Just now, ubonjoe said:

That entirely depends upon what country you are applying for a passport for,.

Most do not do all of that since applications can be done by mail. Just the photo and the info shown on data page is on the chip.

Agreed, I was referring to the more technologically advanced places.  I know for sure that Hong Kong does it for its ID cards.

At least they have seats on Thai.  My last direct flight to UK was on BA and I had to stand for over half the flight because the seat pan was broken, before I sat on it!  After a couple of hours it was too painful to remain seated as my back started to ache from the abnormal position and stresses.  Cabin crew were very good and apologetic but there were no other seats on the plane as it was January 1st and completely full.  Had to sit in it for the landing and that could have been very dangerous if it had collapsed completely.

Cabin crew made official complaint for me and I received a reply from their Customer Service Head Office in Newcastle acknowledging the seat was broken and they promised to fix it.  They acknowledged the seat was an important part of their service but all that I got was an official apology.  I wrote back and they 'generously' offered me a voucher for 20 quid.  When returning via Heathrow I asked where the customer service office was at Terminal 5.........there isn't one, you have to email Newcastle!

I do not do do Facebook or Twitter so perhaps they check these first to see how much damage you can do online before offering adequate compensation.

NEVER, NEVER, NEVER fly BA.

To the best of my knowledge digital data is captured for facial, iris and fingerprint recognition and is collected at the time of applying for a passport.  This is then converted to a readable code and embedded to the chip or digital watermark on an ID card or passport.

When going through a passport control the scanner reads the code and then performs the checks using the technology at the border control point.  Intervention or action by Border Control staff only happens when the system cannot verify the person.  Border control organisations do keep file copies of the data but the checking point does not refer to that database for a match as it would take ages to check against a file containing several million people; far quicker to check against that held on the card/passport.

Fingerprints and irises cannot be changed and facial recognition is based upon several specific identifying points on the face which, when checked together give an accurate reading of the person using it and sufficient to accept as proof of ID; especially when done in conjunction with iris and fingerprint scans.

I renewed my passport a few years ago and I'm fairly certain this new recognition data was collected, it is one of the reasons that the number of issuing offices has been reduced as it would be prohibitively expensive for each Consular office to be equipped to provide this service.

I think the passport photo is just there to embarrass us!

16 hours ago, overherebc said:

Nah mate, if you listen to Alf Garnett you'd know Jesus was church of england see, Moses now, well 'e was jewish, ah mean let's face it in the 'beginning' there was 20 commandments, but, bein' one of yir jews like, he did a deal an' got it down to 12 for a discount. Obvious innit.

I see, does that mean we can't take the bible as gospel then?

Wasn't it in Bangladesh a few years ago that the central banking communication system was hacked by professionals and millions/billions lost?  I'm sure they retired after that!  Or did they look around for other systems in the world that may not have the best firewalls and computer security systems?

Just asking!

Just now, Enoon said:

 

It wasn't always so.

 

The words of (St) Paul in his letter to the Corinthians:

 

"Haven't I the right to follow the example of the other apostles and the Lord's brothers and Peter, by taking a Christian wife with me on my travels?

 

The existence of (St) Peters wife has been written out of "mainstream" Christian history, choosing to ignore this specific reference to her accompanying him.

 

 

Seems a little odd as most of the followers of Christ, according to the Bible written a few hundred years after his existence, referred to themselves as followers of Christ not as Christians.  That was a term given to them later.  From what is written of Jesus of Nazareth, a Jew, it would be difficult to accept that he would acknowledge such a reference during his life.  He was a modest and unassuming man from what everybody seems to agree.  It would seem logical to assume that words of St Paul, quoted above, may not have been his words but something attributed to him.  The words of the Bible do not appear wholly truthful.

8 hours ago, cookieqw said:

monkeys are

 

And people say we have evolved!  I stand corrected, but I would like to hear of the case of the monkey assisting another to rape a sibling; must watch National Geographic more often.

Civilisation evolves and takes the time to record known, proven truths; years ago this was not the case and the storytelling/fables/religion was used to pass on messages on morals and rules to live by.  Laws are based on a consensus by mankind who decide what are the rules within which a civilised society should operate; those rules are always open, in a free society, to question as we learn more about ourselves and the world around us.  Indoctrination of children is not necessary as education is the key, as long as they are able to learn and understand the logic behind the rules they are capable of eventually making their own decision on whether to abide by them and face the consequences laid down by civilisation if they don't.

A belief in a supreme power is something claimed by the various representatives of religions, they not only question the rules but completely ignore them and then disobey them.  If they can ignore the laws given by their supreme power to the extent that they have been shown to do, then why can't everybody else?

The capacity for good and evil is inside every person, whether they choose one or the other is based on personal choice and circumstances.  That choice is better influenced by knowledge than belief.

Quoted from JAG

'If you are a Roman Catholic, then you believe that the Church is Almighty God's creation, and not for man to dispose of.' 

I am happy for everyone in the world to follow their chosen belief system but I am open to persuasion how, according to your claim above, the Church is Almighty God's creation but its leaders carry out such abhorrent crimes.  If the Church is flawed to the extent that is now becoming very clear, then why did an Almighty God create it in the first place.  By extension the claim leads to Almighty God creating something for sick and twisted individuals to pervert and use for their own personal gains and criminal sexual gratification.

I think your quote should read, 'If you are a Roman Catholic, then you are told that the Church is Almighty God's creation, and not for man to dispose of.'  Perhaps man should man up and do something about it if not dispose of it?

Vatican voices 'shame and sorrow' over damning sex abuse report.

It is now August 2018 and the abuse has been going on, reported, covered up and denied for decades.  How many lives have been destroyed by the actions of these predatory criminals who abuse the trust placed in them by simple people?  They claim to be disciples and spokesmen for God and Christ, perhaps now is the time for the omniscient and omnipotent 'God' to strike them down?  To this organisation it appears to be all about numbers, influence and profit; they make the robber barons of the dark ages seem positively saintly.

Just now, hyku1147 said:

A sad trans oceanic parallel:

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2018/08/14/stunning-findings-on-report-catholic-church-abuse-pa-priests-molested-more-than-1000-children.html

 

Yes, I heard that earlier on the news.  As we go along there are more and more instances of abuse and an organisational cover up extending to the highest reaches of the church.  It is hard to comprehend the thought processes of these people that think the reputation of their organisation is more important than any abuse of children.  The church has lost all authority to preach morals and good behaviour.  

It claims to be a nation state and the Vatican is considered so; but if the diplomats of any other nation state committed such acts on a widespread scale, and were protected by their country, there would be international sanctions and reprisals on a global scale.

Just now, lambchops said:

 

To this day many are in a sense complicit in many things that are reasonably considered offensive to a civil society.

Wife beating/ occasional slapping/intimidation would top the list.

I really don't see how you can compare sexual molestation and RAPE of a child to wife beating/occasional slapping/intimidation.  None of the aforesaid are acceptable but the organised cover up by a religious body of the deeply offensive and criminal actions of its own staff is utterly reprehensible.

A quick overview of criminology may even lead you to realise that spousal abuse is often carried out by individuals who were physically or sexually abused as children.

15 hours ago, Small Joke said:

The CP of China, barstewards that they are, are on the case in this regard, the latest BS there is Falun Gong.

It's one thing to allow free thought, even permit the feeble minded their false comfort from imaginary sky daddies, it's quite another to hijack developing human minds, as religions do, without accountability.

And I might add, atheist Governments use the same shit to push nationalistic agendas.

I'm against all forms of thought control.

One day, this brainwashing for (insert your heavenly cop here) will be a form of child abuse, as it should be.

Religion only exists because rational thought continues to be discouraged in youngsters under age 7, by adult children who were brainwashed under age 7, myself included.

Santa being the biggest example of how real these ideas are to kids. Then, after 7 that shit is hardwired, and it takes exceptional effort to break out.

Let them pray to the three wise monkeys for all I care, but tax, and if necessary, jail their leaders -like the rest of us.

Well, you've just ruined my Xmas!  Next thing you'll be claiming is that reindeer can't fly.

The Hyatt Regency is right next door to an MTR station.  The MTR lines can get busy but, from memory, start around 0530 ish and finish after midnight.  Broaden your search to other hotels next to an MTR station and you might decide it's worth the commute of 20-30 minutes for the cheaper hotel.  Use a search engine with your cost parameters then find out where the place is.

I lived in HK for over 30 years and happy to answer any queries you have by PM.

Just now, JAG said:

I don't know how it was treated by the Roman Catholic Church. Since he was prosecuted and sentenced by the Australian authorities one assumes they were party to the progress. 

 

Are you sure that you are not extending your contempt for the despicable acts of the abusers, and now proven by the courts to be condoned by this man, to the entire "bead rattling community". 

I can accept that you despise the Roman Catholic Church as an institution, and maybe hold in contempt its beliefs. I do wonder to what extent you believe these acts reflect and should colour the worldwide two millenia old institution. 

I fully accept and respect your belief system.  I am not so sure that a thorough examination of the worldwide two millenia old institution reflects very well on it.  Stephen Fry puts it far more eloquently than I could.

11 hours ago, Briggsy said:

Check out the lorry stopped just before the edge.

He probably left a few skid marks!

2 hours ago, worgeordie said:

The exhaust smoke that contains Carbon monoxide,on  a faulty exhaust system 

can you have one without the other as you say Carbon monoxide is odorless,

but exhaust smoke is not,it stinks.

Maybe you're right,but we will never know as there are very rarely follow ups

from the media in cases like this.

regards worgeordie

According to my wife I'm never right!

Agree with you on exhaust smoke smell, unfortunately it can sometimes be ignored with fatal results after only a few minutes.  I have once suffered the after effects, vomiting, nausea and headaches, from driving a vehicle with the hatch back open and the exhaust smoke circulated through the vehicle even though I had all windows open.  Air does not directly pass through the vehicle but causes vortices that cause the exhaust smoke to be trapped.  Seen the same in small open boats with a CS gas grenade in them where, very surprisingly, the CS is not blown away at high speed but circulates within the confines of the boat for quite a period of time. 

Sitting in the back of a pick up truck is also not the healthiest place to be.

Sadly I also don't think we will get any follow up on the cause of death.

Just now, atyclb said:

 

 

you might consider staying up to date aka current on things

No need, 'tebee' explained it to me on the last page.  Perhaps you missed it?  Apparently the policy changed in 2013.  Happy in my own little world.

Just now, zydeco said:

According to the Chinese way of measuring age, the 6 year old would qualify. When born he would have been 1. Add five and you get 6.

That's true.  Does that mean I could have started drinking in pubs at 17?  I actually started at 15, but that's neither here nor there, and so was I on many a night out!

Just now, worgeordie said:

28 years young,if the exhaust was faulty as some theorise,I am

sure the young lad would have smelt it.

I just hope they find the real cause of his death,and its not just

a cover up.

regards Worgeordie

Carbon monoxide is colourless and odourless; I think it is sometimes referred to as the 'silent killer'.  I'm not theorising anything just pointing out alternatives to the suicide or heart attack options.

Just now, tebee said:

Used to have 

 

In November 2013, following the Third Plenum of the 18th Central Committee of the Chinese Communist Party, China announced the decision to relax the one-child policy. Under the new policy, families could have two children if one parent, rather than both parents, was an only child

Both kids born before that date.