Andy wrote:

> What Stu said!
>
> A passport is the most proof positive ID you can possess.

They are good idea, but that is all. I will remind you that those
Islamic terrorists who hijacked jets and flew them into the twin towers
had passports and visas..... and they had been living in the US for months.

Dave Bugg > wrote:

wrote:

>> On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 16:46:11 +0000 (UTC), (Steve
>>> If you normally have a passport, is there any added convenience
>>> to also having the enhanced ID?

>> No

>The hell there ain't. I don't need to carry two documents and risk
>misplacing my passport. I only need to drag my passport around for real
>international travel.

That's what I was thinking. There is the advantage of
duplicity. Er, redundancy.

Time was, you could just order a duplicate passport and
they'd send it to you ... that way you could lose one.
I do not think that is still true. It was also useful
when traveling to multiple adversarial countries (e.g.
Israel and Egypt before the peace treaty).

S.

Chemiker wrote:


> Maybe Canadians don't care who enters their country. Maybe
> Canada is not worried about terrorism because, like some
> other nations, terrorists know it's there but pretty much don't
> give a damn. I believe Canada is not a real or potential
> threat to any nation..... it doesn't have the capability.
> Maybe Canada couldn't control who enters their country
> if they tried.

That's rich. Canada does not have thousands of people sneaking across is
borders like the Mexicans streaming in to re-occupy the south western
states.

> Chemiker, remembering a guy caught entering the US
> with intent to blow up part of Seattle. He entered from
> Canada.

And you think that the US authorities did that all on their own and
weren't tipped off that he was coming? If he had been stopped in Canada
the worst that would happen would be that he would be charged with
possession of explosives and the US would have no access to "interview"
him.

pavane > wrote:

>"Steve Pope" > wrote in message

>| Famous Canadian foods:

>| Poutine (false cognate? you decide)
snip

>moe panzer's pastrami

That sounds interesting. More info?

>....and according to the latest news releases, baby seal heart:
>http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5040945.shtml

The rat *******s. ****'em, eh.

For information: the EU and the US both ban imports of
Canadian baby seal pelts. I'm not sure where they're selling
them. Probably Dubai or some such.

Steve

Bobo Bonobo® wrote:

> On Jun 2, 12:40Â*pm, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>> > ChattyCathy wrote:
>>
>> >> *Real* Maple syrup............
>>
>> >> (imagining pouring some and enjoying)
>>
>> > We have that in the US, too. Â*Several northern states are known
>> > for their maple syrup, especially Vermont.
>>
>> > nancy
>>
>> The closest we get to Maple Syrup (from Canada or Vermont) is the
>> 'fake' stuff they sell here i.e. some syrup made from cane sugar (OK,
>> at least it's *real* cane sugar) that has 'Maple Syrup flavoring'...
>
> You really can't get it there? I bet you can get it somewhere.

I probably could (at some fancy supermarket/store that imports such food
stuffs - or on-line). But I'm not that much of a 'food snob' to pay the
prices they want for it...

--
Cheers
ChattyCathy

graham wrote:
> "Dave Smith" > wrote in message
> ...
>> wrote:
>>
>>>> Holy shit. Not you too. If ever ever there was a case of repeating a lie
>>>> often enough people will start to believe it, it is one. That was a cock
>>>> and bull story that circulated immediately after the WTC attacks and
>>>> every once in a while people in the US who should know better, repeat
>>>> the lie.
>>>>
>>>> That is ironic in view of the fact that it was the US that had allowed
>>>> those 9/11 hijackers into the country. They were all there with visas.
>>>> Some of them had been interviewed in the visa process. Some had not.
>>>> Some of them were being watched by various intelligence
>>>
>>> Lets not forget that the people responsible for the world trade attack
>>> had been in the USA for many months prior to the attack in the
>>> southern states learning to fly, most came from Europe and had
>>> passports/visas. But the fools at homeland security will keep
>>> perpetuating the lie that they came from Canada at every avenue to
>>> cover up their incompetence.
>> And every once in a while, some ignorant and misinformed doofus will
>> repeat the lie as if it were true.
>
> Like McCain!
>

Not just McCain. The Secretary of Homeland security,Barbara Napolitana,
was caught uttering the same false claim, but admitted that she
"misspoke" , which is one of those phrases that various people in the
administration say when they are caught lying.

Chemiker wrote:


> Dave, maybe the key is in the new data chips in US passports. Mine
> doesn't have one, but my wife's does. No manual data entry needed.
> Just swipe the passport, and, if you've been flagged, the alert is
> immediate. Wife and I both has passports scanned in Schiphol,
> and again when we returned through Detroit.

The whole thing IMO is a crock in this day high tech age. When the news
first came out about the impending requirement for passports to enter
the US it was frustrating that Canadian passports (at $85 plus cost of
photo) are valid for only 5 years and were not renewable. You had to go
through the whole process allover again. Meanwhile, US passports are
valid for 10 years and were renewable. We were told that they could not
extend the period of validity because of technological changes.... but
the US seemed to manage ok with that. And that is our fault not yours.

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> iffu trolled some mo
>
>> Lets not forget that the people responsible for the world trade attack
>> had been in the USA for many months prior to the attack in the
>> southern states learning to fly, most came from Europe and had
>> passports/visas. But the fools at homeland security will keep
>> perpetuating the lie that they came from Canada at every avenue to
>> cover up their incompetence.
>
> What incompetence, troll? The Department of Homeland Security DIDN'T EXIST
> at the time.

Homeland Security may not have existed at the time, but HS Secretary
Barbara Napilano repeated the lie just last month. Some of the
terrorists got visas without being interviewed and some of them had been
flagged and questioned. They did not sneak into the US from Canada.
They arrived directly in the US with passports and visas.

Dave Smith > wrote:

>The whole thing IMO is a crock in this day high tech age. When the news
>first came out about the impending requirement for passports to enter
>the US it was frustrating that Canadian passports (at $85 plus cost of
>photo) are valid for only 5 years and were not renewable. You had to go
>through the whole process allover again. Meanwhile, US passports are
>valid for 10 years and were renewable. We were told that they could not
>extend the period of validity because of technological changes.... but
>the US seemed to manage ok with that. And that is our fault not yours.

Obviously the terrorist types will just get a US passport because
it has fewer chips, less RFID and only requires renewal every
10 years instead of 5.

You can therefore be assured no terrorist will ever bother getting
a Canadian passport. You're in the clear.

Steve

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>
>
>> FWIW, I have crossed the US border many times and I have travelled around
>> Europe. While passports were required, no one ever looked at them. The
>> first time I went to Europe I arrived in Paris. We had filled out a form,
>> walked up to a the desk, handed in the form, held out my Canadian passport
>> and was waved through. Last summer I went through customs and immigration
>> in the Netherlands, Estonia, Sweden, Denmark and Canada. The only place
>> they ever actually looked at the passport was in Toronto. In Amsterdam
>> they passed it under a scanner.
>
> My experience is different. At London's Heathrow airport, I had to show my
> passport at multiple checkpoints inside the airport, and the attendant was
> scrutinizing them closely. (And this was *before* 9/11.)


Was that upon arrival there or when boarding a flight. Generally, you
have to show your passport when you pick up your tickets, when gong
through security, upon entering the arrivals lounge, before getting on
the ramp to the plane and again before getting on the plane.

It really makes you wonder about people who arrive here by plane and try
to claim refugee status and have no passport. They rip them up and flush
them down the toilet. AFAIAC, that should be grounds to send them right
back to wherever they came from because they have proved themselves to
be dishonest.

jay got all crazy:

>> My experience is different. At London's Heathrow airport, I had to show
>> my passport at multiple checkpoints inside the airport, and the attendant
>> was scrutinizing them closely. (And this was *before* 9/11.)
>>
>
> But this was *YOU* freak!
> First they got a whiff of you and so then they knew to take a good look. I
> would venture a guess that anywhere *you* go, heads turn!

Based on the fact that I have a happy marriage, a good job, and a large
circle of friends, while you have none of those things, I'd say it's a good
bet that my personal hygiene is perfectly fine, while yours is probably
nonexistent.

Bob

Dave wrote:

>> iffu trolled some mo
>>
>>> Lets not forget that the people responsible for the world trade attack
>>> had been in the USA for many months prior to the attack in the
>>> southern states learning to fly, most came from Europe and had
>>> passports/visas. But the fools at homeland security will keep
>>> perpetuating the lie that they came from Canada at every avenue to
>>> cover up their incompetence.
>>
>> What incompetence, troll? The Department of Homeland Security DIDN'T
>> EXIST
>> at the time.
>
> Homeland Security may not have existed at the time, but HS Secretary
> Barbara Napilano repeated the lie just last month. Some of the terrorists
> got visas without being interviewed and some of them had been flagged and
> questioned. They did not sneak into the US from Canada. They arrived
> directly in the US with passports and visas.

I'm not disputing that the 9/11 terrorists entered the US from points other
than Canada. I'm disputing iffu's troll that the Department of Homeland
Security was incompetent in allowing 9/11 to happen.

As for Janet Napolitano (NOT formerly of Concrete Blonde, but it's how I
remember her name), she did retract her error:
http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/s...5/daily32.html

Bob

"Steve Pope" > wrote in message ...
| pavane > wrote:
|
| >"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
|
| >| Famous Canadian foods:
|
| >| Poutine (false cognate? you decide)
| snip
|
| >moe panzer's pastrami
|
| That sounds interesting. More info?

Sorry...and this is the correct spelling, too:
http://www.torontolife.com/guide/res...-pancers-deli/

|
| >....and according to the latest news releases, baby seal heart:
| >http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...n5040945.shtml
|
| The rat *******s. ****'em, eh.
|
| For information: the EU and the US both ban imports of
| Canadian baby seal pelts. I'm not sure where they're selling
| them. Probably Dubai or some such.
|
| Steve

Dave wrote:

>> At London's Heathrow airport, I had to show my passport at multiple
>> checkpoints inside the airport, and the attendant was scrutinizing them
>> closely. (And this was *before* 9/11.)
>
> Was that upon arrival there or when boarding a flight. Generally, you
> have to show your passport when you pick up your tickets, when gong
> through security, upon entering the arrivals lounge, before getting on the
> ramp to the plane and again before getting on the plane.

I was going from the terminal where my flight arrived to the terminal from
which my next flight would depart. I had to show my passport before boarding
the bus which goes from one terminal to the next, at the landing after
departing the bus, in a corridor which led to the "hub" of the terminal, and
at the departure gate.

Bob

In article >,
wrote:

> I don't know how you feel about it but I resent that we as your
> neighbour have to produce passports to cross the border we have been
> doing so as friends and neighbours for over a 100 years. It makes us
> feel as though we're the enemy you want to keep out and not your
> neighbours. Think about it.

I've thought about it -- a lot. I feel like I'm an enemy in my own
country. I'm flying on Saturday, within the country. I will have to
show a government-issue photo id, more than once, in the process of
getting to the aircraft. My wife cannot see me off at the gate anymore.
I will have to go through security. I've already lost one knife. It
had a one inch blade. So I will have to remember to put my pocket knife
in my checkin bag. I will have to put any liquids, other than medicine,
in the checkin bag. They will X-ray my checkin bag. Last two times I
flew, they opened the bag. My carry on bag will be searched. It may or
may not be a detailed search, as I have medical supplies that involve
needles.

--
Dan Abel
Petaluma, California USA

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>
>>> *Real* Maple syrup............
>>>
>>> (imagining pouring some and enjoying)
>>
>> We have that in the US, too. Several northern states are known
>> for their maple syrup, especially Vermont.

> The closest we get to Maple Syrup (from Canada or Vermont) is the
> 'fake' stuff they sell here i.e. some syrup made from cane sugar (OK,
> at least it's *real* cane sugar) that has 'Maple Syrup flavoring'...
>
> Heh. I still like it on pancakes <veg>

I had breakfast at someone's house and that's what they did,
made "maple syrup" with sugar/water/maple flavoring. I'd never
seen that before. If you can't get the real thing, what the heck.
If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.

nancy

nancy wrote about real maple syrup:

> If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
> fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.

Can you imagine the mess if it broke in shipping?

Bob

"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
...
> Dave Smith > wrote:
>
>>The whole thing IMO is a crock in this day high tech age. When the news
>>first came out about the impending requirement for passports to enter
>>the US it was frustrating that Canadian passports (at $85 plus cost of
>>photo) are valid for only 5 years and were not renewable. You had to go
>>through the whole process allover again. Meanwhile, US passports are
>>valid for 10 years and were renewable. We were told that they could not
>>extend the period of validity because of technological changes.... but
>>the US seemed to manage ok with that. And that is our fault not yours.
>
> Obviously the terrorist types will just get a US passport because
> it has fewer chips, less RFID and only requires renewal every
> 10 years instead of 5.
>
> You can therefore be assured no terrorist will ever bother getting
> a Canadian passport. You're in the clear.
>
No, but they are the most popular to steal!

Nancy Young wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>
>>>> *Real* Maple syrup............
>>>>
>>>> (imagining pouring some and enjoying)
>>>
>>> We have that in the US, too. Several northern states are known
>>> for their maple syrup, especially Vermont.
>
>> The closest we get to Maple Syrup (from Canada or Vermont) is the
>> 'fake' stuff they sell here i.e. some syrup made from cane sugar (OK,
>> at least it's *real* cane sugar) that has 'Maple Syrup flavoring'...
>>
>> Heh. I still like it on pancakes <veg>
>
> I had breakfast at someone's house and that's what they did,
> made "maple syrup" with sugar/water/maple flavoring. I'd never
> seen that before. If you can't get the real thing, what the heck.
> If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
> fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.
>
> nancy

Thanks, nancy.

Thing is, it prolly wouldn't make it thru 'customs and excise' anyway.
But one of these fine years (when I win the lottery...) I'll mosey on
over to the 'northern hemisphere' and get me some of the 'real' stuff
<g>

--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

food911,

Great post. I found it compelling.

You've passed the 100 reply mark in probably record time, not counting "jay
the jerk off

Politics aside (we don't always agree!) it was a worthy post.

Imho.

Congrats!

Thanks,

Andy

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:54:23 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>Chemiker wrote:
>
>
>> Maybe Canadians don't care who enters their country. Maybe
>> Canada is not worried about terrorism because, like some
>> other nations, terrorists know it's there but pretty much don't
>> give a damn. I believe Canada is not a real or potential
>> threat to any nation..... it doesn't have the capability.
>> Maybe Canada couldn't control who enters their country
>> if they tried.
>
>That's rich. Canada does not have thousands of people sneaking across is
>borders like the Mexicans streaming in to re-occupy the south western
>states.

Think about that..... our Politicians want those illegals as potential
voters, and to Hell with out laws. Your politicians probably wonder
why so few people want to emigrate to Canada for the great
healthcare system. Especially Mexicans. What are their explanations
for the disparity, do you think?

>And you think that the US authorities did that all on their own and
>weren't tipped off that he was coming? If he had been stopped in Canada
>the worst that would happen would be that he would be charged with
>possession of explosives and the US would have no access to "interview"
>him.

I don't know and admit it . Do you know, for a fact?

Alex, curious as to just *who* and *how many* emigrate
to Canada per year. Europeans? Africans? Asians?

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Nancy Young wrote:

>> If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
>> fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.
>
> Thing is, it prolly wouldn't make it thru 'customs and excise' anyway.

That's what I figured, if it was just the cost, I'd send it. But I
don't know if they'd let it in.

nancy

Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> nancy wrote about real maple syrup:
>
>> If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
>> fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.
>
> Can you imagine the mess if it broke in shipping?

Ay yi yi. I would wrap it in layers of sealed plastic wrap,
that's for sure.

nancy

Bob Terwilliger wrote:

>> Homeland Security may not have existed at the time, but HS Secretary
>> Barbara Napilano repeated the lie just last month. Some of the terrorists
>> got visas without being interviewed and some of them had been flagged and
>> questioned. They did not sneak into the US from Canada. They arrived
>> directly in the US with passports and visas.
>
> I'm not disputing that the 9/11 terrorists entered the US from points other
> than Canada. I'm disputing iffu's troll that the Department of Homeland
> Security was incompetent in allowing 9/11 to happen.

Then you will at least admit that it was something that had been missed
or neglected by the various security agencies of the time, and Homeland
Security is basically an organization to facillitate the sharing and
analysis of information

> As for Janet Napolitano (NOT formerly of Concrete Blonde, but it's how I
> remember her name), she did retract her error:
> http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/s...5/daily32.html

Sure, she retracted the statement.... after the Canadian government
objected strongly. She also said that she regrets that Canada can't seem
to get past her "one misstatement" . She is the Secretary of Homeland
Security for crying out loud. She should have known better than to think
that those guys had snuck in from Canada But, no.... she repeated that
same lie, misinformation, misstatement that has been floating around and
repeated by high ranking officials and politicians including
presidential candidates and wannabe candidates.


Napolitano also said that Canada "lets people into its country that we
don't allow into ours." That is a preposterous statement. It is
especially preposterous in the context of an attempt to clarify her
"misstatement" (read "lie") about the terrorists sneaking into the US
from Canada. We didn't let those hijackers into Canada, but American
authorities allowed them into the US, and did so despite several of them
being flagged.

The really sad thing isn't just that they think that they can get away
lies like that, but that they sometimes do. Then there is the attitude
that, after a person in a position to know better gets caught repeating
that same old misstatement/misinformation lie, she gets all indignant
and says that we just get past it. Sure, we live next to a belligerent
superpower that wants to extend its jurisdiction internationally and,
when caught lies used to justify their agenda, think we should just get
over it.

Chemiker wrote:

> Alex, curious as to just *who* and *how many* emigrate
> to Canada per year. Europeans? Africans? Asians?

Well, a few years ago a lot of mexican illegals in the American southeast
started fleeing to Canada for 'asylum'.
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/21/us/21refugees.html

From what I recall, Canadian officials were not real happy.

--
Dave
What is best in life? "To crush your enemies, see them driven before
you, and to hear the lamentation of the women." -- Conan

Nancy Young wrote:

> ChattyCathy wrote:
>> Nancy Young wrote:
>
>>> If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
>>> fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.
>>
>> Thing is, it prolly wouldn't make it thru 'customs and excise'
>> anyway.
>
> That's what I figured, if it was just the cost, I'd send it. But I
> don't know if they'd let it in.
>
> nancy

I sincerely doubt it - health laws and all that...

OMG, talking about sending/receiving food stuffs - biltong is one of the
first things that the customs officers ask about when we cross our
mutual borders. It's simply not allowed. Or stuff like buttah and
margarine... I get a bit annoyed about the the buttah - but I
understand about the margarine <g>
--
Cheers
Chatty Cathy

Chemiker wrote:

>> That's rich. Canada does not have thousands of people sneaking across is
>> borders like the Mexicans streaming in to re-occupy the south western
>> states.
>
> Think about that..... our Politicians want those illegals as potential
> voters, and to Hell with out laws.

Not to mention cheap domestic help, and party supporters who rely on
cheap labour.

> Your politicians probably wonder
> why so few people want to emigrate to Canada for the great
> healthcare system. Especially Mexicans. What are their explanations
> for the disparity, do you think?

Almost 430,000 in 2007, compared to just over a million in the US. That
means that we are getting a much larger number of immigrants per capita
than the US.


>> And you think that the US authorities did that all on their own and
>> weren't tipped off that he was coming? If he had been stopped in Canada
>> the worst that would happen would be that he would be charged with
>> possession of explosives and the US would have no access to "interview"
>> him.
>
> I don't know and admit it . Do you know, for a fact?

Do you have faith in your enforcement agencies to believe they did it on
their own? There are a number of articles online that indicate that
the RCMP had been on his trail for two years and when he slipped through
their fingers in Vancouver they alerted the US authorities.



> Alex, curious as to just *who* and *how many* emigrate
> to Canada per year. Europeans? Africans? Asians?


Europeans, eastern Europeans, Africans, Asians, Chinese, Korean, West
Indians, South Americans. Google is your friend.

"Nancy Young" > wrote in message ...
| ChattyCathy wrote:
| > Nancy Young wrote:
|
| >> If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
| >> fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.
| >
| > Thing is, it prolly wouldn't make it thru 'customs and excise' anyway.
|
| That's what I figured, if it was just the cost, I'd send it. But I
| don't know if they'd let it in.
|
| nancy

They should if it is sealed, why not send a tin to avoid breakage?
http://www.maplesyrupinvermont.com/

pavane

pavane wrote:
> "Nancy Young" > wrote in message
> ...
>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>>> If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
>>>> fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.
>>>
>>> Thing is, it prolly wouldn't make it thru 'customs and excise'
>>> anyway.
>>
>> That's what I figured, if it was just the cost, I'd send it. But I
>> don't know if they'd let it in.

> They should if it is sealed, why not send a tin to avoid breakage?
> http://www.maplesyrupinvermont.com/

Thanks for the website! I don't know what drives customs to turn away
some items, they have their reasons. If Cathy is interested, she can
email me, I'd give it a shot.

nancy

"ChattyCathy" > wrote in message
...
> Nancy Young wrote:
>
>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>
>>>> If I thought I could mail you some and it wouldn't cost a small
>>>> fortune, I'd send you some of the real stuff.
>>>
>>> Thing is, it prolly wouldn't make it thru 'customs and excise'
>>> anyway.
>>
>> That's what I figured, if it was just the cost, I'd send it. But I
>> don't know if they'd let it in.
>>
>> nancy
>
> I sincerely doubt it - health laws and all that...
>
> OMG, talking about sending/receiving food stuffs - biltong is one of the
> first things that the customs officers ask about when we cross our
> mutual borders. It's simply not allowed. Or stuff like buttah and
> margarine... I get a bit annoyed about the the buttah - but I
> understand about the margarine <g>

Cathy,
I had to look that one up. Sounds interesting.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Biltong

Jon

On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 16:08:01 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:


>Almost 430,000 in 2007, compared to just over a million in the US. That
>means that we are getting a much larger number of immigrants per capita
>than the US.

>> Alex, curious as to just *who* and *how many* emigrate
>> to Canada per year. Europeans? Africans? Asians?

>Europeans, eastern Europeans, Africans, Asians, Chinese, Korean, West
>Indians, South Americans. Google is your friend.

And what do you believe their reasons for emigration are? Carrot? or
Stick? I'd imagine the reasons would vary with the nationality....

Alex

Dave Smith wrote:

>> I'm not disputing that the 9/11 terrorists entered the US from points
>> other than Canada. I'm disputing iffu's troll that the Department of
>> Homeland Security was incompetent in allowing 9/11 to happen.
>
> Then you will at least admit that it was something that had been missed or
> neglected by the various security agencies of the time, and Homeland
> Security is basically an organization to facillitate the sharing and
> analysis of information

Yes, I'll admit that the extant agencies didn't pool their knowledge, and if
they had pooled it, maybe 9/11 would have turned out differently. But that
doesn't change the fact that iffu lied about the "incompetence" of Homeland
Security. It's like taking Canada to task for the Ice Age.

However, the Department of Homeland Security is *much* more than an
organization to facilitate information sharing and analysis. It contains the
people responsible for manning and watching our borders, for one thing. It
contains our Coast Guard. It contains our Secret Service. It contains our
Transportation Security Administration (the cretins at the airports). It
contains our Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. And so forth and so
on; an exhaustive list of the agencies included under the "Homeland
Security" department can be seen at the Wikipedia article on DHS.


>> As for Janet Napolitano (NOT formerly of Concrete Blonde, but it's how I
>> remember her name), she did retract her error:
>> http://www.bizjournals.com/phoenix/s...5/daily32.html
>
> Sure, she retracted the statement.... after the Canadian government
> objected strongly. She also said that she regrets that Canada can't seem
> to get past her "one misstatement" . She is the Secretary of Homeland
> Security for crying out loud. She should have known better than to think
> that those guys had snuck in from Canada But, no.... she repeated that
> same lie, misinformation, misstatement that has been floating around and
> repeated by high ranking officials and politicians including presidential
> candidates and wannabe candidates.
>
> Napolitano also said that Canada "lets people into its country that we
> don't allow into ours." That is a preposterous statement. It is
> especially preposterous in the context of an attempt to clarify her
> "misstatement" (read "lie") about the terrorists sneaking into the US from
> Canada. We didn't let those hijackers into Canada, but American
> authorities allowed them into the US, and did so despite several of them
> being flagged.
>
> The really sad thing isn't just that they think that they can get away
> lies like that, but that they sometimes do. Then there is the attitude
> that, after a person in a position to know better gets caught repeating
> that same old misstatement/misinformation lie, she gets all indignant and
> says that we just get past it. Sure, we live next to a belligerent
> superpower that wants to extend its jurisdiction internationally and, when
> caught lies used to justify their agenda, think we should just get over
> it.

I think when she said that the perpetrators of 9/11 came to the USA from
Canada, she believed that to be the case. She learned otherwise, and
apologized, then tried to save face by coming up with the asinine shit you
mentioned above. How long do you think she should dwell on it, how many
times do you think she should keep hearing about it, and how many times do
you think she should apologize? Yes, she SHOULD have known the truth of the
matter, but I don't believe she did.

Fact is, if she did believe that the 9/11 terrorists entered via Canada,
then she's probably not the best person for the job -- but what mid-level
politician is? If the top job at Homeland Security were given to a top-level
cop or intelligence analyst, things would probably be very different, but
since it's a political appointment, you're ALWAYS going to have a politician
there. Sometimes politicians say really ignorant things, and many have the
habit of compounding ignorance with bullshit, but of course *that*
phenomenon is not limited to any one country.

Bob

On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 12:46:28 -0600, "graham" > wrote:

>
>"Steve Pope" > wrote in message
...
>> Dave Smith > wrote:
>>
>>>The whole thing IMO is a crock in this day high tech age. When the news
>>>first came out about the impending requirement for passports to enter
>>>the US it was frustrating that Canadian passports (at $85 plus cost of
>>>photo) are valid for only 5 years and were not renewable. You had to go
>>>through the whole process allover again. Meanwhile, US passports are
>>>valid for 10 years and were renewable. We were told that they could not
>>>extend the period of validity because of technological changes.... but
>>>the US seemed to manage ok with that. And that is our fault not yours.
>>
>> Obviously the terrorist types will just get a US passport because
>> it has fewer chips, less RFID and only requires renewal every
>> 10 years instead of 5.
>>
>> You can therefore be assured no terrorist will ever bother getting
>> a Canadian passport. You're in the clear.
>>
>No, but they are the most popular to steal!
>

Big cash for a stolen Canadian passport.

Mr. Bill > wrote in
:

> On Tue, 02 Jun 2009 21:36:51 +0800, Phil--c <invaild@invalid> wrote:
>
>>Perhaps reading this may help you and or your prejudices
>
> another non food related hissy fit spat...... KILLFILE!

Are you saying the US is free of prejudice and that you don`t need to be
reminded every now and then that that is pure fantasy?

And the article was written by a USAian on the number of USAians who own
passport, which we know is a source of hissy fits among Canadians...NOT!

--

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest
of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest
good of everyone. - John Maynard Keynes

On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:35:18 -0700, "Dave Bugg" >
wrote:

> Bob Terwilliger wrote:
> > Sheldon wrote:
> >
> >> Canada is much less stringent about who enters its borders.
> >
> > I hear you can even buy Cuban cigars there.
> >
> > Hey Canada, in New York we've got a great big statue which bears this
> > inscription:
> >
> > The New Colossus
> > Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
> > With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
> > Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
> > A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
> > Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
> > Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
> > Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
> > The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
> > "Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
> > With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
> > Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
> > The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
> > Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
> > I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
> >
> >
> > We don't seem to be using the poem; would you like to have it?
>
> That poem is oft-times used, by those who have agendas, as a reason to
> ignore laws of the land. I would pay Canada to take it off our hands. I find
> it interesting that the statue's country-of-origin now struggles with ways
> to reverse the effects of what its "gift" symbolizes.

Such a shame that some of those who are Americans because their
ancestors benefited from the aspirations that poem articulates would
now repudiate it and them.

Matthew

--
Mail to this account goes to the bit bucket.
In the unlikely event you want to mail me replace usenet with my name

Andy > wrote in :

> I think that stems from past intelligence that terrorists were entering
> Canada and then entering the USA.

Which has been refuted. We suspect our terrorists (the current
conservative gummint) imported their ideas from the US. We are not closing
the border because of that.

--

Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest
of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greatest
good of everyone. - John Maynard Keynes

Matthew Malthouse wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 10:35:18 -0700, "Dave Bugg" >
> wrote:
>
>> Bob Terwilliger wrote:
>>> Sheldon wrote:
>>>
>>>> Canada is much less stringent about who enters its borders.
>>>
>>> I hear you can even buy Cuban cigars there.
>>>
>>> Hey Canada, in New York we've got a great big statue which bears
>>> this inscription:
>>>
>>> The New Colossus
>>> Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
>>> With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
>>> Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
>>> A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
>>> Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
>>> Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
>>> Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
>>> The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
>>> "Keep ancient lands, your storied pomp!" cries she
>>> With silent lips. "Give me your tired, your poor,
>>> Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
>>> The wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
>>> Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me,
>>> I lift my lamp beside the golden door!"
>>>
>>>
>>> We don't seem to be using the poem; would you like to have it?
>>
>> That poem is oft-times used, by those who have agendas, as a reason
>> to ignore laws of the land. I would pay Canada to take it off our
>> hands. I find it interesting that the statue's country-of-origin now
>> struggles with ways to reverse the effects of what its "gift"
>> symbolizes.
>
> Such a shame that some of those who are Americans because their
> ancestors benefited from the aspirations that poem articulates would
> now repudiate it and them.

What I repudiate are the activists who would overturn the law pretending the
words of a poem constrain us from making rational policy. Your post is a
perfect example of how some attempt to use those words as a club when facing
opposing viewpoints. Since the aspirations that the poem embodies are, and
have always been, embraced by America and its Constitution, the statue is
meaningless. FYI, my parents are of aboriginal origin; they didn't immigrate

--
Dave
What is best in life? "To crush your enemies, see them driven before
you, and to hear the lamentation of the women." -- Conan

Mr. Bill wrote:
> On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 08:29:55 -0500, jay >
> wrote:
>
>> OBFOOD: Are Canadians famous for any foods at all? NO!
>
> Wrong!! Canadian bacon...................(ducking and running)

This may sound a dumb question but what about their Atlantic salmon
Cod and Crab industries ?

Also they really do produce a heck of a lot of wheat
Especially in Alberta region

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Mr. Bill wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 2 Jun 2009 08:29:55 -0500, jay >
>> wrote:
>>
>>> OBFOOD: Are Canadians famous for any foods at all? NO!
>> Wrong!! Canadian bacon...................(ducking and running)
>
> *Real* Maple syrup............
>
> (imagining pouring some and enjoying)
Heck I forgot about that and its so Obvious
Although I hate the stuff

ChattyCathy wrote:
> Bobo Bonobo® wrote:
>
>> On Jun 2, 12:40 pm, ChattyCathy > wrote:
>>> Nancy Young wrote:
>>>> ChattyCathy wrote:
>>>>> *Real* Maple syrup............
>>>>> (imagining pouring some and enjoying)
>>>> We have that in the US, too. Several northern states are known
>>>> for their maple syrup, especially Vermont.
>>>> nancy
>>> The closest we get to Maple Syrup (from Canada or Vermont) is the
>>> 'fake' stuff they sell here i.e. some syrup made from cane sugar (OK,
>>> at least it's *real* cane sugar) that has 'Maple Syrup flavoring'...
>> You really can't get it there? I bet you can get it somewhere.
>
> I probably could (at some fancy supermarket/store that imports such food
> stuffs - or on-line). But I'm not that much of a 'food snob' to pay the
> prices they want for it...
>
Cath
Do you get Golden syrup over there in SA ?
I can not recall ever seeing it in the USA
we call it Cockies Joy here (no Idea why )
But use it to make up bird feeder cakes made out of seeds and grains
and hang in the trees perhaps that is where the nick name came from .


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_syrup
I also hate that stuff - Old Boarding school left over
dislike (the food was lousy )