White Morons

Originally posted by FishHead111
Ya mean people landing at international airports all over the world have asked for permission in advance to land there? Having a passport isn't good enough?

Freedom to travel without visa restrictions depends on what passport you hold.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3021237/The-powerful-passports-world-revealed-ones-barely-let-travel-anywhere.html

The score was calculated based on visa regulations of all countries and territories in the world, and the number of other countries that their citizens can travel to without having to obtain a visa.

Finland, Germany, Sweden, the UK and the US, [shared] first position, who are able to access 174 countries visa-free.

You can get facts like these fairly easily. You do not have to remain a bunch of white morons. Pots - Kettles.

Originally posted by finnegan
Freedom to travel without visa restrictions depends on what passport you hold.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/travel/travel_news/article-3021237/The-powerful-passports-world-revealed-ones-barely-let-travel-anywhere.html

The score was calculated based on visa regulations of all countries and territories in the world, and the number of other countries that ...[text shortened]... ts like these fairly easily. You do not have to remain a bunch of white morons. Pots - Kettles.

Typical finnegan answer, you avoided the question entirely .

Originally posted by FishHead111
Typical finnegan answer, you avoided the question entirely .

Your question: "Having a passport isn't good enough?"

My answer: a source detailing how useful the passpot of any one country is in seeking entry to another country.

Seems pretty relevant and not at all avoiding the question. What is your problem with my answer to your question (other than the usual ones of a personality disorder and low intelligence, expressed in a relentless commitment to racism without regard to evidence)?

Originally posted by finnegan
Your question: "Having a passport isn't good enough?"

My answer: a source detailing how useful the passpot of any one country is in seeking entry to another country.

Seems pretty relevant and not at all avoiding the question. What is your problem with my answer to your question (other than the usual ones of a personality disorder and low intelligence, expressed in a relentless commitment to racism without regard to evidence)?

My question was regarding the claim that one had to ask permission before entering a country.

Originally posted by FishHead111
My question was regarding the claim that one had to ask permission before entering a country.

In general yes, and where mutual agreements between nation states exist (which can be unilaterally revoked at any time) there are often rules for longer visits.

Originally posted by FishHead111
My question was regarding the claim that one had to ask permission before entering a country.

What is a visa?

Originally posted by finnegan
What is a visa?

Don't play the answer a question with a question game., I know what a visa is, and most countries don't require a visa for visitors that just staying for a short period of time, typically 90 days. They don't have to ask permission from anyone if they have a valid passport.

Originally posted by FishHead111
Don't play the answer a question with a question game., I know what a visa is, and most countries don't require a visa for visitors that just staying for a short period of time, typically 90 days. They don't have to ask permission from anyone if they have a valid passport.

Slow down.

A visa is in effect a permission to enter the country with conditions.

My link showed how any countries allow people to enter without a visa, depending on which passport they hold.

Having some passports is good enough more often than having some others.

QED

Originally posted by finnegan
Slow down.

A visa is in effect a permission to enter the country with conditions.

My link showed how any countries allow people to enter without a visa, depending on which passport they hold.

Having some passports is good enough more often than having some others.

QED

So in a nutshell most countries DON'T require you to ask for permission to enter them?
Thanks for the long winded obfuscated answer.

Originally posted by FishHead111
So in a nutshell most countries DON'T require you to ask for permission to enter them?
Thanks for the long winded obfuscated answer.

Your inability to see the point without detailed explanation reflects your status as a moron. If you find my reply either longwinded or obsfuscated, then you are clearly struggling.

Originally posted by finnegan
Your inability to see the point without detailed explanation reflects your status as a moron. If you find my reply either longwinded or obsfuscated, then you are clearly struggling.

So in a nutshell most countries DON'T require you to ask for permission to enter them?

Why is that such a problem for you to say?

Originally posted by Eladar
For some reason it is what leftists want, or at least help to create.

Not THIS leftist. I firmly believe the planet Earth will be a lot better off with ONE billion humans than the present drive to TEN. The Earth needs a good catastrophe to rid itself of human vermin who have nothing more on their minds than the destruction of the ecology that makes life possible.

"We don't give a crap how many species die, we need that oil, we need that coal and we are going to stop at nothing to get it, pisss on those polar bears, we could give a crap if the world heats up 10 degrees, that just means we will have a better growing season'

The right wing mantra.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Not THIS leftist. I firmly believe the planet Earth will be a lot better off with ONE billion humans than the present drive to TEN. The Earth needs a good catastrophe to rid itself of human vermin who have nothing more on their minds than the destruction of the ecology that makes life possible.

"We don't give a crap how many species die, we need that oi ...[text shortened]... s up 10 degrees, that just means we will have a better growing season'

The right wing mantra.

Major catastrophes will not filter based on ideology. Good liberals, and those dependents who worship at that alter will be more likely to demise, than those who are self reliant.

Survivors have always been able to glean from the earth, and from other species the needs to sustain life. In a major catastrophe, beggers will simply go extinct.

Originally posted by sonhouse
Not THIS leftist. I firmly believe the planet Earth will be a lot better off with ONE billion humans than the present drive to TEN. The Earth needs a good catastrophe to rid itself of human vermin who have nothing more on their minds than the destruction of the ecology that makes life possible.

"We don't give a crap how many species die, we need that oi ...[text shortened]... s up 10 degrees, that just means we will have a better growing season'

The right wing mantra.

The Earth is equally "well off" with one billion people as with ten billion, a hundred billion people or no people at all. The Earth is a lump of rock circling around a ball of fire and doesn't care about anything including its own existence or that of beings on it.

Originally posted by KazetNagorra
The Earth is equally "well off" with one billion people as with ten billion, a hundred billion people or no people at all. The Earth is a lump of rock circling around a ball of fire and doesn't care about anything including its own existence or that of beings on it.

That's true, but humans seem to dominate what goes on around this hunk of rock, as other species apparently did before them.

I wonder if any critters were worried about the dinosaurs becoming extinct?