visas. What do we gain from these people? They give us money, get an education and leave. They reap the rewards of our resources.

These transients are the terror risks. Have we banned them, barred them, deported them? No, we asked for fingerprints to supplement our data.

Why is a passport not xenophobia? Why can&#39;t I just travel freely, why do the xenophobes around the world need to look at my government issued papers. It&#39;s all a matter of perspective.

What an appalling attempt to distort my post.

And as I have said 4 times, which you have ignored, while selecting a line which reads differently out of context, I will gladly submit my fingerprints, if that is what Brazil choses. If I don&#39;t like it, I won&#39;t visit. It is their country and letting me in to visit and work or vacation is a priviledge they grant me, not a right of mine.

[Busyman]

Your post makes me recall a bit I saw on 60 Minutes talking about why Middle Easterners hate us and they were interviewing a Saudi.

The reporter asked where his children go to college.
The Saudi said in America.
The reporter then said why would you send your children to a place that you hate.
The Saudi said "Why not send my children to get the best education they can receive?"

Weird but somewhat logical.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 07:13

Contrary to what seems to be the popular rhetoric, the world did not change on September 11th, 2002. The United States is, frankly, overreacting. Quite a few other countries have had, and continue to have, acts of terrorism. The only thing that was brand-spanking-new was the use of fully-fueled airplanes flown into buildings and blowing said buildings up.


That is a ridiculous and frankly offensive thing to say.

What happened that day was atrocities. To suggest that requiring (Visa) visitors to the USA to supply a photograph and fingerprints is an over-reaction to what the world witnessed that day is a stunning position to take.

A terrorist organisation murdered thousands of people. It attacked the fiscal, political and military centres of the USA. It did this in a particularly cowardly and indiscriminate way, murdering civilians from across the world. Of all creeds and colours. It cared not one jot who the victims were, so long as they were on US soil at the time.

This is not an over-reaction, it is a simple and not particularly intrusive security measure. You should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting that it is.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+8 January 2004 - 01:53--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 8 January 2004 - 01:53)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 07:13

Contrary to what seems to be the popular rhetoric, the world did not change on September 11th, 2002. The United States is, frankly, overreacting. Quite a few other countries have had, and continue to have, acts of terrorism. The only thing that was brand-spanking-new was the use of fully-fueled airplanes flown into buildings and blowing said buildings up.


That is a ridiculous and frankly offensive thing to say.

What happened that day was atrocities. To suggest that requiring (Visa) visitors to the USA to supply a photograph and fingerprints is an over-reaction to what the world witnessed that day is a stunning position to take.

A terrorist organisation murdered thousands of people. It attacked the fiscal, political and military centres of the USA. It did this in a particularly cowardly and indiscriminate way, murdering civilians from across the world. Of all creeds and colours. It cared not one jot who the victims were, so long as they were on US soil at the time.

This is not an over-reaction, it is a simple and not particularly intrusive security measure. You should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting that it is. [/b][/quote]
Man........when ya put it that way...Magic STFU.

:P just kidding man


.........but J&#39;Pol makes a very good point

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Busyman@7 January 2004 - 21:24
Are you dense?

I GOT IT I GOT IT DAMN&#33;&#33;&#33;

Your asking why on a very broad question.

There are tons of security holes STILL OPEN&#33;&#33;

Are you suggesting an all-or-nothing approach?

Are you suggesting we would be &#39;less&#39; secure by just closing 1 security hole?

To be honest the US in some respects is &#39;too free&#39; which is our strength and weakness.

It seems foreigners like our freeness and criticize us more than we criticize ourselves.

In the US we consider some of the new measures introduced after 9-11 "inconvenient" but we gladly submit because it ultimately helps save lives. I guess I see why foreigners are whining.

There&#39;s no immediate benefit to them. <_<

(unless you&#39;re caught in a terrorist&#39;s blast)
i am not talking on a broad question, i am talking about one specific one, fingerprinting. i think extra security should be in place and i don&#39;t think that it should be all or nothing as some is better than nothing.
the fact is that the USA (and i am American so i am not just a whinging forienger) is only doing people from some countries..not all..thereby leaving the whole process to seem more like (and i hate this term) a conspiracy to keep fear and paranoyer up at a time when the whole iraqi war steam train is running out of coal.
the usa has put itself in the position where it needs to be on alert and i can see no excuse for doing something half heartedly..are you suggesting that if fingerprinting is going to keep us safe we should only do it occasionally if we can be bothered?
perhaps we should also only x-ray every 7th bag...better than nothing i guess.
security is too important to do things by half measures. it&#39;s bad enough that as you point out there are tons of holes already,that does not excuse the same lax attitude to new measures. so why not plug up a hole in a new measure before it has a chance to leak?
as to the comment about foriegn people and terrorists blast, An American plane was blown up over lockabie (i know off topic) and in reaction the rest of the world introduced a system where baggage cannot travel without the passenger..i believe it was a US directive...yet in the USA a non US citizen can fly to say Dallas and have a connecting flight to say alburqurque and miss his connection because immigration is busy, or he just doesn&#39;t want to get on the flight..howevever his bag can arrive at alburquerque without him..apparently it was too costly to introduce the same system to be worth it here in the states.
ok so i am just agreeing with you that there are holes.

if you want to bathe in a bath that has a 1 inch plughole you don&#39;t use a 3/4 inch plug

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 January 2004 - 01:53
That is a ridiculous and frankly offensive thing to say.

What happened that day was atrocities. To suggest that requiring (Visa) visitors to the USA to supply a photograph and fingerprints is an over-reaction to what the world witnessed that day is a stunning position to take.

A terrorist organisation murdered thousands of people. It attacked the fiscal, political and military centres of the USA. It did this in a particularly cowardly and indiscriminate way, murdering civilians from across the world. Of all creeds and colours. It cared not one jot who the victims were, so long as they were on US soil at the time.

This is not an over-reaction, it is a simple and not particularly intrusive security measure. You should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting that it is.
Look at all the things that have been, or are in the process of being, implemented.
Forcing foreign airlines to have armed marshalls on certain flights to, from, or over the United States. Requiring fingerprints, photographs, and highly detailed background information from travellers - and people on visas in the US, including work visas. Trying to force biometric passports onto foreign governments. The ever-so-useful "missile defense" program. The Patriot Act. Trying to "secure" the internet.

Some of this is ineffective. Some of it is downright dangerous. Governmental policy should not be totally emotionally-driven. Because it is, measures have been put into place unquestioned by the American public at large. Anyone who does raise alarm is slammed as "unAmerican," "unpatriotic," "divisive," and so on. It wouldn&#39;t surprise me if the House Un-American Activities Committee made a resurgence, although perhaps under a different name.

:ninja:

[hobbes]

Why do you say it is emotionally based? It is not like this was decided by an MTV poll.

[MagicNakor]

Certain things (such as the Patriot Act), were passed six weeks after September 11th, 2001. At that time, emotions were still very raw, and so it wasn&#39;t scruntinized as closely as policies usually are. That three states and 152 communities have denounced it as "[violating] an individual&#39;s civil rights under the Constitution," that members of Congress have introduced legislation to take the teeth out of it, and that the follow-up "Patriot II" act was brought down due to public uproar (although I&#39;m not currently aware of its modified state as the Victory Act), should be enough to prove that the government wasn&#39;t acting rationally but emotionally.

:ninja:

[hobbes]

3 states out of 50? That means 94% of states don&#39;t object. That doesn&#39;t make much of a case that it was "totally emotionally driven".

As for public uproar, I&#39;ve lived here the whole time, and I haven&#39;t heard a peep from anyone. Most people are completely unaffected by this act except for the inconvenience at airports.

The security people searched through my check-in luggage, sifting through my dirty laundry after a business trip and made me take off my shoes. I just shrugged my shoulders and appreciated that the world just wasn&#39;t the same since 9/11 and I was going to have to adapt to a new level of security.

[1234]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@8 January 2004 - 00:53
That is a ridiculous and frankly offensive thing to say.

What happened that day was atrocities. To suggest that requiring (Visa) visitors to the USA to supply a photograph and fingerprints is an over-reaction to what the world witnessed that day is a stunning position to take.

A terrorist organisation murdered thousands of people. It attacked the fiscal, political and military centres of the USA. It did this in a particularly cowardly and indiscriminate way, murdering civilians from across the world. Of all creeds and colours. It cared not one jot who the victims were, so long as they were on US soil at the time.

This is not an over-reaction, it is a simple and not particularly intrusive security measure. You should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting that it is.
You are a hypocrital asswipe.

The US has killed untold hundreds of thousands of people in terrorist actions and has supported terrorists all over the world. You didn&#39;t shed a single damn tear for those people and in fact happily waved your blood soaked flag.

The US is the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world, and these security measures owe as much to trade concessions as anything else. You&#39;ll notice not a single US airline flight has been delayed/cancelled while UK, French and many other nations have had their flights delayed or cancelled.

It is extremely intrusive that the US demands bank account details and other information from travellers, as shown by the US protests at the Brasilian tit for tat measures.

I&#39;d say you should be ashamed, but anyone who supports US foreign policy is obviously beyond shame.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by 1234+8 January 2004 - 18:29--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (1234 &#064; 8 January 2004 - 18:29)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@8 January 2004 - 00:53
That is a ridiculous and frankly offensive thing to say.

What happened that day was atrocities. To suggest that requiring (Visa) visitors to the USA to supply a photograph and fingerprints is an over-reaction to what the world witnessed that day is a stunning position to take.

A terrorist organisation murdered thousands of people. It attacked the fiscal, political and military centres of the USA. It did this in a particularly cowardly and indiscriminate way, murdering civilians from across the world. Of all creeds and colours. It cared not one jot who the victims were, so long as they were on US soil at the time.

This is not an over-reaction, it is a simple and not particularly intrusive security measure. You should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting that it is.
You are a hypocrital asswipe.

The US has killed untold hundreds of thousands of people in terrorist actions and has supported terrorists all over the world. You didn&#39;t shed a single damn tear for those people and in fact happily waved your blood soaked flag.

The US is the biggest sponsor of terrorism in the world, and these security measures owe as much to trade concessions as anything else. You&#39;ll notice not a single US airline flight has been delayed/cancelled while UK, French and many other nations have had their flights delayed or cancelled.

It is extremely intrusive that the US demands bank account details and other information from travellers, as shown by the US protests at the Brasilian tit for tat measures.

I&#39;d say you should be ashamed, but anyone who supports US foreign policy is obviously beyond shame. [/b][/quote]
Once again what does what YOU are talking about have to do with us beefing up OUR security.

What is hypocrital of J&#39;Pol in response to the US "overreacting".

I&#39;ve noticed only foreigners and the most recently made citizens are the only ones talking shit.


We Americans gladly accept the "uncomfortable" measures introduced in response to 9-11.

Foreigners are talking shit because the measures don&#39;t directly "benefit" them.

1234 please count backwards and GTFO. You sound stupid calling people asswipes.

edit: I meant benefit not effect

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by 1234+8 January 2004 - 18:29--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (1234 &#064; 8 January 2004 - 18:29)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@8 January 2004 - 00:53
That is a ridiculous and frankly offensive thing to say.

What happened that day was atrocities. To suggest that requiring (Visa) visitors to the USA to supply a photograph and fingerprints is an over-reaction to what the world witnessed that day&nbsp; is a stunning position to take.

A terrorist organisation murdered thousands of people. It attacked the fiscal, political and military centres of the USA. It did this in a particularly cowardly and indiscriminate way, murdering civilians from across the world. Of all creeds and colours. It cared not one jot who the victims were, so long as they were on US soil at the time.

This is not an over-reaction, it is a simple and not particularly intrusive security measure. You should be ashamed of yourself for suggesting that it is.
You are a hypocrital asswipe.

The US has killed untold hundreds of thousands of people in terrorist actions and has supported terrorists all over the world. You didn&#39;t shed a single damn tear for those people and in fact happily waved your blood soaked flag.

[/b][/quote]
I&#39;m not an American, so which particular flag do you speak of.

Though I have to say the word asswipe, seems quite an Americanism to me. This would suggest to me that you either are an American or you want to be.

In which case, the flag is more yours than mine.

I was simply reacting to what I believed to be a horrendously insensitive and ill-informed post. I believe that what the American people do to defend themselves from it happening again is a matter for them. If anyone doesn&#39;t like it, then they don&#39;t have to visit. It really is that simple.

It is ironic that all of these American haters seem to be so keen to get free movement in and out of that country.

[Gemby!]

what happens if you dont like your picture being taken ??

people can be so unkind &#33;

[1234]

Originally posted by Busyman@8 January 2004 - 19:59
Once again what does what YOU are talking about have to do with us beefing up OUR security.

What is hypocrital of J&#39;Pol in response to the US "overreacting".

I&#39;ve noticed only foreigners and the most recently made citizens are the only ones talking shit.


We Americans gladly accept the "uncomfortable" measures introduced in response to 9-11.

Foreigners are talking shit because the measures don&#39;t directly effect them.

1234 please count backwards and GTFO. You sound stupid calling people asswipes.
The issue was whether the world changed on that 9/11. It didn&#39;t. The attacks on NY etc were just another terrorist attack like many others in the world, some sponsored by the US. Are you even aware of the first 9/11? The one in 1973. That was what I (and the poster he was replying to) were referring to.

The issue of "beefing up security" is fine, but don&#39;t whine (like the US is doing right now) when people do the same to you (Brasil). At least the Brasilians are not asking for bank account details. Would you be happy to pass your bank details to a foreign country you don&#39;t trust?

Btw US citizens are not affected at all by the measures the US is introducing so no clue what you are on about there. Only foreign visitors have personal/biometric data taken.

J&#39;Pol, you may not be American but you are guilty of the same empty phrases as all US policy supporters. The only change in the world after 9/11 was that the US cowboy started rampaging round the world in person rather than by proxy as it usually does.

The word "asswipe" is general net slang and a mild insult that is acceptable on PG friendly boards. I can call you some rather more old fashioned Anglo Saxon words if you want, but I was trying to fit into board policies on the use of profanities. Your attempted jibe falls flat I&#39;m afraid :)

What was uninformed and insensitve was your assertion that somehow the NY/Washington attacks were unique and world shattering. The only unique thing, as was pointed out, was that fully fueled aircraft were used. In your statement you diminished the suffering of millions worldwide who suffer terrorism daily (a lot of it backed by US govt dollars) and have done for a loooong time.

Therefore I stick to my statement - you are a hypocritical (insert your insult of choice here)

[leftism]

Originally posted by hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Since the comment bears nothing on my ultimate conclusion, how is it "desperate", tactics boy?[/b]

&#39;Boy&#39;? Such maturity is a wonder to behold :)


Originally posted by hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Any earnest discussion begins with addressing the issue (Homeland security- necessary or not?) [/b]

Sorry I thought that was painfully obvious. Yes it&#39;s necessary. Happy now?

Btw your not applying these rigorous standards to yourself. Or did I miss the bit in your 1st post where you stated that Homeland security was necessary?


Originally posted by hobbes

It then progresses to your opinion on how it is being implemented including the factors which formed that opinion (experience, research, etc) and an alternative solution, if possible. Sometimes you cannot offer an alternative, this is fair, but you should make this admission.


If it&#39;s fair not to offer an alternative then why bring it up as a criticism of my post? Has anyone else offered an alternative? Have you demanded that everyone make this admission that they dont have an alternative solution? I suggest you start applying these &#39;rules&#39; to everyone. A little consistency in your &#39;principles&#39; might lead me to believe your post was more than a poorly disguised flame. Although the 1st sentence was a bit of a give away.


Originally posted by hobbes
Why would any honest person not follow this simple etiquette, always?

I&#39;m not sure, you may want to ask everyone that same question. I suggest you start by interrogating yourself. Perhaps your the one being dishonest with this "how to write a perfect post" method that only applies to one individual? :)


Originally posted by hobbes
I understand that the US has concerns about homeland security. I think that fingerprinting will be an ineffective screening tool for x,y,z, and may, in fact, drive a wedge in international relationships by placing the criminal stigmata of fingerprinting on upstanding foreign citizens.

I cant believe you&#39;ve dedicated a sizeable portion of your post to criticising me for omitting that 1st sentence&#33;


At least the US attempted to start simply and they didn&#39;t expel all foreign nationals living in the US on Visas. These people are not tourists, and they don&#39;t come from the 27 countries that have Visa exemptions, they are resource leeches, who want to learn a skill and take it back home. We clearly don&#39;t need them or their money. They pose nothing but a security risk.

If you genuinely believe that then you should kick everyone out. Do you recall Richard Reid the British &#39;shoe bomber&#39;? A Visa does not mean you aren&#39;t a security risk.

Your resource leech comment is also pretty odd. Let&#39;s say 2 people are studying and paying for the same university course in the US. One has a Visa and the other is exempt. Why is one a resource leech while the other is not?

In a nutshell.. why not kick them all out? Surely the damage to the economy is worth it? As you said yourself...

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@
Only American citizens have the rights of freedom our people have.

The rest are here as visitors and we would like to know who you are. To make things simple, we could just close our doors period. You are not needed here for any reason. 9/11 would never have happened at all.

By letting the foreigners in, all we do is expose ourselves to risk without any possible benefit.
[/quote]

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
If Tom Ridge thinks that he can point back at this as the pinnacle of anti-terrorism and seek absolution of all guilt if terrorists strike again, he is seriously deluded.[/quote]

Never underestimate the politicians comtempt for the electorate, they really do think your that stupid :) . Remember the terrorists passport that survived the raging inferno of 9/11 and fell to the sidewalk virtually untouched? If they expect you guys to swallow that they&#39;ll expect you to swallow anything ;)

Let me expand on my &#39;bottom line&#39;. The only way the USA will be anyway near secure is if all foreign nationals are expelled and the borders closed to everyone except returning Americans. Then you&#39;ll just need to worry about American born terrorists.

I&#39;m not sure whether this should be done, the damage to the economy would have to be calculated (Can you put a price on stopping a 2nd 9/11?) But its definitely the only way the US will achieve it&#39;s goal of security. Unless this happens you should really be thinking about a terrorist attack in terms of &#39;when&#39; not &#39;if&#39;.

[J'Pol]

1234

As has been said many times, the answer is simple don&#39;t visit America.

No one is forcing you to, so if you don&#39;t like America and don&#39;t want to go there, then you are perfectly entitled not to. Then the whole picture and fingerprint thing becomes a non-issue.

No matter how long your diatribe, the US authorities have every right to take whatever steps they wish to defend their country. What other people chose to do is a matter for them.

With regard to the "Anglo Saxon" insults, please feel free, they will say more about you than they do about me.

I would be interested If you could show me what part of my statement diminished the suffering of millions worldwide. Or where I did anything other than react to the comments of others.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by 1234@8 January 2004 - 22:45
The issue was whether the world changed on that 9/11. It didn&#39;t. The attacks on NY etc were just another terrorist attack like many others in the world, some sponsored by the US. Are you even aware of the first 9/11? The one in 1973. That was what I (and the poster he was replying to) were referring to.

The issue of "beefing up security" is fine, but don&#39;t whine (like the US is doing right now) when people do the same to you (Brasil). At least the Brasilians are not asking for bank account details. Would you be happy to pass your bank details to a foreign country you don&#39;t trust?

Btw US citizens are not affected at all by the measures the US is introducing so no clue what you are on about there. Only foreign visitors have personal/biometric data taken.

J&#39;Pol, you may not be American but you are guilty of the same empty phrases as all US policy supporters. The only change in the world after 9/11 was that the US cowboy started rampaging round the world in person rather than by proxy as it usually does.

The word "asswipe" is general net slang and a mild insult that is acceptable on PG friendly boards. I can call you some rather more old fashioned Anglo Saxon words if you want, but I was trying to fit into board policies on the use of profanities. Your attempted jibe falls flat I&#39;m afraid :)

What was uninformed and insensitve was your assertion that somehow the NY/Washington attacks were unique and world shattering. The only unique thing, as was pointed out, was that fully fueled aircraft were used. In your statement you diminished the suffering of millions worldwide who suffer terrorism daily (a lot of it backed by US govt dollars) and have done for a loooong time.

Therefore I stick to my statement - you are a hypocritical (insert your insult of choice here)
I&#39;m sorry 6789 I do not have the restraint of J&#39;Pol.

Read carefully dipshit. Are your eyes peeled?

First off, the only one whining is you. If Brazil wanted to stick probes up foreigners asses for stool samples we Americans would just say, "Oh well, can&#39;t go to Brazil".

Maybe you would be the first in line though.
You&#39;re like the disgruntled kid who can&#39;t go outside with his friends.
If you want to come here, get your damn picture taken; it won&#39;t steal your soul.
If you don&#39;t want your picture taken, stay the fuck home.
If you don&#39;t want to come here then you are blowing a tremendous amount of smoke and there is concise need for you to STFU.

Second off, please step outside of your third world mind for a moment.
The NY/Washington attacks were very unique AND world shattering to US and that is why WE are taking security measures that benefit US.
So while you want bring up all the sufferings of millions worldwide, that has very little to do with the thought process behind OUR government trying to take care of the USA.

If you lived in NY you wouldn&#39;t have said (after 9-11), "but what about the car bombing in Israel"
It was the worst terrorist act committed here. Do you understand?

We here are not used to the terrorism that you might have grown up training for.

Maybe your post would have made more sense if you called the American government hypocrites.



Then again if we sponsored all this terrorism is it wrong to protect ourselves against it? ;)

[1234]

Not visiting is fine with me, that is not really the point of my post.

My point is that terrorism on that scale is not new, and is often US financed. The hypocrisy of the US position and it&#39;s "war on terror" is what I am referring to. The issue of US border controls are really of utmost indifference to me. Oh and for the record, I have been to the US before.

Those attacks on the US were long overdue really. If you have the foreign policies that the US has had for decades, eventually it will bite you. On 9/11 (I wonder if the hijackers knew the significance of that date) it bit back. It is people like you and others here that let the US off the hook for it&#39;s terrorist record and defend it&#39;s ludicrous "war on terror".

That is where you dismiss the suffering of millions. So I feel comparing you to whats left on a piece of toilet paper is quite apt. Not quite as apt as applying it our next poster though, I grant you that.

If Brazil wanted to stick probes up foreigners asses for stool samples we Americans would just say, "Oh well, can&#39;t go to Brazil".

The US State Dept has demanded that Brasil stop it&#39;s actions against US citizens. Doesn&#39;t seem like "oh well" to me.

Maybe you would be the first in line though.

Hoho, gay jibe. I am, once more, crushed.

If you want to come here, get your damn picture taken; it won&#39;t steal your soul.
If you don&#39;t want your picture taken, stay the fuck home.

Yep, those are the options. I have no problem with choosing to go or not.

If you don&#39;t want to come here then you are blowing a tremendous amount of smoke and there is concise need for you to STFU.

Nope, I am dealing with the background issues and the US&#39;s endless agression.

Second off, please step outside of your third world mind for a moment.

Third world mind? Can we add racism to your CV then? Are only US citizens allowed to have views on world events?

The NY/Washington attacks were very unique AND world shattering to US and that is why WE are taking security measures that benefit US.

Only unique in the fact that you were the victims not the perpretators. It is one of those coincidences of history that 9/11 is the anniversary of the US led coup in Chile that killed .... yep over 3000 people. The last 2 centuries are full of US mass murders in countries you can&#39;t even find on a map. Ever heard of the SOA? US&#39;s own terrorist training camp responsible for some of the worst dictators in recent history. It is still open while Bush waffles on about a war on terrorism. Heres a clue, start looking in your own damn country.

So while you want bring up all the sufferings of millions worldwide, that has very little to do with the thought process behind OUR government trying to take care of the USA.

As just shown, the suffering of millions worldwide is directly due to US govt policies both before and after 9/11. You reap what you sow. Or rather, those poor sods in the WTC reaped it while the people responsible sat in bunkers in the middle of Nevada or wherever.

If you lived in NY you wouldn&#39;t have said (after 9-11), "but what about the car bombing in Israel"
It was the worst terrorist act committed here. Do you understand?

I live in the UK, we have had US financed terrorist attacks here for decades. Members of your damn govt publically helped finance those attacks. Are you going to arrest those sponsors of terrorism? Anyway, like I said, the US is responsible for much worse atrocities than 9/11.

We here are not used to the terrorism that you might have grown up training for.

You really have no clue do you. The US is the worlds largest exporter of terrorism, and has been for decades. Want me to pull out some choice Kissinger quote

Maybe your post would have made more sense if you called the American government hypocrites.

I do, and anyone who supports them.

Then again if we sponsored all this terrorism is it wrong to protect ourselves against it?

Sure, since even the terrorists that are attacking you were created by your own country. You must have been proud seeing the WTC go down, thinking - "damn thats some efficent terrorists we have created".

EDIT: Damn dodgy tags

[hobbes]

Originally posted by leftism@8 January 2004 - 23:36
Let me expand on my &#39;bottom line&#39;. The only way the USA will be anyway near secure is if all foreign nationals are expelled and the borders closed to everyone except returning Americans. Then you&#39;ll just need to worry about American born terrorists.


Lefty, I meant to say "Billy", not "boy".

People here know whether I am honest or a shit-stirrer. Your credentials are less well known ;)

I&#39;m sure your interest in our forum is earnest and I just wanted to give you a few pointers on how to engage in a discussion and avoid a name calling rant. Probably just a neophtye mistake on your part.

I explained the "leech" comment to my satisfaction, in a couple posts actually, you can PM me if this is really a point of confusion.

To many on this board, "fingerprinting" is an over-reaction to 9/11, what would they think of your bottom line?

A bit harsh, no? I would say that 95+% of those people on Visas are here to do what they say they are.

Do you really think we should do that? That would be a touch xenophobic.

I think we should have spent all of our time and effort since 1980 or so investing in alternative sources of energy to make our country self sufficient in this regard. But I firmly believe that government corruption, lead by the oil cronies, undermined these efforts. So now we interfere in politics across the seas and dethrone uncooperative leaders so that we can secure a pipeline of oil. Had all these resources been funneled into becoming energy self-sufficient, I think many problems could have been avoided.

[leftism]

Originally posted by 1234
Or rather, those poor sods in the WTC reaped it while the people responsible sat in bunkers in the middle of Nevada or wherever.

Very true :(

[lynx]

Without a doubt, the US has a right to implement whatever measures it thinks right to defend itself within its own borders.

But I think it (the administration, not the people) has not thought through the implications of its actions. As has been stated earlier, the measures taken will do virtually nothing to reduce the impact of terrorism. So if we consider the reasons for their implementation the only conclusion is that they are to reassure the population.

But if you look at the effect on public opinion outside the US, the result (again) seems to be negative. And the more negative effects you get the more you get disgruntled people, which in turn leads to more people saying "I&#39;ve had enough". The end result is less co-operation and will inevitably result in the US being in more danger of terrorist attacks.

No other country has publicly introduced this sort of recording before, although I suspect that the Soviet Union may have done it covertly. We all know what happens to repressive regimes in the long run.

INFO for those currently in the visa waiver areas. This scheme runs out in October this year, unless you have a biometric passport (which in any case holds the info they are taking from visa required entrants).

The UK, which is one of the most advanced in this area cannot produce them before the middle of 2005. Most other countries will be unable to produce such passports before 2006. Can you really see a family of 4 queueing at the US embassy for hours, paying £60 each, plus travelling costs, just to go for a couple of weeks in Florida? In any case, the US embassy could not possibly cope with the demand, even if only 10% decided it was worth it.

I suggest it is time to think about the real implications of this ludicrous piece of legislation.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by 1234@9 January 2004 - 02:03
Sure, since even the terrorists that are attacking you were created by your own country. You must have been proud seeing the WTC go down, thinking - "damn thats some efficent terrorists we have created".

The thread is about "fingerprints and a picture" and not US foreign policy. Make your own thread or join one of the delightful ones already available in this forum.

The only real difference betweeen US foreign policy and that of other countries is that we have the means to execute some of what we desire. Every other country would do the same to ensure the prosperity of their nation.

The big burr worldwide is that the "average American joe", thinks that we are "good guys" and is honestly bewildered why everyone is so mad at us. Most of the things that the US government does worldwide are unknown to the average citizen, most don&#39;t even know where Chile is.

Americans are just like everyone else, as long as the government provides for the people. We go to work, complain about our bosses and watch the old television. If this luxury were to collapse, we would become a lot more world savvy, by necessity, just like those abroad already are.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by lynx@9 January 2004 - 02:21
I suggest it is time to think about the real implications of this ludicrous piece of legislation.
A post from beyond the grave?

[vidcc]

Originally posted by lynx@9 January 2004 - 01:21

The UK, which is one of the most advanced in this area cannot produce them before the middle of 2005. Most other countries will be unable to produce such passports before 2006. Can you really see a family of 4 queueing at the US embassy for hours, paying £60 each, plus travelling costs, just to go for a couple of weeks in Florida? In any case, the US embassy could not possibly cope with the demand, even if only 10% decided it was worth it.

I suggest it is time to think about the real implications of this ludicrous piece of legislation.
has the US embassy re-opened to the public again ? as i thought they were all cordoned off after 9/11....i know in london the only way to get a visa was by post.
regardless you make a very valid point on the deterent of people holidaying in the states.

that said if some of the posts here are true none of those visitors would bring any benefit to us and we don&#39;t need you. ( not my view )
finally disneyland paris will have someone on the rides..just like they always wanted :lol:

[Biggles]

I have to say I am surprised with regards the amount of confusion and hostility created by this move on the part of the US.

The proposals do appear patchy and I have some sympathy with the Brazilians who appear to have somehow got enmeshed in this (when was the last time Brazil gave us anything other than truly beautiful football). Whilst Brazilians are queing other nations who could potentially spawn terrorists still appear to be free to travel.

If the US administration is guilty of anything in this rather minor issue it is muddled thinking.

With regards further attacks in the US, the probability is that the next set of assailants are already there and simply awaiting the signal - although I hope I am wrong on that score.

A point I think worthy of note is that if we end up unable to conduct normal daily business for fear of terrorism then they have won.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by vidcc+9 January 2004 - 02:34--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 9 January 2004 - 02:34)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-lynx@9 January 2004 - 01:21

The UK, which is one of the most advanced in this area cannot produce them before the middle of 2005. Most other countries will be unable to produce such passports before 2006. Can you really see a family of 4 queueing at the US embassy for hours, paying £60 each, plus travelling costs, just to go for a couple of weeks in Florida? In any case, the US embassy could not possibly cope with the demand, even if only 10% decided it was worth it.

I suggest it is time to think about the real implications of this ludicrous piece of legislation.
has the US embassy re-opened to the public again ? as i thought they were all cordoned off after 9/11....i know in london the only way to get a visa was by post.
regardless you make a very valid point on the deterent of people holidaying in the states.

that said if some of the posts here are true none of those visitors would bring any benefit to us and we don&#39;t need you. ( not my view )
finally disneyland paris will have someone on the rides..just like they always wanted :lol: [/b][/quote]
You people are clearly not reading the threads. I am not talking about tourists, tourism comes from the Visa-waiver countries mostly.

Tourism is big, I have clearly stated that I am not talking about that, sheesh.

[lynx]

Originally posted by vidcc+9 January 2004 - 00:34--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 9 January 2004 - 00:34)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-lynx@9 January 2004 - 01:21

The UK, which is one of the most advanced in this area cannot produce them before the middle of 2005. Most other countries will be unable to produce such passports before 2006. Can you really see a family of 4 queueing at the US embassy for hours, paying £60 each, plus travelling costs, just to go for a couple of weeks in Florida? In any case, the US embassy could not possibly cope with the demand, even if only 10% decided it was worth it.

I suggest it is time to think about the real implications of this ludicrous piece of legislation.
has the US embassy re-opened to the public again ? as i thought they were all cordoned off after 9/11....i know in london the only way to get a visa was by post.
regardless you make a very valid point on the deterent of people holidaying in the states.

that said if some of the posts here are true none of those visitors would bring any benefit to us and we don&#39;t need you. ( not my view )
finally disneyland paris will have someone on the rides..just like they always wanted :lol: [/b][/quote]
You obviously haven&#39;t been keeping up. The requirement for a visa is to have a (pre-arranged) interview. Cost £60. That&#39;s going to be a little difficult if the embassy isn&#39;t open. And it is inevitable that they won&#39;t be able to cope with demand, so most people will go elsewhere.

And I don&#39;t care, not our loss.

But you miss the point that once again poor US foreign policy increases the risk of terrorist acts.

[lynx]

Originally posted by hobbes+9 January 2004 - 00:53--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 9 January 2004 - 00:53)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by vidcc@9 January 2004 - 02:34
<!--QuoteBegin-lynx@9 January 2004 - 01:21

The UK, which is one of the most advanced in this area cannot produce them before the middle of 2005. Most other countries will be unable to produce such passports before 2006. Can you really see a family of 4 queueing at the US embassy for hours, paying £60 each, plus travelling costs, just to go for a couple of weeks in Florida? In any case, the US embassy could not possibly cope with the demand, even if only 10% decided it was worth it.

I suggest it is time to think about the real implications of this ludicrous piece of legislation.
has the US embassy re-opened to the public again ? as i thought they were all cordoned off after 9/11....i know in london the only way to get a visa was by post.
regardless you make a very valid point on the deterent of people holidaying in the states.

that said if some of the posts here are true none of those visitors would bring any benefit to us and we don&#39;t need you. ( not my view )
finally disneyland paris will have someone on the rides..just like they always wanted :lol:
You people are clearly not reading the threads. I am not talking about tourists, tourism comes from the Visa-waiver countries mostly.

Tourism is big, I have clearly stated that I am not talking about that, sheesh. [/b][/quote]
Hobbes, you are obviously not reading the posts properly either.

The current "visa waiver" areas will not be able to operate effectively under that system after October.

[leftism]

Originally posted by hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Lefty, I meant to say "Billy", not "boy".[/b]

With all due respect I really think your pushing it by expecting me to believe that.

(btw why &#39;Billy&#39;?)


Originally posted by hobbes+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I&#39;m sure your interest in our forum is earnest and I just wanted to give you a few pointers on how to engage in a discussion and avoid a name calling rant. Probably just a neophtye mistake on your part.[/b]

Thats ridiculous and quite offensive. My post was not aggressive in any way shape or form.


Originally posted by leftism
Lets apply a little logic.

The 9/11 terrorists didnt use false ID&#39;s. Even if they had been fingerprinted and had their DNA taken it wouldnt have changed a thing.

These measures wont guarantee your safety, they will however guarantee an illusion of safety. Surprisingly, this seems to be more than adequate for many people.

If your referring to the minor altercation with j2k4, I was provoked and I firmly believe in the right to defend one&#39;s self. :D

I might take one pointer from you though you f***n whore, sorry I meant to type &#39;friendly hobbes&#39; (j/k) :D

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@
To many on this board, "fingerprinting" is an over-reaction to 9/11, what would they think of your bottom line?[/quote]

I would imagine they would think it is an over-reaction too. However I did not say I supported that strategy, I simply pointed out that it is the only way the USA can be anywhere near secure. My problem with the fingerprinting was it&#39;s effectiveness or rather the lack of it.

I also think dividing foreign nationals into those who are exempt from carrying Visas and those who need them is a pointless and perhaps even a dangerous distinction to make. What would be the point of fingerprinting people from Brazil while the next Richard Reid walks onto the plane quite happily? (finger printing him wouldnt help either of course). Then you also have to take into account the factor of people with false passports from &#39;safe&#39; countries. Even letting tourists in is taking a pretty significant risk.

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
I think we should have spent all of our time and effort since 1980 or so investing in alternative sources of energy to make our country self sufficient in this regard. But I firmly believe that government corruption, lead by the oil cronies, undermined these efforts. So now we interfere in politics across the seas and dethrone uncooperative leaders so that we can secure a pipeline of oil. Had all these resources been funneled into becoming energy self-sufficient, I think many problems could have been avoided.[/quote]

I cant help but agree 100% with you on that one. I&#39;ve noticed many of your fellow countrymen explode at the idea of oil and American foreign policy being connected, (this seems to be pretty universal on all the forums I visit). I&#39;m not sure if you&#39;ll be exempt from the usual wrath one incurs but good luck anyway :)

[Busyman]

Originally posted by 1234@9 January 2004 - 02:03
Not visiting is fine with me, that is not really the point of my post.

My point is that terrorism on that scale is not new, and is often US financed. The hypocrisy of the US position and it&#39;s "war on terror" is what I am referring to. The issue of US border controls are really of utmost indifference to me. Oh and for the record, I have been to the US before.

Those attacks on the US were long overdue really. If you have the foreign policies that the US has had for decades, eventually it will bite you. On 9/11 (I wonder if the hijackers knew the significance of that date) it bit back. It is people like you and others here that let the US off the hook for it&#39;s terrorist record and defend it&#39;s ludicrous "war on terror".

That is where you dismiss the suffering of millions. So I feel comparing you to whats left on a piece of toilet paper is quite apt. Not quite as apt as applying it our next poster though, I grant you that.

If Brazil wanted to stick probes up foreigners asses for stool samples we Americans would just say, "Oh well, can&#39;t go to Brazil".

The US State Dept has demanded that Brasil stop it&#39;s actions against US citizens. Doesn&#39;t seem like "oh well" to me.

Maybe you would be the first in line though.

Hoho, gay jibe. I am, once more, crushed.

If you want to come here, get your damn picture taken; it won&#39;t steal your soul.
If you don&#39;t want your picture taken, stay the fuck home.

Yep, those are the options. I have no problem with choosing to go or not.

If you don&#39;t want to come here then you are blowing a tremendous amount of smoke and there is concise need for you to STFU.&nbsp;

Nope, I am dealing with the background issues and the US&#39;s endless agression.

Second off, please step outside of your third world mind for a moment.

Third world mind? Can we add racism to your CV then? Are only US citizens allowed to have views on world events?

The NY/Washington attacks were very unique AND world shattering to US and that is why WE are taking security measures that benefit US.

Only unique in the fact that you were the victims not the perpretators. It is one of those coincidences of history that 9/11 is the anniversary of the US led coup in Chile that killed .... yep over 3000 people. The last 2 centuries are full of US mass murders in countries you can&#39;t even find on a map. Ever heard of the SOA? US&#39;s own terrorist training camp responsible for some of the worst dictators in recent history. It is still open while Bush waffles on about a war on terrorism. Heres a clue, start looking in your own damn country.

So while you want bring up all the sufferings of millions worldwide, that has very little to do with the thought process behind OUR government trying to take care of the USA.

As just shown, the suffering of millions worldwide is directly due to US govt policies both before and after 9/11. You reap what you sow. Or rather, those poor sods in the WTC reaped it while the people responsible sat in bunkers in the middle of Nevada or wherever.

If you lived in NY you wouldn&#39;t have said (after 9-11), "but what about the car bombing in Israel"
It was the worst terrorist act committed here. Do you understand?

I live in the UK, we have had US financed terrorist attacks here for decades. Members of your damn govt publically helped finance those attacks. Are you going to arrest those sponsors of terrorism? Anyway, like I said, the US is responsible for much worse atrocities than 9/11.

We here are not used to the terrorism that you might have grown up training for.

You really have no clue do you. The US is the worlds largest exporter of terrorism, and has been for decades. Want me to pull out some choice Kissinger quote

Maybe your post would have made more sense if you called the American government hypocrites.

I do, and anyone who supports them.

Then again if we sponsored all this terrorism is it wrong to protect ourselves against it?

Sure, since even the terrorists that are attacking you were created by your own country. You must have been proud seeing the WTC go down, thinking - "damn thats some efficent terrorists we have created".

EDIT: Damn dodgy tags
WTF does alllll that shit you are sprouting about basically paying homage to worldwide terrorism have to do with OUR security measures.
Who the fuck is "letting the US off the hook" as you say?

What am I supposed to do say

"Awww man well it&#39;s our governments fault that the 9-11 hijackers blew up the WTC and the Pentagon."
"I&#39;m not mad at the hijackers. I&#39;m mad at the US"
"Due to security breaches we should not beef up security but instead please 1234-69 with a pole in the ass and, so we don&#39;t piss off anyone else, allow those same breaches so we can let someone blow up the WTC when it is rebuilt."

Furthermore, RIF (Reading is fundamental)
It&#39;s obvious there&#39;s an itch in your ass about some shit you think we&#39;ve done in the UK. Either way:

We ARE not used to terrorism. Once again step outside of your third world mind.

If you read carefully. I said THE WORST TERRORIST ACT COMMITTED HERE.

The average American is NOT used to terrorism.
Knowing of terrorism abroad does not make you used to it.
America has been buffered by a huge separation of water. The UK in contrast does not have the same separation (as well as most of the other countries).

9-11 was probably less unigue to YOU because it happened abroad (and you&#39;re used to it). Get it?



Then again if we sponsored all this terrorism is it wrong to protect ourselves against it?

Sure, since even the terrorists that are attacking you were created by your own country. You must have been proud seeing the WTC go down, thinking - "damn thats some efficent terrorists we have created".


With that end post sir I mean bitch, you didn&#39;t even answer the question (well you did say sure; all the other shit didn&#39;t make sense). You just took a jab at making light of a horrible act. Your explanation is "well there have been other acts of terrorism".

btw I don&#39;t know your race and my post never alluded to it.
I do know you are troller who is wayyyyyy off topic.

I apologize to anyone else for obliging this "member" with his history lesson in regards to "Us To Fingerprint & Photograph All Visa Travellers". I not will reply to this bastard again seeing that, to quote 1234, "Those attacks on the US were long overdue really".

Damn you&#39;re an idiot&#33;&#33;&#33; <_<

(wouldn&#39;t be surprised if 1234 is an alias for another member anyway)


1234 BLACKLISTED

[J'Pol]

Night, Night Troll.

Another time perhaps. I tire of your tedious repetition.

Please try to put a bit more effort in, it is just getting boring now. You may wish to try copying and pasting ideas from someone else. It will almost certainly enliven your pathetic efforts.

Can I recommend google as a source.

[leftism]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol
Night, Night Troll.

Another time perhaps. I tire of your tedious repetition.
.

Well said. Busymans constant barrage of "dipshit", "idiot" and "bitch" was getting a little dreary.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by leftism+9 January 2004 - 03:51--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 9 January 2004 - 03:51)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol
Night, Night Troll.

Another time perhaps. I tire of your tedious repetition.
.

Well said. Busymans constant barrage of "dipshit", "idiot" and "bitch" was getting a little dreary. [/b][/quote]
I did apologize lefty. I shouldn&#39;t have obliged.
Interesting that you assumed he was talking about me. (maybe you agree with 1234 hmmmm..)

Fortunately he was not talking about me. <_<

Nice try anyway. It does seem me and J&#39;Pol were thinking along similiar lines (at least by the END of my post) <_<

[hobbes]

Hobbes, you are obviously not reading the posts properly either.

The current "visa waiver" areas will not be able to operate effectively under that system after October.
Not referring to your post, lynx. I was referring to a comment made by Vidcc. We will see what adjustments are made in October in regard to you point. The plural "you" was to include others, but not you. I was going to post a clarification, but I thought I would just quote his thread to direct the comment. Kind of forgot that his post contained a quote from you. ;)

[lynx]

Originally posted by Busyman@9 January 2004 - 01:37
We ARE not used to terrorism. Once again step outside of your third world mind.

If you read carefully. I said THE WORST TERRORIST ACT COMMITTED HERE.

The average American is NOT used to terrorism.
Knowing of terrorism abroad does not make you used to it.
America has been buffered by a huge separation of water. The UK in contrast does not have the same separation (as well as most of the other countries).

9-11 was probably less unigue to YOU because it happened abroad (and you&#39;re used to it). Get it?
I think you mean you&#39;ve finally had your eyes opened to what has been happening in the world, and much of it in your name although you didn&#39;t want to here about it, but now you wish to distance youself from the truth.

To be blunt, STOP BLAMING THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR YOUR OWN COUNTRY&#39;S SHORTCOMINGS. You made most of the mess, don&#39;t expect someone else to clean up your shit. Either that, or close up your borders, AND STAY BEHIND THEM.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by lynx+9 January 2004 - 04:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (lynx &#064; 9 January 2004 - 04:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@9 January 2004 - 01:37
We ARE not used to terrorism. Once again step outside of your third world mind.

If you read carefully. I said THE WORST TERRORIST ACT COMMITTED HERE.

The average American is NOT used to terrorism.
Knowing of terrorism abroad does not make you used to it.
America has been buffered by a huge separation of water. The UK in contrast does not have the same separation (as well as most of the other countries).

9-11 was probably less unigue to YOU because it happened abroad (and you&#39;re used to it). Get it?
I think you mean you&#39;ve finally had your eyes opened to what has been happening in the world, and much of it in your name although you didn&#39;t want to here about it, but now you wish to distance youself from the truth.

To be blunt, STOP BLAMING THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR YOUR OWN COUNTRY&#39;S SHORTCOMINGS. You made most of the mess, don&#39;t expect someone else to clean up your shit. Either that, or close up your borders, AND STAY BEHIND THEM.[/b][/quote]

I agree with paragraph #1.

How was he blaming anyone for our countries shortcomings. And what shortcoming are you talking about? Security, I am guessing.

He is talking about our response to 9/11. He never stated that the US has not done anything to create enemies. He has focused on the point: 9/11 happened, what can we do to prevent it from occuring again?

How was that blaming the world, I didn&#39;t see him blame anyone. Where was his plea for outside intervention. We have a security problem, fingerprints are a part of our attempt to assist in securing it, ourselves.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by hobbes+9 January 2004 - 04:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 9 January 2004 - 04:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by lynx@9 January 2004 - 04:09
<!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@9 January 2004 - 01:37
We ARE not used to terrorism. Once again step outside of your third world mind.

If you read carefully. I said THE WORST TERRORIST ACT COMMITTED HERE.

The average American is NOT used to terrorism.
Knowing of terrorism abroad does not make you used to it.
America has been buffered by a huge separation of water. The UK in contrast does not have the same separation (as well as most of the other countries).

9-11 was probably less unigue to YOU because it happened abroad (and you&#39;re used to it). Get it?
I think you mean you&#39;ve finally had your eyes opened to what has been happening in the world, and much of it in your name although you didn&#39;t want to here about it, but now you wish to distance youself from the truth.

To be blunt, STOP BLAMING THE REST OF THE WORLD FOR YOUR OWN COUNTRY&#39;S SHORTCOMINGS. You made most of the mess, don&#39;t expect someone else to clean up your shit. Either that, or close up your borders, AND STAY BEHIND THEM.

I agree with paragraph #1.

How was he blaming anyone for our countries shortcomings. And what shortcoming are you talking about? Security, I am guessing.

He is talking about our response to 9/11. He never stated that the US has not done anything to create enemies. He has focused on the point: 9/11 happened, what can we do to prevent it from occuring again?

How was that blaming the world, I didn&#39;t see him blame anyone. Where was his plea for outside intervention. We have a security problem, fingerprints are a part of our attempt to assist in securing it, ourselves. [/b][/quote]
Excellent point hobbes.

I know America has done lowdown crap.
Never said they didn&#39;t.

And hobbes I totally disagree with the first paragraph.

Again WE .....ARE .......NOT........USED.......TO........TERRORISM.
Again PLEASE READ.

1. Think. How many of these horrid acts have happened here? I am not talking small isolated incidents.
2. Some do come to mind.
Timothy Mcvey reduced half a federal building to rubble.
The 1st WTC attack
The 2nd and worst WTC attack and Pentagon
I think his name was Kamala; he gunned down some CIA agents
the thwarted gasing of the NY tunnel (related to the 1st WTC attack)
and the most recent Sniper in my native Washington DC area (somewhat unrelated)

3. Remember we are buffered from Europe, Asia, and Africa.

4. Most terrorism for Americans was heard about as overseas news (which it was) so how would we be used to it.

You seem to want rant almost like 1234 (lynx is that really you..hmmmmm)

I meant what I said but I guess you are talking to someone else about this very subject while posting a response to mine.

I am seeing the anti-Americanism on this board that many others have described.

btw, I would love for America to close it&#39;s borders or least tighten them. Our borders are way too porous in this day and time.

One shortcoming of ours is that we are TOO free and accepting.

[leftism]

Originally posted by busyman
I did apologize lefty. I shouldn&#39;t have obliged.
Interesting that you assumed he was talking about me. (maybe you agree with 1234 hmmmm..)

Yes I do agree with him.



Fortunately he was not talking about me.&nbsp;

Sorry about that, I saw one guy calmly explaining his position and another guy spitting out a barrage of insults. I guess we must have different definitions of the word &#39;troll&#39;.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by leftism@9 January 2004 - 12:19
Yes I do agree with him.

Sorry about that, I saw one guy calmly explaining his position and another guy spitting out a barrage of insults. I guess we must have different definitions of the word &#39;troll&#39;.
1. I figured as much.

2. Actually there was just an insult here and there.
I only did that after his "asswipe" comment. This topic didn&#39;t have such a thing inserted before that. A troller is not a person spouting insults.

It&#39;s a person especially going off-topic to get a rise out of others.

Calmly or not.

I can calmy say: I agree with Hitler&#39;s policies. All of them.
You can tell me to STFU, idiot.

It doesn&#39;t neccesarily make you a troller. ;)

[leftism]

Originally posted by busyman+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (busyman)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I can calmy say: I agree with Hitler&#39;s policies. All of them.
You can tell me to STFU, idiot.

It doesn&#39;t neccesarily make you a troller.&nbsp; [/b]

I will agree he was slightly OT but trolling? I dont think so. Lets take a look.

<!--QuoteBegin-busyman

As just shown, the suffering of millions worldwide is directly due to US govt policies both before and after 9/11. You reap what you sow. Or rather, those poor sods in the WTC reaped it while the people responsible sat in bunkers in the middle of Nevada or wherever[/quote]

That seems like a pretty reasonable opinion to me.

[Biggles]

:)

Guys, is it just me or has this drifted into one of those long running spats where the topic is merely secondary?

I have moved my mis-placed piece but I thought I would leave the above because it does still seem relevant.

[Biggles]

:frusty: :frusty:

Wrong spat

Is there a friendly mod out there who could move the above post to the right thread?

Sorry guys

[J'Pol]

Oh I think we all know I was referring to Leftism, another incarnation of one of the most pathetic trollers the board has had the misfortune to be subjected to.

Whether terrorism occurs elsewhere is not the point here.

Whether the US Government is entitled to protect it&#39;s citizens and guests from terrorism is. I fully support their rights to take any steps they feel appropriate. They would be totally wrong not to. I think I said it earlier, damned if you do, damned if you don&#39;t.

What other Governments chose to do (or not do) is up to them. I will certainly support my own Government when it tries to protect me from cowardly indiscriminate murderers. If the cost is a photograph and some fingerprints, so be it.

The bank account thing is a red herring. Think of the personal details you give when getting a mortgage, car loan or whatever. You have no choice, don&#39;t do it you don&#39;t get the money, your loss.

[leftism]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Oh I think we all know I was referring to Leftism, another incarnation of one of the most pathetic trollers the board has had the misfortune to be subjected to.
[/b]

Strange, I argued that fingerprinting wont prevent any terrorist attack and that means I&#39;m a "pathetic troller".

We certainly do have different definitions of the word troll. :rolleyes:


Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@
I fully support their rights to take any steps they feel appropriate. They would be totally wrong not to.

I agree with that and have never suggested anything else.

Next time you feel like venting your aggression over the internet, make sure the target of your attention doesnt agree with you. Then you wont look so foolish :)

Of course you could be referring to me agreeing with this...

<!--QuoteBegin-1234
As just shown, the suffering of millions worldwide is directly due to US govt policies both before and after 9/11. You reap what you sow. Or rather, those poor sods in the WTC reaped it while the people responsible sat in bunkers in the middle of Nevada or wherever[/quote]

But that would just mean your calling me a troller for having a pretty reasonable opinion, which is also foolish.

Next time you accuse me of being a troll, be more specific. Then I wont have to second guess what your referring to and you&#39;ll be forced to back up your statements. :)

[J'Pol]

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[lynx]

Originally posted by Busyman@9 January 2004 - 03:31
Again WE .....ARE .......NOT........USED.......TO........TERRORISM.
Again PLEASE READ.

1. Think. How many of these horrid acts have happened here? I am not talking small isolated incidents.
2. Some do come to mind.
Timothy Mcvey reduced half a federal building to rubble.
The 1st WTC attack
The 2nd and worst WTC attack and Pentagon
I think his name was Kamala; he gunned down some CIA agents
the thwarted gasing of the NY tunnel (related to the 1st WTC attack)
and the most recent Sniper in my native Washington DC area (somewhat unrelated)

3. Remember we are buffered from Europe, Asia, and Africa.

4. Most terrorism for Americans was heard about as overseas news (which it was) so how would we be used to it.

You seem to want rant almost like 1234 (lynx is that really you..hmmmmm)

I meant what I said but I guess you are talking to someone else about this very subject while posting a response to mine.

I am seeing the anti-Americanism on this board that many others have described.
Your first paragraph is the one which is objectionable.

WE ARE NOT USED TO TERRORISM ?????

I think you mean you are not used to it happening on your soil. Your government is certainly well versed in terrorist activities, but most of you have for years turned a blind eye to what our government does, although I suspect this is pure idleness.

1. Why should we care that few of these atrocities have occured on US soil in the past? The fact that many of them have been indirectly sponsored by your government has &#39;de facto&#39; ensured that situation.

2. As I understand it, Timothy Mcvey was protesting about the actions of your government. Although I don&#39;t agree with his methods, and probably not what he was complaining about, at least someone has the balls to say something.

The Washington sniper - heck, you&#39;ve had so many of this sort of incident over the years, how can you pin this one on terrorism and ignore all the rest. Oh, of course, one of them was a Muslim. Good job you didn&#39;t throw any racist comments in too.

The rest was 9/11 related, how many times do you want it counted?

3. Buffered from Europe, Asie and Africa? More like can&#39;t be bothered to find out what really happens in the rest of the world. Again, it is your own idleness which causes your ignorance.

4. It is only overseas news because you haven&#39;t understood how your own government was involved. It must be great to be shielded from reality by your news programmes.

I&#39;ve no idea who 1234 is, but I&#39;m sure if you want to PM a mod they&#39;ll tell you it isn&#39;t me.

Why would I need to talk to someone else about this subject? I&#39;m perfectly able to think for myself. How about you?

Oh-oh, are we being anti-American? Well if so, tough shit, I&#39;m not going to apologise for it. If you don&#39;t like it, put your house in order before complaining that people don&#39;t like you.

[leftism]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol
:lol:&nbsp; :lol:&nbsp; :lol:&nbsp; :lol:&nbsp; :lol:

If I weren&#39;t such a trusting and naive soul, I might take that response to mean you dont have an adequate reply :)

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by leftism+10 January 2004 - 04:24--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 10 January 2004 - 04:24)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

If I weren&#39;t such a trusting and naive soul, I might take that response to mean you dont have an adequate reply :)[/b][/quote]
:)

[billyfridge]

Looks to me like the terrorists are achieving their objectives, mahem and discord.
they created mayhem on 9&#092;11 and they only need to read this forum to see the discord <_<
the only good thing so far, if you can call it a good thing, and that is they&#39;re bombing their own people/muslims. i think their heads are so far up their arses the don&#39;t know what they&#39;re doing <_<

[vidcc]

Originally posted by billyfridge@10 January 2004 - 03:44
Looks to me like the terrorists are achieving their objectives, mahem and discord.
they created mayhem on 9&#092;11 and they only need to read this forum to see the discord <_<
the only good thing so far, if you can call it a good thing, and that is they&#39;re bombing their own people/muslims. i think their heads are so far up their arses the don&#39;t know what they&#39;re doing <_<
this isn&#39;t having a pop just would like to say on the line about bombing their own people/muslims...erm muslims are not terrorist just happens that some are,as are catholics,protestants, any other religion and any other non religious person that commits acts of terrorism.
this is not a holy war despite what some might like to say.

i appreciate you are just giving the example about 9/11 but you must have seen how some people blow a slight thing like that out of proportion :D

[clocker]

Jeez Lynx, where to start?

I think you mean you are not used to it happening on your soil. Your government is certainly well versed in terrorist activities, but most of you have for years turned a blind eye to what our government does, although I suspect this is pure idleness.
Are you suggesting that we should "get used" to terrorism on American soil?
Thanks a lot, but no.
Your sweeping assertion re: what " most of us" do and our level of concern is sheer speculation and not worthy of response.

1. Why should we care that few of these atrocities have occured on US soil in the past? The fact that many of them have been indirectly sponsored by your government has &#39;de facto&#39; ensured that situation.
Go ahead, don&#39;t care.
Too bad that what affects the US, and our subsequent response, ultimately will affect the rest of the world also.
You might care then.

2. As I understand it, Timothy Mcvey was protesting about the actions of your government. Although I don&#39;t agree with his methods, and probably not what he was complaining about, at least someone has the balls to say something.
"At least he had the balls to say something"?
Given his great good fortune to be born American, Mr. McVey had the freedom to say anything he wanted.
Too bad he was too stupid to realize that his voice was stronger than diesel fuel and fertilizer, but I guess he reached you, didn&#39;t he?

3. Buffered from Europe, Asie and Africa? More like can&#39;t be bothered to find out what really happens in the rest of the world. Again, it is your own idleness which causes your ignorance.

4. It is only overseas news because you haven&#39;t understood how your own government was involved. It must be great to be shielded from reality by your news programmes.
Again the assumption that Americans are lumpen, ignorant fools, too distracted by the joys of Starbucks to appreciate the harsh realities and subtle political machinations of the world in which you live.
This is based on long term and wide ranging experience on your part?
Or is it just easier to imagine that the country that so affects your life is full of dolts inferior to yourself?
I suspect the latter.

[Monkster]

Again the assumption that Americans are lumpen, ignorant fools, too distracted by the joys of Starbucks to appreciate the harsh realities and subtle political machinations of the world in which you live.Many Americans are, which is why the world views America the way it does.

[clocker]

Originally posted by Monkster@9 January 2004 - 22:04

Again the assumption that Americans are lumpen, ignorant fools, too distracted by the joys of Starbucks to appreciate the harsh realities and subtle political machinations of the world in which you live.Many Americans are, which is why the world views America the way it does.
I see.
And the rest of the world is populated entirely by politically savvy, well read activists?
Bullshit.

[Monkster]

I never said that. What I said was that many Americans don&#39;t think about anyone but themselves, and they think that America can do whatever it want toward other nations.

The world perceives Amercans as ignorant fools because of there attitude toward other nations.

[clocker]

Originally posted by Monkster@9 January 2004 - 22:24
I never said that. What I said was that many Americans don&#39;t think about anyone but themselves, and they think that America can do whatever it want toward other nations.

The world perceives Amercans as ignorant fools because of there attitude toward other nations.
And many Brits, French, Saudis, Israelis, Germans, etc., etc., think in exactly the same way.
We are the world, didn&#39;t you know that?

[hobbes]

When an uncontested super power appears upon the Earth you will know it by this sign, the impotent will join in a confederacy against it.

Really, it is simple human psychology. All men/nations want autonomy over their lives, their destiny. When this is removed, it causes unrest, anger, and resentment.

Like all the low level workers who gather in the break room talking about how stupid their boss is, slapping each other on the back and laughing. They discredit any achievements of the boss as a ruse to mask their impotence. They demean the boss and his integrity. They wouldn&#39;t be caught dead being such an ass kissing low life as their boss who was obviously pandered to all his live.

The Boss acts without caring about others. Yeah, like any country, ever, has passed up something to strengthen itself because it wouldn&#39;t be "nice". Humans are humans.

So all I see is anger and specious moral high ground acting as a facade to mask fear and impotence.

[1234]

Ok let me put this in one sentance for you since you are not really listening to the points in my longer posts.

If the US stopped supporting terrorists and dictators, the US would be a lot safer than if it just introduces fingerprinting and photos of visitors.

Not one of you attacking me can answer my points. You are blind to what really caused the attacks on the WTC, and as long as you continue to be - it will happen again and again.

On the economic front, the US will lose up to 17million jobs if tourism is badly affected as well as over 5 billion dollars. High price to pay to continue to support terrorists.

Btw, "long overdue" does not mean I welcome the attacks. It means it is surprising that the US was not attacked much earlier.

PS. I am not Lynx or anyone else but myself. I just don&#39;t post here much.

[hobbes]

But every country does this to whatever degree it is capable. There are no "nice" governments.

Since governments acting in the self interest in their country will never change, we must deal with the variables that are amenable to change.

It would be nice if we could elect people who can make better decisions about what will be beneficial long term, but unfortunately, we can&#39;t seem to find any honest candidates. Politicians are the bigggest chameleons out there, the best liars seem to come out on top.

edit: so big, I used 3 "g"s

[lynx]

I&#39;ll make one last point, then I&#39;ll probably be out of this discussion.

If the failure to acknowledge how damaging US foreign policies are to itself and the rest of the world can cause such vitriol on this board, try to imagine how much hatred the policies themselves cause around the world. And then ask yourselves what sort of response you would expect.

No-one in this thread has wished the terrorist attacks on you, but now that some of the worst terrorist groups are no longer financed by you they obviously see no reason why you shouldn&#39;t also be a target.

Say what you will, you won&#39;t see an improvement until you remove the cause.

[clocker]

Originally posted by lynx@10 January 2004 - 07:33


If the failure to acknowledge how damaging US foreign policies are to itself and the rest of the world can cause such vitriol on this board, try to imagine how much hatred the policies themselves cause around the world. And then ask yourselves what sort of response you would expect.


Lynx,
Sorry to disturb your slumber...
Can you ( or anyone else for that matter) offer up a country who&#39;s foreign policy you would consider to be a model for the US to emulate?

The general sense that I get is that you guys feel that the rest of the world has it all figured out and only the US stands in the way of a utopian future.
So who should we become?

[Biggles]

Clocker

I recall a Woddy Allen film in which they overthrow the regime of the day. I think the end result was that everyone had to speak Swedish and change their underpants three times a day. (underpants to be worn on the outside of clothing in order to facilitate checking).

Sweden it is then&#33;

[billyfridge]

Originally posted by vidcc+10 January 2004 - 04:31--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 10 January 2004 - 04:31)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-billyfridge@10 January 2004 - 03:44
Looks to me like the terrorists are achieving their objectives, mahem and discord.
they created mayhem on 9&#092;11 and they only need to read this forum to see the discord <_<
the only good thing so far, if you can call it a good thing, and that is they&#39;re bombing their own people/muslims. i think their heads are so far up their arses the don&#39;t know what they&#39;re doing <_<
this isn&#39;t having a pop just would like to say on the line about bombing their own people/muslims...erm muslims are not terrorist just happens that some are,as are catholics,protestants, any other religion and any other non religious person that commits acts of terrorism.
this is not a holy war despite what some might like to say.

i appreciate you are just giving the example about 9/11 but you must have seen how some people blow a slight thing like that out of proportion :D [/b][/quote]
Sorry VIDcc, perhaps i was a bit strong on the muslims, is just that it seems all terrorists actually caught are muslims. the UK prisoners held by the US are muslims caught in Afganistan. what were they doing there, on holiday&#33;&#33; what religeon is bin laden? I wonder what religeon the terrorists who are killing US and UK soldiers in Iraq are <_<

[Biggles]

Billy

I think you might have hit on a truism there.

All Islamic terrorists are Muslims. All Loyalist terrorists in NI are Protestants. All Republican terrorists in NI are Catholic.

Likewise all the indigenous terrorists in Papa New Guinea are native peoples - this equally applies to a number of S. American countries.

At this particular time there is an ideological struggle going on in the ME which because of the regions economic importance has spilled out into the west. There are a lot of conflicts going on in the world but it is human nature to see our conflict as symbolising the whole problem. The fact is, large numbers of people die in these other conflicts too but it goes largely unreported.

There are 1 billion Muslims in the world - very few get involved in terrorism. However, if we play our cards right I suppose we could convince them to do otherwise.

[exeus]

Originally posted by billyfridge@11 January 2004 - 02:18

Sorry VIDcc, perhaps i was a bit strong on the muslims, is just that it seems all terrorists actually caught are muslims. the UK prisoners held by the US are muslims caught in Afganistan. what were they doing there, on holiday&#33;&#33; what religeon is bin laden? I wonder what religeon the terrorists who are killing US and UK soldiers in Iraq are <_<
" in Iraq " yes what are we doing over there......and all the countrys we have seen fit to set foot on their soil and kill them

i am Australian we do whatever the US wants it sucks&#33;

[Samurai]

And I&#39;m sure if two towers of your own went down with HUGE loss of life your country would not be the least bit interested in hunting down terrorists?

My apologies, it seems the Middle East&#39;s breeding grounds for terrorism are required sanctuary because Australia don&#39;t believe in the cause...

[exeus]

Im sorry if i miss read your post, but the cause of all this is Australia USA UK and others i walk with my eyes open i see what we do to other countrys and peoples...kick a dog enough and it will bite you

[Samurai]

Originally posted by exeus@10 January 2004 - 14:53
kick a dog enough and it will bite you
So your answer is to roll over and ACCEPT TERRORISM as a part of our life???

Tell me exeus, what would you say is the best course of action?



If all the Middle Eastern nations (Yes, I&#39;m identifying these countries, because this is where the majority of terrorists originate from) can see that the US, UK, Australia & other nations will not stand for terrorism, do you think they&#39;ll be happy about it. As a quote from &#39;Pearl Harbor&#39;, "They&#39;ve woken a sleeping giant".

[exeus]

No for sure we have to put end to terrorism, all i am saying is we caused this ourselves.
So yes i think we need to stop terrorism but we also need to look at what we do to others countrys to make them want to resort to terrorism. We have been messing about in the Middle East for how long...i mean we could go back to the crucades (yer i know i cant spell) just because here in the Western World we dont see in the Media what we do in other countrys be it open as now or in secret dosnt mean it dosnt happen.

[Samurai]

The Middle East has been at war with itself since time began... and with that comes hatred towards the &#39;West&#39;. Because of the fact that they can&#39;t do anything but create wars between themselves, their countries have literally gone to shit.

They are jealous and angered by the fact that &#39;John Doe&#39; from the West has his own house, TV, Internet and lives his life in luxury.

Their belief is that anyone who does not believe in the religion of Islam, is evil and according to (their) God, must be punished.

Until these countries learn that life is the most precious thing on this Earth and that stoning is getting a little old, things will not change. They will carry on fighting with each other, carry on allowing terrorists to thrive in their communities and celebrate when an atrocity happens such as September 11th.

The Middle East in my view, could be a wonderful place, avast with palaces and monuments to aquire admiration from any nation.

This will never happen though, or at least in the far future, because they can&#39;t get off their behinds and do something worth while.

Why do you think the &#39;West&#39; has fighter jets, aeroplanes, motor cars, computers, televisions? The Middle East has purchased these items themselves because they&#39;re so fu*king stupid to attempt to do it themselves. Maybe in 20 years or so, they&#39;ll be able to have their very own market in carpet making. I hear the trades good over there.

[exeus]

"life is the most precious thing on this Earth"

i agree fully

[leftism]

Sorry samurai but thats a load of bollocks.

Mathematics and algorithims were first developed in the Middle East while Europe was still in the Dark Ages. In fact we wouldnt even have computers without the number system they created. Before they created a number system founded on base (decimal = base 10, binary = base 2) the western world was using the Roman number system. Try creating a computer based on that number system :)

The same goes for astronomy and various other scientific endeavours.

Also.. not all of the middle east is desert and wooden shacks y&#39;know.

As for the jealousy argument thats rubbish too. Life is not that simple.

I could also pull out numerous quotes from the koran to show you that Islam does not advocate the killing of all non-muslims. Its the same as any other religion, you get a few wackos who can twist it round to justify anything e.g. You have heard about the Inquisition, witch hunts etc?

It seems to me that your opinions are based on tired stereotypes and not historical fact. I suggest you actually meet some muslims from the Middle East and talk to them. It might open your eyes a little.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by billyfridge+10 January 2004 - 15:18--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (billyfridge &#064; 10 January 2004 - 15:18)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by vidcc@10 January 2004 - 04:31
<!--QuoteBegin-billyfridge@10 January 2004 - 03:44
Looks to me like the terrorists are achieving their objectives, mahem and discord.
they created mayhem on 9&#092;11 and they only need to read this forum to see the discord <_<
the only good thing so far, if you can call it a good thing, and that is they&#39;re bombing their own people/muslims. i think their heads are so far up their arses the don&#39;t know what they&#39;re doing <_<
this isn&#39;t having a pop just would like to say on the line about bombing their own people/muslims...erm muslims are not terrorist just happens that some are,as are catholics,protestants, any other religion and any other non religious person that commits acts of terrorism.
this is not a holy war despite what some might like to say.

i appreciate you are just giving the example about 9/11 but you must have seen how some people blow a slight thing like that out of proportion :D
Sorry VIDcc, perhaps i was a bit strong on the muslims, is just that it seems all terrorists actually caught are muslims. the UK prisoners held by the US are muslims caught in Afganistan. what were they doing there, on holiday&#33;&#33; what religeon is bin laden? I wonder what religeon the terrorists who are killing US and UK soldiers in Iraq are <_< [/b][/quote]
what about the IRA and the many other groups from northern Ireland? (just using as an example and if anyone wants to start a rant about the rights or wrongs start another topic please)...terrorists come from all walks of life.

now i know this will draw some flak but think about it...the fighters in Iraq at the moment are not terrorists they are people in their own occupied country. i think the attacks they are doing are evil and often indiscriminent, however If the USA or Uk were invaded and occupied any citizen that did the same would be considered a hero by our people as were the French resistance in ww2.
i support our troops fully, they have been put in a place of great danger and i want to see every one of the reamining troops come home safely......i think it is a travesty that anyone has to lose their lives.
but this is all off the post topic.

as i said i was not having a pop just trying to get the emphasis away from religious scaremongering

[Biggles]

Originally posted by Samurai@10 January 2004 - 16:22
The Middle East has been at war with itself since time began... and with that comes hatred towards the &#39;West&#39;. Because of the fact that they can&#39;t do anything but create wars between themselves, their countries have literally gone to shit.

They are jealous and angered by the fact that &#39;John Doe&#39; from the West has his own house, TV, Internet and lives his life in luxury.


:D

Ok Mr Kilroy come on out, we know it is you.

I don&#39;t often say this, but I haven&#39;t read so much ill informed nonsense for a long time.

I take it by "since time began" you mean since 1919 after the break up of the Ottoman Empire. They presumably started the US civil war, WW1, WW2, the Korean war and a whole host of others - any one of which resulted in far more deaths and casualties than any ME war you care to mention.

Prior to the Romans, the ME was barely aware of the existence of the West let alone jealous of it. Indeed as the cradle of civilisation they considered far off lands barbarous and dodgy. The post Ptolemeic Persian Empire was the only power that the Romans decided was a bridge too far.

Up until the 20th century there was little difference in the living conditions, mortality and general well being of the masses in any country and the rich have always been rich whatever land you live in (even the Russian elite had their Dachaus in the country). The glory of the Ottoman palaces and the Persian/Mogul cities were bywords for beauty and luxury in medieval Europe. We aspired to their achievements not the other way round.

The overwhelming majority of the terrorists involved in the current difficulties are Saudis - a country were poverty is not exactly a problem and where there are more Rolls Royces per head of population than most other countries in the world put together. Osama was worth hundreds of million and he chose instead to go and fight the Russians in Afghanistan. He and his followers are not motivated by money or TVs or internet connections (these things are just tools to achieve their ends) and if the West can&#39;t understand that it will never defeat them.

Incidently, if you look at the bottom of most products in your house you will see that they are manufactured in China, Japan or Korea.

[Busyman]

I wanted to address some things:

1. @lynx- When I say America is NOT used to terrorism I was talking the American people not the government (that was fairly obvious).

2. @exeus- America was not around during the Crusades. It was European Christians trying to recover Holy Land from Muslims. Also the force feeding of Christianity onto non-Christians.

3. @Samurai- The higher mathematics WERE developed in the Middle East.
Think "AL"GEBRA. ;)

4. @everyone- Terrorists that have been interviewed and they say the same thing. America is main target due to our support of ISRAEL. Israel has a long standing feud with Palestine. They know Israel gets weapons and financing from the US. One Saudi said, "We see made in the USA on the rockets that bomb Muslim villages", which makes little sense but I get the point.

5. Our foreign policy changed drastically due to events in WW2 (for obvious reasons).

6. @lefty- All Muslims are not terrorists but.......there is breeding ground of hate from birth and it is spreading like a virus. At this point Osama and others have twisted the interpretation of "jihad" to mean kill anyone from America, in America, or that sympathizes with America. They are training children to strap bombs on themselves to later commit suicide bombings (pregnant women also). Osama can now say kill the French and there would suicide bombings in France if sees fit.

7. Why the America, America crap? There have been numerous Islamic terrorist acts commited and thwarted in France, the UK, and others.
Did you know terrorists planned to fly a plane into the Eiffel Tower? I guess that was due America. Terrorism is just evil. It does not attack government directly it just kills innocent people.

Sorry exeus among others, we have not &#39;caused&#39; terrorism.


btw this is biggest turn way off topic I have ever seen in a thread (and I&#39;m guilty too)

[hobbes]

Busyman,

This forum is rather formulaic.

Step 1: A Topic is started, supposedly to discuss a point, but often times as a thinly veiled jump off point for America bashing.

Step 2: is people bringing their sack of "issues" about America with them to take us off the topic. Said issues are usually conveyed as below:

Just using the "Moonbase thread" as an example "Fuck America, how could they waste so much money to camp on a rock with all the pain and suffering going on at home. Stupid fools"&#33;

Step 3: the actual topic becomes irrelevant and people start responding to the EMOTION of the other posters and not their actual points. A responder may agree that space exploration is excessive, feeling that health care should be priority number 1, but respond in the defensive because of the vitriol in the post above. It is like talking about your sister. You feel free to call her a stupid bitch, but you will beat the crap out of anyone outside your family who calls her that.

Step 4: Thread vaults off topic, usually relating to American hypocracy, corruption or the general stupidity of the average US citizen. Customarily selected zingers are employed such as "your appointed, not elected President" or "brainwashed by your government controlled media". If we are lucky perhaps a parallel will be drawn between the US policies and the Nazi&#39;s and our society will be referred to as Orwellian . The coup de grace is "9/11, get over it already&#33; You guys are just blowing it all out of proportion&#33;"

It seems that few people have actually figured how to disagree and to express this disagreement in a way that leads to something useful. Most people are lead by their emotions about America (as I discussed earlier) and have no interest in anything but delivering a few cathartic cheap shots.

Look how they got you stirred up.

I tip my cap to those exceptions here who don&#39;t peddle shit.

[Busyman]

Tru dat hobbes. I was ready to smack someone in the mouth and I&#39;m on the internet. :lol:

[vidcc]

Originally posted by hobbes@10 January 2004 - 19:58
Step 2: is people bringing their sack of "issues" about America with them to take us off the topic. Said issues are usually conveyed as below:

Just using the "Moonbase thread" as an example "Fuck America, how could they waste so much money to camp on a rock with all the pain and suffering going on at home. Stupid fools"&#33;


-erm i can&#39;t find that post anywhere on the thread i started..that thread was as stated aimed at American (i am a taxpaying American) and as far as i can see the only person that gave issue to it was another American

[Busyman]

Originally posted by vidcc+10 January 2004 - 23:52--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc &#064; 10 January 2004 - 23:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@10 January 2004 - 19:58
Step 2: is people bringing their sack of "issues" about America with them to take us off the topic. Said issues are usually conveyed as below:

Just using the "Moonbase thread" as an example "Fuck America, how could they waste so much money to camp on a rock with all the pain and suffering going on at home. Stupid fools"&#33;


-erm i can&#39;t find that post anywhere on the thread i started..that thread was as stated aimed at American (i am a taxpaying American) and as far as i can see the only person that gave issue to it was another American [/b][/quote]
WTF HE SAID EXAMPLE&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

This is what "I" have been talking about hobbes.
Folks lack of logic and READING.
vidcc even with context of his sentence AND the fact you didn&#39;t see that post on that thread, I can&#39;t believe you didn&#39;t deduce the "example".

[hobbes]

Originally posted by vidcc+10 January 2004 - 23:52--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc &#064; 10 January 2004 - 23:52)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@10 January 2004 - 19:58
Step 2: is people bringing their sack of "issues" about America with them to take us off the topic. Said issues are usually conveyed as below:

Just using the "Moonbase thread" as an example "Fuck America, how could they waste so much money to camp on a rock with all the pain and suffering going on at home. Stupid fools"&#33;


-erm i can&#39;t find that post anywhere on the thread i started..that thread was as stated aimed at American (i am a taxpaying American) and as far as i can see the only person that gave issue to it was another American [/b][/quote]
I was a making generalization, to make a point. In regard to your thread, I intentionally added the word "usually" as I made a review of your posts and determined that you were American.

Did you read the first reply in your thread? Didn&#39;t take long to fullfil my prophecy.

[vidcc]

yes i read the first reply and he did correct himself as being rather foolish because he didn&#39;t read the article.


just a question busyman....have you ever posted without profanities?...be they the whole word or just shortform

[hobbes]

Originally posted by vidcc@11 January 2004 - 00:06
yes i read the first reply and he did correct himself as being rather foolish because he didn&#39;t read the article.


just a question busyman....have you ever posted without profanities?...be they the whole word or just shortform
I actually wrote my post before reading your thread, I just chose it because I thought it looked like a promising one to make my point for me. Checking back later, I saw his post and his apology. It was a most unusal thing to see, and I praise him for being man enough to step up like that.

Most people here, when shown to be incorrect or in the wrong, just disappear rather than say, "oh, good point". Then they re-emerge days later, spouting the same shit again, as they have no interest in truth, but rather, are only interested in spreading their agendas.

@Busyman,

Another sad aspect of this forum is that people tend to be infatuated with their posts and fail to read anything not directly related to them.

How many times have you had to type, "As I stated before...... or "As discussed by "X" earlier...".

It is really frustrating as the thread spins like a wheel on ice, rather than progressing.

[J'Pol]

"As stated earlier .... " or any derivative, is very common in the written word.

I myself use it often.

I also use "As X said .... " as a form of acknowledgment, that someone else has made the same point.

I make no apology for either. In my world they are perfectly normal and acceptable terms.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by vidcc@11 January 2004 - 00:06
yes i read the first reply and he did correct himself as being rather foolish because he didn&#39;t read the article.


just a question busyman....have you ever posted without profanities?...be they the whole word or just shortform
Aww shit yeah

More so recently during this damn thread.

Just venting my little frustration with others reading comprehension. <_<

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Busyman+11 January 2004 - 01:37--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Busyman &#064; 11 January 2004 - 01:37)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-vidcc@11 January 2004 - 00:06
yes i read the first reply and he did correct himself as being rather foolish because he didn&#39;t read the article.


just a question busyman....have you ever posted without profanities?...be they the whole word or just shortform
Aww shit yeah

More so recently during this damn thread.

Just venting my little frustration with others reading comprehension. <_<[/b][/quote]
Your own writing would not suffer from the appropriate use of the comma.

[hobbes]

Commas?

How could the placement of a comma make a concrete mind appreciate the difference between concrete reality and an abstract concept?

[Busyman]

OMG&#33;&#33; He didn&#39;t put a comma there....so .......I .....can&#39;t......com..pre..hend..the meaning...I can&#39;t ....fathom..................

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Busyman@11 January 2004 - 19:38
OMG&#33;&#33; He didn&#39;t put a comma there....so .......I .....can&#39;t......com..pre..hend..the meaning...I can&#39;t ....fathom..................
You&#39;re not impressed by other people&#39;s reading comprehension, so you vent your frustration.

Then you get all precious when someone mentions your writing ability, quoting the "comprehension" post.

Oh diddums :cry1:

People who live in glass houses shouldn&#39;t.

[Busyman]

Uh...huh I misspelll words too.
I sometimes don&#39;t put periods at the end of my sentences

If, the, period, isn&#39;t, there, or, the, wordd, is, misspellled, I, apologize, if, one, doesn&#39;t, have, the, "foggiest", idea, what, is, meant.

I can say the skyy is blue and a bonehead will say, "What you mean is you think the sky blue". <_<

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Busyman@12 January 2004 - 00:21
Uh...huh I misspelll words too.
I sometimes don&#39;t put periods at the end of my sentences

If, the, period, isn&#39;t, there, or, the, wordd, is, misspellled, I, apologize, if, one, doesn&#39;t, have, the, "foggiest", idea, what, is, meant.

I can say the skyy is blue and a bonehead will say, "What you mean is you think the sky blue". <_<
You also insult other people indiscriminately and react badly when someone returns the compliment.

[Busyman]

There is a huge difference between the placement of my comma and reading comprehension.

Some people lack "common sense" in there reading.

I insult people for a reason.
In almost all cases I&#39;m jiving around and it&#39;s very rare for it to be serious.

So yes I may call someone a dipshit if after 3 times of writing plain English (commas and all) they want to tell me what I meant. Furthermore ANYONE making light of a national tragedy will get a mouthful. (indiscriminate? :lol: )

btw why, no,t start a t,hread abo,ut sent,ence structu,re? (my bad if you can&#39;t comprehend that)

(and please post it the Lounge)

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Busyman@12 January 2004 - 01:04
Some people lack "common sense" in there reading.



What are you talking about?

Did you mean "there" or "their".

STFU, both of you. :lol:

[Busyman]

I was wondering if someone would notice that.
Good one hobbes. I&#39;m S(ing)TFU about my sentence structure. :lol: :lol:

[J'Pol]

Just venting my little frustration with others reading comprehension.

Why would you be frustrated because other people read comprehension.

When you write your posts the way you do, it is your fault that people don&#39;t understand them, not their&#39;s. The frustration you feel is self-inflicted. People respond to what you have actually written, not what you think it was.

You then take a hissy fit and get sarcastic when someone responds in kind. My comprehension of the written word is absolutely fine, thank you very much indeed.

[vidcc]

what was the subject again?

[Busyman]

What do you mean?

edit: vidcc beat me to it. damn. :lol:

[vidcc]

Originally posted by Busyman@12 January 2004 - 00:28
What do you mean?

edit: vidcc beat me to it. damn. :lol:
and i was poised with a sarcastic comment about you not comprehending :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

[hobbes]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@12 January 2004 - 01:25

Just venting my little frustration with others reading comprehension.

Why would you be frustrated because other people read comprehension.

When you write your posts the way you do, it is your fault that people don&#39;t understand them, not their&#39;s. The frustration you feel is self-inflicted. People respond to what you have actually written, not what you think it was.

You then take a hissy fit and get sarcastic when someone responds in kind. My comprehension of the written word is absolutely fine, thank you very much indeed.
JPol,

Busyman was not mad because his post was misunderstood, but mine. And my thread was pretty clear that I was "making an example", not describing a literal post.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by hobbes@12 January 2004 - 01:32
And my thread was pretty clear that I was "making an example", not describing a literal post.
Starting a sentence with and, that&#39;s just ugly.

You of all people should know better and be ashamed of yourself.

I am appalled. Quite, quite appalled.

[clocker]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+11 January 2004 - 17:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol &#064; 11 January 2004 - 17:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@12 January 2004 - 01:32
And my thread was pretty clear that I was "making an example", not describing a literal post.
Starting a sentence with and, that&#39;s just ugly.

You of all people should know better and be ashamed of yourself.

I am appalled. Quite, quite appalled. [/b][/quote]
You mean "appaulled", surely.

one, two, three...

[Busyman]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+12 January 2004 - 01:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol &#064; 12 January 2004 - 01:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@12 January 2004 - 01:32
And my thread was pretty clear that I was "making an example", not describing a literal post.
Starting a sentence with and, that&#39;s just ugly.

You of all people should know better and be ashamed of yourself.

I am appalled. Quite, quite appalled. [/b][/quote]
"For" what.? :D

btw "you mean" j&#39;polled. :lol:

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Busyman@12 January 2004 - 01:38

btw "you mean" j&#39;polled. :lol:
:lol: :lol: :lol:

I was going to write that, but thought better of it.

[hobbes]

It is apparent that this is all my fault.

I apologise to Jpol, busyman, and clocker for letting my stupidity be a source of confusion and conflict on this forum.

BTW, you are all homos :lol:

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by hobbes@12 January 2004 - 01:48
It is apparent that this is all my fault.

I apologise to Jpol, busyman, and clocker for letting my stupidity be a source of confusion and conflict on this forum.

BTW, you are all homos :lol:
Oh, it&#39;s always your stupidity, it couldn&#39;t be anyone else&#39;s.

Conceited bar steward.

[Busyman]

Originally posted by hobbes@12 January 2004 - 01:48
It is apparent that this is all my fault.

I apologise to Jpol, busyman, and clocker for letting my stupidity be a source of confusion and conflict on this forum.

BTW, you are all homos :lol:
Take those boots off
ya gay pirate

[hobbes]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+12 January 2004 - 01:51--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 12 January 2004 - 01:51)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@12 January 2004 - 01:48
It is apparent that this is all my fault.

I apologise to Jpol, busyman, and clocker for letting my stupidity be a source of confusion and conflict on this forum.

BTW, you are all homos :lol:
Oh, it&#39;s always your stupidity, it couldn&#39;t be anyone else&#39;s.

Conceited bar steward. [/b][/quote]
I think I know why I enjoy this forum.

[billyfridge]

Originally posted by clocker@12 January 2004 - 00:37


I am appalled. Quite, quite appalled.
You mean "appaulled", surely.

one, two, three... [/quote]
Im appalled at your spelling go back to school :D :D :D

[j2k4]

I&#39;ve been missing all the fun here, I see. :)

[billyfridge]

Originally posted by j2k4@12 January 2004 - 16:34
I&#39;ve been missing all the fun here, I see. :)
We&#39;ve been appalled at your absence J2K4 :unsure: :blink:

[100%]

Are you guys having fun?

[Busyman]

Originally posted by Zedaxax@12 January 2004 - 19:49
Are you guys having fun?
Uh..huh. Come on in; the water&#39;s great. :D

[j2k4]

Originally posted by billyfridge+12 January 2004 - 14:43--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (billyfridge @ 12 January 2004 - 14:43)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@12 January 2004 - 16:34
I&#39;ve been missing all the fun here, I see.&nbsp; :)
We&#39;ve been appalled at your absence J2K4 :unsure: :blink: [/b][/quote]
Appalled?

Surely not.

I&#39;ve been occupied with a few projects around the house; even todayis a bit tight. ;)

Carry on; I&#39;ll join in as I am able.

:D

[Biggles]

Hobbes has been keeping everything in order with just the right amount of irony for my taste. :rolleyes:

[dudevenezuela]

American Airlines pilot Dale Robun Hirsch raises his middle finger while he was being photographed by Brazilian immigration officers
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040115/i/r834766954.jpg

LINK (http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story2&u=/040115/ids_photos_wl/r834766954.jpg&e=3)

[J'Pol]

To be fair, he was leaving the Ladies toilet at the time.

[billyfridge]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@16 January 2004 - 01:05
To be fair, he was leaving the Ladies toilet at the time.
Nice one Jpol :lol: Why would he be using the ladies? :blink:

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by billyfridge+16 January 2004 - 02:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (billyfridge @ 16 January 2004 - 02:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@16 January 2004 - 01:05
To be fair, he was leaving the Ladies toilet at the time.
Nice one Jpol :lol: Why would he be using the ladies? :blink: [/b][/quote]
He does look a bit "Village People" with the moustache, shiny head and the white tux.

[billyfridge]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+16 January 2004 - 01:17--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 16 January 2004 - 01:17)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by billyfridge@16 January 2004 - 02:09
<!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@16 January 2004 - 01:05
To be fair, he was leaving the Ladies toilet at the time.
Nice one Jpol :lol: Why would he be using the ladies? :blink:
He does look a bit "Village People" with the moustache, shiny head and the white tux. [/b][/quote]
He might have been wiping his finger. :o

[vidcc]

Originally posted by dudevenezuela@16 January 2004 - 00:56
American Airlines pilot Dale Robun Hirsch raises his middle finger while he was being photographed by Brazilian immigration officers

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: serves him right. You would have thought he would have known better. Can you imagine what we would do if a Brazilian did that?

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by vidcc+16 January 2004 - 03:07--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (vidcc @ 16 January 2004 - 03:07)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-dudevenezuela@16 January 2004 - 00:56
American Airlines pilot Dale Robun Hirsch raises his middle finger while he was being photographed by Brazilian immigration officers

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: serves him right. You would have thought he would have known better. Can you imagine what we would do if a Brazilian did that? [/b][/quote]
Taken a photograph ?

[100%]

Originally posted by dudevenezuela@16 January 2004 - 01:56
American Airlines pilot Dale Robun Hirsch raises his middle finger while he was being photographed by Brazilian immigration officers
http://us.news1.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/rids/20040115/i/r834766954.jpg




So American Airlines pilot Dale Robun Hirsch
hereby shows all visa travellers how they should react.
Hence Dale thinks it is bullshit
and should go home and tell Bush to stop the bs,
cause this is how the S.americans,azians, eastern block and middle east Travellers to the US will feel and react.
Thank you Dale

[billyfridge]

God point Zedaxax, just what i was thinking, but it might be only Americans can do things like that <_<

[hobbes]

Originally posted by billyfridge@16 January 2004 - 03:34
God point Zedaxax, just what i was thinking, but it might be only Americans can do things like that <_<
Would the ability to extend the middle digit be the next step in evolution, then? I had no idea that the word suffered from contracture of the middle phalanx.

BTW, the 999 others photographed did no such thing, why let the exception represent the rule, unless of course, that fits your agenda. I certainly wouldn&#39;t let some pissy Alex Trebec/ Captain Picard hybrid, ladies room frequenter, speak for me. I assumed he was extending the finger for the purpose of "printing".

[100%]

He is not a passenger
he is American Airlines pilot Dale Robun Hirsch

hence he represents........ :blink:

respect?

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Zedaxax@16 January 2004 - 03:53
He is not a passenger
he is American Airlines pilot Dale Robun Hirsch

hence he represents........ :blink:

respect?
As an American, he is an individual, first and foremost, not a government spokesperson.

He flies a plane, so what?

[100%]

I agree with you - As an American, he is an individual, first and foremost, not a government spokesperson.


He flies a plane, so what?

Yes, so whats all the hype?

[vidcc]

Originally posted by hobbes@16 January 2004 - 03:01

He flies a plane, so what?
An American airlines engineer dies and goes to heaven. At the pearly gates he is greeted by an angel who becons him to walk through.
the engineer says "i will enter heaven only as i believe it is supposed to be my reward, therefore can you promise me there won&#39;t be any pilots in there"
"i promise you" came the reply
a few days later the engineer was laying on a cloud drinking nectare when he saw an American Airlines pilot walk past. Imediately he got up and went to complain.
"i thought you promised me there would be no pilots here &#33;&#33;&#33;" ranted the engineer
" oh that wasn&#39;t a pilot....that was god....he just likes to think he&#39;s one" :lol: :lol:

[MagicNakor]

From a US tourist in Brazil (right off the news):

"It&#39;s disrespectful to be fingerprinted and photographed without doing anything wrong."

:ninja:

[Busyman]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@16 January 2004 - 05:34
From a US tourist in Brazil (right off the news):

"It&#39;s disrespectful to be fingerprinted and photographed without doing anything wrong."

:ninja:
Get over it&#33;&#33;&#33;

[MagicNakor]

Simply relaying what this particular American man&#39;s thoughts were on being fingerprinted and photographed when he stepped off the plane in Brazil.

If you dislike what he thoughts are, you ought to take it up with him.

:ninja:

[Busyman]

Originally posted by MagicNakor@16 January 2004 - 09:59
Simply relaying what this particular American man&#39;s thoughts were on being fingerprinted and photographed when he stepped off the plane in Brazil.

If you dislike what he thoughts are, you ought to take it up with him.

:ninja:
And uh....duh....I&#39;m relaying that he should get over it&#33;&#33;&#33; <_<

Are you the pilot?
And I can&#39;t be talking about YOU now can I?

[lynx]

Originally posted by Busyman@16 January 2004 - 12:02
And uh....duh....I&#39;m relaying that he should get over it&#33;&#33;&#33; <_<
And uh....duh....just how is this board going to get it back to the person who originally said it?

[hobbes]

(billyfridge @ 16 January 2004 - 03:34)

God point Zedaxax, just what i was thinking, but it might be only Americans can do things like that&nbsp;

hobbes

Would the ability to extend the middle digit be the next step in evolution, then? I had no idea that the word suffered from contracture of the middle phalanx.

BTW, the 999 others photographed did no such thing, why let the exception represent the rule, unless of course, that fits your agenda. I certainly wouldn&#39;t let some pissy Alex Trebec/ Captain Picard hybrid, ladies room frequenter, speak for me. I assumed he was extending the finger for the purpose of "printing".


As, I said, you can&#39;t take one persons opinion and apply it as the norm. The concensus of Americans on this board have no problem with it. As myfiles3000 icily told me once, "that is ancedotal".

[MagicNakor]

Originally posted by Busyman+16 January 2004 - 14:02--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Busyman @ 16 January 2004 - 14:02)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-MagicNakor@16 January 2004 - 09:59
Simply relaying what this particular American man&#39;s thoughts were on being fingerprinted and photographed when he stepped off the plane in Brazil.

If you dislike what he thoughts are, you ought to take it up with him.

:ninja:
And uh....duh....I&#39;m relaying that he should get over it&#33;&#33;&#33; <_<

Are you the pilot?
And I can&#39;t be talking about YOU now can I? [/b][/quote]
Seeing as you like to throw out the "read the post" line: read my post.

It&#39;s not referring to the pilot. It was a tourist.

:ninja:

[Busyman]

Originally posted by MagicNakor+16 January 2004 - 18:20--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MagicNakor @ 16 January 2004 - 18:20)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Originally posted by Busyman@16 January 2004 - 14:02
<!--QuoteBegin-MagicNakor@16 January 2004 - 09:59
Simply relaying what this particular American man&#39;s thoughts were on being fingerprinted and photographed when he stepped off the plane in Brazil.

If you dislike what he thoughts are, you ought to take it up with him.

:ninja:
And uh....duh....I&#39;m relaying that he should get over it&#33;&#33;&#33; <_<

Are you the pilot?
And I can&#39;t be talking about YOU now can I?
Seeing as you like to throw out the "read the post" line: read my post.

It&#39;s not referring to the pilot. It was a tourist.

:ninja: [/b][/quote]
Point taken....Get over it....still&#33;&#33;&#33; :lol: :lol:

[Busyman]

Originally posted by hobbes@16 January 2004 - 16:35
(billyfridge @ 16 January 2004 - 03:34)

God point Zedaxax, just what i was thinking, but it might be only Americans can do things like that

hobbes

Would the ability to extend the middle digit be the next step in evolution, then? I had no idea that the word suffered from contracture of the middle phalanx.

BTW, the 999 others photographed did no such thing, why let the exception represent the rule, unless of course, that fits your agenda. I certainly wouldn&#39;t let some pissy Alex Trebec/ Captain Picard hybrid, ladies room frequenter, speak for me. I assumed he was extending the finger for the purpose of "printing".


As, I said, you can&#39;t take one persons opinion and apply it as the norm. The concensus of Americans on this board have no problem with it. As myfiles3000 icily told me once, "that is ancedotal".
What&#39;s wrong with you hobbes?
Apparently..all Americans think alike. <_<

I love how foreigners basically go, "Ha see he didn&#39;t like it either".

[Busyman]

Originally posted by lynx+16 January 2004 - 16:25--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (lynx @ 16 January 2004 - 16:25)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Busyman@16 January 2004 - 12:02
And uh....duh....I&#39;m relaying that he should get over it&#33;&#33;&#33; <_<
And uh....duh....just how is this board going to get it back to the person who originally said it? [/b][/quote]
Oh I&#39;m sorry I should have said:

"I think the tourist should get over it"

Seeing as though you, oh I mean MagicNakor, was not in Brazil, I must show that for those who might get confused.

[hobbes]

@MN

Sorry, I thought you were posting a quote from the pilot, it was morning mistake, not a lack of reading every post. Does that really change anything, it is still anecdotal: A pilot, a tourist.

I know a guy from Canada who states he has a penis ring, would I be out of line to assume you have one as well?

Let us poll a thousand people and see how the numbers shape up.

[vidcc]

Originally posted by hobbes@16 January 2004 - 22:37
Sorry, I thought you were posting a quote from the pilot, it was morning mistake, not a lack of reading every post. Does that really change anything, it is still anecdotal: A pilot, a tourist.

I know a guy from Canada who states he has a penis ring, would I be out of line to assume you have one as well?

Lets poll a thousand people and see how the numbers shape up.
not sure about the penis ring...but i&#39;ve often heard they have had rings Around their penis :lol: :lol:

[Dudefrommars]

you insignificant Earth people.. muahahahahaha

I&#39;ll use my ray gun to vaporize you all...muahahahhaha