Jump to content

All Activity

This stream auto-updates     

  1. Last week
  2. Earlier
  3. Erin, any luck with your project ? I would like to know.
  4. The single most interesting thing about newman's recent postings, aside from the fact that he has re-ignited the issue of having some substantiation for them, is the fact (and this is an indisputable fact) that the "total all out nuclear attack" he advocates being launched against China would likewise result in a total all out nuclear attack on the United States and the rest of the world. Should the U.S. launch newman's total all out nuclear attack on China, they would undoubtedly retaliate in kind and with equal devastation. That's the premise behind "mutual assured destruction" (you can look it up). And that would draw in the Russians, North Korea, Israel, Iran, India and Pakistan, Ukraine and whomever else has The Bomb. True, Costa Rica might be spared the immediate effects of a worldwide nuclear conflagration, but the radioactive fallout alone would get the rest of us, even newman. The good news, should newman get his way, is that it would reduce the matter of the coronavirus to a mere footnote in history. That is, of course, if there were anyone left alive to write that history which there wouldn't be. Amusing side note: Last week, a rent-a-cop at PriceSmart told me that there is a secret worldwide society which unleashes all these disasters like the coronavirus on the world for some purpose he could not explain. I explained that there is an even more secretive cabal that makes up and spreads unfounded conspiracy theories like the ones newman wraps his arms around.
  5. Anyone is free to believe whatever bizarre notion that pops into their heads. But if you post something, you presumably want others to share that belief. If the only basis for that belief is "because I think it's true" then you aren't going to persuade others to share it - so what's the point? As for the original post, yes, it's true that the US State Department is aiding Americans abroad in getting back to the US - but only because so many flights have been canceled since the pandemic surfaced that many are having a hard time getting home. The State Department did the same thing after September 11, 2001 when many Americans abroad were also stranded. It has absolutely nothing to do with any alleged impending attack on China.
  6. Hi I agree that there is not 1 shred of fact in the conspiracy theory that China made this virus. If they did, then did they make all of the previous Viruses that have been spawned in China? Something must be done about china though, more strong sanctions from EVERY country in the world, only to be lifted when China can demonstate that they have stopped all the live torture and slaughter of dogs, cats, bats and who knows what else, in open markets. D
  7. Perhaps we can't, but they ought to –and should– be required to substantiate what they report so that others who are interested can verify the information. PM ==
  8. Suggesting in unsubstantiated fashion that China has committed an act of war by manufacturing a global virus and that they should be retalliated against with a nuclear attack is not sensible. Not sensible when that report has be shown by Snopes.com to be false. Spreading such unfounded concerns can only cause unnecessary panic in sectors of the public so should not be encouraged without verification from reliable sources. PM ==
  9. You can't convince someone who believes in conspiracy theories that they are wrong. T
  10. newmans 1st post: facts stated, then his beliefs based on the facts. He expanded on those beliefs in his second post in answer to David's question. Of course we may not always agree with one another . Global Advisory from travel.state.gov "U.S. citizens who live in the United States should arrange for immediate return to the United States, unless they are prepared to remain abroad for an indefinite period" 19.3.20 Since when did we need to substantiate our beliefs or did I miss something?
  11. REMINDER! Be civil when posting replies! Replies are welcome, but if a member cannot reply in polite fashion to another member's post then s/he should just not reply. Abusive posts will absolutely not be tolerated so, members who cannot make a civil reply may be placed on moderated status, suspended from posting, or even removed from the Forums without further comment. Thank You – Moderator - -
  12. If you have actual proof that this virus was deliberately engineered and released by the government of China then put up - or shut up. If a country wanted to unleash biological warfare against another it would be pretty stupid to infect its own people first in the hope that they would then carry it to other countries.
  13. Newman, how do you substantiate your claims here? You cite no reliable news source to verify that any of what you have posted is fact. This pandemic is nothing more than a very serious health concern and as such it is a wholly non-partisan organism: The virus doesn't care who you are, whether you are black, white, green, male or female; it is an equal opportunity, non-discriminatory, infectious organism. As such it makes no sense for some malicious entity or faction to release an infectious agent which would also infect and kill them as well! Please stop with the consipracy theories, Newman. So UNLESS you cite some reliable sources to back your statements up this thread is closed. Thank You – Moderator - -
  14. what china has done is an act of war - to unleash on the world a biological agent of such horrendous destruction is an act of a group of monstrous minds - a total all out nuclear attack is warranted against china!
  15. What do you believe the USA is going to "hit" China with, newman? And why?
  16. Hello, I am in Costa Rica right now. I am from the US. I have been applying synthetic stucco in the US for almost 30 years. I have been to countless classes on its application. I am one of the good ones. If there is anything I can do to help, just let me know. My email is stuccodavid@hotmaillcom. I don't have any of my tools with me but it wouldn't take much to get them.
  17. I used to rent a nice condo in guachipelin, escazu and I had roosters crowing every morning. we are never immune from farm animals here, lol
  18. I think Dennis makes some good points immediately above. Whether you're looking to rent, buy or build, it's important to realize that Costa Rica's land use restrictions are very lax. There's little to keep someone from building a hog farm or drop forge on the lot next to and upwind from your own. A useful caution would be to never buy or rent anything you haven't seen in person and that you haven't visited during the day and at night. Roosters may not crow much during the day, but we lived briefly in a place where they crowed all night -- ALL NIGHT LONG! Real estate listings may show the structure being offered, but what of the neighbors and their dogs and chickens? If all you're looking for in a place to live is somewhere to get in out of the rain, then renting may be your best option, but if you're a "nester", as we are and as Dennis appears to be, then owning your own piece of the rock is important. If I had any choice at all, I'd not only buy but I'd build. I've seen a lot of houses, here and up north, that were built in accordance with the builder's preferences but I've seen very few that would satisfy our interests. So build we would build and build we did -- four times, actually. Others may not be so picky and that's fine for them, but living with someone else's mistakes and misconceptions is not for us.
  19. Tom and Marcia. We here are not working in a vacuum, we have talked to many lawyers, city officials, etc. I know I do not own the land, I am not stupid, but the fact that I do not own the land is 'irrelevant' if the squatter is building a structure that does not adhere to their codes, that is why they could still make him take it down. I have heard the excuse of 'physical retribution' before, and I am not a fan of it. Many many folks, expats as well as ticos, are not happy with this squatter and we are not going hide because someone who is taking property that does not belong to them is pissed off. I am also not a fan of "It's better to rent" I've been hearing that for 5 years. I came here wanting to buy, to enjoy working on MY property, and having an asset to leave my heir. but thanks for the comments If I could do it all over again, I would make sure that I knew who owned the vacant land below me, and if I could contact the owner, if the taxes are paid, and how much is it? Dennis
  20. BTW. A better name for a paid squatter is a caretaker. They protect your property from unwanted squatters. T
  21. I'm no lawyer (in any county). But, it doesn't sound like you have any standing in this. You don't own the lot and even though you paid six figures for your view, you don't own that other lot or the view. The person who has nothing or his family could also take physical actions against you if you threaten his family's home. This is another real example of why it is best to rent. You can move easier than you can move others. Interest on six figures in CD's pay most people's rent. I would be very cautious. T
  22. Muni Inspectors came to the property, but cannot finish the process until later because of COVID-19
  23. us state department has advised all americans overseas to get home - they have dispatched aircraft to guatemala/morrocco and other sites to get any americans home that want to get back - they are evacuating all non essential personnel from embassies - I believe that the USA is going to "hit" red china!
  24. Okay Gents. Okay to disagree but please be sure y'all keep things civil. Thanx! PM ==
  25. Exactly right again, Steve. One account of someone paying squatters to occupy a property hardly qualifies as proof of widespread abuses. Note, too, that nowhere in the article does the author assert that squatting, paid or not, is common. He refers only to one or two instances. We have still to learn of the source of Derrick's assertion and so must take it for a figment of his colorful imagination (and maybe bias). Derrick, that's all you've got? " . . Get over yourself . . . "? Still nothing to back up your assertion of "fact"? We can only conclude that you were, in fact, fabricating this "fact" out of your colorful imagination and will regard it as such. Consider the implications for your future contributions here.
  1. Load more activity
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.