Slashdot Mirror


US Expands Fingerprint and Mugshot Program for Visitors

prakslash writes "The US State Department has expanded its anti-terrorist fingerprinting program to include visitors from close US allies such as the UK, Australia, France, Germany and Japan. Everytime a visitor enters or leaves the US, they will have to get their mugshot and fingerprints taken - something that used to be mainly limited to your local police precinct. More news can be found here and here. In addition to the huge costs involved, one has to wonder if this will affect tourism to this country." Hmmm, a huge database of digital mugshots and digital fingerprints, which will be kept forever - hope we have enough RAM to search through it quickly and constantly.

7 of 1,073 comments (clear)

  1. Re:Spain by JohnnyCannuk · · Score: 5, Informative

    Well, I for one, probably won't go to Java One this year because of this. That's about $10 k out of the San Francisco area economy. Now apply that to all the foriegn visitors for all the conference places like the Moscone Centre host in a year.

    All it does is get my identity into a database for a foreign country to use against me. And since I'm not a citizen, I have no right to see how the information is being used or whether it's accurate.

    I personally think Canada's security is OK. We'll arrest you when we have the evidence, as we recently did in Ottawa (where I live), not before.

    BTW, if you think taking pictures and finger prints is going to increase security, you are living in a dream world. Try reading any of the last 5 or 10 Cryptograms and let Bruce Schneier tell you why it will likely make us less secure.

    It an unescesary invasion of my privacy. Having my fingerprints will not help the US deter or track terrorists.

    --
    Never by hatred has hatred been appeased, only by kindness - the Buddha
  2. Re: A Fingerprint's Rights by demachina · · Score: 4, Informative

    It not a "single fucking case". Its one among many its just really well documented and was really over the top. Its pretty fucking amazing you can sit in your easy chair and say its no big deal someone guilty of nothing spent a year being tortured in Syria because our government has decided to suspend the most basic due process. You just don't seem to understand how democracy and the rule of law is supposed to work. Its become quite apparent that terrorist suspects. I repeat >, who don't respond to simple interrogation in the U.S. are being shipped to countries like Saudi Arabia where they can be properly tortured.

    If our government didn't make mistakes and only did this stuff to terrorists maybe you could rationalize it. Fact is they are making mistakes and hurting innocent people.

    Hundreds, if not thousands, of people have been wrongfully held since 9/11.

    An Egyptian student was staying at a hotel near ground zero on 9/11. A security guard at the hotel framed him, because he was Arab, and accused him of having a radio that could monitor airline frequencies that was found in the hotel. The FBI managed to coerce a confession out of him by threatening to turn his brother over to Egyptian authorties, just like the Syrian case. He admitted it was his radio to protect his family which led to him being a suspected part of the plot. After the confession hit the news the private pilot that actually owned the radio came forward. The FBI's threats were so good they made him confess to something he didn't do.

    http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/12/13/wtc.pilot.radi o. suit/

    Your missing a basic point. As soon as they started doing it there is nothing stopping them from continuing to do it and doing it more and worse. You really don't want to visit a country, where you can be arrested and held without charges and denied access to your embassy. It is the most basic travelers right. Unfortunately

    Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen, has been held without access to a lawyer, his family or any judicial review for a couple years now. He may be guilty of associating with terrorists. If he's guilty of something try him and prove it. Holding him forever without proving anything is simply not what a country based on law does.

    http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney01032004.html

    Capt. James Yee, an Islamic Chaplain at Guantanami, was in a military brig in isolation for more than 2 months facing a death penalty charge for espionage. The military destroyed his life and his marriage. Last week they back handedly admitted he wasn't guilty of anything but they aren't going to apologize for destroying his life. During the course of the trial the military's lawyers inadvertently divulged classified documents to the defense team. The military in fact was guilty of what they were accusing Yee of doing. None of the docs he had in his possession were, rightly or wrongly, marked as classified.

    http://www.refuseandresist.org/detentions/art.ph p? aid=1292

    Several British citizens held at Guantanamo were likewise just released. Only thing they were guilty of was being in Afghanistan when the war started so they got a couple years in relatively brutal solitary confinement and a series of beatings.

    --
    @de_machina
  3. Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. by DreamerFi · · Score: 4, Informative

    The new Spanish leader thinks that by removing troops from the middleast his country will be safer. Well they found another bomb on the train tracks today. I hope he realizes that deals cannot be made.

    And they also decided to double the number of troops they have in Afghanistan. You remember that one? The country the terrorist actually came from?

    -John

  4. Fingerprints are not as infallible as people think by mark2003 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Interesting article at this link on the New Scientist website casting doubts on the reliability of finger printing as a way of proving identity.

    Fingerprint link

    What's the bet that the first Al-Queda terrorist arrested through matching fingerprints turns out to be an 80 year old nun from Canada?

  5. Re:You're obviously sarcastic... by surprise_audit · · Score: 3, Informative

    Immigrants under 18 too - my kids green cards have their right index fingerprint and they were 8 & 10 at the time. I don't remember if they were printed for the CIA background checks, but if so, they'd have been even younger.

  6. Freedom of speech by pubjames · · Score: 5, Informative

    Why are we so willing to comprimise our rights?

    Hey, I thought you guys had freedom of speech? If so, why is it that virtually no USA based media is reporting that an FBI insider, Sibel Edmonds, has said that the Bush administration knew about the 911 attacks before they happened. Apparently your government has used a law to stop this story in the press.

    Freedom of speech indeed!

    1. Re:Freedom of speech by pubjames · · Score: 4, Informative

      Because Ms. Edmonds didn't say the Bush administration knew about the 9/11 attacks before the happened.

      She effectively did. She said that they had information that there were planned attacks with aeroplanes against skyscrapers in the short term before September 11.

      She was brought in AFTER 9/11 to clear a backlog of untranslated documents

      True. Two days after.

      But these were UNTRANSLATED DOCUMENTS, so nobody knew what information they contained.

      But that's not what she is saying. She is saying that she saw documentation that showed that they knew, prior to 9/11, that there might be such an attack. And she said that in her testomony she was quite clear about which documents she was referring to, and it would be easy to confirm what she was saying.

      I think the CIA/NSA/FBI frowns on translators revealing information

      Yep, I can understand that. However, if what she is saying is true, this is a huge news story and definately "in the public interest".

      She has testified before the commission investigating intelligence failures before 9/11, in private. But that wasn't good enough for her, so she went to the UK media.

      Yes, I expect because she thought there would be a cover-up. Remember, this information could be embarassing to both the Rublicans and the Demoncrats. Both parties might want it covered up.

      I think if what she says is true then she did the right thing going public about it. However, no doubt she is now going to get smeared, because that's what happens when someone speaks out, at least in the USA and UK.