Travel Trends: 100 Most Visited Cities

Figures released from Euromonitor International Top City Destinations Ranking, covering 100 of the world's leading and most dynamic cities in terms of international tourist arrivals have just been released for 2011. Report shows emerging city destinations located in Asia Pacific saw an increase due to a strong economic environment.

While many cities remained in the same rank, Vietnam showed a particularly strong performance with Ho Chi Minh and Hanoi experiencing 40% growth for the second consecutive year, with future demand is likely to be driven by other Vietnamese cities including Hue, Hoi An, Nha Trang and Phu Quoc emerging as international tourists look to discover more new places.

Uncertainty in the global economy still exists, especially in the US and Europe, future growth will be driven by Asia Pacific, the Middle East, Africa and Latin America.

Top City Destinations Ranking 2011
Country	City	Rank	2011 Growth (%)
Hong Kong, China	Hong Kong	1	8.8
Singapore	Singapore	2	8.7
United Kingdom	London	3	2.7
Malaysia	Kuala Lumpur	4	16.0
China	Macau	5	8.4
Thailand	Bangkok	6	12.5
Turkey	Antalya	7	13.3
China	Shenzhen	8	6.8
USA	New York City	9	3.5
Turkey	Istanbul	10	20.2
China	Guangzhou	11	8.9
France	Paris	12	3.5
United Arab Emirates	Dubai	13	-0.1
China	Shanghai	14	-5.8
USA	Miami	15	7.1
Saudi Arabia	Mecca	16	4.7
Thailand	Pattaya	17	10.5
Italy	Rome	18	4.5
USA	Las Vegas	19	4.2
Spain	Barcelona	20	4.0
Taiwan	Taipei	21	51.3
China	Beijing	22	5.1
USA	Los Angeles	23	8.1
Thailand	Phuket	24	9.5
Hungary	Budapest	25	8.5
Netherlands	Amsterdam	26	12.8
Russia	Moscow	27	11.5
USA	Orlando	28	4.1
Czech Republic	Prague	29	0.0
Germany	Berlin	30	7.5
Austria	Vienna	31	4.8
Turkey	Mugla	32	11.9
Vietnam	Ho Chi Minh	33	45.1
Spain	Madrid	34	0.8
Ukraine	Kiev	35	6.6
Poland	Warsaw	36	35.0
Ireland	Dublin	37	-6.7
Egypt	Cairo	38	-35.0
Turkey	Edirne	39	9.3
China	Zhuhai	40	-2.2
India	Chennai	41	14.0
China	Hangzhou	42	14.2
Argentina	Buenos Aires	43	9.2
USA	San Francisco	44	2.9
Russia	St Petersburg	45	16.0
South Korea	Seoul	46	1.7
Mexico	Mexico City	47	3.7
Japan	Tokyo	48	-28.0
Canada	Toronto	49	0.3
India	Delhi	50	15.0
Australia	Sydney	51	0.2
Indonesia	Denpasar	52	0.5
Mexico	Cancún	53	9.1
Peru	Lima	54	30.0
China	Suzhou	55	14.0
Romania	Bucharest	56	10.0
India	Mumbai	57	7.0
Belgium	Brussels	58	2.1
Dominican Republic	Punta Cana	59	11.0
South Africa	Johannesburg	60	8.4
Germany	Munich	61	4.0
France	Nice	62	2.6
New Zealand	Auckland	63	7.7
Portugal	Lisbon	64	5.4
India	Agra	65	15.0
Italy	Milan	66	4.8
India	Jaipur	67	16.0
Morocco	Marrakech	68	1.2
Egypt	Sharm el Sheikh	69	-21.6
Saudi Arabia	East Province	70	6.4
Syria	Damascus	71	-18.4
Canada	Vancouver	72	-6.6
Indonesia	Jakarta	73	0.3
Bulgaria	Burgas	74	7.7
Syria	Aleppo	75	-12.3
Italy	Venice	76	4.7
Philippines	Manila	77	23.0
Italy	Florence	78	4.5
Bulgaria	Varna	79	7.4
Kenya	Nairobi	80	40.3
USA	Honolulu	81	2.8
Greece	Athens	82	2.0
Vietnam	Hanoi	83	41.5
New Zealand	Christchurch	84	-0.5
United Arab Emirates	Abu Dhabi	85	6.3
Brazil	Rio de Janeiro	86	7.0
China	Guilin	87	14.3
Australia	Melbourne	88	14.4
Brazil	São Paulo	89	3.0
Thailand	Chiang Mai	90	6.3
USA	Washington DC	91	2.6
Saudi Arabia	Riyadh	92	6.5
Azerbaijan	Baku	93	8.6
Turkey	Izmir	94	27.1
China	Nanjing	95	14.4
Bulgaria	Sofia-City & Greater Area	96	9.7
Kyrgyzstan	Issyk-Kulskaya Oblast	97	57.6
Belarus	Minsk	98	2.8
India	Kolkatta	99	9.0
Switzerland	Zurich	100	3.3

---

Source: Euromonitor International’s Top 100 City Destinations Ranking (2001 Results)

United States Authorities to decide who can visit Canada, Mexico and Cuba

New rules require British Airways and other airlines flying to certain airports outside America to submit passengers' personal data to US authorities.  The information is checked against a "No Fly" list containing tens of thousands of names. Even if the flight plan steers well clear of US territory, travellers whom the Americans regard as suspicious will be denied boarding. One million British travellers planning to fly to Canada, the Caribbean and Mexico this year face the risk of being turned away at the airport – at the insistence of the US Department of Homeland Security.

WHO IS AFFECTED?
Visitors to Canada. Airports affected: Ottawa, Toronto, Montreal, Halifax, Vancouver, Calgary. Visitors to Mexico. Airports affected: Mexico City and Cancun.  Visitors to Cuba. Airports affected: Havana, Varadero and Holguin

New security checks are already in place, even for flights hundreds of miles from American airspace.

"The concern by the United States for its own security is entirely understandable, but it seems to me it's a whole different issue that American wishes should determine the rights and choices of people travelling between two countries neither of which is the US."

Deputy leader of the Liberal Democrats

Every US-bound passenger has had to provide Advance Passenger Information (API) before departure for several years now, but Washington has extended the obligation to air routes that over-fly US airspace, such as Heathrow to Mexico City or Gatwick to Havana. Now the US is demanding passengers' full names, dates of birth and gender from airlines, at least 72 hour before departure from the UK to Canada. 

Any passenger who refuses to comply will be denied boarding. Those who do supply details may find their trip could be abruptly cancelled by the Department of Homeland Security, which says it will "take boarding pass determinations up until the time a flight leaves the gate ... If a passenger successfully obtains a boarding pass, his/her name is not on the No Fly list." In other words, travellers cannot find out whether they will be accepted on board until they reach the airport. 

Air Canada and British Airways said they would comply with any new rules. The US will have full details of all British visitors to Cuba, including business travellers, which could potentially be used to identify people suspected of breaking America's sanctions against the Castro regime.

"This extension of the rule to include flights that never enter US airspace is scarcely credible. What on earth right does the US have to ask for passenger information if you're flying London-Havana."

Tony Wheeler, founder of Lonely Planet

The land called 'home of the free' seems to be becoming more like a tough parent than a big brother. Canada, Mexico and Cuba cannot do anything to stop this information being passed to US Authorities, acting more like a state within it. It appears to be an extension of US borders, a demonstration of a desire for control of a growing American Empire.

This could lead the way, that one day, Washington may have the authority to get Advance Passenger Information on any flight, and decide if your allowed on - or not.

Source:  Planning a trip to Canada or the Caribbean? US Immigration may have other ideas...

Rule Britannia - Why Britain Will Rule in 2012

Being the Olympic hosts of 2012, it also celebrates the Queens Diamond Julilee, which will make for a summer of events throughout London and the United Kingdom.

A big year for Britain, for it will showcase the world's largest sporting event in the summer, after a massive regeneration of east London, which will only mean prosperity to a nation struggling with financial difficulties. This will boost tourism now and in the coming years for a city which still remains the most visited city on earth!

The year also marks the Queens Diamond Julilee, marking 50 years after the Queen took to the throne. It means a shuffle in bank holidays, and an additional day, making for 4 days of celebration in the first weekend of June,  just 8 weeks before the Olympic opening.

So in tribute to Great Britain, a short video celebrating this nation.

Occupy London Movement - The Debate

The Occupy Movement started as a way to oppose government rules and regulations regarding the banking and financial institutions, in regards to the banking system that got saved by public money, and where wealth is kept in the top 1%.  

The problem with the movement is the lack of agreeing what the movement is about, its focus, and how it can be solved to end such an occupation. Personally, I don't think that even those who are camping here will come to an agreement that will end it. In the end, this movement is one to stay, an eye sore, more like vermin. If true change is to happen, it is by actions, not camping on a site.





This initial statement was agreed by over 500 people on the steps of St Paul’s on 26 October 2011, a work in progress and is used as a basis for further discussion and debate.

• The current system is unsustainable. It is undemocratic and unjust. We need alternatives; this is where we work towards them.

The above statement is true, but offers no solutions as to how this is done.

• We are of all ethnicities, backgrounds, genders, generations, sexualities dis/abilities and faiths. We stand together with occupations all over the world.

We do not stand together around the world, each occupation movement has different agendas, and as a whole the movement is not united in one common goal.

• We refuse to pay for the banks’ crisis.

 Too late, we already have. Lets move on.

• We do not accept the cuts as either necessary or inevitable. We demand an end to global tax injustice and our democracy representing corporations instead of the people.

What does the movement propose? Who will pay? Camping on a site does not contribute towards making our society better, perhaps the movement could be more politically involved.

1. We want regulators to be genuinely independent of the industries they regulate.

The above statement is true, but in the end it is the people that elect the governments, who in turn, create teh regulators.

1. We support the strike on the 30^th November and the student action on the 9^th November, and actions to defend our health services, welfare, education and employment, and to stop wars and arms dealing.

OK, but what does this have to do with the initial statement of the movement? It loses its initial focus of the Occupy Movement.

1. We want structural change towards authentic global equality. The world’s resources must go towards caring for people and the planet, not the military, corporate profits or the rich.

No kidding Sherlock! This has been happening for decades, at least 100 years! At the same time we dont' want to pay for equality - its just too expensive! Ask yourselves, have you bought because of the value/price, or because of ethical reasons. War is business - and America and Britain have done well with it for more than a century.

• The present economic system pollutes land, sea and air, is causing massive loss of natural species and environments, and is accelerating humanity towards irreversible climate change. We call for a positive, sustainable economic system that benefits present and future generations.

For this we have Greenpeace. The Occupy Movement has another purpose, but again ask yourself, have you bought something because of price/value, or ethical reasons? Even the movement is guilty of not following this mantra above, the site is dirty and polluted, the Occupy Movement does not lead by example.

• We stand in solidarity with the global oppressed and we call for an end to the actions of our government and others in causing this oppression.

We are oppressed and have been for more than a decade. It is the people that have elected the governments. The propaganda machine is at work. You believed it in the past, only now you realise we are only puppets in the hands of big players.

• This is what democracy looks like. Come and join us!

If democracy looks like the Occupy Movement, I'll stick with what I have.

I'm not against voicing your opinion, or beliefs. I understand what the movement is trying to obtain, though am unconvinced how this will be achieved. The camp is not pleasant, it occupies a public space. It is dirty and littered.

If the movement really wants a voice, perhaps daily demonstrations, or involvement in the politics is a much better way of achieving the aim of the first goal, a statement that reads;

Find a system that is sustainable, and just, with true democracy of the people. A call for a positive, sustainable economic system that benefits present and future generations.