Tipping in USA/Canada
in [Airline Travel]
|
From: Greg Procter on 25 Dec 2007 15:36 "Mr. Travel" wrote: > > Greg Procter wrote: > > > Mr Travel wrote: > > > >>Greg Procter wrote: > >> > >> > >>>It's called 'English grammar'. > >> > >>"I take" in English is present tense. > > > > > > So what is your "english grammar" for "my philosophy in life and > > throughout my life is and has been to take ..." > > <sigh> > > You said "I take". Very true! The english language can be ambiguous for idiots like you.
From: Greg Procter on 25 Dec 2007 15:37 "Mr. Travel" wrote: > > Greg Procter wrote: > > > Mr Travel wrote: > > > >>Greg Procter wrote: > >> > >> > >>>"Mr. Travel" wrote: > >>> > >> > >>>>Are you suggesting England is not beyond N. America? > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>>No, that's your story. > >> > >>You claom the poem never made it outside the US, when it was written in > >>England. > > > > > > > > There was a war on - servicemen's poems rarely got international airing > > at that time. > > Was the poem published in Europe? > > Yes. > = When? Where? How? Who?
From: Greg Procter on 25 Dec 2007 15:43 "Mr. Travel" wrote: > > Craig Welch wrote: > > > Greg Procter <procter(a)ihug.co.nz> said: > > > > > >>Mr Travel wrote: > >> > >>>Greg Procter wrote: > >>> > >>>>"Mr. Travel" wrote: > >>> > >>>>>There was no war declared by either side in the conflict. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>That seems to be an entirely yank concept! (see brainwashing) > >>> > >>>Great, please report the evidence that either side declared war on the > >>>other. > >> > >> > >>You really can't be _that_ stupid??? > >> > >>A B52 load of bombs deliberately dropped on a foreign nation constitutes > >>a declaration of war in anyone's book - unless of course you can > >>convince the recipients that it was an accidental deliberate act. > >>(Huhh???) > > > > > > In that case, the US declared war on Iran when it shot down that > > Airbus? > > > > China declared war on the US when its J-8IIM flew into the P-3C > > Orion? > > > > Anothe rexample > > Did the USSR or South Korea declare war when the Soviet Union shot down > the 747, KAL flight 007? Yeah, I know, with a number like 007, it had to > be a spy plane. It was a spy plane.
From: Greg Procter on 25 Dec 2007 15:45 "Mr. Travel" wrote: > > Greg Procter wrote: > > > Craig Welch wrote: > > > >>Greg Procter <procter(a)ihug.co.nz> said: > >> > >> > >>>Mr Travel wrote: > >>> > >>>>Greg Procter wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>"Mr. Travel" wrote: > >>>> > >>>>>>There was no war declared by either side in the conflict. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>That seems to be an entirely yank concept! (see brainwashing) > >>>> > >>>>Great, please report the evidence that either side declared war on the > >>>>other. > >>> > >>> > >>>You really can't be _that_ stupid??? > >>> > >>>A B52 load of bombs deliberately dropped on a foreign nation constitutes > >>>a declaration of war in anyone's book - unless of course you can > >>>convince the recipients that it was an accidental deliberate act. > >>>(Huhh???) > >> > >>In that case, the US declared war on Iran when it shot down that > >>Airbus? > > > > > > That was definitely an act of war by most narions standards - an > > everyday act for the USa. > > OK dipshit. Forget the US. Did Iran declare war on the US when that > happened? The governments of small nations don't go declaring war on overwhelmingly large nations without extreme reasons - that's why the US can get away with being such a bully nation.
From: Greg Procter on 25 Dec 2007 16:05
TMOliver wrote: > > "Greg Procter" <procter(a)ihug.co.nz> wrote in message > news:476EBC86.40922A28(a)ihug.co.nz... > > Mr Travel wrote: > >> > >> Greg Procter wrote: > >> > >> > "Mr. Travel" wrote: > >> > > >> >>Jeff wrote: > >> >> > >> >>>"Craig Welch" <craig(a)pacific.net.sg> wrote in message > >> >>>news:5k7jm3p9oqljfhauogac946kt3mgg23bts(a)4ax.com... > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>>>"Mr. Travel" <mtravel(a)a.a> said: > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>> > >> >>>>>It is possible to be against a country without being in a war with > >> >>>>>them. > >> >>>>> > >> >>>>>For example, look at Iran and North Korea. > >> >>>>>We aren't at war with them. > >> >>>>>By your logic, that means we are their friend. > >> >>>> > >> >>>>The US is still at war with North Korea. > >> >>>> > >> >>> > >> >>> > >> >>>Actually, there is no "war" between the U.S. and North Korea. This > >> >>>was a UN > >> >>>action and the armastice (sp??) is between North and South Korea. > >> >> > >> >>As mentioned on M*A*S*H many times, it was a police action. > >> > > >> > > >> > You were slaughtering Koreans to stop them from reuniting their own > >> > country. > >> > >> You really don't read much, do you? > > > > > > I not only read but I also think about what I read. > > Are you suggesting the US actions in Korea were _not_ intended to keep > > Korea divided??? > > The efforts, sponsored by the UN and under the UN flag involved force > contributions from all sorts of places, Australia to be sure and even New > Zealand. I suspect even the history books provided to New Zealand's kids > might mention that it was N. Korea's troops that invaded S. Korea across the > 38th Parallel, a "Truce Line" established in 1945 between the Soviet and > Allied* Zones of Occupation. Exactly who in the UN pushed for such an action??? > > (*New Zealand being one of those Allies) To our eternal shame. > > Yes, the goal was to keep Korea divided, Thank-you. <sheesh> > protecting the folks in the at > least semi-democratically governed South from being over-run by the forces > of the "Peoples Republic of North Korea", a Soviet and Chinese client state > in which even in recent years millions still starve because of the > totalitarian government's commitment to the maintenance of a over-sized > military, attempts to build long range missiles, and what was undeniably an > attempt to develop nuclear weapons. The USa has loing range missiles and nuclear weapons! North Korea was never a Soviet/Chinese client state. > > When the cast of Monte Python spoke of a "Gormless Twit", it sure must have > been you to whom they were referring. > > TMO Sure, in the land of the blind the sighted man is the odd one out. |