Wrong...Foreign Nationals DO have the SAME Constitutional protections as US citizens within the US. If they are overseas, that no longer applies (as they are outside the US territory).
You carefully explained you read a pamphlet on buying a house and that educated you enough to do it all yourself. Fine...when you buy your next house, you will find there are many things a realtor can do for you. Yes...you can do all the work yourself...but when you sell the house you have now, you may find a realtor useful. Generally (there are always exceptions), a realtor will sell your property for a higher amount seen by you than you can get by doing a FSBO. This can be something as simple as telling you where to put some money to have a greater result in selling. For example, you may want to update the kitchen, but the realtor my let you know that your kitchen is still in vogue, but the paint needs updating.
There are also some tax advantages to using a realtor as a seller. The commission paid to them can be a deductible on your taxes as a cost of doing business (see your CPA or tax attorney for better, detailed advice).
As for you not calling my acumen into question, you seem to be backpedaling, AC....you said "How do you know that realtor is "good" at housing construction and with the mechanicals of the house? Ask them?"
The answer is "Yes." You do ask them questions. You ask them lots of questions until you are comfortable with them as experts. The same way I would ask a web monkey questions on how they would do certain things...what woudl their approach be to the problem. They may surprise me with an idea I had not thought of. Or they may surprise me and be only a MS Frontpage user and prove themselves out the door.
I agree you do need to educate yourself about the process regardless of what it is you are buying, be it cars, houses, or electronics. You don't have to be the expert because that is why you are paying someone to be the expert for...but you do need to be able to speak the same language.
As the general contractor...I did not swing a hammer, apply any paint, work on any floors, but knew enough to find the best available to work with and for me. And while working with them, I learned even more. I still don't swing a hammer, etc, but I can get in the ballpark of what a job will cost and what it will take to finish fixing an issue.
The first line in my initial post said: "A good realtor can help you decide if a house is worth getting an INSPECTOR for (as in, you may want to buy it or not) as there could be issues they spot BEFORE you need an INSPECTOR. Things like the roof, electrical, plumbing can give signs of problems without a inspection report if you know what you are looking for."
Again, apparently you fail to read what is actually posted. I at no time said that you should not get an inspector, but that a good realtor may spot things that cause you to not even bother needing an inspector as you will not be buying that specific property.
As for how I know a realtor may know something...I was a general contractor for a while. I know a little about construction, and an experienced/good realtor should be able to spot potential trouble before the inspector arrives. Your aunt must not be that good of a realtor. She may sell houses, but then she is JUST a salesperson. A GOOD realtor will have educated themselves on construction types, potential issues, signs of problems, approximate costs to repair certain issues, etc. THAT is the ADDED value a GOOD realtor brings to the table. If I request a "fixer" that only needs cosmetic work, I do not want to replace the roof, or do other major work on the property, beyond perhaps updating the windows. A GOOD realtor will eliminate the majority of the crap before showing houses to me.
As far as buying homes...how many have you bought, AC? In how many states? Over how many years? Me? I have bought several (TX, NM, FL) over the past 20 years. I am pretty knowledgeable about the buying process. I have several friends who are house "flippers" and have done a few joint ventures with them (we bought close to a block of houses in TX in one case, refurbed then sold for a decent profit).
You apparently have read one book, bought one house and consider yourself an expert on buying property! WOW! Read a book one time! Impressed.
I hope, based on your ability to read shown here, your wife also read the book because you possibly got screwed in your purchase if you relied on your reading ability.
There is one other aspect you failed to realize....I am perfectly capable of doing all the work myself. However, I consider my TIME to be valuable, and am willing to pay others to do all the running around and the paperwork for me. That is why I have a lawyer, accountant, etc. They free up my time to make more money. If I did the things they did (which quite often I could do easily), then that would interfere in either my billable (earning) time or my recreation/family time. Time is a currency that has more value to me than the (relatively) small amount I pay the experts to handle stuff for me.
Finally, the issue of liability is one you ignore. Having a realtor (or lawyer) take care of the paperwork puts them on the hook for damages if something goes wrong. Do it yourself....you are SOL as you have taken on the liability yourself.
You are an idiot who is living in their own world and fails to actually read.
One: I said a good realtor. Not a newby who got into real estate for a quick buck, but someone who has experience (either as a general contractor, or with years of realtor experience under their belt). GOOD realtor.
Two: Who said that I was relying on just the realtor? I said that if they point out something BAD, it may impact my buying decision. A formal inspection will be done before closing, but if there is something an GOOD realtor spots before we even get to needing an inspector that is potentially very expensive to repair may cause me to consider not making an offer, or a substantially lower one at the beginning, with caveats on the closing based on a clean inspection. I have bought several homes over the years around the country over the past couple of decades. A good realtor can save me lots of time.
Your example of a used car is not quite applicable. However, if the used car salesman told me of a problem with the car, then yes, I would like that input. It may be something I have no problem fixing myself or it may be I am looking for a perfect machine. But if they are pointing out flaws, then I am not going to argue with them!
Three: The selling realtor did all the paperwork and presented it to you. How much paperwork did you fill out personally? Even if you had your own realtor, if you did not read everything carefully, you would be an idiot. The exception would be if you had an attorney do the reading. The realtor had you sign because they were representing the seller and you decided to do it all yourself. No matter what though, that realtor arranged the escrow, title, etc and set up the closing. Not you, not the seller, but the realtor. A good realtor will earn their fees (but the % is negotiable up front by the seller).
Lastly: Having a realtor involved provides a person to be blamed (and one who carries insurance) if something goes wrong (failure to disclose for example) and you have to file suit to make yourself whole.
A good realtor can help you decide if a house is worth getting an inspector for (as in, you may want to buy it or not) as there could be issues they spot BEFORE you need an inspector. Things like the roof, electrical, plumbing can give signs of problems without a inspection report if you know what you are looking for.
A realtor that can give you an idea of costs for things that may need work can help you decide if a house is worth pursuing. If the price is right, you may not mind fixing certain things, but you may want to know that up front before going deeper into the buying process.
As for you not having a realtor when you bought your home....you had a realtor..the same one as the seller. Who showed the house to you? The owner or their realtor? How did you find the house? I would lay odds you gave the seller's realtor a nice bonus: not having to split the commission.
I shouldn't reply to an AC, but you make a wild accusation about the country going bad due to forced prayers by educators being banned by the courts.
Children are free to pray any time they want. The ruling you refer to in typical religious nut-job way, stated that the GOVERNMENT cannot require prayer by students and cannot lead students in prayer as that as the implication of Government endorsement of religion.
If the end result is the same, what is the difference on whether you call it "theology" or "doctrine" (though I think having a book called "Doctrine and Covenants" pretty much answers the question on whether the LDS have official Doctrine).
If you do not follow and believe the same as the leadership of the LDS church, you will be considered "not in good standing" and denied the highest sacraments of your church. Whether your theology is written down or simply passed from person to person, the functionality is the same.
"Mormonism has no official theology and precious little dogma."
huh???? If it has no official theology, then what to you call D&C and the Pearl of Great Price and the Book of Mormon? Seems like they meet the requirement of a theology to me! Even the LDS church speaks of Mormon theology at http://www.lds-mormon.com/lds_theology.shtml
The issue is NOT the pre-installed systems, but those that shipped PRE-Vista with coupons, etc as being VISTA-Ready. These were shipped by OEMs using MicroSoft's information. MS was misleading on what "Vista-Ready" meant.
Perhaps, rather than simply arguing in ignorance of the facts, you do a little research (and buck the typical/. fashion) first.
The issue the lawsuit is about is MS stated that the lower spec'd systems would be capable of running Vista, and then de-emphasized the part that those machines would only be able to run the lowest, least capable version of Vista.
The AVERAGE person would simply look at the "Vista Ready" logo and think the machine that is cheap will be able to run EVERY version of Vista.
Bottom-line: MS is being accused of misleading the buying public.
No...if it were analogous, then Google would have entered people's homes to take photos after already being sued once for it but having decided it is cheaper to settle out of court for the few who get harmed.
Google was on a public access road. The drive was private but cameras apparently have this ability to capture the whole image in front of them. Private roads in many (if not most) jurisdictions means the owners maintain the road. In many locations this means they are in an unincorporated part of the county and so pay lower taxes, but have to plow their own snow and fix their own potholes/drainage issues, etc. However, the road must also allow traffic down it and failure to maintain the road can be grounds for a city to annex the area (and gain the tax revenue that entails).
The right to privacy only extends to INSIDE the home or other obviously protected areas (ie a high fence or purposefully grown high hedges to block the public view). Taking a photo from a public area (and "private road" is NOT necessarily a road the public cannot be on...is it gated, etc? all apply to determining in court if the public had access. ob. IANAL).
Hmm..please note the reporting of Hate criems to the FBI is voluntary, and if you did a little more research, you would find those other states' police departments report them to the FBI more than states like KY do. Usually to avoid being seen as a location with a lot of racism...but it usually means more people think they cover it up more often.
The answer to your question is yes, especially with regard to excell and powerpoint. I have no doubt that there are some specific files it may not work with but that is also true of MSO itself.
To answer your question, she did not know I was working on it. She thought I was listening to music as I often do. I was planning on making the changes the next day when I had more time to play around, but figured speaker cable only take a few seconds to swap out, so why not then? As I usually use certain albums with good sound quality to test any changes (not all are improvements, some are simply different, some make it worse, some better, some no effect at all), I played the first one and my wife then made the comment.
She is a great resource as she easily tells me if it sounds worse (as some things i have tried over the years did). Usually it coincides with my thoughts, sometimes not....and then I am forced to return the system back to her preferred configuration.
I have done just this experiment, but it was not intentional. I went from basic Monster Cable speaker cable to Audioquest Midnight speaker cable (bought at a really cheap price as it was the last 30' of the spool)...my wife who was reading a book in the next room suddenly yelled out that whatever I had just done sounds better (Klipsch Heresy IIs, 300B based amp from Cary, Linn turntable, Sony ES cd player, can't remember the pre-amp, Kimber PBJ interconnects). She has no real concern with what she sees as my "toys" as long as she can play music on it, but she heard an improvement without a clue on what I had done.
For a 12 year veteran, you are pretty ignorant. As a 21 year man, I have seen a few commanders relieved of command, and seen several folks go to jail. I point out Col Fiscus (formerly Maj Gen), among those who careers were ended for things that are not crimes in the civilian sector. Remember, even sexual harassment is a crime in the military whereas in the civilian sector it is "just" a civil legal violation. As a MEO 9Social Actions) member, I have seen a person go to jail for sexual harassment.
As for hard points on the wings of a Buff....google is your friend. Use it. The B-52 has racks that can be mounted on the wings (inboard, not on the wing tips) for munitions mounting. Fortunately, as a former Buff MX guy (I was in the 43rd Bombardment (Heavy) Wing, Andersen AFB, Guam, 1988-1990), I did not need to use Google-fu to know that.
Of course, I also can't completely deny that happened either. And, from the same article, it shows that at least one attempt was caught (by US officials)....but no idea of how many have not been.
"The sensitivity, they say, is heightened by fear that terrorists could infiltrate the United States from Canada. There is at least one known example of an attempt. In December 1999, border agents arrested an Algerian man, Ahmed Ressam, as he was trying to enter at Port Angeles, Wash., with homemade explosives in his rental car. He was later convicted of plotting to bomb the Los Angeles International Airport or some other airport in Southern California"
Actually, why should the provider CHANGE their config which works perfectly fine with OSes that follow standards? They were NOT the one deploying software, MS was, and MS failed to meet the standard.....and hence fucked these customers more than they have a few others.
Of course, not being able to get on the web does decrease the malware they get infected by.
1st Use of the epithet "Spics" is racist in and of itself.
2nd. Beyond the use of false SSNs to get hired, illegal immigrants do contribute to the tax base by their spending. As they rent a place, the tax on that rental income is sent in by the landlord. They buy clothes, food, etc. Again, taxes are paid.
3rd. By the use of false SSNs, the majority of illegal immigrants will never collect on the social security they paid into.
4th. The majority of illegal immigrants that cross our southern borders are not Mexican, but are a mixture of central and south Americans.
5th. The people that caused us some issues on Sept 11, 2001 came into the US legally or via Canada. In contrast, the ones coming up from the south are finding employment in the worst jobs we can provide.
The Union Flag (the Jack is only on ships), is for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The flag is made up of the flags of St George (England- Red Vertical cross on a white field), St Andrew (White diagonal cross on a blue field) and St Patrick (Red diagonal cross on a white field).
So, as the parent stated, the flag of ENGLAND (not Britain) is a Red Cross on a White Field.
For those in the US military, to be able to go on Emergency Leave requires the ARC to notify the military member's unit of the situation after being notified by the family. The post in question stated the uncle died and word was to be sent to the soldier in question. The ARC failed to do their job (as part of their Congressional charter) and therefore the family was forced to use other channels (who invariably tell the ARC to verify the situation).
My father served in the US military 1950-1975...and hated the ARC prior to his service as a result of his interaction with them after a plane crash in the early mid 1940s. His interaction with them while in the miltary did nothing to change his impression of them.
I have served in the military since 1986 (and still counting) and my opinion of the ARC is no better than my father's based on my experiences with them and witnessing the experiences that others have had with them.
Corrected timeline:
Step 1. Red Cross created.
Step 2. Red Cross organization, havign the name RED CROSS, began using a RED CROSS as their symbol.
Step 3. Johnson and Johnson created 6 years later.
Step 4. J&J begin using a Red Cross, made popular by the RED CROSS ORGANIZATION as a logo. They do so without paying the charity anything, but that is OK, the Charity does not care. Step 4.5. Founder of Red Cross enters agreement/contract with J&J over usage of symbol
Step 5. Congress approves Red Cross as a charity.
Step 6. More than 100 years go by.
Step 7. The Charity Red Cross , violating the agreement with J&J, makes a small amount of money licensing some buisnesses to use the Red Cross as a logo.
Step 8. J&J, knowing they had a contract/agreement to use the Red Cross symbol from a charity called RED CROSS, sues the Charity for trademark breach.
Slashdot Mirror
Wrong...Foreign Nationals DO have the SAME Constitutional protections as US citizens within the US. If they are overseas, that no longer applies (as they are outside the US territory).
You carefully explained you read a pamphlet on buying a house and that educated you enough to do it all yourself. Fine...when you buy your next house, you will find there are many things a realtor can do for you. Yes...you can do all the work yourself...but when you sell the house you have now, you may find a realtor useful. Generally (there are always exceptions), a realtor will sell your property for a higher amount seen by you than you can get by doing a FSBO. This can be something as simple as telling you where to put some money to have a greater result in selling. For example, you may want to update the kitchen, but the realtor my let you know that your kitchen is still in vogue, but the paint needs updating.
There are also some tax advantages to using a realtor as a seller. The commission paid to them can be a deductible on your taxes as a cost of doing business (see your CPA or tax attorney for better, detailed advice).
As for you not calling my acumen into question, you seem to be backpedaling, AC....you said "How do you know that realtor is "good" at housing construction and with the mechanicals of the house? Ask them?"
The answer is "Yes." You do ask them questions. You ask them lots of questions until you are comfortable with them as experts. The same way I would ask a web monkey questions on how they would do certain things...what woudl their approach be to the problem. They may surprise me with an idea I had not thought of. Or they may surprise me and be only a MS Frontpage user and prove themselves out the door.
I agree you do need to educate yourself about the process regardless of what it is you are buying, be it cars, houses, or electronics. You don't have to be the expert because that is why you are paying someone to be the expert for...but you do need to be able to speak the same language.
As the general contractor...I did not swing a hammer, apply any paint, work on any floors, but knew enough to find the best available to work with and for me. And while working with them, I learned even more. I still don't swing a hammer, etc, but I can get in the ballpark of what a job will cost and what it will take to finish fixing an issue.
The first line in my initial post said:
"A good realtor can help you decide if a house is worth getting an INSPECTOR for (as in, you may want to buy it or not) as there could be issues they spot BEFORE you need an INSPECTOR. Things like the roof, electrical, plumbing can give signs of problems without a inspection report if you know what you are looking for."
Again, apparently you fail to read what is actually posted. I at no time said that you should not get an inspector, but that a good realtor may spot things that cause you to not even bother needing an inspector as you will not be buying that specific property.
As for how I know a realtor may know something...I was a general contractor for a while. I know a little about construction, and an experienced/good realtor should be able to spot potential trouble before the inspector arrives. Your aunt must not be that good of a realtor. She may sell houses, but then she is JUST a salesperson. A GOOD realtor will have educated themselves on construction types, potential issues, signs of problems, approximate costs to repair certain issues, etc. THAT is the ADDED value a GOOD realtor brings to the table. If I request a "fixer" that only needs cosmetic work, I do not want to replace the roof, or do other major work on the property, beyond perhaps updating the windows. A GOOD realtor will eliminate the majority of the crap before showing houses to me.
As far as buying homes...how many have you bought, AC? In how many states? Over how many years? Me? I have bought several (TX, NM, FL) over the past 20 years. I am pretty knowledgeable about the buying process. I have several friends who are house "flippers" and have done a few joint ventures with them (we bought close to a block of houses in TX in one case, refurbed then sold for a decent profit).
You apparently have read one book, bought one house and consider yourself an expert on buying property! WOW! Read a book one time! Impressed.
I hope, based on your ability to read shown here, your wife also read the book because you possibly got screwed in your purchase if you relied on your reading ability.
There is one other aspect you failed to realize....I am perfectly capable of doing all the work myself. However, I consider my TIME to be valuable, and am willing to pay others to do all the running around and the paperwork for me. That is why I have a lawyer, accountant, etc. They free up my time to make more money. If I did the things they did (which quite often I could do easily), then that would interfere in either my billable (earning) time or my recreation/family time. Time is a currency that has more value to me than the (relatively) small amount I pay the experts to handle stuff for me.
Finally, the issue of liability is one you ignore. Having a realtor (or lawyer) take care of the paperwork puts them on the hook for damages if something goes wrong. Do it yourself....you are SOL as you have taken on the liability yourself.
You are an idiot who is living in their own world and fails to actually read.
One: I said a good realtor. Not a newby who got into real estate for a quick buck, but someone who has experience (either as a general contractor, or with years of realtor experience under their belt). GOOD realtor.
Two: Who said that I was relying on just the realtor? I said that if they point out something BAD, it may impact my buying decision. A formal inspection will be done before closing, but if there is something an GOOD realtor spots before we even get to needing an inspector that is potentially very expensive to repair may cause me to consider not making an offer, or a substantially lower one at the beginning, with caveats on the closing based on a clean inspection. I have bought several homes over the years around the country over the past couple of decades. A good realtor can save me lots of time.
Your example of a used car is not quite applicable. However, if the used car salesman told me of a problem with the car, then yes, I would like that input. It may be something I have no problem fixing myself or it may be I am looking for a perfect machine. But if they are pointing out flaws, then I am not going to argue with them!
Three: The selling realtor did all the paperwork and presented it to you. How much paperwork did you fill out personally? Even if you had your own realtor, if you did not read everything carefully, you would be an idiot. The exception would be if you had an attorney do the reading. The realtor had you sign because they were representing the seller and you decided to do it all yourself. No matter what though, that realtor arranged the escrow, title, etc and set up the closing. Not you, not the seller, but the realtor. A good realtor will earn their fees (but the % is negotiable up front by the seller).
Lastly: Having a realtor involved provides a person to be blamed (and one who carries insurance) if something goes wrong (failure to disclose for example) and you have to file suit to make yourself whole.
A good realtor can help you decide if a house is worth getting an inspector for (as in, you may want to buy it or not) as there could be issues they spot BEFORE you need an inspector. Things like the roof, electrical, plumbing can give signs of problems without a inspection report if you know what you are looking for.
A realtor that can give you an idea of costs for things that may need work can help you decide if a house is worth pursuing. If the price is right, you may not mind fixing certain things, but you may want to know that up front before going deeper into the buying process.
As for you not having a realtor when you bought your home....you had a realtor..the same one as the seller. Who showed the house to you? The owner or their realtor? How did you find the house? I would lay odds you gave the seller's realtor a nice bonus: not having to split the commission.
I shouldn't reply to an AC, but you make a wild accusation about the country going bad due to forced prayers by educators being banned by the courts.
Children are free to pray any time they want. The ruling you refer to in typical religious nut-job way, stated that the GOVERNMENT cannot require prayer by students and cannot lead students in prayer as that as the implication of Government endorsement of religion.
If the end result is the same, what is the difference on whether you call it "theology" or "doctrine" (though I think having a book called "Doctrine and Covenants" pretty much answers the question on whether the LDS have official Doctrine).
If you do not follow and believe the same as the leadership of the LDS church, you will be considered "not in good standing" and denied the highest sacraments of your church. Whether your theology is written down or simply passed from person to person, the functionality is the same.
"Mormonism has no official theology and precious little dogma."
huh???? If it has no official theology, then what to you call D&C and the Pearl of Great Price and the Book of Mormon? Seems like they meet the requirement of a theology to me! Even the LDS church speaks of Mormon theology at http://www.lds-mormon.com/lds_theology.shtml
The issue is NOT the pre-installed systems, but those that shipped PRE-Vista with coupons, etc as being VISTA-Ready. These were shipped by OEMs using MicroSoft's information. MS was misleading on what "Vista-Ready" meant.
/. fashion) first.
Perhaps, rather than simply arguing in ignorance of the facts, you do a little research (and buck the typical
The issue the lawsuit is about is MS stated that the lower spec'd systems would be capable of running Vista, and then de-emphasized the part that those machines would only be able to run the lowest, least capable version of Vista.
The AVERAGE person would simply look at the "Vista Ready" logo and think the machine that is cheap will be able to run EVERY version of Vista.
Bottom-line: MS is being accused of misleading the buying public.
No...if it were analogous, then Google would have entered people's homes to take photos after already being sued once for it but having decided it is cheaper to settle out of court for the few who get harmed.
Google was on a public access road. The drive was private but cameras apparently have this ability to capture the whole image in front of them. Private roads in many (if not most) jurisdictions means the owners maintain the road. In many locations this means they are in an unincorporated part of the county and so pay lower taxes, but have to plow their own snow and fix their own potholes/drainage issues, etc. However, the road must also allow traffic down it and failure to maintain the road can be grounds for a city to annex the area (and gain the tax revenue that entails).
The right to privacy only extends to INSIDE the home or other obviously protected areas (ie a high fence or purposefully grown high hedges to block the public view). Taking a photo from a public area (and "private road" is NOT necessarily a road the public cannot be on...is it gated, etc? all apply to determining in court if the public had access. ob. IANAL).
Hmm..please note the reporting of Hate criems to the FBI is voluntary, and if you did a little more research, you would find those other states' police departments report them to the FBI more than states like KY do. Usually to avoid being seen as a location with a lot of racism...but it usually means more people think they cover it up more often.
The answer to your question is yes, especially with regard to excell and powerpoint. I have no doubt that there are some specific files it may not work with but that is also true of MSO itself.
To answer your question, she did not know I was working on it. She thought I was listening to music as I often do. I was planning on making the changes the next day when I had more time to play around, but figured speaker cable only take a few seconds to swap out, so why not then? As I usually use certain albums with good sound quality to test any changes (not all are improvements, some are simply different, some make it worse, some better, some no effect at all), I played the first one and my wife then made the comment.
She is a great resource as she easily tells me if it sounds worse (as some things i have tried over the years did). Usually it coincides with my thoughts, sometimes not....and then I am forced to return the system back to her preferred configuration.
I have done just this experiment, but it was not intentional. I went from basic Monster Cable speaker cable to Audioquest Midnight speaker cable (bought at a really cheap price as it was the last 30' of the spool)...my wife who was reading a book in the next room suddenly yelled out that whatever I had just done sounds better (Klipsch Heresy IIs, 300B based amp from Cary, Linn turntable, Sony ES cd player, can't remember the pre-amp, Kimber PBJ interconnects). She has no real concern with what she sees as my "toys" as long as she can play music on it, but she heard an improvement without a clue on what I had done.
You forgot the most dangerous...Scientologists!
And yet lesbians have the lowest rates of all groups....
Seems like being a Lesbian is the safest route to go...
For a 12 year veteran, you are pretty ignorant. As a 21 year man, I have seen a few commanders relieved of command, and seen several folks go to jail. I point out Col Fiscus (formerly Maj Gen), among those who careers were ended for things that are not crimes in the civilian sector. Remember, even sexual harassment is a crime in the military whereas in the civilian sector it is "just" a civil legal violation. As a MEO 9Social Actions) member, I have seen a person go to jail for sexual harassment.
As for hard points on the wings of a Buff....google is your friend. Use it. The B-52 has racks that can be mounted on the wings (inboard, not on the wing tips) for munitions mounting. Fortunately, as a former Buff MX guy (I was in the 43rd Bombardment (Heavy) Wing, Andersen AFB, Guam, 1988-1990), I did not need to use Google-fu to know that.
Actually, having since done some research, I cannot substantiate the latter part. In fact, I can almost refute that part. See http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A388 16-2005Apr8.html for details.
Of course, I also can't completely deny that happened either. And, from the same article, it shows that at least one attempt was caught (by US officials)....but no idea of how many have not been.
"The sensitivity, they say, is heightened by fear that terrorists could infiltrate the United States from Canada. There is at least one known example of an attempt. In December 1999, border agents arrested an Algerian man, Ahmed Ressam, as he was trying to enter at Port Angeles, Wash., with homemade explosives in his rental car. He was later convicted of plotting to bomb the Los Angeles International Airport or some other airport in Southern California"
Actually, why should the provider CHANGE their config which works perfectly fine with OSes that follow standards? They were NOT the one deploying software, MS was, and MS failed to meet the standard.....and hence fucked these customers more than they have a few others.
Of course, not being able to get on the web does decrease the malware they get infected by.
1st Use of the epithet "Spics" is racist in and of itself.
2nd. Beyond the use of false SSNs to get hired, illegal immigrants do contribute to the tax base by their spending. As they rent a place, the tax on that rental income is sent in by the landlord. They buy clothes, food, etc. Again, taxes are paid.
3rd. By the use of false SSNs, the majority of illegal immigrants will never collect on the social security they paid into.
4th. The majority of illegal immigrants that cross our southern borders are not Mexican, but are a mixture of central and south Americans.
5th. The people that caused us some issues on Sept 11, 2001 came into the US legally or via Canada. In contrast, the ones coming up from the south are finding employment in the worst jobs we can provide.
You may carry a weapon while wearing the Red Cross as medical personnel for the purpose of defending your patients.
The Union Flag (the Jack is only on ships), is for the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. The flag is made up of the flags of St George (England- Red Vertical cross on a white field), St Andrew (White diagonal cross on a blue field) and St Patrick (Red diagonal cross on a white field).
So, as the parent stated, the flag of ENGLAND (not Britain) is a Red Cross on a White Field.
For those in the US military, to be able to go on Emergency Leave requires the ARC to notify the military member's unit of the situation after being notified by the family. The post in question stated the uncle died and word was to be sent to the soldier in question. The ARC failed to do their job (as part of their Congressional charter) and therefore the family was forced to use other channels (who invariably tell the ARC to verify the situation).
My father served in the US military 1950-1975...and hated the ARC prior to his service as a result of his interaction with them after a plane crash in the early mid 1940s. His interaction with them while in the miltary did nothing to change his impression of them.
I have served in the military since 1986 (and still counting) and my opinion of the ARC is no better than my father's based on my experiences with them and witnessing the experiences that others have had with them.
Corrected timeline:
Step 1. Red Cross created.
Step 2. Red Cross organization, havign the name RED CROSS, began using a RED CROSS as their symbol.
Step 3. Johnson and Johnson created 6 years later.
Step 4. J&J begin using a Red Cross, made popular by the RED CROSS ORGANIZATION as a logo. They do so without paying the charity anything, but that is OK, the Charity does not care.
Step 4.5. Founder of Red Cross enters agreement/contract with J&J over usage of symbol
Step 5. Congress approves Red Cross as a charity.
Step 6. More than 100 years go by.
Step 7. The Charity Red Cross , violating the agreement with J&J, makes a small amount of money licensing some buisnesses to use the Red Cross as a logo.
Step 8. J&J, knowing they had a contract/agreement to use the Red Cross symbol from a charity called RED CROSS, sues the Charity for trademark breach.