Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
Home
Discussion Groups
General
ModelsRailroadsRockets
Radio Controlled
Air ModelsHelicoptersLand ModelsWater Models
ModelGeeks.com
Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map

Model Forum / Radio Controlled / Air Models / July 2004



Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

What a shame

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Shin Gou - 04 Jul 2004 19:00 GMT
For those of you who are interested in the 2004 FAI World Control Line
Aeromodelling Championships, the Chinese team couldn't make it this
time because they couldn't get the US visa.

The Chinese team has been the world champions in F2B consecutively
since 1994. Their winning history in this class can be traced back to
1984 except '86 by USSR and '92 by the US. check the link:
http://www.control-line.org/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=59

But their consecutive championships will STOP in this session.

Is there any control line fan at State Department or the US embassy in
Beijing? Anyway, good trick, well done. Congradulations to you, the
F2B champion this year.

Shin Gou
Robert A. Booey - 04 Jul 2004 19:13 GMT
> For those of you who are interested in the 2004 FAI World Control Line
> Aeromodelling Championships, the Chinese team couldn't make it this
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Shin Gou

Huh-Huh, you said "goo".

Oh wait, I guess you said "gou". Never mind.
Frank Costa - 04 Jul 2004 21:06 GMT
> > Is there any control line fan at State Department or the US embassy in
> > Beijing? Anyway, good trick, well done. Congradulations to you, the
> > F2B champion this year.
> >
> > Shin Gou

You must be kidding. You think strings were pulled for something as
unimportant to world affairs or politics as... a control line chanpionship?
I just love conspiracy theorists.
Paul McIntosh - 04 Jul 2004 22:24 GMT
Thi isn't the only instance of visas being denied to foreign sportsmen.
Anthony Gobert (Australian) was also denied a timely visa to race in the
Daytona (?) motorcycle race.
--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com

> > > Is there any control line fan at State Department or the US embassy in
> > > Beijing? Anyway, good trick, well done. Congradulations to you, the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> unimportant to world affairs or politics as... a control line chanpionship?
> I just love conspiracy theorists.
Frank Costa - 04 Jul 2004 23:53 GMT
And there must legions of non-sportsmen who had them denied as well. You're
talking about a huge faceless beurocracy that cares little for such things.
C'mon, a conspiracy to deny a country a championship in control line?

> Thi isn't the only instance of visas being denied to foreign sportsmen.
> Anthony Gobert (Australian) was also denied a timely visa to race in the
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
> chanpionship?
> > I just love conspiracy theorists.
The Natural Philosopher - 05 Jul 2004 00:17 GMT
> Thi isn't the only instance of visas being denied to foreign sportsmen.
> Anthony Gobert (Australian) was also denied a timely visa to race in the
> Daytona (?) motorcycle race.

You will see more and more of it.

Followed probably by the nationalisation of US assets on foreign soil..

America chooses to isolate itself. *shrug*. Fine. Let's get on with it then.

Better start working out which country you want to be in Paul.
Paul McIntosh - 05 Jul 2004 14:29 GMT
Even with all its faults, I will STILL take the USA over any other.  Too bad
that some of the far right view wanting to make it better as being
unpatriotic.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com

> > Thi isn't the only instance of visas being denied to foreign sportsmen.
> > Anthony Gobert (Australian) was also denied a timely visa to race in the
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Better start working out which country you want to be in Paul.
Roger - 05 Jul 2004 15:47 GMT
Lessee, now:
The US is attacked by Radical Islam terrorists. Aided and abetted by
Governments of various "Friendly" and unfriendly countries.
The rest of the world says "So What" and ignores the situation. The US
confronts it head-on.
Who is isolating whom?
Next time the European appeasement policies get them in deep do-do,
we'll just let you guys handle it yourselves. It's your problem, not ours.
or are you Europeans still so p!$$ed that we took so long to join WW-II
that you are repeating our mistake?

Roger--US American and Proud of it!

>> Thi isn't the only instance of visas being denied to foreign sportsmen.
>> Anthony Gobert (Australian) was also denied a timely visa to race in the
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
> Better start working out which country you want to be in Paul.
Paul McIntosh - 05 Jul 2004 16:18 GMT
Well, Roger, where was the US when these radical islamists were attacking
OTHER countries?  This is not a new thing and has been going on for decades
(well, centuries, actually).  It is only after the US is attacked that these
radicals are suddenly so dangerous as to merit extermination.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> Lessee, now:
> The US is attacked by Radical Islam terrorists. Aided and abetted by
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
> >
> > Better start working out which country you want to be in Paul.
The Natural Philosopher - 05 Jul 2004 20:17 GMT
> Well, Roger, where was the US when these radical islamists were attacking
> OTHER countries?

Funding them actually. As long as they kept the russians busy, Uncle sam
was happy to set up training camps and give them money.

 This is not a new thing and has been going on for decades
> (well, centuries, actually).  It is only after the US is attacked that these
> radicals are suddenly so dangerous as to merit extermination.

Indeed. And they are rather good. The CIA saw to that.
Ken Maltby - 06 Jul 2004 10:18 GMT
> > Well, Roger, where was the US when these radical islamists were attacking
> > OTHER countries?
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
> Indeed. And they are rather good. The CIA saw to that.

 Was it the CIA that got them to buy all their equipment from
France, Russia, and Germany?

And where were France, Russia, and Germany when OTHERS
were attacked?  Negotiating better kickbacks?

LOL;
   Ken
The Natural Philosopher - 06 Jul 2004 11:22 GMT
>>>Well, Roger, where was the US when these radical islamists were
>
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> And where were France, Russia, and Germany when OTHERS
> were attacked?  Negotiating better kickbacks?

Quite possibly. After all, we at least knew what we had sold them. and
it wasn't chemical weaponry...oh. Maybe that WAS what the US sold them,
and maybe it was necessary to invade to destroy the paperwork?

Theres a nice new theory for you :-)

> LOL;
>     Ken
Todd Klondike - 06 Jul 2004 14:18 GMT
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> posted message
ID<ccduki$nsn$4$830fa79d@news.demon.co.uk>on Tue, 06 Jul 2004 11:22:32
+0100

>>>>Well, Roger, where was the US when these radical islamists were
>>
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
>Theres a nice new theory for you :-)

Another fact-free accusation from Neville.  
C.O.Jones - 06 Jul 2004 16:21 GMT
> Quite possibly. After all, we at least knew what we had sold them. and
> it wasn't chemical weaponry...oh. Maybe that WAS what the US sold them,
> and maybe it was necessary to invade to destroy the paperwork?
>
> Theres a nice new theory for you :-)

You mean as opposed to what France and Germany sold them?  Gee!  Just how
many "Components" were supplied by those two so called "allies"?  And how
much might UK industry have been involved?
Frank Costa - 05 Jul 2004 21:18 GMT
 It is only after the US is attacked that these
> radicals are suddenly so dangerous as to merit extermination.

Your damn skippy. We are filling up paradise with thousands of cowardly
murderers. Praise Allah.
Dennis Leonhardi - 05 Jul 2004 22:31 GMT
The Stunt flyers (PAMPA) I've heard from think it's a damn shame, they
wanted us to see how really bad the Chinese are!

:)
Dennis

>   It is only after the US is attacked that these
> > radicals are suddenly so dangerous as to merit extermination.
>
> Your damn skippy. We are filling up paradise with thousands of cowardly
> murderers. Praise Allah.
Lyman Slack - 06 Jul 2004 15:03 GMT
The ONLY land the US asks for overseas has been and continues to be is the
sacred land where our heroic dead are buried.

Cheers --  \__________Lyman Slack_________/
                 \______AMA6430 IMAA1564___/
                   \____Flying Gators R/C______/
                     \__Gainesville FL _________/
  Visit my Web Site at: http://www.LymanSlack.com

"The Natural Philosopher"
> Followed probably by the nationalisation of US assets on foreign soil..
C.O.Jones - 06 Jul 2004 16:23 GMT
> The ONLY land the US asks for overseas has been and continues to be is the
> sacred land where our heroic dead are buried.

Maybe it's time to bring them home too!  Along with out dollar, wheat, corn,
industry, defense and friendship!
Paul McIntosh - 06 Jul 2004 19:43 GMT
Such a narrow-minded view that shows total ignorance regarding our economy.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com

> > The ONLY land the US asks for overseas has been and continues to be is the
> > sacred land where our heroic dead are buried.
>
> Maybe it's time to bring them home too!  Along with out dollar, wheat, corn,
> industry, defense and friendship!
Six_O'Clock_High - 06 Jul 2004 20:14 GMT
Nah, not narrow minded but correct.  If other countries really do feel we
are being the isolationists the political jerks who wish to control us
claim, the only way to change that is to give them a few months of actually
acting like that.  Then ask what 'we' are.  Nobody said it would be easy or
not hurtful to all, but I predict that the U.S. would get along better than
some of the manure throwers claim and recover better that ever before.
Think about it for a day or so.

> Such a narrow-minded view that shows total ignorance regarding our economy.
>
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> corn,
> > industry, defense and friendship!
C.O.Jones - 06 Jul 2004 23:42 GMT
> Such a narrow-minded view that shows total ignorance regarding our economy.

Yep!  Total ignorance!  That's me!

Did I mention I hold an MBA?  And did I mention that is the general field
form which I retired early?

Not ignorance of our economy Paul.  But rather a very good understanding of
what such a move on our part would do to the rest of the world!
James Calivar - 07 Jul 2004 05:00 GMT
> > Such a narrow-minded view that shows total ignorance regarding our
> economy.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Did I mention I hold an MBA?  And did I mention that is the general field
> form which I retired early?

Oooh an MBA!!  Wow!

Lemme guess - University of Phoenix Online, where you basically write a check
for your supposed degree?

Sheesh.  Even Shrub can get an MBA.
The Natural Philosopher - 07 Jul 2004 13:39 GMT
>>>Such a narrow-minded view that shows total ignorance regarding our
>>
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>
> Sheesh.  Even Shrub can get an MBA.

Mostly Bloody Awful.

You can by used ones on Ebay I seem to recall. Going cheap, Like C O
Jones brain. Never been used.
Paul McIntosh - 07 Jul 2004 07:15 GMT
OOOOOHHHH, an MBA!
--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com

> > Such a narrow-minded view that shows total ignorance regarding our
> economy.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> Not ignorance of our economy Paul.  But rather a very good understanding of
> what such a move on our part would do to the rest of the world!
The Natural Philosopher - 07 Jul 2004 13:37 GMT
>>The ONLY land the US asks for overseas has been and continues to be is the
>>sacred land where our heroic dead are buried.
>
> Maybe it's time to bring them home too!  Along with out dollar, wheat, corn,
> industry, defense and friendship!

Yes, why not? Close the door when you leave.
The Natural Philosopher - 07 Jul 2004 13:36 GMT
> The ONLY land the US asks for overseas has been and continues to be is the
> sacred land where our heroic dead are buried.

Ah Guantanamo Bay.

> Cheers --  \__________Lyman Slack_________/
>                   \______AMA6430 IMAA1564___/
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
>>Followed probably by the nationalisation of US assets on foreign soil..

But I fail to see the relevance to what I said.

I can only assume you don't understand English. Never mind. Nor does
Dubya, so you can get to be top a.shole as well, if your daddy is rich
enough.

Hint: 'On foreign soil' is not the same as 'consisting of foreign soil'
WTH - 07 Jul 2004 14:56 GMT
> Ah Guantanamo Bay.

Just out of curiousity, do you understand how Guantanamo Bay is leased?
Apparently not.

   WTH
The Natural Philosopher - 07 Jul 2004 15:52 GMT
>>Ah Guantanamo Bay.
>
> Just out of curiousity, do you understand how Guantanamo Bay is leased?
> Apparently not.

Farlyt similarly to Hong Kong was I imagine.

>     WTH
WTH - 07 Jul 2004 16:29 GMT
The Natural Philosopher <a@b.c> bored us with:

>>> Ah Guantanamo Bay.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>
>>     WTH

Somewhat.  So how does Guantanamo make any point for you?

   WTH
Paul McIntosh - 07 Jul 2004 20:17 GMT
Panama Canal Zone

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com

> > The ONLY land the US asks for overseas has been and continues to be is the
> > sacred land where our heroic dead are buried.
[quoted text clipped - 18 lines]
>
> Hint: 'On foreign soil' is not the same as 'consisting of foreign soil'
Paul McIntosh - 04 Jul 2004 22:25 GMT
WHY couldn't they get a visa?  Did their team manager not apply in time?

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> For those of you who are interested in the 2004 FAI World Control Line
> Aeromodelling Championships, the Chinese team couldn't make it this
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Shin Gou
The Natural Philosopher - 05 Jul 2004 00:18 GMT
> WHY couldn't they get a visa?  Did their team manager not apply in time?

Alasmost certainly because national paranoia and 'security concerns'
means there is a six month backlog.

> --
> Paul McIntosh
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
>>
>>Shin Gou
MK - 04 Jul 2004 23:18 GMT
Whoever wins will know shallow victory because they didn't compete with all
contenders.
A shame is correct.
mk
> For those of you who are interested in the 2004 FAI World Control Line
> Aeromodelling Championships, the Chinese team couldn't make it this
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Shin Gou
Frank Costa - 04 Jul 2004 23:54 GMT
Whoever wins should not be faced with dirision just because China didn't
have it's act in order. Please.

> Whoever wins will know shallow victory because they didn't compete with all
> contenders.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> >
> > Shin Gou
notonyour@life.com - 05 Jul 2004 01:06 GMT
The only way the US ever wins, by CHEATING
Happy 4th July, land of satan.

> Whoever wins should not be faced with dirision just because China didn't
> have it's act in order. Please.
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> > >
> > > Shin Gou
GuW - 05 Jul 2004 00:15 GMT
As little as I belive there is any conspiracy in either case, it's still a
shame.

But why do the US still use the system with visa?
It wont stop any terrorists from getting to USA, it will only upset decent
people.

It's like the form I had to fill out before I could get of the plane in the
USA, they asked if I was a terrorist, comunist or other enemy of the USA, do
they belive that someone ever is going to check the "Yes" box on that?
C G - 05 Jul 2004 23:48 GMT
> As little as I belive there is any conspiracy in either case, it's still a
> shame.
>
> But why do the US still use the system with visa?

Most countries use a visa for visitors.  It's just that some countries
have reciprical agreements which allow granting the visa on entry.

> It wont stop any terrorists from getting to USA, it will only upset decent
> people.
Every time I have gone to China I needed a visa.  I needed a visa when I
went to Brazi.  In fact, I am probably going to Australia soon, and I
need to get a visa before I travel there too.  When my wife and I went
to Korea she needed a visa.  Note, I did not because I am American.
When my wife went to the UK, she needed a visa.  So, get off your high
horse about the USA, visas are needed for many countries.
Paul McIntosh - 06 Jul 2004 06:52 GMT
A minor correction.  Most countries only require a visa for citizens of
certain other countries.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com

> > As little as I belive there is any conspiracy in either case, it's still a
> > shame.
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
> When my wife went to the UK, she needed a visa.  So, get off your high
> horse about the USA, visas are needed for many countries.
C G - 06 Jul 2004 11:30 GMT
If you said that most countries require obtaining a visa before arrival
for citizens of certain other countries, I would agree.  Technically, a
visa is almost always required, but they are frequently granted at the
border.

> A minor correction.  Most countries only require a visa for citizens of
> certain other countries.
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>>When my wife went to the UK, she needed a visa.  So, get off your high
>>horse about the USA, visas are needed for many countries.
WTH - 05 Jul 2004 03:12 GMT
notonyour@life.com <notonyour@life.com> bored us with:

> The only way the US ever wins, by CHEATING
> Happy 4th July, land of satan.

Yeah, that's why we have a huge backlog just of visas, because this is a
horrible place that nobody wants to visit or live in.

   WTH
Shin Gou - 05 Jul 2004 04:35 GMT
Whoever wins Olympic basketball game should not be faced dirision just
because the US didn't have it's act in order. Please.

> Whoever wins should not be faced with dirision just because China didn't
> have it's act in order. Please.
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> > >
> > > Shin Gou
Frank - 05 Jul 2004 07:18 GMT
See, now you get it!

> Whoever wins Olympic basketball game should not be faced dirision just
> because the US didn't have it's act in order. Please.
[quoted text clipped - 23 lines]
> > > >
> > > > Shin Gou
Paul McIntosh - 05 Jul 2004 14:26 GMT
Do you have other information that shows China being at fault?  This whole
Homeland Security thing has gone WAY out of proportion.  There seems to be
very little intelligent thought used in many aspects of what is happening.
Mostly window dressing.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> Whoever wins should not be faced with dirision just because China didn't
> have it's act in order. Please.
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
> > >
> > > Shin Gou
Fubar of The HillPeople - 05 Jul 2004 01:10 GMT
Wonder how many times US (insert sport here) teams were denied Visas to
China...
Signature

Dan
AMA605992
KE6ERB
http://www.fubar1.net
"I've heard the screams of the vegetables..."
Take out the "trash" to reply

> Whoever wins will know shallow victory because they didn't compete with all
> contenders.
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> >
> > Shin Gou
Paul McIntosh - 05 Jul 2004 14:30 GMT
How many world class events have been held in China?  How many times did US
participants get denied?  YOU brought it up, YOU answer it.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> Wonder how many times US (insert sport here) teams were denied Visas to
> China...
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
> > >
> > > Shin Gou
The Natural Philosopher - 05 Jul 2004 00:15 GMT
> For those of you who are interested in the 2004 FAI World Control Line
> Aeromodelling Championships, the Chinese team couldn't make it this
[quoted text clipped - 12 lines]
>
> Shin Gou

Oh. don't worry. The USA won't be attending the Olympic games this year
either. Too scared to leave the Fortress Amerika.
Frank - 05 Jul 2004 02:09 GMT
Been watching too many Michael Moore propaganda films, bonehead??

> > For those of you who are interested in the 2004 FAI World Control Line
> > Aeromodelling Championships, the Chinese team couldn't make it this
[quoted text clipped - 15 lines]
> Oh. don't worry. The USA won't be attending the Olympic games this year
> either. Too scared to leave the Fortress Amerika.
The Natural Philosopher - 05 Jul 2004 09:27 GMT
> Been watching too many Michael Moore propaganda films, bonehead??

Not seen that one yet actually, no.

Just been listening to too many people like you, on here.
C.O.Jones - 05 Jul 2004 14:42 GMT
> > Been watching too many Michael Moore propaganda films, bonehead??
>
> Not seen that one yet actually, no.
>
> Just been listening to too many people like you, on here.

Then maybe you should LEAVE?
Six_O'Clock_High - 05 Jul 2004 15:45 GMT
> > > Been watching too many Michael Moore propaganda films, bonehead??
> >
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Then maybe you should LEAVE?

Jones,
By now you ought to know that D.H. won't leave untill well after his bottle
runs out.
The Natural Philosopher - 05 Jul 2004 20:15 GMT
>>>Been watching too many Michael Moore propaganda films, bonehead??
>>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Then maybe you should LEAVE?

That's my decision isn't it?

Or is it something you would rather force down my throat at gunpoint, in
the name of liberty and democracy?
C G - 05 Jul 2004 05:03 GMT
> Is there any control line fan at State Department or the US embassy in
> Beijing? Anyway, good trick, well done. Congradulations to you, the
> F2B champion this year.
>
> Shin Gou
Tell the whole story.  Why were they denied a visa?  Did they apply too
late?  Did they not submit the correct papers?  Did some of the people
applying overstay their visa on another trip to the US?  I'm sure there
is another side of this story that you are choosing to not tell.
Shin Gou - 05 Jul 2004 16:29 GMT
Is there any Chinese applicant who dares to play fool with the US visa
officers? They do whatever the visa officers want them to do--only
faster and better.

I guess none of you here have ever applied a visa, so let me tell you
what's going on in the barbarian world outside the fortress of the
secure homeland.

I talked to the Chinese team leader and he told me they made the visa
interview appointment one month ahead and was schdeuled to July 2, one
day before the game (the embassy makes the call on the interview date,
Chinese applicants--you get a pencil and write it down and listen
carefully because I won't repeat, and yes, the embassy knew the
Chinese team's itinerary.) Still the team bought the tickets for July
3, only wishing they wouldn't miss too much in the competition and
would do well in jet lag.  The team leader told me in the interview
the visa officer asked him what the group would be doing in the US,
how many people in the group and then denied him. If a naive applicant
wants to ask the deny reason, he will be given a uniform paper saying
"this applicant shows an immigration tendency" (I don't have this
piece of paper in hand, but it's the exact meaning.) If the applicant
is even more naive to try to argue, the visa officer will immediately
call security guard. The team's paperworks and documents and whatever
on the requiremet list were all well prepared, but the team leader
said the visa officer didn't take a look at any of them.

I know many people here would say that is just the story from the
team's side, but I will say, THAT IS the story because I've heard many
many (too many) such stories from people I don't know and from my
closest friend, and this story isn't the worst one.

Maybe next time you travel to the exotic far east, after the great
wall and forbidden city you can go to the US embassy and look at
people's faces there, and maybe you will ask, which naive stupid said
all human are born equal?

Sorry if my post goes too far away from the aeromodelling.

> > Is there any control line fan at State Department or the US embassy in
> > Beijing? Anyway, good trick, well done. Congradulations to you, the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
> applying overstay their visa on another trip to the US?  I'm sure there
> is another side of this story that you are choosing to not tell.
C G - 05 Jul 2004 17:26 GMT
> Is there any Chinese applicant who dares to play fool with the US visa
> officers? They do whatever the visa officers want them to do--only
> faster and better.

Many try to.  They apply for a tourist visa even though they know they
plan to stay in the US.

> I guess none of you here have ever applied a visa, so let me tell you
> what's going on in the barbarian world outside the fortress of the
> secure homeland.

Maybe some don't.  I know a whole lot more about the US Visa process for
Chinese people than you might think.  I'm also very familiar with the
process for applying for a Chinese visa.

> I talked to the Chinese team leader and he told me they made the visa
> interview appointment one month ahead

Isn't the current recommendation to apply 3 months ahead?

> and was schdeuled to July 2, one
> day before the game (the embassy makes the call on the interview date,
> Chinese applicants--you get a pencil and write it down and listen
> carefully because I won't repeat, and yes, the embassy knew the
> Chinese team's itinerary.)

Yes, the embassy knew that the team had planned poorly instead of
following the recommendation on how far in advance to apply.  The
embassy is busy.  They recommend applying 3 months in advance so there
is enough time to get the interview before the travel.

> Still the team bought the tickets for July
> 3, only wishing they wouldn't miss too much in the competition and
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> on the requiremet list were all well prepared, but the team leader
> said the visa officer didn't take a look at any of them.

For this you can blame all the Fujian people who are in the US long past
their visas expired.  The fact is MANY people from China have come to
the US on tourist visa and then stayed.  This is fact.  I meet such
people in almost every Chinese restaurant I go to.

> I know many people here would say that is just the story from the
> team's side, but I will say, THAT IS the story because I've heard many
> many (too many) such stories from people I don't know and from my
> closest friend, and this story isn't the worst one.

Yes, and I know MANY Chines people who have no trouble getting visas.

> Maybe next time you travel to the exotic far east, after the great
> wall and forbidden city you can go to the US embassy and look at
> people's faces there, and maybe you will ask, which naive stupid said
> all human are born equal?

I've been to the Beijing embassy, and the consulates in Shanghai and
Guangzhou.  I know what happens there.  By looking at the papers and
talking to the person, the consulate officer has to decide whether the
person applying for a visa is going to return to China or stay in the US
like so many have.  If there were not so many staying in the US after
their visas expired, it would be much easier for people from China to
get a visa.

> Sorry if my post goes too far away from the aeromodelling.

No problem, I consider it useful to have open discussions, it's the way
people learn what happens in the rest of the world.

Chuck

PS. Wode laopo shi Shanghai ren.
Shin Gou - 06 Jul 2004 01:25 GMT
Nice comment Chuck. I totally understand the simple reason why it's so
hard for Chinese people to get US visa. No blame for Fujian people
though who are just doing what people on "May Flower" were doing back
then. Exactly the same thing except there's no visa back then.

Congraduations on accomplishing the odyssey of bringing your wife to
the US. I know it's not easy.

Shin

> > Is there any Chinese applicant who dares to play fool with the US visa
> > officers? They do whatever the visa officers want them to do--only
[quoted text clipped - 73 lines]
>
> PS. Wode laopo shi Shanghai ren.
C G - 06 Jul 2004 03:30 GMT
> Nice comment Chuck. I totally understand the simple reason why it's so
> hard for Chinese people to get US visa. No blame for Fujian people
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Congraduations on accomplishing the odyssey of bringing your wife to
> the US. I know it's not easy.

Thanks.  It was not easy, and there is still more paperwork to do.
C G - 06 Jul 2004 03:33 GMT
>> Nice comment Chuck. I totally understand the simple reason why it's so
>> hard for Chinese people to get US visa. No blame for Fujian people
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>
> Thanks.  It was not easy, and there is still more paperwork to do.

Follow up question.  I'm curious if there are any places in China to buy
R/C kits or ARFs at really good prices?  It seems that since so many are
made in China that there must be a place to buy some.  My wife is
probably going to be  visiting Shanghai in August.  I was hoping I would
be able to have her buy a few planes for me while she is there.
Dennis Leonhardi - 06 Jul 2004 05:19 GMT
This from Muncie:

"The Chinese team has been delayed because of visa problems
with the good old US of A Goverment. They are in transit
from Beijing to Chicago at this moment, landing on Tue
morning. Will fly in the comp tomorrow if they can get here
in time and get processed before their flight slot comes up."

Comment: Entrants were advised that visas could be a lengthy process - if
the Chinese waited until a month before the competition, who do you think
should take responsibility?

Dennis
Dennis Leonhardi - 06 Jul 2004 05:32 GMT
If you wanna talk about the "politics" involved here, I would pose this
question: Would criticism of China ever be seen here as an email originating
in that country?

Golly gee whiz, I know a young American woman who went to work in China
right after graduation from college, hoping to put together an impressive
resume for a career in international marketing.  Her mail was opened, both
incoming and outgoing.  Her phone conversations were monitored.  Her emails
were reviewed.  She had absolutely no expectation of privacy whatever.  This
wasn't a century ago, more like 5 years.

You gotta admit - one thing that makes "America bashing" easy is that we
allow it.

:)
Dennis,
who thinks that anyone who takes competition seriously gets their act
together and leaves the bitching for losers...
Paul McIntosh - 06 Jul 2004 06:55 GMT
Gee, try working for many major corporations in the US.  CCTV, email
monitoring software, etc.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> If you wanna talk about the "politics" involved here, I would pose this
> question: Would criticism of China ever be seen here as an email originating
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> who thinks that anyone who takes competition seriously gets their act
> together and leaves the bitching for losers...
Dennis Leonhardi - 06 Jul 2004 07:25 GMT
I have.  When I'm employed by a [fill in the blank], I believe they have
every right to monitor my correspondence.  What I do in my personal life, at
my expense, ought to be my business.  At least in terms of writing/voicing
my opinions or observations.  Try that in China.  Or don't you get the
point?

Dennis

> Gee, try working for many major corporations in the US.  CCTV, email
> monitoring software, etc.
>
> --
> Paul McIntosh
Todd Klondike - 06 Jul 2004 14:16 GMT
"Dennis Leonhardi" <dleonhardi@nc.rr.com> posted message
ID<3BrGc.101493$wH4.5550024@twister.southeast.rr.com>on Tue, 06 Jul
2004 06:25:03 GMT
>I have.  When I'm employed by a [fill in the blank], I believe they have
>every right to monitor my correspondence.  What I do in my personal life, at
>my expense, ought to be my business.  At least in terms of writing/voicing
>my opinions or observations.  Try that in China.  Or don't you get the
>point?

The only point Paul ever 'gets' is the one on top of his head.  When
he makes an absurd claim, ask him for facts or evidence supporting his
position.  He will then run away, with both arms over his head,
screaming like a girl at a boy-band concert, and wetting himself down
both legs.  I suspect he may be french.
C.O.Jones - 06 Jul 2004 16:24 GMT
> The only point Paul ever 'gets' is the one on top of his head.  When
> he makes an absurd claim, ask him for facts or evidence supporting his
> position.  He will then run away, with both arms over his head,
> screaming like a girl at a boy-band concert, and wetting himself down
> both legs.  I suspect he may be french.

Scary thought!  Would explain much!  But a scary thought just the same! :)
Paul McIntosh - 06 Jul 2004 19:33 GMT
You are the only one who changes the subject when confronted with your own
crap.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> "Dennis Leonhardi" <dleonhardi@nc.rr.com> posted message
> ID<3BrGc.101493$wH4.5550024@twister.southeast.rr.com>on Tue, 06 Jul
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> screaming like a girl at a boy-band concert, and wetting himself down
> both legs.  I suspect he may be french.
Todd Klondike - 06 Jul 2004 19:53 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<_eCGc.3649$Fc7.681476@stones.force9.net>on Tue, 6 Jul 2004 19:33:42
+0100
>You are the only one who changes the subject when confronted with your own
>crap.

Evidence, please?  
Todd Klondike - 07 Jul 2004 23:23 GMT
Todd Klondike <bacchus@delphifourmss.com> posted message
ID<40eaf518.105852343@news.bellatlantic.net>on Tue, 06 Jul 2004
18:53:40 GMT
>"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
>ID<_eCGc.3649$Fc7.681476@stones.force9.net>on Tue, 6 Jul 2004 19:33:42
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>Evidence, please?  

<crickets>

It appears that Paul is attempting to prove my point for me with his
silence.
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 00:56 GMT
OOOhh, prove your point!  How high school.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> Todd Klondike <bacchus@delphifourmss.com> posted message
> ID<40eaf518.105852343@news.bellatlantic.net>on Tue, 06 Jul 2004
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
> It appears that Paul is attempting to prove my point for me with his
> silence.
Todd Klondike - 08 Jul 2004 00:59 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<N30Hc.4258$Fc7.775624@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 00:56:04
+0100
>OOOhh, prove your point!

It was easy to predict.  It's not like you've ever supported one of
your statements before.

> How high school.

Sorry if you found that confusing.  I'll keep future posts at a
grade-school level to enhance your understanding.
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 06:46 GMT
Proof please?

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> "Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
> ID<N30Hc.4258$Fc7.775624@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 00:56:04
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Sorry if you found that confusing.  I'll keep future posts at a
> grade-school level to enhance your understanding.
C.O.Jones - 08 Jul 2004 10:25 GMT
> Proof please?

Grow up Paul!
Todd Klondike - 08 Jul 2004 13:04 GMT
"C.O.Jones" <ifyouneedit@yougotit.com> posted message
ID<7q8Hc.573$Qj.383@lakeread01>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 05:25:28 -0400

>> Proof please?
>
>Grow up Paul!

Careful.  You'll bruise the fish.
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 17:14 GMT
Don't have any, I see (sounds just like Klondyke!)

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com

> > Proof please?
>
> Grow up Paul!
Todd Klondike - 08 Jul 2004 13:04 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<uc5Hc.4273$Fc7.784695@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 06:46:43
+0100
>Proof please?

Too easy.

Message-ID: <eP0Cc.19178$NK4.3293047@stones.force9.net>
"Bush stood up in front of everyone and proclaimed that Iraq had tons
of unaccounted for WMDs" — Paul McIntosh

Message-ID: <KknCc.20367$NK4.3396445@stones.force9.net>
"All of the higher-ups in his administration had been saying it.
There are plenty of quotes available from Ari and the rest." — Paul
McIntosh

Message-ID: <_eCGc.3649$Fc7.681476@stones.force9.net>
"You are the only one who changes the subject when confronted with
your own crap." — Paul McIntosh

Feel free to substantiate any of your absurd claims.
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 17:16 GMT
I entered a 100+ lines of quotes that you conveniently ignored when it
showed you wrong.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> "Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
> ID<uc5Hc.4273$Fc7.784695@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 06:46:43
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Feel free to substantiate any of your absurd claims.
Todd Klondike - 08 Jul 2004 17:29 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<xqeHc.4409$Fc7.808058@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:16:04
+0100
>I entered a 100+ lines of quotes that you conveniently ignored when it
>showed you wrong.

Nonsense, cupcake.  I showed you where your 'proof' was anything but,
and you ran away screaming like a girl at a boy band concert, hands in
the air, and wetting yourself down both legs.

Message-ID: <40dd318e.63728531@news.bellatlantic.net>
>So, after I show that you are a LIEberal lieing to everyone around, you
>resort to deflection rather than taking it head on like I did.  You asked
>for quotes and I geve them.  Your response?  yawn. — Paul

Nonsense, of course.  After you claimed 'Bush stood up in front of
everyone and proclaimed that Iraq had tons of
unaccounted for WMDs', you switched to 'All of the higher-ups in his
administration had been saying it.  There are plenty of quotes
available from Ari and the rest'.  When challenged to provide proof,
you predictably produced one quote that mentions an estimated volume
of WMD, and then surrounded it with a bunch of quotes that do no such
thing in an effort to make 'ONE' look like 'PLENTY'.

I'm sure you spent a lot of time and effort to cut and paste those
quotes from some website or other, but 'ONE' does not equal 'PLENTY'.
Thus the 'yawn' followed by ample proof that the belief that Saddam
had WMD was not held by Republicans alone. — Me

Message-ID: <40dcaaa4.15782890@news.bellatlantic.net>
>No one here ever said the WMD debacle was purely a Republican affliction. — Paul, again

Which neatly dodges your claims that:

a) "Bush stood up in front of everyone and proclaimed that Iraq had
tons of unaccounted for WMDs"

b) "All of the higher-ups in his administration had been saying it.
There are plenty of quotes available from Ari and the rest"

You presented your made-up hysterical rants as though President Bush
personally attempted to mislead you, all the while ignoring what he
actually said, and what the democrats have been saying for years.  

And you still wonder why folks refer to your type as 'LIEberal'.— Me
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 17:54 GMT
Well, since you dozed off the first time...

For the dense among you (Klondyke and Jones) here is a great quote from
someone fairly high up in the Bush administration:

     5 Feb 2003 During his U.N. presentation, Secretary of State Colin
Powell declares: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a
stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is
enough agent to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets."

Well, where are they?

Here is a great Bush series:

     11 Oct 2000 During a debate at Wake Forest University in
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Presidential candidate George W Bush
declares: "We don't know whether he's developing weapons of mass
destruction.

     28 Oct 2002 During a speech at the Riner Steinhoff Soccer Complex in
Alamogordo, New Mexico, President George W Bush declares: "He's got weapons
of mass destruction. This is a man who has used weapons of mass
destruction."

And his buddy:

     24 Feb 2001 In Cairo, Secretary of State Colin Powell declares: "He
has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass
destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his
neighbors."

     5 Feb 2003 During his U.N. presentation, Secretary of State Colin
Powell declares: "Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a
stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is
enough agent to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets."

Then, the truth:

     30 May 2003 During a press conference, Lt. General James Conway, USMC
declares: "It was a surprise to me then, it remains a surprise to me now,
that we have not uncovered weapons... in some of the forward dispersal
sites. Again, believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to
virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and
Baghdad, but they're simply not there... We were simply wrong."

Then THIS great piece of BS:

     9 Jul 2003 White House spokesman Ari Fleischer somehow manages to say
with a straight face: "Saddam Hussein had biological and chemical weapons
that were unaccounted for that we're still confident we'll find. I think the
burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass
destruction to tell the world where they are... just because they haven't
yet been found doesn't mean they didn't exist. The burden is on the critics
to explain where the weapons of mass destruction are. If they think they
were destroyed, the burden is on them to explain when he destroyed them and
where he destroyed them."

Then, the final surrender:

     16 May 2004 Secretary of State Colin Powell tells Meet the Press:
"When I made that presentation in February 2003, it was based on the best
information that the Central Intelligence Agency made available to me. We
studied it carefully; we looked at the sourcing in the case of the mobile
trucks and trains. There was multiple sourcing for that. Unfortunately, that
multiple sourcing over time has turned out to be not accurate. And so I'm
deeply disappointed... it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and
wrong and in some cases, deliberately misleading. And for that, I am
disappointed and I regret it."

And, here is the whole chronology that shows what they said pre and post
911:

Before 9-11
     2 Dec 1999 During a debate in New Hampshire, Presidential candidate
George W Bush declares: "If I found in any way, shape or form that he was
developing weapons of mass destruction, I'd take 'em out. I'm surprised he's
still there." Asked if that meant he would overthrow Saddam, Bush said he
was only talking about "the weapons of mass destruction."
     11 Feb 2000 Stumping in South Carolina, Presidential candidate George
W Bush declares: "If we catch them developing weapons of mass destruction,
there won't be any weapons of mass destruction left in Iraq -- if I'm the
Commander-in-Chief."
     11 Oct 2000 During a debate at Wake Forest University in
Winston-Salem, North Carolina, Presidential candidate George W Bush
declares: "We don't know whether he's developing weapons of mass
destruction. He better not be, or there's going to be a consequence --
should I be the President."
     22 Feb 2001 President George W Bush declares: "The Secretary of State
is going to go listen to our allies as to how best to effect a policy, the
primary goal of which will be to say to Saddam Hussein: we won't tolerate
you developing weapons of mass destruction, and we expect you to leave your
neighbors alone."
     24 Feb 2001 In Cairo, Secretary of State Colin Powell declares: "He
has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass
destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his
neighbors."
     17 May 2001 State Department spokesman Richard Boucher declares:
"We're working toward what will be a significant change in our approach to
Iraq in the United Nations... The focus is on strengthening controls to
prevent Iraq from rebuilding military capability in weapons of mass
destruction, while facilitating a broader flow of goods to the civilian
population of Iraq."
     7 Aug 2001 President George W Bush declares: "He's been a menace
forever, and we will do -- he needs to open his country up for inspection,
so we can see whether or not he's developing weapons of mass destruction."

But shortly after September 11, 2001, the Bush administration (and Tony
Blair, and several members of Congress) suddenly began telling everybody
that Saddam Hussein definitely possessed weapons of mass destruction, and
that those things constituted a clear and present danger against the United
States:

After 9-11
     Nov 2001 Pentagon official Richard Perle: "He has weapons of mass
destruction. The lesser risk is in pre-emption. We've got to stop wishing
away the problem."
     11 Mar 2002 British Prime Minister Tony Blair declares: "The threat
that Saddam Hussein poses is an issue in its own right, because the reason
why the UN Security Council passed these resolutions was precisely because
we know the threat that there is from the weapons of mass destruction that
he has."
     26 Aug 2002 Vice President Dick Cheney declares: "Simply stated, there
is no doubt that Saddam Hussein now has weapons of mass destruction. There
is no doubt that he is amassing them to use against our friends, against our
allies, and against us."
     4 Sep 2002 Senator Joseph Lieberman declares: "Every day Saddam
remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the
development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States."
     18 Sep 2002 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld tells the House Armed
Services Commitee: "[Saddam] has amassed large clandestine stocks of
biological weapons... including anthrax and botulism toxin and possibly
smallpox. His regime has amassed large clandestine stockpiles of chemical
weapons, including VX and sarin and mustard gas... [he] has at this moment
stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons."
     19 Sep 2002 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld tells the Senate Armed
Services Commitee: "There are a number of terrorist states pursuing weapons
of mass destruction -- Iran, Libya, North Korea, Syria, just to name a
few -- but no terrorist state poses a greater or more immediate threat to
the security of our people than the regime of Saddam Hussein and Iraq."
     24 Sep 2002 British Prime Minister Tony Blair declares: "His weapons
of mass destruction program is active, detailed and growing. The policy of
containment is not working. The weapons of mass destruction program is not
shut down. It is up and running... The intelligence picture (the
intelligence services) paint is one accumulated over the past four years. It
is extensive, detailed and authoritative. It concludes that Iraq has
chemical and biological weapons, that Saddam has continued to produce them,
that he has existing and active military plans for the use of chemical and
biological weapons, which could be activated within 45 minutes, including
against his own Shia population; and that he is actively trying to acquire
nuclear weapons capability."
     7 Oct 2002 During a speech in Cincinnati, President George W Bush
declares: "Iraq could decide on any given day to provide a biological or
chemical weapon to a terrorist group or individual terrorists."
     28 Oct 2002 During a speech at the Riner Steinhoff Soccer Complex in
Alamogordo, New Mexico, President George W Bush declares: "He's got weapons
of mass destruction. This is a man who has used weapons of mass
destruction."
     28 Oct 2002 During a speech at the Wings Over the Rockies Air and
Space Museum in Denver, President George W Bush declares: "It's a person who
claims he has no weapons of mass destruction, in order to escape the dictums
of the U.N. Security Council and the United Nations -- but he's got them.
See, he'll lie. He'll deceive us. And he'll use them."
     31 Oct 2002 During a speech at Northern State University in Aberdeen,
South Dakota, President George W Bush declares: "This is a guy who's used
weapons of mass destruction. He not only has them, he's used them."
     1 Nov 2002 During a speech at the Pease International Tradeport
Airport in Portsmouth, New Hampshire, President George W Bush declares:
"Saddam Hussein is a man who has told the world he wouldn't have weapons of
mass destruction, and yet he deceived the world. He's got them... We know
he's got chemical weapons, probably has biological weapons."
     2 Nov 2002 During a speech at the University of South Florida,
President George W Bush declares: "He's a man who has told the world he
wouldn't have weapons of mass destruction, yet he does."
     2 Nov 2002 During a speech at the Cobb Galleria Centre in Atlanta,
Georgia, President George W Bush declares: "He's a threat to America, he's a
threat to our close friends and allies. He's a man who has said he wouldn't
have weapons of mass destruction, but he's got them... Not only does he have
weapons of mass destruction, but, incredibly enough, he has used weapons of
mass destruction."
     2 Nov 2002 During a speech at the Tri-Cities Regional Tn/Va Airport in
Blountville, Tennessee, President George W Bush declares: "He told the world
he wouldn't have weapons of mass destruction -- 11 years ago he said that.
He's got them... We know that this is a man who has chemical weapons, and we
know he's used them."
     3 Nov 2002 During a speech at the Illinois Police Academy in
Springfield, Illinois, President George W Bush declares: "Saddam Hussein is
a threat to America. He's a threat to our friends. He's a man who said he
wouldn't have weapons of mass destruction, yet he has them. He's a man that
not only has weapons of mass destruction, he's used them."
     3 Nov 2002 During a speech at the Xcel Energy Center in St. Paul,
Minnesota, President George W Bush declares: "This is a man who not only has
got chemical weapons, I want you to remind your friends and neighbors, that
he has used chemical weapons."
     3 Nov 2002 During a speech at the Sioux Falls Convention Center in
Sioux Falls, South Dakota, President George W Bush declares: "Saddam Hussein
is a man who told the world he wouldn't have weapons of mass destruction,
but he's got them... It's a man who not only has chemical weapons, but he's
used chemical weapons against some of his neighbors."
     4 Nov 2002 During a speech at the Family Center in St. Louis,
Missouri, President George W Bush declares: "He said he wouldn't have
chemical weapons; he's got them."
     4 Nov 2002 During a speech at the Northwest Arkansas Regional Airport,
President George W Bush declares: "This is a man who told the world he
wouldn't have weapons of mass destruction, promised he wouldn't have them.
He's got them... He said he wouldn't have chemical weapons, he's got them."
     4 Nov 2002 During a speech at Southern Methodist University, President
George W Bush declares: "He has weapons of mass destruction. At one time we
know for certain he was close to having a nuclear weapon. Imagine Saddam
Hussein with a nuclear weapon. Not only has he got chemical weapons, but I
want you to remember, he's used chemical weapons."
     7 Nov 2002 During a press conference, President George W Bush
declares: "Some people say, 'Oh, we must leave Saddam alone, otherwise, if
we did something against him, he might attack us.' Well, if we don't do
something he might attack us, and he might attack us with a more serious
weapon. The man is a threat... He's a threat because he is dealing with al
Qaeda... And we're going to deal with him."
     13 Nov 2002 Condoleezza Rice declares: "He already has other weapons
of mass destruction. But a nuclear weapon, two or three our four years from
now -- I don't care where it is, when it is -- to have that happen in a
volatile region like the Middle East is most certainly a future that we
cannot tolerate."
     2 Dec 2002 White House spokesman Ari Fleischer declares: "If he
declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again
misleading the world."
     9 Jan 2003 White House spokesman Ari Fleischer declares: "We know for
a fact there are weapons there."
     10 Jan 2003 Senate majority leader Bill Frist tells Capital Report: "I
am absolutely convinced, based on the information that's been given to me,
that the weapon of mass destruction which can kill more people than an
atomic bomb -- that is, biological weapons -- is in the hands of the
leadership of Iraq."
     20 Jan 2003 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares: "Saddam
Hussein possesses chemical and biological weapons... His regime is paying a
high price to pursue weapons of mass destruction -- giving up billions of
dollars in oil revenue. His regime has large, unaccounted for stockpiles of
chemical and biological weapons -- including VX, sarin, cyclosarin and
mustard gas; anthrax, botulism, and possibly smallpox -- and he has an
active program to acquire and develop nuclear weapons."
     20 Jan 2003 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld declares: "It should be
noted that biological weapons -- which Iraq and North Korea both possess --
can be as deadly, and arguably more immediate a danger -- because they are
simpler and cheaper and deliver, and are even more readily transferred to
terrorist networks than are nuclear weapons."
     22 Jan 2003 Senate majority leader Bill Frist tells The NewsHour with
Jim Lehrer: "What is unique about Iraq compared to, I would argue, any other
country in the world, in this juncture, is the exhaustion of diplomacy thus
far, and, No. 2, this intersection of weapons of mass destruction."

--

Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> "Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
> ID<uc5Hc.4273$Fc7.784695@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 06:46:43
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
>
> Feel free to substantiate any of your absurd claims.
Todd Klondike - 08 Jul 2004 18:10 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<h_eHc.4412$Fc7.809501@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:54:11
+0100
>Well, since you dozed off the first time...
>
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>stockpile of between 100 and 500 tons of chemical weapons agent. That is
>enough agent to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets."

The difference between 'estimate' and 'statement of fact' continues to
elude you.

>Well, where are they?

Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.  My guess is Syria.

>Here is a great Bush series:
>
[quoted text clipped - 231 lines]
>country in the world, in this juncture, is the exhaustion of diplomacy thus
>far, and, No. 2, this intersection of weapons of mass destruction."

Really impressive, Paul.  You're certainly the cut-n-paste wiz.
However, I fail to see exactly where any of this proves that President
Bush lied, or claimed Iraq 'had tons of WMD'.  As you know, WMD have
been found in Iraq.  That Saddam managed to fool the UN as well as
every intelligence organization in the world is not President Bushs'
fault.  

Oh, and repeated quotes in a post only serve as bulk text to throw
about.  It does not make them more-valuable to your untenable
position.
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 23:48 GMT
Well, what about the rest of the quotes where USMC General says there are
none, and where the Secretary of state just about admits to lying?  They are
all there.  Hundreds of them.  All of them saying how Saddam has all these
weapons and then when NONE are found (even the trailers supposedly to make
the WMDs turn out to be hydrogen generators), the tune changes again.
Powell showed the UN satellite photos of the supposed WMD plants as
evidence.  Nothing was ever found.  Not a trace!

This is all a big republican joke.  They will lose the election no matter
WHO runs against them!

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> "Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
> ID<h_eHc.4412$Fc7.809501@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 17:54:11
[quoted text clipped - 132 lines]
> >remains in power with chemical weapons, biological weapons, and the
> >development of nuclear weapons is a day of danger for the United States."

> >      18 Sep 2002 Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld tells the House Armed
> >Services Commitee: "[Saddam] has amassed large clandestine stocks of
[quoted text clipped - 126 lines]
> about.  It does not make them more-valuable to your untenable
> position.
Todd Klondike - 09 Jul 2004 00:07 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<LakHc.4444$Fc7.813990@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 23:48:51
+0100
>Well, what about the rest of the quotes where USMC General says there are
>none, and where the Secretary of state just about admits to lying?  

I don't see where anyone 'just about admits to lying', Paul.  At best,
they admit they were taken in by the same faulty intelligence that the
UN, former president Slick Willie, current presidential-wishful
Waffles Kerry, and the entire rest of the world were fooled by.

Excuse me for being unclear, Paul.  I specificly asked what, exactly,
in your cut-n-paste frenzy, addressed your claim that (and I quote)
"Bush stood up in front of everyone and proclaimed that Iraq had tons
of unaccounted for WMDs" — Paul McIntosh

>They are
>all there.  Hundreds of them.  All of them saying how Saddam has all these
>weapons and then when NONE are found (even the trailers supposedly to make
>the WMDs turn out to be hydrogen generators), the tune changes again.
>Powell showed the UN satellite photos of the supposed WMD plants as
>evidence.  Nothing was ever found.  Not a trace!

Nonsense, of course.  WMD were found, and continue to be found.  I
suppose you wish to quibble over whether or not 'enough' were found.

>This is all a big republican joke.  They will lose the election no matter
>WHO runs against them!

Care to place a wager?  How much can you afford to lose?
Paul McIntosh - 09 Jul 2004 07:10 GMT
He has been shown to be wrong all along.  Your blind allegiance is only
mildly amusing.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> "Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
> ID<LakHc.4444$Fc7.813990@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 23:48:51
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
> Care to place a wager?  How much can you afford to lose?
Todd Klondike - 09 Jul 2004 16:00 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<6FqHc.4454$Fc7.816928@stones.force9.net>on Fri, 9 Jul 2004 07:10:54
+0100
>He has been shown to be wrong all along.  Your blind allegiance is only
>mildly amusing.

The distinction between 'Mistaken' and 'Lying' continues to elude you.

When I say," Paul can't possibly be as stupid as he appears to be", I
am mistaken.  When former president Clinton says, under oath, "I did
not have sex with that woman, Ms. Lewinski", he was lying.

HTH
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 23:51 GMT
30 May 2003 During a press conference, Lt. General James Conway, USMC
declares: "It was a surprise to me then, it remains a surprise to me now,
that we have not uncovered weapons... in some of the forward dispersal
sites. Again, believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to
virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and
Baghdad, but they're simply not there... We were simply wrong."

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
Todd Klondike - 09 Jul 2004 00:08 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<SckHc.4445$Fc7.814071@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 23:51:06
+0100
>30 May 2003 During a press conference, Lt. General James Conway, USMC
>declares: "It was a surprise to me then, it remains a surprise to me now,
>that we have not uncovered weapons... in some of the forward dispersal
>sites. Again, believe me, it's not for lack of trying. We've been to
>virtually every ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and
>Baghdad, but they're simply not there... We were simply wrong."

Care to explain how this supports your absurd claim that President
Bush lied?
Paul McIntosh - 09 Jul 2004 07:08 GMT
President George W Bush declares: "He's got
weapons of mass destruction. This is a man who has used weapons of mass
destruction."

Lt. General James Conway, USMC declares: "We've been to virtually every
ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're
simply not there... We were simply wrong."

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> "Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
> ID<SckHc.4445$Fc7.814071@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 23:51:06
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
> Care to explain how this supports your absurd claim that President
> Bush lied?
Todd Klondike - 09 Jul 2004 16:00 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<4DqHc.4453$Fc7.816885@stones.force9.net>on Fri, 9 Jul 2004 07:08:43
+0100
>President George W Bush declares: "He's got
>weapons of mass destruction. This is a man who has used weapons of mass
>destruction."

Where is the lie?  Where is the mistake, even?  WMD have been found in
Iraq, and it is common knowledge that Saddam used WMD against Iran,
and against his own people.

>Lt. General James Conway, USMC declares: "We've been to virtually every
>ammunition supply point between the Kuwaiti border and Baghdad, but they're
>simply not there... We were simply wrong."

Subsequent events have shown that the good General spoke too soon.
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 23:53 GMT
9 Jul 2003 White House spokesman Ari Fleischer somehow manages to say
with a straight face: "Saddam Hussein had biological and chemical weapons
that were unaccounted for that we're still confident we'll find. I think the
burden is on those people who think he didn't have weapons of mass
destruction to tell the world where they are... just because they haven't
yet been found doesn't mean they didn't exist. The burden is on the critics
to explain where the weapons of mass destruction are."

What the F**k is he saying???  Everyone who didn't believe that Saddam had
WMDs should tell Ari where the WMDs are???

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
Paul McIntosh - 08 Jul 2004 23:54 GMT
16 May 2004 Secretary of State Colin Powell tells Meet the Press:
"When I made that presentation in February 2003, it was based on the best
information that the Central Intelligence Agency made available to me. We
studied it carefully; we looked at the sourcing in the case of the mobile
trucks and trains. There was multiple sourcing for that. Unfortunately, that
multiple sourcing over time has turned out to be not accurate. And so I'm
deeply disappointed... it turned out that the sourcing was inaccurate and
wrong and in some cases, ***deliberately misleading***. And for that, I am
disappointed and I regret it."

You can't get any more plain than that!

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> Well, since you dozed off the first time...
>
[quoted text clipped - 269 lines]
> >
> > Feel free to substantiate any of your absurd claims.
Todd Klondike - 09 Jul 2004 00:10 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<igkHc.4447$Fc7.814123@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 23:54:32
+0100
>16 May 2004 Secretary of State Colin Powell tells Meet the Press:
>"When I made that presentation in February 2003, it was based on the best
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>You can't get any more plain than that!

Well, I'll agree that *you* can't get any plainer than that.
Unfortunately for you, nothing you've posted supports your absurd
contention that President Bush lied.

At best, you've shown that some intelligence-gathering folks were
inaccurate.
Paul McIntosh - 09 Jul 2004 07:11 GMT
SOME were inaccurate?

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> "Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
> ID<igkHc.4447$Fc7.814123@stones.force9.net>on Thu, 8 Jul 2004 23:54:32
[quoted text clipped - 17 lines]
> At best, you've shown that some intelligence-gathering folks were
> inaccurate.
Todd Klondike - 09 Jul 2004 16:00 GMT
"Paul McIntosh" <paul@mcintoshcentral.com> posted message
ID<6GqHc.4455$Fc7.816903@stones.force9.net>on Fri, 9 Jul 2004 07:11:57
+0100
>SOME were inaccurate?

Reading comprehension problems?
Paul McIntosh - 06 Jul 2004 19:33 GMT
You obviously aren't paying attention!  ALL of your activities are now
subject to monitoring without your approval.  Your private email on your
computer at home is subject to monitoring.  Your web surfing is monitored.
Your movements are monitored.  Your credit card usage is monitored.

--
Paul McIntosh
http://www.rc-bearings.com
> I have.  When I'm employed by a [fill in the blank], I believe they have
> every right to monitor my correspondence.  What I do in my personal life, at
[quoted text clipped - 9 lines]
> > --
> > Paul McIntosh
C.O.Jones - 06 Jul 2004 23:52 GMT
> You obviously aren't paying attention!  ALL of your activities are now
> subject to monitoring without your approval.  Your private email on your
> computer at home is subject to monitoring.  Your web surfing is monitored.
> Your movements are monitored.  Your credit card usage is monitored.

Sure nuff?  And with the little bonus cards at the grocery stores, they now
know your eating and drinking habits.  Now if nothing else, your insurance
company can spot your gluttonous ways early on and raise your rates before
the coronary hits! :)  And hey!  The police can know when you're going to
throw a party (by the booze you buy)!  So they can sit near your house and
tag the drunks as they leave the bash!  Now that's really good for your
reputation as a party animal!

Is this the point where we all run around in circles, screaming and waving
our arms above our heads?

Seriously!  They've had the ability for years and the basic problem still
exists.  They gather so much information that unless they have a reason to
single you out to begin with, your data is simply lost in the information
overload that is big brother watching!
Todd Klondike - 07 Jul 2004 00:02 GMT
"C.O.Jones" <ifyouneedit@yougotit.com> posted message
ID<x2GGc.2124$O14.29@lakeread03>on Tue, 6 Jul 2004 18:52:18 -0400

>> You obviously aren't paying attention!  ALL of your activities are now
>> subject to monitoring without your approval.  Your private email on your
[quoted text clipped - 11 lines]
>Is this the point where we all run around in circles, screaming and waving
>our arms above our heads?

Don't forget wetting ourselves' down both legs.

>Seriously!  They've had the ability for year