unicorn

The policy hides the truly malicious item as #9/10, lumping it in with a bunch of other items with which everyone would agree. Obviously, action must be taken against verbally or physically abusive passengers. However, comments about negative experiences on "social media" or "the internet" should not result in adverse action. Negative comments could be taken constructively--to help the airline identify areas for potential improvement. Too bad JAL/ANA don't see it that way.

I detest Trump as much as anyone. He's certainly the most horrific POTUS of all time. But Biden is clearly going down the tubes. What's most concerning is that, as is typical for those with dementia, he has no insight into his loss of cognitive function, and ignores the deafening advice from almost everyone to quit for the good of the country. When my mother had dementia, she was convinced that all of her children, her family doctor, neurologist, etc., were in a conspiracy to label her demented. She also had excuses for everything. When she called the police to report her car stolen, because she couldn't remember where she parked it, it was the city's fault because of "bad lighting." Leaving the gas on, so it filled the house, was something "anyone could do." What a horror if his stubbornness leads to the re-election of the most dangerous maniac in this country's history. Unclear if the Democratic Party has the power to over-ride his wish to stay in the race.

Hmm. I would think that slander is something which must be determined in the courtroom. Will passengers be banned because they post bad reviews and/or travel vlogs? Sounds like a dangerous precedent, if they get to unilaterally decide that a negative posting constitutes "slander" which can lead to action against passengers.

From the above link: "...The videos allegedly contained children as young as infants, with one depicting a 10-year-old child bound and raped by a man, prosecutors said...". "...The popular adult film star is accused of sending and receiving "hundreds of video of child pornography," according to a press release from the U.S. Attorney's Office in the Southern District of New York...". Hopefully, this is not your "average" case, and he will not get a mean or median sentence. Assuming these allegations are true, a crime could hardly be more horrific. Only serial killers like Dahmer or Gacey are worse.

These lists are quite silly, in my view, because these questions are personal matters and depend on one's values, means, and so on. Sydney certainly has a pretty setting, but I find the geography makes traffic quite messy, due to all of the peninsulas and limitations of water transportation. Melbourne isn't as pretty, but getting around is easier. Similarly, SF geography makes traffic horrible due to the bottlenecks. In LA and in Melbourne, if there are traffic issues, one can get around them. Personally, I'd blow my brains out if the alternative were to live in a place with a climate like Calgary's.

There was nothing for me to forget. I was just quoting hard, factual statistics. Nor did I forget matryoshka dolls. I didn't say there wasn't anything Russians make, obviously. What cannot be denied is that the country survives almost entirely on its ability to sell its raw materials. And it's "You forgot that tens of nuclear reactors THAT Russia has built...". (or WHICH)

The things he did are absolutely horrific. This guy should never see the light of day again.

I didn't say nobody wants to buy anything that comes out of Russia. I said that Russians don't actually manufacture much of value. What I said was that the vast majority of what Russia sells is simply stuff they dig out of the ground. Russia is blessed with an abundance of natural resources (oil, gas, minerals, gems, timber, etc.), but goods which actually require the skill or intelligence of Russians to build are not among Russia's important exports. Russians have a lot of natural resources (including a large population), but skill and intelligence aren't among the Russians' resources. These are Russia's main exports: # Export product Value ($) 1 Crude Petroleum 121,443 2 Refined Petroleum 66,887 3 Unspecified commodities 55,265 4 Coal 15,987 5 Petroleum Gas 9,501 6 Wheat 6,399 7 Semi-Finished Iron 6,090 8 Gold 5,740 9 Platinum 5,121 10 Raw Aluminium 4,640 11 Sawn Wood 4,506 12 Oils 4,458 13 Copper 4,137 14 Diamonds 3,768 15 Chemical Fertilizers (Nitrogen, Phosphorus, Potassium) 3,165 16 Nitrogenous Fertilizers 2,896 17 Frozen Fish 2,497 18 Hot-Rolled Iron 2,462 19 Gas Turbines 2,352 20 Potassic Fertilizers 2,337 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_exports_of_Russia Of these, only ONE, gas turbines, is it something Russians actually manufacture themselves, coming in at a low 19th. For 13 years, I had a boyfriend who used to be Russian (born there). As I recall telling him, there are two words to describe a talented and/or intelligent Russian: formerly Russian. He hasn't stepped foot on Russian soil in almost 2 decades and has no desire to do so again. Our neighbors across the street at the time also used to be Russian, and only visited Russia once in 4 decades--during the World Cup. They don't miss it either.

Everybody but you understood that he was commenting that the Soviet Union left a bunch of mostly loser countries, mostly run by despots, whose citizens want to leave. The exceptions, of course, are the countries which embraced free elections and joined the west (i.e. the Baltic nations). The only reason Russia isn't also a completely impoverished, loser country is because what you dig out of the ground. Nobody wants to buy anything Russians actually manufacture. People only buy Russian raw materials (of which, thankfully for them, they have plenty).

You're the one who brought up the subject.

Factually false. This is the current situation: Visa requirements for Russian citizens holding ordinary passports Russia Unlimited Visa not required Visa on arrival eVisa Visa available both on arrival or online Visa-free for group tourists Visa required Admission generally refused

Is he Muslim? Polygamy is only legal in Muslim countries (blue), or only allowed for Muslims in countries with significant Muslim minorities (green and brown): Thailand is in the black area (not legal for anyone).

Interesting. The VB is a right-wing anti-gay, anti-immigrant, anti-abortion, anti-anything that isn't Flemish party. Surprising that he had a Thai girlfriend, since the party he supports believes the Flemish are superior to everyone else.

But to answer your question, "pumping the stomach" usually refers to the placement of a nasogastric tube, then hooking that tube up to low intermittent suction.

Definitely old enough to know better. I hope he has to pay for all of the damage he caused.

It looks as though you're right, unlike in California, there is no enhancement in New York for refusing a BAC test. Probably works out best, if you're dead drunk as JT was, to refuse the test: https://www.bradmazarin.com/test-refusals-in-new-york-state#:~:text=In addition%2C there is a,prior refusal within five years. "...If a person who has been lawfully arrested for DWI in New York State refuses to take a breath test, after being warned of the consequences for doing so, his/her license or privilege to drive in New York will be suspended for either 15 days or until a hearing is held at Department of Motor Vehicles. If the Administrative Law Judge at DMV finds that the driver has refused to submit to a chemical test, his/her license or driving privilege will be revoked for one year. In addition, there is a $500 civil penalty as well as $250 in surcharges each year for three years. Finally, the refusal can be used as evidence of consciousness of guilt in a subsequent criminal trial. The penalties are more severe for individuals who have a prior refusal within five years...". If a person who has been lawfully arrested for DWI in New York State refuses to take a breath test, after being warned of the consequences for doing so, his/her license or privilege to drive in New York will be suspended for either 15 days or until a hearing is held at Department of Motor Vehicles. If the Administrative Law Judge at DMV finds that the driver has refused to submit to a chemical test, his/her license or driving privilege will be revoked for one year. In addition, there is a $500 civil penalty as well as $250 in surcharges each year for three years. Finally, the refusal can be used as evidence of consciousness of guilt in a subsequent criminal trial. The penalties are more severe for individuals who have a prior refusal within five years. California has a harder line on these refusals: https://hartlevin.com/practice-areas/dui/what-happens-if-you-refuse-a-breathalyzer-test/#:~:text=While it is your right,impact on your legal defense. "...Consequences of Refusing a Breathalyzer Test: 1. Automatic License Suspension: Refusing a breathalyzer test triggers an automatic administrative suspension of your driver’s license, regardless of whether you’re ultimately convicted of a DUI. The suspension period typically lasts longer than for a first-time DUI offense. It’s important to note that this administrative suspension is separate from any suspension imposed by the court. The normal suspension on a first offense DUI with refusal is one year of no driving. There is no ability to drive even for work purposes. The one year suspension is a hard suspension which is why it is critical to fight it. 2. Increased Penalties: If you are later convicted of a DUI after refusing a breathalyzer test, the fact that you refused can be used against you in court. The prosecution may argue that your refusal indicates a consciousness of guilt, potentially leading to enhanced penalties, such as longer license suspensions, mandatory alcohol education programs, or even jail time. The DA’s policy is to ask for a minimum of 48 hours in jail for a refusal, not considering any other aggravating factors that may further enhance the punishment. So it looks like it's sad, but you're probably right. Given that this happened in New York, the consequences for JT will be minor. He'll just need to hire a driver, not a big deal for someone like JT. However, one can hope that the judge will see through this and enhance his penalties...

Pretty shameful.

That posting was probably a joke. But what an asshole for being that fucked up, and not even ordering a Lyft or Uber. The cost would have been insignificant for him. And now he's going to pay big-time. Why endanger others' lives when it would be just as easy for you not to? 😤 Seriously messed up.

These questions can usually be answered quickly by Wikipedia or Google: "Anchorage (Tanaina: Dgheyay Kaq'; Dgheyaytnu), officially the Municipality of Anchorage, is the most populous city in the U.S. state of Alaska. With a population of 291,247 at the 2020 census, it contains nearly 40 percent of the state's population. The Anchorage metropolitan area, which includes Anchorage and the neighboring Matanuska-Susitna Borough, had a population of 398,328 in 2020, accounting for more than half the state's population. At 1,706 sq mi (4,420 km2) of land area, the city is the fourth-largest by area in the U.S...".

Whenever I hear about the Aleuts, this song always pops in my head:

We went to a drag show in Anchorage last Saturday, and I encountered a couple of customs I hadn't encountered before, certainly not in the US. The first was that the entry fee was listed as $5 for those identifying as LGBTQ+, and $20 for those identifying as straight/allies. I wonder if such practices are even legal. This practice does bother me somewhat. It certainly doesn't seem to promote a spirit of equality. Most of the crowd were clearly LGBTQ+, but there were three couples in which the men made a point to lavish their female guests with PDA's. I wonder if they paid the higher fee, just to avoid identifying at LGBTQ+. The 2nd thing I'd never seen before (but my fiance had), was a drag king, who hosted the festivities. Basically, it was a lesbian with a painted-on beard, and a hair muscle chest plastic board which covered the breasts. Have any of you seen either of these customs before? https://madmyrnas.com/events/diva-variety-show The drag king was Hank Van Dickerson: https://madmyrnas.com/divas

While I think it's always a bad idea to have sex with anyone under 18, apparently the law only makes it illegal if the sex is "commercial" for ages 16 and 17, or in any case if the person is under 16: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PROTECT_Act_of_2003#:~:text=In the case United States,still faces an obscenity charge. "...For the purposes of this law, illicit sexual conduct is defined as commercial sex with or sexual abuse of anyone under 18, or any sex with anyone under 16...".

Well, some may recall the string I posted several months ago when the hotel receptionist carded my then 30 year-old fiance because he thought I might be involved with a minor! 😤

I feel a song coming on...

Laws vary from country to country and state to state. I'm not interested in having sex with anyone under 18, but if I were, I would research local laws very carefully. The age of consent may be under 18 in most places, but it may depend with whom and/or under what circumstances. It may be legal to have sex with a 16 year-old, but if he were to complain he was pressured, one could find oneself in deep doo-doo. Just stick to men 18+, and don't stay up all night worrying. I was certainly willing and able to consent when I was 16, but the law can get tricky.