Comment The title is the summary (Score 0) 24
FTFY:
Zothecula writes
Zothecula writes
Neither, it's Australian.
And its common name is Bruce.
"Member of a neo-Nazi gang, her day job is to take care of four crazy old people that all are just waiting to die. Her life becomes a journey into a burlesque fairytale, where the rules of the game are created by Mette herself. Mette is indifferent about her way of life, until she one night assaults a man, kicking him senseless. Waking up the day after, she realizes that something is wrong, and in company with the her crazy oldies she longs for respect and love. She can tell that the old folks are marginalized by the modern society, but together they create a world and a voice of their own."
As I can see by the comments made here, I realize I'm not alone in thinking that the border control in the USA is outrageous and insulting. It happens that I recently visited the States (in fact, Chicago) and I was pretty close to not want to get into the country and flight back to Barcelona (Spain) just because of the way they were treating me and the way I was feeling: am I a thief, a terrorist?
I've been to the States three times, and every single one of them I've had to get to to Homeland Security and explain the reason of my trip. Once was because I was staying too long! I was visiting a friend and staying at her house for 7weeks which, apparently was not right
The last time, my mum had a lighter in the suitcase. They told us she couldn't keep it. Why? Because it was rechargeable... wtf?? Am I not allowed to get 100ml into bottles on the plain? Why not a lighter?
I don't even wanna talk about the fact that they have the *right* to break through your baggage even if that means they have to break it! ARGGG it happened this to me on this very trip! And I could not protest!
Well, I think I made my point...
It'll probably take a long time to me to get back to the states, there are plenty of places to get where I'll be treated properly ( note: I'm not talking about the american citiziens themselves, who happen to be very welcoming and friendly).
Damnshock
'You're moving into a land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas. You've just crossed over into... the Twilight Zone.'
Is not what the intro to my first episode says...
I wasn'a around at the time, and YouTube stated it was down for maintenance when I was going to check the link.
However;
The intro to the first episode (1959) that I watched says:
'You're traveling through another dimension. A dimension not only of sight and sound, but of mind. A journey into a wonderous land whose boundaries are that of imagination. At the sign-post up ahead, your next stop - The Twilight Zone'
I guess there may have been alternate intros though...
Why not make the source itself a formal language?
It already IS a formal language: American English Leagalese.
This language started out as essentially the language as spoken at the time the early laws were written, then various words had their meanings defined, clarified, and frozen by court decisions. Further laws, contracts, and legal arguments and decisions used these words whose meanings were clarified in preference to other words that had not been so clarified. Meanwhile, in the absense of public education in the law for people who weren't making a carreer in the legal system, the spoken language drifted away.
I don't see what was particularly veiled about the commentary in the show. Half the time, Serling himself would outright state the moral the end, or the beginning.
If you read the Papers written by middle class idiots who'd be afraid of their shadow in most working class neighborhoods of the world
There, corrected for ya, I grew up in a neighborhood the newspaper like to describe as "omg violent gangs shooting each other" and yet, the ministry of justice's statistics hint (let's face it they wouldn't tell it) at the very well known fact that there's more police brutality going on than actual violent crime.
Crime requires an injured party. Who am I injuring when I'm carrying weed in my pocket? I mean, besides the hurt feelings of some person who believes they can tell me what I can or cannot do with my own person...
Pray tell, why are you so pissy about this?
You call it 'pissy' because you disagree with me and believe that making an Ad Hominem attack will somehow help you make a point. I call it 'passionate'. This is one of the key issues of our time.
It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.