Slashdot Mirror

Brits are as loony about spreading fear as our local media/authorities in the US. Actual advice from British F&C Office for tourists to US:

There is a general threat from terrorism in the United States. Attacks could be indiscriminate, including in places frequented by expatriates and foreign travellers. We remind British nationals of the global threat of terrorism and need to remain vigilant.

I happen to live in the NYC, and there are marines with machine guns stationed all over the place.... so it must be true.

Bamkin's current client is the country of Gibraltar.

Gibraltar is not a country, it is a British overseas territory.

Also it's woth noting the World Service I'm pretty sure is paid for by the goverment rather than from the license.

This is no longer the case. One of the first things the Tories did when they recently got back into power was to "freeze" the BBC Licence Fee. From 2014, the BBC World Service will be funded from the Licence Free and not from the Government. The deliberate effect is to force bigger cuts onto the rest of the BBC.

source?

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/travel-advice-by-country/south-america/ecuador/

Express kidnappings are a common crime in Ecuador and are on the increase, particularly in Quito and Guayaquil. Both Ecuadorians and foreign visitors are targets. The kidnappings involve short-term opportunistic abductions aimed at extracting cash from victims who are selected at random. They are held while criminals empty their bank accounts using the victims bank cards. Once the money has been taken the victim is usually released in an isolated area. However, criminals have started to force victims to take them to their homes once they have withdrawn the cash, and violence is becoming more common. This type of crime can involve illegitimate taxis and complicit taxi drivers. In some recent cases in January, March and April 2012, the passengers were pepper sprayed. In 2009 a British tourist was express-kidnapped from a hotel in the north of Quito.

Well, you do have a significantly smaller population, and a larger country than the UK, so population density is much reduced, I think when this happens a per capita death rate for the roads is expected to be less, as every day on the roads there are less opportunities for a crash per capita.

Furthermore in 2010 Norway's per capita road deaths were higher than the UK
"In 2010 there were 210 road deaths in Norway (source: DfT). This equates to 4.3 road deaths per 100,000 of population and compares to the UK average of 3.1 road deaths per 100,000 of population in 2010."
http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/travel-advice-by-country/europe/norway

I only chose this measure because the statistics are easy to pull up, and due to a driver re-education course I recently had to go on I found out that the UK actually has pretty good road safety statistics.

There is a reason importing your own population into occupied territory is prohibited by the 4th Geneva Convention, because it amounts to ethnic cleansing. The West Bank has been occupied since 1967, not 2000. There is no freeze, Tel Aviv just authorized another 1000 housing units on occupied territory, which was condemned by the UK, France, Germany, and Portugal.

The purpose of the entire settlement enterprise, and Zionism itself, is to take the land without the people, which is ethnic cleansing. It's what happened in 1947-1948 and has been going on continually since 1967. There is no need to make comparisons between Congo, Kosovo, or Darfur because it stands on it's own as an ongoing crime against humanity.

Forget France or Britain, gimme Bangkok, Cartagena or Pyongyang!!

I think you should remove Bangkok from your list. Thailand is popular for Europeans to visit (probably others too?), especially rich, young ones. The usual reason for going is to do volunteer work, mature, etc (spoof video, meme in the UK. Back at university, they recount stories of ordering a bucket of strong punch for $1 from a pretty woman on a beach, drinking it all, and partying until dawn, every day. (I'm sure it's a great place to visit, but I don't think of it as "non-standard").

"847,198 British nationals visited Thailand in 2010 (Source: Thai Immigration)" -- that's over 1% of the country (!). (source). Less British people visited Sweden...
Compare "Very few British nationals visit North Korea and those that do are usually part of an organised tour." and "Around 23,000 visits were made by British passport holders to Colombia in 2010" (though purely by distance, Columbia must be more popular with Americans.)

Maybe the government shouldn't tell you to copy your passport then:

make a note of the passport number and consider taking a photocopy with you

- http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/staying-safe/checklist

or

* Make a note of your passport number, date and place of issue (or take a photocopy), and keep separately in a safe place
* Leave a photocopy with a friend or relative at home
* Keep your passport in the hotel safe and carry a photocopy with you

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/gapyear/gapyearplanning/gapyearvisaspassports

Or maybe your misinterpreting the actual laws about copying passport covers in advertisements or making physical copies that someone could try and pass off as real.

Maybe the government shouldn't tell you to copy your passport then:

make a note of the passport number and consider taking a photocopy with you

- http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/staying-safe/checklist

or

* Make a note of your passport number, date and place of issue (or take a photocopy), and keep separately in a safe place
* Leave a photocopy with a friend or relative at home
* Keep your passport in the hotel safe and carry a photocopy with you

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/travel-and-living-abroad/gapyear/gapyearplanning/gapyearvisaspassports

Or maybe your misinterpreting the actual laws about copying passport covers in advertisements or making physical copies that someone could try and pass off as real.

The BBC World Service is a self-contained sub-entity within the BBC funded by the Foreign Office focused on representing the United Kingdom overseas, all content for domestic consumption if funded be either the licence fee of profits from the BBC's commercial operations.

This is starting to be available for exiting Islam. There are bus ads for leaving Islam in New York. In countries that have freedom of religion but a big Islamic immigrant population, like the UK, France, and the Netherlands, this can work. The UK now has a Government Forced Marriage Unit, with services for people forced into marriage by their families. (Guidance of members of Parliament: "Mediation, reconciliation, and family counseling as a response to forced marriage can be extremely dangerous. There have been cases of victims being murdered while mediation was being undertaken.")

Actually it's not quite as good of a decision as was being made out once you get past the headlines.

The decision in question was specific to a few paragraphs in a report which the UK government had said had to be censored because the US asked us to keep out of the public - so we did.

At some point, a report in the US publically quoted those paragraphs and so UK courts ruled that since the information was now in the public domain there was no reason not to publish the censored paragraphs ourselves

The decision did however go against the UK governments continued wish to keep the paragraphs censored since those paragraphs basically said the UK knew about and supported torture of a UK citizen.

[It was reported that a new series of interviews was conducted by the United States authorities prior to 17 May 2001 as part of a new strategy designed by an expert interviewer.

v) It was reported that at some stage during that further interview process by the United States authorities, BM had been intentionally subjected to continuous sleep deprivation. The effects of the sleep deprivation were carefully observed.

vi) It was reported that combined with the sleep deprivation, threats and inducements were made to him. His fears of being removed from United States custody and "disappearing" were played upon.

vii) It was reported that the stress brought about by these deliberate tactics was increased by him being shackled in his interviews

viii) It was clear not only from the reports of the content of the interviews but also from the report that he was being kept under self-harm observation, that the inter views were having a marked effect upon him and causing him significant mental stress and suffering.

ix) We regret to have to conclude that the reports provide to the SyS made clear to anyone reading them that BM was being subjected to the treatment that we have described and the effect upon him of that intentional treatment.

x) The treatment reported, if had been administered on behalf of the United Kingdom, would clearly have been in breach of the undertakings given by the United Kingdom in 1972. Although it is not necessary for us to categorise the treatment reported, it could readily be contended to be at the very least cruel, inhuman and degrading treatment by the United States authorities]"

Source: FCO Website : http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/news/latest-news/?view=News&id=21733568

-passport stamps from Arab countries -

What's wrong with visiting an arab country? or do you believe in enclosing a race to their own land and prevent them from outside contact? Similar logic to that of a certain country, I must say.

From the FCO website (just as an example): "You require a visa for Syria. Whether or not you have a visa you should be aware that if your passport contains an Israeli stamp or stamps from other countries' border crossing points with Israel, you will be refused entry to Syria."

Similarly, it's not recommended to visit the USA if your passport has a stamp from Cuba. Cuba know this though, so they usually won't stamp foreign passports.

I should not have to leave my opinion at the border when entering a country, if my opinion is not causing any harm to anyone.

That's funny, because when I went last visited your country I had to tick a box saying I wasn't a communist.

They don't do it because both the US and the UK (the only states who'd have the balls to consider something like that) have (largely) cut bilateral diplomatic relationships with Iran, and neither operate an embassy in said dictatorship, and Iran does not operate embassies in the US or the UK.

UK DOES have an embassy in Iran:
British Embassy
198, Ferdowsi Avenue
Tehran 11316-91144

http://ukiniran.fco.gov.uk/en/

As does Iran in the UK:
Embassy of the Islamic Republic of Iran
16 Princes Gate
London SW7 1PT

http://www.iran-embassy.org.uk/page/?m=vp&i=162

Is it hard to immigrate from the US to the UK? =)

I don't know (I was born here), but I meet all the criteria to be a "highly skilled migrant". It looks like I'd be able to apply for permission to go to the UK to seek work. "Skilled migrants" need a job offer first.

http://ukinusa.fco.gov.uk/en/faqs/living-working/work
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/pointscalculator
http://www.ukba.homeoffice.gov.uk/workingintheuk/

I'm pretty sure they already do this in the US with fingerprints. No conviction? Well, if we find your fingerprints at any crime scene in the future, you're gonna get it.

Even if you just happen to be travelling to the US (or passing through, iirc) they get to take your fingerprints and "digitally photograph" you - no need to even be arrested (at least, according to the FCO). Call me a stubborn fool, but I'd rather live in the UK and hope I don't get arrested than travel to the US.

I'm not sure why people are so worried about high tech methods of "stealing" passports when thousands of passports are physically lost and stolen every year. Check out the statistics from the past two Brits abroad reports.

http://www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/press-release/2007/08/fco_hp_npr_070802_britsbehavab

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/newsroom/latest-news/?view=PressR&id=5226726

I'm not sure why people are so worried about high tech methods of "stealing" passports when thousands of passports are physically lost and stolen every year. Check out the statistics from the past two Brits abroad reports.

http://www.fco.gov.uk/resources/en/press-release/2007/08/fco_hp_npr_070802_britsbehavab

http://www.fco.gov.uk/en/newsroom/latest-news/?view=PressR&id=5226726

Before posting such blatant falsehoods, read the treaty. All the relevant language is 100% symmetrical between the US and the UK, and both sides have the same obligations: to provide some minimal amount of information by default, and to provide any further information the other side asks for if asked. The US has made it known that it needs further information: prima facie evidence of guilt. Nothing in the treaty forbids the UK from insisting on having the same information before making decisions. For whatever reasons, the UK has decided not to ask for this (this choice is codified in the Extradition Act of 2003) -- but this is a choice made by the UK which is not compelled by the treaty. The treaty is clearly Constitutional in both the US and the UK. It's possible that the Extradition Act of 2003 isn't Constitutional, but that's a different kind of problem.

I'm not so sure about that..

Google search for "extradited from the US": http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=%22extradited+fro m+the+US%22 (12,400 results)
US-UK extradition treaty: http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/USExtradition_21 0503.pdf (PDF)

(it's a per-screen tax, right?)

What was David Blunkett thinking more like? He was the Home Secretary at the time, and signed the UK Extradition Treaty (Google Cache HTML) (PDF). I've tried reading through it, there are many references but IANAL so I can't interpert it properly.

A BBC News article in Feb 2006 stated that:
"Since the 2003 Act came into force, 11 UK citizens have been extradited to the US."
and
"Of the 11, none was a terrorism case." which already shows how much this policy has been abused. With enough pressure, The US can extradite anyone it wants from the UK - meaning for Brits like me, I should be even more concerned about the news, events and laws in the States.

There are a lot of mistakes said about extradition treaty in this thread. First, yes, US citizens can be extradited. Extradiction treaty is both way including the one with U.S. and British. http://www.fco.gov.uk/Files/kfile/USExtradition_21 0503.pdf It is not true that U.S. citizen is protected from extradition. The constitution of US requires evidences of guilt before extradition of U.S. citizen.

Anyone have the link to confirm this? I can't remember where I read it.

Travel between France, England, Germany, Spain, and all the rest of Europe involves ZERO uses of one's passport

Actually, the UK isn't a Schengen country, so you will still need your passport to enter and leave the country (an Identity card of an EU member state is also acceptable, but obviously Americans won't have these).

The same applies if you want to enter most coutries in Eastern Europe. Only Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Italy, Greece, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, Spain and Sweden are Schengen states.

more information here

The AP's survey was not a comprehensive compilation of the nationwide death toll, but was a sampling intended to assess the levels of violence. Figures for violent deaths in the months before the war showed a far lower rate.

That doesn't mean Iraq is a more dangerous place than during Saddam Hussein's regime. At least 300,000 people were murdered by security forces and buried in mass graves during the dictator's 23-year rule, U.S. officials say, and human rights workers put the number closer to 500,000.

"We cannot compare the situation now with how it was before," Nouri Jaber al-Nouri, inspector general of the Interior Ministry, said recently. "Iraqis used to fear everything. ... But now, despite all that is happening, we feel safe."
--
In Baghdad, a city of about 5.6 million, 4,279 people were recorded killed in the 12 months through April 30, according to figures provided by Kais Hassan, director of statistics at Baghdad's Medicolegal Institute (search), which administers the city's morgues.
---
U.S. forces have records for the numbers of claims for compensation from Iraqis for personal injury, deaths of family members, or for property damage caused by U.S. military action in "non-combat" situations.

Some $3 million has been paid to about 5,000 claimants, American officials said last month. About 8,000 claims had been rejected and 3,000 were pending, they said.

The officials declined to provide a breakdown of the figures to show how many claims were for deaths. They also said a single incident involving U.S. forces could lead to multiple compensation claims.
---
The human rights organization Amnesty International (search), based in London, estimated in March that more than 10,000 Iraqi civilians had been killed "as a direct result of military intervention in Iraq, either during the war or during the subsequent occupation."

"This figure is an estimate as the authorities are unwilling or unable to catalogue killings," the group said in a statement.

There are no precise estimates for deaths during last year's invasion.

The Associated Press conducted a major investigation of wartime civilian casualties, documenting the deaths of 3,240 civilians from March 20 to April 20, 2003.

That investigation, conducted last May and June, was based on a survey of about half of Iraq's hospitals, and counted only those deaths for which hospitals had good documentation. The report concluded the real number of civilian deaths was sure to be much higher.

10-20k killed seems likely. 30k - 40k, maybe. 100k? I doubt it.

The Iraqis as a people are much better off this year.

Yeah, right. +1, Insightful.

I think so. Think of it. No more UN imposed sanctions. Saddam's mass murdering regime is no longer filling mass grave

The Foreign & Commonwealth Office seems to have with strained themselves.

How long will it take for Bugtraq and similar full disclosure lists to be prosecute under the DMCA ?

Last year I posted a simple exploit to Bugtraq which allowed remote access to a users file. That after all is a way of gaining an unauthorized copy of a file by circumventing copy-protection methods (i.e operating system defences). Would this now be a violation of the DMCA ?

How long before buffer overflow exploits get regarded as methoods to circumvent copyprotection methods ?

How long until legal action is taken against SecurityFocus ?

If you're in the UK write to the foreign office and try and get them to change the "LOCAL LAWS AND CUSTOMS" section in their USA travel advice to include a warning to anyone who is either a computer developer or taking any computer software/hardware abroad that they could be arrested if they or any of their possesions violate the DMCA.

While your at it don't forget to have a look at the Free Sklyarov UK protest site and Fax your MP abput the issues that matter to you.

How long will it take for Bugtraq and similar full disclosure lists to be prosecute under the DMCA ?

Last year I posted a simple exploit to Bugtraq which allowed remote access to a users file. That after all is a way of gaining an unauthorized copy of a file by circumventing copy-protection methods (i.e operating system defences). Would this now be a violation of the DMCA ?

How long before buffer overflow exploits get regarded as methoods to circumvent copyprotection methods ?

How long until legal action is taken against SecurityFocus ?

If you're in the UK write to the foreign office and try and get them to change the "LOCAL LAWS AND CUSTOMS" section in their USA travel advice to include a warning to anyone who is either a computer developer or taking any computer software/hardware abroad that they could be arrested if they or any of their possesions violate the DMCA.

While your at it don't forget to have a look at the Free Sklyarov UK protest site and Fax your MP abput the issues that matter to you.

This development is particularly frustrating, since up to now UK .gov sites have generally been very standards compliant. In fact the open.gov.uk initiative even has a W3C standards statement. I quote:

"The most important aspect of publishing information on the internet is to ensure that it is available to all, not just a select few who happen to have the newest browser, all the latest plugins and a top of the range, superfast PC.

UK public sector information must be accessible, legible and fast to download."

The really interesting part here is that the actual report on the U.S. doesn't really say any of the things that the CNET article attributes to it. So it's closer to journalist FUD (an all-to-common phenomenon) than government FUD... but FUD nonetheless.

Waiting to be moderated down...

That link doesn't seem to work, I'm afraid

Have a look at the Foreign & Commonwealth Office's breakdown by country at http://www.fco.gov.uk/travel/dynpag e.asp?Page=144

Available here

It seems to me that they're being very sensible. Some might call it FUD, but one person's FUD is another's reasonable, pragmatic reaction to an unclear future. Unless your crystal ball is functioning 100% error-free, there's no way you can tell me that Y2K will not be a problem in some way to someone somewhere.

The chances are that most large organisations will escape scot-free, but it only takes a small cog to fail for the whole system to come down. "But for a nail, the shoe was lost ...."

FUD is not always a bad thing, but you have to receive it with an open mind.