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.

Comments

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Three Headed Man]

Bah, don't worry, It's only the foreigners who are having civil liberties violated. But they're not citizens, so it doesn't matter, right?

what do you want?

[mixtape5]

freedom or safety? Why are we so willing to comprimise our rights? Where does it stop?

Just some questions...

Re:what do you want?

[wmspringer]

Well, if you want to be technical, we're not compromising OUR rights. I haven't read the article, but from the description it doesn't look like US citizens have to go through that. Yet.

Re:what do you want?

[the_mad_poster]

I don't know if you joke or not, but I am SERIOUSLY entertaining the idea of my first gun purchase lately. I used to think those psychos in Montana were out of their minds. I still think they were, but more and more, I fear that they weren't/aren't.

This sort of thing occurs in steps - gradually. However, eventually, a lot of people may well wake up one morning and say "Holy shit! It's 1984!"

I, for one, am not willing to let that happen.

And, still.... I do not post A/C....

Re:what do you want?

[tftp]

The whole trick is that when it *is* 1984, nobody will pay any attention.

Re:what do you want?

[iminplaya]

Believe me. Domestic terrorism is much more dangerous to Americans. If the Americans were really serious about saving lives, they would actually DO something about drunk drivers. They kill an airplane load of people every two days.

Re:what do you want?

[MajorDick]

Ok, listen to me , carefully, NEVER buy ANY GUN that can in ANY way shape or form be traced or has paperwork. I SERIOUSLY suggest making your own (YES it is %100 legal, but you can never transfer it as in sell it only your heirs may inherit it) You can buy what are called 80% Frames or Receivers for 1911A1 (Colt 45) M16 etc, and cheap, these are the registered parts (supposed to have a serial number) The 80% parts are %80 done they generally just need a couple holes drilled, rails cut etc. Its actually VERY cost effective, not to mention FUN :) Then you buy a parts-kit for your weaponof choice these sell cheap, hell look up sten kit on ebay, the receiver tube is just a piece of exhust tube and it a quite effetive SMG. Buy the parts let them sit, then you know thell be available when you need them. I go on the assumption that the day I need a full auto SMG, well the laws that are in place now will be long gone.My Bren cost me 119 bucks with a spare barrel and 2 mags, it could if needed be put together in a couple of hours with an arc welder and a dremmel. Screw SMG, I want an LMG

Re:what do you want?

[iminplaya]

Last time I checked the numbers, it was roughly half.(about 17,000 per year) And that involved alcohol ONLY, not other drugs. Unfortunately, usually it's not the damn drunk that gets killed. Excuse my "french", but this is a bit of a touchy subject with me.

Re:what do you want?

[harikiri]

We need a 'scary' mod option for posts like above!

Re:what do you want?

[Fulcrum of Evil]

What use is freedom when you're dead from a terrorist attack?

Better to die on my feet than live on my knees. The terrorists can kiss my ass (except for Cheney - eww).

Re:what do you want?

[the_mad_poster]

What's scarier? That s/he posted that, or that I take him/her seriously?

I used to be highly anti-gun...

Re:what do you want?

[TekPolitik]

We need a 'scary' mod option for posts like above!

Don't worry, the rest of the world has already moderated GWB -6billion "Scary".

Re:what do you want?

[Kohath]

But would it be an up-mod or a down-mod?

Re:what do you want?

[FredGray]

You have to be very careful with the "involved" statistic. It counts every accident where any party, at fault or not, had any measurable blood alcohol level. In other words, if a completely sober driver rear-ends someone who had a beer five hours before (say, a 0.01% blood alcohol level), that counts.

Re:what do you want?

[westlake]

Rule Number One: The police and the military have more raw firepower than you can ever imagine.
Rule Number Two: There are no exceptions to Rule Number One.

You may think you are armoured up like Rambo but you are still as good as dead.

Re:what do you want?

[Anonymous Coward]

Why is guns the american solution to everything? You seem to think that the only way to stop your country from becoming even more ass-backwards than it already is is to get a gun and join a militia. Look, you put yourself in this situation through electing Bush (allthough that was a seriously questionable election), you can get yourself out of this situation through electing someone sane. A democrat would be a good start, but you seriously need to get over your fear of socialism and move just a little bit to the left. Look at Canada and many of the European countries. You can have free education and free health-care without becoming a totalitarian state. You can restrict guns (I am not talking about completely outlawing guns, but seriously, why would I need a 9 mm automatic?) and still have all of your rights intact.

Also, please stop fucking up countries all over the world, yeah we're greatful you helped us stop hitler and all, but that doesn't give you the right to bully every country in the world.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[paroneayea]

No, that isn't it at all. How can we expect this to stay as a free country if we show ourselves as so closed to the rest of the world? (let alone ourselves)

I wouldn't visit the United States

[Heartz]

This is why these laws won't work.

• If somebody is going to commit something illegal, he'll probably enter the country illegally. Probably through the porous mexican border or the huge coastline that the US has.

• Secondly, this is downright disrespectful. Detractors will argue that it's for the safety of the US. Well, I really don't see how it'll help. Once the dude is in the country, and has committed the offence, this sort of system is absolutely worthless. Effort should be put into preventing these sort of tragedies. Efforts like putting more effort into the Israel Palestine crisis, managing Iraq more effectively, stop being so patriachal and showing more respect to the citizens of the world.

I for one, will be taking my tourist dollars elsewhere. Where the authorities respect me. Where I'm not treated like a criminal and people realise that not everybody is out to get them.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[SquierStrat]

Likewise, if someone is going to commit a crime with a firearm he'll probably aquire that firearm illegally, or possibly possess it illegally (if he or she is a prior felon.) Yet people still support gun control legislation (or in some cases outright gun bans) do they not?

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[zx75]

Come to Canada! We'll welcome you with open arms if you're a terrorist, and even if you're not!

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Jack Porter]

If somebody is going to commit something illegal, he'll probably enter the country illegally

Actually, most (all?) of the September 11 hijackers entered the USA legally. The problem was that no-one stopped them.

But I'm not sure how taking their photograph or fingerprints on entry would have done anything to stop it.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[aled]

If somebody is going to commit something illegal, he'll probably enter the country illegally.
Suposedly 9/11 terrorist entered legally USA. Perhaps it will be more effective to remove the people that ignored the warnings...
stop being so patriachal and showing more respect to the citizens of the world.
That would be apreciated :-) but difficult to happen :-( and it would take many many years.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[TyrranzzX]

Heh, you forget the logic they'll use.

If you don't have your papers, then you're obviously a terrorist and it's into the slammer with you. That's how it'll work, you see the grounds for that being put into place today; make people afraid, strip away their rights one by one, catalouge and condition them like sheep. Once you've got them controlled enough and you've got absolute control of the media, begin the cleansing of ideals, er, winning of hearts and minds. If you're a blank on their system, you're not a citizen. If you aren't registered and you're on american soil, then you're a terrorist, and subject to the same treatment as the current round of people are getting at guantanimo, or not if they just decide it's too expensive to export you or make you an american citizen and shoot you.

Of course, people will forget their papers all the time. There'll be "mistakes", because as we all know, you can't keep that many people in jail. Or people who burn their papers will be thrown into jail. So, of course, they're going to mandate RFID or some kind of mark that can't be taken off. And after everyone has RFID tags, then all the banks and commerce are going to switch over to that system since it's easier and more secure that way.

Getcha mark of the beast ere', $10!

Call me a troll if you must, but that's where it's going. The only reason it hasn't already happened is because this pesky internet thing is here and they can't stop it and moreso, more and more people are moving onto the internet and getting their info from alternative sources. Last year fox lost half of it's watchers, and CNN lost a good 25%. The internet takes that control away and helps to put people in power that should be in power.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Anonymous Coward]

You're right. I also think these laws will not work. They're some sort of "Duck and Cover" for the terrorist threat. The government says "Ladies and Gents, it's not gonna happen again, because we're photographing people and confiscating swiss army knives...".

Security has been "tightened" at airports. Fingerprinting is already in place, on-line systems and the works. And yet, the Immigration officer will turn to you and ask: "For how long did you stay in the US the last time you've been here?". Damn?!? If they don't know this, how do you expect them to catch terrorists?

Also, remember that the terrorists from 9/11 were lawful resident aliens. They would not be caught in the anti-terrorist net.

Moreover, it's a fallacy to think that all terrorists are from abroad. Just remember the unsolved Anthrax cases.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[AresTheImpaler]

Likewise, if someone is going to commit a crime with a firearm he'll probably aquire that firearm illegally, or possibly possess it illegally (if he or she is a prior felon.) Yet people still support gun control legislation (or in some cases outright gun bans) do they not?

it's not the same. a better comparison IMHO would be gun conrols and getting a visa which is a permit to get into the country. Which is a good thing. So I think instead of making everyone feel like criminals by doing this, they should focus on a better way to check backgrounds, etc. when giving out visas. Also it would be a good thing to have very secure visas as to not have someone have their own fake visa.
I dont know if I'm making much sense.. alcohol is not letting me think...

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[PacoTaco]

A lot of politicians support gun control so they can say they care about reducing violent crime without having to tackle real, controversial issues (like poverty). This program is simply another way for the Bush administration to say they're doing something about terrorism, even if its usefulness is questionable.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[ZiggyM]

Actually, I believe parent post is wrong. Most people still dont get the way terrorist most attacks are done, here in Peru where I live (80's shinning path) or the Sept. 11 attack: they will find the easiest way to do it, take advantage of a weakness. If airport security is lax, then take advantage of that and hijack a plane. But now that the security is in-place in airports, of course they will not use that method again.
Now they will take advantage of other weaknesses, like the ones the parent post mentions (mexican border, etc).

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[iminplaya]

These laws aren't meant to actually "work". They are just trying to maintain the illusion of safety. The "bad guys" already know how to get around these kind of things, and each new measure will be cracked within months, if not days, of implementation. In a way, it's already working, because the Americans are swallowing it hook, line, and sinker, and they're probably going to re-elect the guy responsable for the whole thing.
The U.S. is THE biggest arms dealer in the world. They have absolutely NO interest in resolving the Mideast thing, or any other conflict for that matter.
The Mexican border is probably pretty tight compared to the Canadian border, but there's not too many Canadians crossing over looking for the "good life". So, it's not going to get the press coverage.
Man, I would love to see a concerted effort by everyone to avoid doing any business with the Americans until they come down off their high horse and start treat others with some respect. Judging from the American farmer strike a long time ago, entertainment boycotts, etc., it's not bloody likely.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[thogard]

Your not alone with taking your money elsewhere. When they 1st started this, a friend of mine was cuaght up in the stupididty and she changed the tickets for about 20 people to go to Europe the other way.

I was just talking to a friend about going to Orlando in June. After this nonsense, it looks like Europe is going to get the tourist money.

Any one want to bet what happens the 1st time the US finger prints an Aussie whos on the jet fighter selection comitteee? I'm betting that will sway the decision about the Euro-fighter. The decision has already been made about buying Boeing jets by two of the local airlines and they declined.

Tourism in the US is just starting to recover in the US (www.bea.gov) but international tourism is flat and its the 4th largest "import" of money into the US. The US Gov't is spending $50 mil tring to get more tourist. Germany, Japan, UK, Canada and Mexico account for about 3/4 of all visitors in to the US. France used to be major contributor but they seem to be going elsewhere.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[SquierStrat]

Actually, it is the same thing: they are both laws which assume that law abiding people are the ones who commit crimes.

However, let's also think about this: name 1 person who has committed a terrorist act in this country who entered it illegally (not who was here illegally, but who enter here illegally.)

For the record, I'm opposed to this as I don't think it'll solve much since most islamic terrorists are dead after they commit their act.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[iminplaya]

The only reason it hasn't already happened is because this pesky internet thing is here and they can't stop it and moreso, more and more people are moving onto the internet and getting their info from alternative sources.

You're probably right. I sure hope you are. One night FOX was speculating whether or not there should be "some kind of control" against "liberal" sites like moveon.org, etc. Obviously they're getting nervous. The gov't is trying to pass some new anti-pirate law, linking P2P with kiddy porn in order to whip up the troops. (old story, I know, but some house sub-committe(sp) just "passed" some new copyright resolution) My point is that they are already worried about the net.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Guppy06]

"Actually, most (all?) of the September 11 hijackers entered the USA legally."

Depends on how you define "legally." IIRC their applications were horribly out of order and if the people in charge of reviewing the applications did their jobs they wouldn't have gotten into the country. It's like saying that driving at 90 MPH is legal because you didn't get pulled over/tire spiked/whatever.

All in all, it's just another example of Congress passing new laws when what we really need is better enforcement of existing ones.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[gekhond]

I sympathize with your plead for better background checks, but have you recently applied for a US visa with the INS? ;-)

The delays are astounding. The whole system, due to endless backgrounds checks, an inept and underfunded administration forced to apply an incredible set of Kafkaesque regulations is simply maddening! I shudder to think these people are now going to track fingerprints for every single visitor to enter and exit the US.

And, all of it applies *only* to those who are actually *legally* trying to move to or stay in the US. This fingerprinting business to me is just another one in a series of insults visitors and immigrants to this country have been made to suffer. And if you think we're just talking about people who are desparate to come here and should be happy to put up with this, have a look at our universities, national laboratories, the computer industry and any major technological ventures in this country. It's just not good policy if prevention of terrorism is your objective.

I posted this before, but Linus Torvalds is a good example:
http://www.usvisanews.com/memo861.html
Apparently, it took the INS 4 years to issue his greencard:
http://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/silic onvalley/623 7239.htm
Some background check...;-)

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[wass]

In a way, it's already working, because the Americans are swallowing it hook, line, and sinker, and they're probably going to re-elect the guy responsable for the whole thing.

Please don't lump all Americans into one basket, I'd call that racist, but it's not an issue of race but of country.

Remember - half of the US voters voted for Gore. Actually, more than half. Off topic - Best bumper sticker I saw after the 2000 election - "Re-elect Gore in 2004!" (And no, I didn't and won't vote for Bush).

Anyway, seriously, we are not all the same. We're really not this brainwashed mass that you make us out to be. Yeah, Fox News totally bites and some US TV programs aim for the lowest common intellectual denominator. Yeah, there's crappy stuff about any country's culture.

But extrapolating some things to the general populace is just as ridiculous and dangerous as claiming all Jews are cheap or all Arabs are terrorists.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Anonymous Coward]

With good software to do face recognition, it's easy to compare photos of against pictures of known terrorists. This helps in the event of phony documentation.

Let's pretend we live in a dreamy world where face recognition is correct 90% of the time. Every year, there are about 200,000 airline passengers entering the united states. Suppose 200 of them are known terrorists (probably far too high). That leaves 199,800 innocent passengers.

In this scenario, the system will flag 19,980 innocent passengers as potential terrorists. It will flag 180 terrorists as potential terrorists. So the alarm will be wrong 99.1% of the time. When the system flags someone as a terrorist, the authorities will assume it is yet another false alarm and ignore it. So what good did face recognition do?

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[iminplaya]

Please don't lump all Americans into one basket...

No...just the American voter. Why won't they even nominate a decent person into one party or the other?

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Fancia]

But I'm not sure how taking their photograph or fingerprints on entry would have done anything to stop it. It's simple! If you take a photograph, and they don't show up, they're vampires! Voila, no more British terrorist vampires.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[LostCluster]

Actually, most (all?) of the September 11 hijackers entered the USA legally. The problem was that no-one stopped them.

The real problem is that most had legal paperwork while entering the country, but then did not leave when that paperwork said they had to. What we really need to do is actually enforce the visa laws, which means when a foriegn student skips too many classes, we find them and throw them outta here. Yeah, it's a bit mean to the student who is harmlessly goofing off... but we can't stand allowing the ones who aren't so harmless being allowed to go untracked.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[1029]

Wow, I'm a US citizen who would like, and in fact demands, to see a HUGE change in the way things are handled here. But you are just being a reactionary jackass.

The U.S. is THE biggest arms dealer in the world.

The US is also the biggest foriegn aide spender in the world, has done more to rebuild countries after major wars/catastrophies than the UN ever has/will/can, and its private citizens give billions of dollars a year to help people from all walks of life, all around the globe.

But yeah, the US, a country of 250+ individuals, can be boiled down to: "they" don't want to do anything about Isreal/Palestine. "They" don't care about any world conflict. "They" all elected some cowboy president. "They" are the enemy. This nebulous "they" entity. You sound like such a bigot/racist/zealot, do you realize?

Sounds like the only one on a high horse is you. And you certainly have one hell of a chip on your shoulder. But by all means, please do tell me where you live. I'd love to go to this great utopia where everyone is free yet somehow agrees on all world conflicts, on all internal policy, has the most enlightened leader ever, and doesn't even need an army because the country is loved by everybody, world over.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[1029]

A bit of an addendum:

Obviously in the 3rd paragraph that should read "250+ million individuals." :)

And now, before anybody goes off on me about the individual faults of US policy (internal or external), I'd like to again state that I know things are only getting worse. It needs to change, but that is the way every country goes. The politicos grab power and impose law to keep their power. The people have to get that power back (or just stop giving it away). And even those methods don't last forever.

No great civilization in history has lasted forever. I doubt the US will be magic #1 in this regard. But this country certainly has a solid enough foundation (Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc..) that it can at least remain free for many more generations, if we as a citizenry choose to stand up for ourselves.

Anyhow, thats it for my addendum/rant/what-have-you.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[CrackedButter]

I agree, i am never travelling to the US either, i had always wanted to go, so you are not alone, but is there enough people to decide this and make a difference? Don't care because i'm hoping the US and its affairs is on a downwarding spiral into chaos. But I only ever thought this after 9/11, my attitude changed with theirs.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Sesostris III]

Well, I agree. It is totally wrong to lump all US citzizens together and blame them all for some of the partisan actions of a partisan US Administration, or the actions of a few large corporations.

But then again, may I suggest that it is equally wrong to lump all non-US citizens together and brand them as potential terrorists, hell bent on destroying the US way of life.

I'm from the UK. Although I haven't been to the US tmyself, I do know a large number who have, or who intend to go some time in the near future. Why? Not because they want to destroy the US way of life, but because they LIKE the US!

To be honest, I LIKE the US! I wouldn't mind visiting the place myself (for some reason the image of hiring a Harley and biking through Arizona comes to mind! No idea if this is recommended, practical or even possible). However, I will NOT be doing anything of the sort if my fingerprints and mug-shot is going to be taken on entry and exit. I wouldn't want my own government doing that to me, let alone a foreign one.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Jim Starx]

Yes, I believe as a country we have a right to know who is within our borders. That is exactly why people already have to display visa's when entering the country, so we know who they are. Any arguments about knowing who is in our country need to be centered on improoving the visa system, not adding new systems. And what good are fingerprints going to do us? Achmed bin-assal bin-whocares has never been fingerprinted. When he's done committing whatever terrorist crime he came to commit there's probably barely enough left for a dna test let alone fingerprints.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[thona]

::The US is also the biggest foriegn aide spender ::in the world, has done more to rebuild ::countries after major wars/catastrophies than ::the UN ever has/will/can Yes, but interesting enough most of these wars/catastrpopies are a direct consequence of idiotic foreign policy actions of said US. Now, if you come to my house and ruin it, I would surely expec you to clean up the mess you did. If you deduct this "american smartness tax" from the foreign aid, there is propably not much left. I would say they still own the world quite a lot, actually.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Phekko]

• Now they will take advantage of other weaknesses, like the ones the parent post mentions (mexican border, etc).

The upside of this is you can't fly the mexican border smack into the side of a big building ;)

Getting back to the topic, though: Most people don't have to realize how terrorist attacks are done and they don't really need to. It would be enough if the FBI did realize it and acted on that knowledge pre-emptively. My personal opinion is that fingerprints and mugshots isn't quite the answer.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[klang]

Actually, the easiest way to get a bomb into the US of A is NOT to smuggle it at all. All the parts you need to make a bomb can be gotten hold of locally.

Just ask the the guy with the heorin shipment, I'm quite sure that he knows people with access to explosives..

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[klang]

You are so right .. theese willing people WILL even be disgruntet/lonely citizens of the US of A ..

That's the sad part :-/

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[HeghmoH]

but we can't stand allowing the ones who aren't so harmless being allowed to go untracked.

Er, why not? I don't think earning a reputation of being total jackasses to everybody who isn't a citizen is worth a miniscule increase in security.

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[Skjaero]

France used to be major contributor but they seem to be going elsewhere.

After the political ideology conflicts of both media markets, and the USA's nationwide protest against anything of french origin or french background (well, not everything, guess it still wants to retain the freedom statue for some reason), it's no surprise that french people feel a bit uneasy and prefer to rather not walk in a country that seems to be so hostile.

"everyone who's not with us is against us"

Re:I wouldn't visit the United States

[ces]

Actually, the easiest way to get a bomb into the US of A is NOT to smuggle it at all. All the parts you need to make a bomb can be gotten hold of locally.

Depends somewhat on exactly what type of bomb you want. For conventional explosives your are probably better off making your bomb in the same country as your target.

On the other hand you might have a need to smuggle that nuclear warhead you bought off those nice Pakistani scientists into the US. In that case hiding it in the heroin shipment might be your best bet.

Big Brother is watching...

[modder]

But he's not even _your_ big brother.

Maybe they could offer the tourists a copy of the photo in a lovely decorated cardboard frame as a memento of their trip.

April 1?

[nspitze]

Is this a late submission? Great way to make enemies of allies.

Ex Post Facto

[erick99]

So after a terrorist commandeers a 747 and plows it into a high-density residential development we will be able to find a charred finger and know EXACTLY who it was that committed this horrific act.

Okay, a silly example but how far from the truth is it? I just don't think these measures do much at all to prevent acts of terror.

Happy Trails!

Erick

Re:Ex Post Facto

[-tji]

The same could be said for any security measure that you come up with.

Nothing is 100% secure, but that doesn't mean it should not be implemented. We have always had a very open travel policies in the US, but that doesn't mean it's a human entitlement to travel here with absolute minimum security measures. Particularly at this time, when we are under foreign threat of a kind we're still very much struggling to deal with.

Assuming they have some decent procedures and technology, this doesn't need to be much more cumbersome than the current passport controls that have always been applied. Hopefully they have electronic fingerprint readers, and digital cameras that take the pics as part of the normal passport control procedure.

I'm a lot less disturbed by this "strong authentication" of foreign travellers to the U.S. than I am of all the policies applying to U.S. citizens with no oversight or public review. Those are the bad ones, when the gov't does things behind closed doors, without checks, balances, reviews and reports.. And, that's why I badly want Bush out of office in the upcoming election.

Re:Ex Post Facto

[BJH]

Oh lovely, so you get everybody else to cooperate in your slide down the slippery slope towards a fascist state.

While the terrorists send people without any prior travel record as their catspaws.

Brilliant, just brilliant.

Re:Ex Post Facto

[hak1du]

The same could be said for any security measure that you come up with.

No, the same could not be said for any security measure. Some security measures actually would be effective in preventing the harm terrorism does: secure cockpit doors, remote control of passenger airplanes, replacing air travel by other means of transportation, etc. But those require investments by the airlines, whereas these ineffective measures just require spending your tax dollars.

I'm a lot less disturbed by this "strong authentication" of foreign travellers to the U.S. than I am of all the policies applying to U.S. citizens with no oversight or public review.

Well, you should be disturbed by them. Contrary to what you may have been led to believe, most of the protections of the US Constitution are not limited to US citizens, they were intended to apply to all people within its jurisdiction.

But, apart from such legal and political technicalities, think about what both these kinds of policies and your kind of statements send to the world. Basically, they are saying "we don't care about the rights of others; other nations are second class as far as we are concerned; we can treat you like shit, in ways we wouldn't treat our own worst criminals" (foreign visitors to the US already have very few of the legal protections and protection against unreasonable government actin that even US criminals have).

That kind of treatment has grave consequences for the US. You can bet that European voters who visit the US will increasingly vote for politicians that are not friendly towards the US because of this kind of treatment--what point is there in supporting a nation that commits such gross violations of privacy and treats its allies like that?).

Furthermore, tourism to the US will probably drop even further, and tourism is of huge economic importance to the US. That's not just because of the increasing invonvenience involved in traveling to the US. It's also because many of the visitors that the US attracts come because the US has a certain mystique as the "land of the free", but that image is hard to maintain if people who come here are fingerprinted, recorded, screened, and tracked.

This really sucks

[Rupan]

As a taxpaying citizen, I am appalled by this move. It is my dollar that is paying for this system, and each day it seems more and more that I am distanced from control over how my country works. Was this how the Framers intended our country to be?

My girlfriend is Japanese. She went back to Japan recently for her brother's wedding, and upon her return she had to go through this procedure. She has a green card. It saddens and sickens me what this country does in the name of preventing terrorism.

Re:This really sucks

[nzkoz]

A friend of mine is a US citizen. Passport etc. However he's also a NZ citizen.

Upon arriving at LAX on his last trip, he was taken aside and asked how he became a US citizen. What right he had to be one etc. It seems I was born here you idiots isn't enough when you've been to NZ, which we all know is the hot bed of south pacific terrorism.

Re:This really sucks

[BJH]

No, they're not.

Japanese alien registration cards used to carry a single fingerprint from your index finger, but that requirement's been lifted now.

Funny how the 'land of the free' is the one intent on ignoring the human rights of foreign visitors, while a country long known for its insularity is getting rid of invasive procedurs, isn't it?

Re:This really sucks

[gclef]

Actually, as a dual-national myself (UK/US), I think I can explain some of this. The US only recognizes *some* dual nationality possibilities. Being born in the US, to NZ parents would normally require you to choose between US and NZ at age 18. Same if you were born overseas to US parents.

The only reason I'm getting away with it is that my father is British, and my mom's American, which means I *inherit* both. But, as the post above mentioned, I only show the US passport to the US customs folks. (and vice versa for the UK/EU customs folks.) While I suspect they'd handle it fine, it's never a good idea to tax their brains.

Re:This really sucks

[chialea]

The US has started getting a lot better about this, apparently, in the face of quite a few countries that do not allow revokation of citizenship. The new standard is "did you intend to revoke your US citizenship" by doing whatever (for example, getting a new citizenship, including loyalty oath). The standard is that they just ask you, though if you DO wish to revoke it, you should go to the US consulate and tell em that and get it recorded. It's not a bad idea to tell them if you don't, either (though a notarized letter will suffice).

And yes, the reccomended practice is that you use whatever passport is appropriate. If you're in Canada, and have a Canadian citizenship, they have dominion over you as a citizen, what do they care that you're also Syrian or Chinese or American or whatever (for example)?

Lea

Let's hope its reciprocated....

[Roger W Moore]

I like the Brazilian response where they fingerprinted and photographed all visiting US citizens. The Americans apparently didn't like that...should be good all of them visitng Europe are made to do the same. Maybe it will make them feel about as welcome as us Europeans will feel in the US if they implement it. Mind you it will probably solve their security problem - by the time they have finished nobody will want to go to the US!

Re:Let's hope its reciprocated....

[jesterzog]

I tended to think the same for a while, but having considered it, I have to admit that most international US travellers who I've met here (I'm in New Zealand) have been much more enlightened about the rest of the world than the people who probably back this type of legislation in the US.

I don't know if it's a smart thing to punish them just because their government does something stupid, and I also don't want to contribute to discouraging US citizens from actually getting out and seeing the rest of the world.

On the other hand, I'd have absolutely no problem with requiring tedious entry procedures for US government officials. The thought of Bush and his entire travel comeraderie being required to have their photo and fingerprints taken before entering other countries just makes me laugh. It won't happen, of course -- the US just has far too much international influence.

Re:Let's hope its reciprocated....

[scottfk]

Yeah... I guess it is laudable if you like petty, reactionary judges dictating law.

Seriously, this is how it happened. A judge just said that due to the concept of "reciprocity" in Brazilian law, it must be done. He did not even give time for the infrastructure to be put in place. He signed his law to take effect within a week. The first groups through got inkpads and polaroids.

The Brazilians are no happier about this than we are. They don't want to tick off tourists. They didn't know where they money was coming from to pay for the cameras and fingerprint readers and computers.

The reasonable Brazilians petitioned to be removed from the list of countries who require visas and fingerprints.

I went to Brazil a couple weeks ago. Coming in through GIG (Rio de Janeiro) was a joke. All the Americans waited in line with everyone else. This was a good couple hours. Once we got our passports and visas checked and stamped the Americans were told to join another, longer line for the photograph and the fingerprints.

It was unrelated to our entry into the country. With the stamp in the passport we had already "entered." This was just another step in the spirit of "reciprocity." It took another couple hours. The camera was a Connectix web cam attached to a laptop. The Windoze "asterix" sound played when the technician took my picture.

Good times, good times.

Futile

[a whoabot]

You know, they do all this to supposedly prevent terrorism, yet, the US has thousands of miles of unguarded and unwatched borders. I can go to any odd border lake or river in Canada with a canoe and paddle right over with a backpack full of anthrax and no one would know. These measures are useless. If someone with half a brain wants to get in to the US and kill a lot of people, guess what? They'll do it. They don't need to take a plane there.

You're obviously sarcastic...

[AllenChristopher]

"Bah, don't worry, It's only the foreigners who are having civil liberties violated. But they're not citizens, so it doesn't matter, right?"

But seriously, what about immigrants? One more way to marginalize that group. They already face language and cultural barriers, stereotypes, and a host of other problems... now they'll be printed, even if they become citizens later.

When the government starts printing people who have committed no crime and may later be citizens, it's clear that we're on the very edge of having full prints taken for something like a marriage license, then for a driver's license, and then at birth.

Even if our government doesn't start printing us for these things, there will be reciprocal arrangements with other countries. Cross any national border into a developed country, get printed, have that shared worldwide.

We already do have footprints taken at birth, so remember not to walk barefoot around the house of your murder victims.

Re:You're obviously sarcastic...

[Anonymous Coward]

FYI, every immigrant over 18yrs has his/her fingerprint taken for the green card already (and had to undergo lots of security background checks and will have to undergo more background checks for naturalization). The only ones in the US who are not screened are citizens.

Re:You're obviously sarcastic...

[wmspringer]

When the government starts printing people who have committed no crime and may later be citizens, it's clear that we're on the very edge of having full prints taken for something like a marriage license, then for a driver's license, and then at birth.

Well, in some cases, citizens already need to be fingerprinted even when not suspected of any crime. (Generally when starting a government job)

I was fingerprinted when I started my job four years ago; it's not really a big deal. I'm not one to be overly trusting of the government, but I'm not all that sure why I need to worry about them having my fingerprints on file either.

Re:You're obviously sarcastic...

[surprise_audit]

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.

USA Ignores Canada Yet Again

[pipingguy]

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

I am slighted, shocked and appalled that Canada was not included in this list.

Goddam Americans.

That tears it.

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm an Australian. I may, or may not, choose to do further overseas travel at some stage in the future. With policies like this, however, I guarantee you that the US is not on my list.

The first question I have is: just what does the US think this will achieve? And the second question: how does it think this will achieve it?

Is it to stop terrorists entering the country? Sorry. No such luck. If Individual A joins a terrorist group, but keeps his head low, he won't be on any of the lists. If he's careful, there'll be no way to say that he is a terrorist, even though he is. Would this system have caught the Unabomber, for example?

Or criminals? Same story.

All this system will do is catch those who have been stupid enough to be caught before... if that. It's a dubious step, of dubious usefulness; the potentials for abuse of this information are sufficient that I, for one, will not be visiting the US in the future (unless they drop this requirement). The UK? Maybe. Africa? Possibly. Maybe even Jamaica (via Britain, rather than the US, as I'd have to get a transit visa to go through the US...)

I would suggest that the US can kiss a reasonable proportion of their current tourist dollars goodbye.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[aled]

I was about to mod you Funny, but then reread the post and probably it wasn't your intention isn't it?

I can see it now...

[ajutla]

Tourist: Ah! America! I'm here at last! This is great!

Customs official: Ah. Welcome to the United States, terrorist--I mean, guest. Yeah. Guest.

Tourist: Why, hello there! This is my first time visiting America, and I must say that--

Customs official: Please be quiet. I need to take your photograph then get your fingerprints. This is essential. It is a matter of national security. You must comply or you'll be on the next plane back to whatever country you came from.

Tourist: What? My photograph? My fingerprints? I'm not a terrorist! I'm just a tourist! I'm just here to take in the sights and see what it's like in yank-land!

Customs official: I'm sorry, you're going to have to comply if you want entry into the United States of America. We are not going to use this information we've gathered about you for any nefarious purpose, anyway.

Tourist: You're not? Then why are you collecting it?

Customs official: That's classified.

Tourist: It is? Well, classified be damned! What do you need this information for? I demand my rants! I'm not from some rogue, anti-American nation! I'll have you know I'm a French citizen!

Customs official: ...Exactly.

Tourist: What? You have something against France?

Customs official: Calm down. Here. I have something for you to eat. They're freedom--I mean, French, fries. Yeah. French fries. Have one. They're really delicious.

Tourist: Why, thank you...hm, they taste kind of...

Customs official: Look, okay, why don't you just let me get your mugshot. I mean, photograph. Yeah. Because the word "mugshot" has negative connotations. And that's obviously not what I'm doing. I'm not doing anything negative.

Tourist: Um, okay...

Customs official: Nothing at all. Of the kind. This data I'm collecting probably--I mean, this data won't be used against you in any way, shape or form. It's just to protect civil liberties.

Tourist: Okay.

Customs official: It's for your privacy.

Tourist: It's for my privacy? You're collecting information about me for my privacy?

Customs official: Yes. These aren't the droids you're looking for.

Tourist: These aren't the droids I'm looking for?

Customs official: No, they aren't. Come here, let me take your photograph and fingerprint you, you dear Frenchman.

Tourist: I will comply. I have no mind of my own--my own. I will--have my photograph taken.

Customs official (thinks): The drugging worked like a charm, I'll be damned. I'm sure it'll work out perfectly next week when we put these fries into the national food supply and drug them all. Then we'll have control. Ahahahaha!

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Three Headed Man]

Yes, I was being sarcastic. This is a gross violation of civil liberties. We need to stop these actions on the part of the Bush administration.

George W Bush: Civil Rights Hero!

A Fingerprint's Rights

[Mulletproof]

This is a lot of sobbing over nothing. A visitor's freedoms within this country aren't being hampered. Infact, the only thing that's really happening here is keeping track of who is coming an going and comparing it to a database of known criminals. Unless you get pulled in by the police for something completely unrelated, this is never going to affect 99.5% of the people who enter the US.

If a freakin fingerprint is all you have to worry about entering this country, you're still doing pretty damn good.

Re: A Fingerprint's Rights

[terrymr]

How is that served by fingerprinting and photographing ? The INS already has a lookout system that uses your name, date of birth passport number etc. to search the watchlists.

The 9/11 problem was that the CIA wasn't sharing the information it had with other government agencies.

Re: A Fingerprint's Rights

[Mulletproof]

Um, fake passports, birthdays and names, maybe?

Fingerprinting is an infrastructure already in place world wide throughout a number of professions, making it an easily shared medium across agencies (hello?) Plus the technology has been tweaked over the last few years to provide a high degree of success in software matching.

I never said it was the end all be all of security, but it is another layer that will undoubtably help in the long run.

Re: A Fingerprint's Rights

[Roger W Moore]

So you won't have a problem if they started compulsory fingerprinting all of you US citizens...just so they could improve security of course, nothing wrong with that is there? I mean it won't affect 99.5% of all of you living there.

Afterall if a freakin fingerprint is all you have to worry about to live in your country, you're still doing pretty damn good, right?

Re: A Fingerprint's Rights

[TekPolitik]

This is a lot of sobbing over nothing.

Being a frog in the world's largest pot, you might not think so. But from outside your country, where we do not have a history of routine fingerprinting of people who are not even suspects in a crime, this is a major deal. If my wife wasn't American, there would be no way I would be going to the US at all now. As it is I'm not happy that she insists I accompany her on visits.

Most people don't realise the value of privacy until they have suffered some consequence of its violation. Your time for this will come.

Re: A Fingerprint's Rights

[demachina]

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.

Re: A Fingerprint's Rights

[HeghmoH]

I went to China last summer, and the worst thing they did to me was take my temperature as I left. No, it wasn't with an anal probe; they had an infrared camera pointed at the line and a computer hooked up to it that figured out everybody's body temperature so that they could keep people with SARS from leaving the country. Coming into the country was dead simple; write down where you're staying (as far as I know never verified), get your bags, leave.

So, you have two countries; one of them does a bit of paperwork and takes your temperature with an infrared camera. The other one fingerprints you, takes a mugshot, and puts it all into a big database. Remind me, which one is the totalitarian dictatorship again?

In all honesty, the US remains a lot more free than China, but the situation at the border sure doesn't help my perception.

Re: A Fingerprint's Rights

[chungking mansions]

Coming into the country was dead simple; write down where you're staying (as far as I know never verified), get your bags, leave.

I lived in China for 6 months and crossed the HK/China border about once a week. One day while waiting in line to cross, I saw security going to each booth and collecting those 'papers' that you fill out from each station - in garbage bags! So your assumption is right - they are certainly not verified. :)

Absolutely Disgusting

[Astroboy!]

The poster has it exactly right -- this is just like treating all visitors as criminals when they enter the US.

Even though terrorism is as disgusting an act as humanity has managed to think up in the past 5000 years, this is an awful move by the US. This goes beyond simple restrictions of civil liberties in the name of security.

What ever happened to "innocent until proven guilty"?

Use the standard model Mcfly!

[Helpadingoatemybaby]

Okay, let's apply this to the current "standard method of terrorizing the United States" which is Saudi terrorists in planes, or car bombs. Everybody knew that the government would do security checks on people booking one way economy tickets with cash, and that's (duh!) why the Saudi terrorists booked return tickets, first class and paid for them with credit cards. And this is the issue with all these "we mean well but we have no idea what to do" initiatives. Everybody knew that, they knew that. And now, everybody will know about the fingerprinting, and they'll know that too. If fingerprinting was applied to the current "standard model" of terrorists flying planes, should we find a piece of a terrorist's finger, we would successfully be able to indentify said finger after he kills hundreds or thousands of people. This is the perfect technology for tracking terrorists post facto. Solves nothing, and is expensive. How does this make anyone safer? I'm not sure either. I suppose it helps secure the borders -- against those with records -- so the next terrorists will be those with no records. Problem solved (for the terrorists.) Oh yes, and it will injure the tourism industry, which previously had produced $582 billion dollars in the economy. This hurt the economy while doing nothing against terrorism. Congratulations to the administration for thinking this up.

Re:Use the standard model Mcfly!

[JohnnyCannuk]

Brilliant, except every one of the 9/11 bombers entered the country legally. Some lived in the US for years. Many had been finger printed before and were on terrorist watch lists. Even the mastermind, Mohammed Atta boarded the plan using his own name and correct identity.

Ask your self this. Would having the pictures and fingerprints of the 9/11 terrorist have stopped them?

Sorry, trick question - the US government did have that information and 9/11 still occured. Quite a few of the 9/11 terrorists used their real identities and despite some of them being on watch-lists, still succeeded.

So tell me again how this extremely expensive initiative is going to make you safer?

Hint: Gathering info about the bad guys isn't the problem - the US has reams of info on terrorist and doesn't need the picture and fingerprints of every person entering the country. The problem is sorting through, connecting and properly and correctly analyzing the data they already have. Wouldn't this money be better and more effectively spent in this area, without insulting and marginalizing the rest of the world?

Think it's not a bother? Ask the US airline pilots who have to get photographed and fingerprinted in Brazil if it's just part of the routine. Or maybe flipping the bird and getting fined is part of the routine...

As a Canadian who works in the U.S.

[RobinH]

First of all, I have no problem with any country who wants to restrict entry to their country. I have a work permit for the U.S., but if they revoked it tomorrow, I wouldn't whine. I realize that as a non-citizen, I'm not protected by that country's constitution, and I'm not counting on it.

However, I do question the efficiency of the plan. I was fingerprinted and had my photo taken for a quickpass to get over the border called Nexus. It certainly seems like taking extra precautions against people who obey the law, cross the border lawfully every day, and pay taxes in your country is a strange focus for your limited resources.

But then again, it seems to me that attacking a country completely unrelated to the terrorist threat is a strange way to focus your resources.

Overall, this should be the decision of the people of the U.S.. It will certainly hassle visitors to your country, and make it seem unwelcoming even to the friendliest of tourists. It will also not stop the people determined to enter your country to harm you. However, it may make it a bit more difficult. Too bad it only takes one whacko with a suitcase nuke.

Personally, I think a lot of this stuff since 9/11 has been a knee jerk reaction. It's understandable, but it's completely illogical, if your goal is to prevent terrorism. You can't beat terrorism. By definition, it is the tool of the people who've already been beaten. It's a force you can't fight if you want to keep your principles.

I'm sad for you guys. Good luck though! I hope you figure yourself a way out of it.

Re:As a Canadian who works in the U.S.

[Anonymous Coward]

U.S. Constitution (14th amendment): No state shall "deny any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws."

In fact, you ARE entitled to equal protection of your rights -US citizen or not!
google " us constitution deny any person"

Re:As a Canadian who works in the U.S.

[Sycraft-fu]

I do agree that it seems a waste of money. The only thing I see it of being any real use for is catching people who overstay their visa, but without a corresponding monitoring facility in the country that isn't going to be so useful. It also would help catch illegal forigners in the event they are arrested, but not much more than what is here now.

What I don't understand is why forigners care. You already have to stand in a long line, get talked to by some semi-literate GS-6 while they look at your passport. What does it matter if also while that happens a camera snaps your picture and a digital reader grabs your finger print? I mean, this changes anything how?

I think people are right to question the utility we get for the cost, but are WAAAAAY over reacting to what is actually being done. The government has photographed and/or fingerprinted me a couple times, and never for a crime. I don't care, it IS their right to know who I am. It isn't their right to watch my every move, but that doesn't mean they aren't allowed to know who I am.

Re:How would you feel flying on a hijacked airline

[mixtape5]

its better for a guilty man to go free than an innocent man be punnished.

I question the intelligence of some...

[ForestGrump]

I questsion the intelligence of some of the guys working immigration at airports.

I was coming back to LAX from a trip on Saturday, and I saw them taking pictures and fingerprints of "foriegn visitors"

As for me, the Immigrations guy did not trust my passport (its offical, its legal, it was issued by his agency) and demands that I produce a 2nd ID. I give him my drivers lic.

After studying both pieces of identification for a good 30-45 seconds, he comments that both pictures are the same.

I calmly tell him that he is not qualified to look at IDs because the picture on the DL was taken at the DMV when I was 16, while the passport photo was taken when I was 19.

-Grump

Visit Canada

[www.fuckingdie.com]

Welcome to Canada. We don't force Urine samples, retinal identification or DNA tests at our borders. More importantly we also do not beleive in tatooing a barcode to your genitals so that you will be too afraid to try and remove it.

This can only hurt tourism coming into the states, so Canada will benefit.

One less tourist.

[marcushnk]

I have never needed to be finger printed, and if thats the way you treat allies/friends/tourists, then you'll never see me spend my money in your country.

Disgraceful

Say goodbye to your science conferences...

[Roger W Moore]

I imagine that, if true, this will have a significant impact on the US hosting scientific conferences. I mean, lets face it, given a choice between visiting the US and getting treated like a criminal or going somewhere else to present your results what are you going to do?

Re:Say goodbye to your science conferences...

[DrEasy]

In fact there are already some scientists who are boycotting the US for this exact reason. However it hasn't really lead to a drop in the number of conferences in the US. The organizing committees might want to consider these factors in the future if they want to have a decent submission rate and attendance.

Re:Say goodbye to your science conferences...

[Spacejock]

Come to Australia... Very little pollution, the language is similar, the people are friendly and we don't fingerprint you on arrival.
Cost of living is cheap, there's free public health and a pension for everyone and...

Wait a minute, what am I saying? I almost let the secret out the bag. Don't come here, it's a horrible place.

Re:Say goodbye to your science conferences...

[wmspringer]

Come to Australia..

I would, but I can't understand the darn accents :-)

Re:Say goodbye to your science conferences...

[Shipud]

Quite true. I came to the US for two years for postdoctoral training. One of the reasons was the number of international conferences held here. Now all people talk about in my institute is moving well-established US conferences to Canada, and in some cases to Europe. Keynote speakers are reluctant to come since they do not want to spend the time and energy required to obtain a visa from a US consulate. This usually involves loss of 1-2 workdays, sitting all day in a consulate building, and being treated rudely by consular officers. If those scientists want to bring their families, they have to subject their spouses, and sometimes their children to the same ordeal. Among the younger scientific generation, many non-American students and postdcos are denied entry visas. Conferences are moved out of the US simply for failing to achive "critical mass".

It will

[Snaller]

one has to wonder if this will affect tourism to this country

Re:how would you feel?

[mobiux]

remember these people are GUESTS in this country, if they don't like it, they don't have to visit.

If i visited another country, and it was the policy in that country, it's basically a tough-noogies type deal. Don't like it, don't visit.

I have a suggestion

[way2trivial]

try the wonderful country of Molvania

To you Righteous EU Citizens

[110010001000]

The EU is planning the exact same measures which will be implemented in 2006. Every country has a right to know who is traversing their borders. You already show a passport, however that is silly since they can be faked easily. People who hold US passports should be fingerprinted too, or have a retinal scan to prove that they are who they say they are. There are no "rights" being lost here. You have no "right" to anonyminity when you enter a country.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

I know you mean well, but please do bear in mind that other countries had this policy for a while. I can only point and laugh that *all* of you go through this now instead of just a select, singled out minority.

In that particular instance that I linked to above, the choice given was stark: if you go to that country, follow the rules *they* impose on your visit, or don't go. Simple as that.

It's not like fingerprinting you is really a big deal in itself, especially if you don't intend staying on in the US. However, the message that this sends out very clearly is that the country no longer welcomes visitors. Hey, fingerprinting is something that I associate with being done just before you're marched into jail, not otherwise.

And fingerprints stop hijackings, how?

[arevos]

9/11 hijackers all entered the US legally. How the fuck would you feel being trapped on the top of a burning building? Did you see the video of dozens of people jumping to their death to get away from the flames?

Fingerprinting hurts far less.

Interesting. I didn't know fingerprinting could prevent people from flying planes into buildings.

How, pray tell, would fingerprints distinguish a legal visitor who wants to go to disneyland, and a legal visitor who wants to hijack a plane and fly it into a building?

If the hijacker has no previous criminal record, as with 9/11 IIRC, why would this possibly be of use?

Re:And fingerprints stop hijackings, how?

[Anonymous Coward]

If the hijacker has no previous criminal record, as with 9/11 IIRC, why would this possibly be of use?

Some of the 9/11 hijackers were already on a terrorist "watch list". The US government already had a list of 'bad guys' that was reasonably accurate. But this does no good if you can't match the list of bad guys against the list of people who are entering the country!

Re:And fingerprints stop hijackings, how?

[wass]

If the hijacker has no previous criminal record, as with 9/11 IIRC, why would this possibly be of use?

I posted elsewhere in this thread, but here's my basic feeling.

I don't think this will do squat for actually stopping terrorism directly.

What it will do is make it much much harder for someone to spoof an identity (ie, fake passport) for coming into the US.

Secondly, if a tourist does a crime and leaves fingerprints then it can help track that down. Regarding fingerprinting, I remember getting fingerprinted when I was little at school, do all Americans get fingerprinted as routine? If so, then it kind of makes sense to treat visitors as we do ourselves.

Anyway, the one good thing about this is that they're apparently making all countries citizens get fingerprinted, and hence all visitors have a level playing field. So it'll make a visitor from Morocco feel less humiliated at immigration than a visitor from Spain, for example.

Re:And fingerprints stop hijackings, how?

[violet16]

How, pray tell, would fingerprints distinguish a legal visitor who wants to go to disneyland, and a legal visitor who wants to hijack a plane and fly it into a building?

Well, they wouldn't, of course. But the second time that guy tries to enter the country to hijack a plane -- we nab him!

Re:how would you feel?

[big_groo]

Then I guess you don't really care if you get their 'tourist dollars'.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Selecter]

Very simple. Get a majority of the poeple to vote for something besides a Republican or Democrat in every race they vote in, across the whole country in 2004.

No Problem.

Re:Spain

[JohnnyCannuk]

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.

Write to your favourite US airline!

[Slef]

Not only will this affect people travelling to the US, but also people transiting through the US to go to other countries.
I will definitely stop going to or through the US and start using a non-US airline. I think I'll write to AA to let them know. Maybe if enough people do that...

Does this mean...

[weeboo0104]

...that we will FINALLY be able to find Carmen Sandiego?

You'd be surprised...

[big_groo]

I grew up in Sault Ste. Marie, ON. My buddy and I jumped in a canoe one day, and decided to paddle over to the US. (we were bored). 20 minutes later, we were being questioned by the US Coast Guard. They saw were were only kids (17) and mentioned that we shouldn't do this. They let us go, but they were checking that we weren't smuggling booze/smokes/drugs.

The Canada/US border is vast, but people *are* watching. Chances are, it has been determined that you're harmless.

copying fingerprints

[sumdumass]

Isn't a massive fingerprint database kinda of dangerouse? I mean, if you collect all the fingerprints before a crime is comitted, how dificult would it be to all the sudden find those fingerprints at a crime sceene. In the case of taking finger prints after the arerst there usually is a long trail of fingerprint being viewed were it couln't be altered, but now I could just say that your finger prints were on the weapon and have one or 2 others validate it after I already caught you.

On the other hand with printers become as good as they are, whats stopping someone from taking prints from the database and printing them on somelatexgloves and leaving someone elses finger prints at a crime sceene? Now I could convict anyone I had a problem with because they entered the country.

My tinfoil hat is comming loose so i better wrap this up.

First hand experience

[psoriac]

I just flew into SFO (San Francisco International) yesterday from Seoul after a week of business there, and shortly before arrival they announced that for security reasons, everyone had to present their passport as they got off the plane - not for customs, but right at the gate exit.

On my way off the exit ramp, sure enough, there were four very large policemen there inspecting everyone's passports. I heard one say to another "is this the name?" and the other reply "no, it's the last name we need to check." Obviously they suspected someone on some flight from the region of asia my flight came through (another flight connected to mine).

Anyway getting to the point, there were a lot of grumbles about the inconvenience and people worrying about whether it would delay them getting to their next connecting flight. Now, imagine not only just checking the passport, but actually getting fingerprinted and photographed - how much more time would that take? And are they going to use the digital fingerprinters, or old fashioned ink? Then everyone has to wash their hands after?

This is a great way to kill off tourism here. I just love my country sometimes.

Your identification papers, Fraulein!

[0x0d0a]

The really awful thing is that a major thing we used to think despicable about Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany was the identification papers and the restrictions on travel.

With computer databases, your image and your fingerprints *are* identification papers, and now you are being forced to hand them over at checkpoints.

Seriously, it was all very funny when we *started* to point out the amazing number of similarities between Hitler and Bush's rise. There was a terrorist act on a national monument (and even, in the 9/11 case, *attempted* on the national legislature, same as Germany) that produced national fear, whipped up by leader, used to convince legislature to pass through critical bills granting extensive police powers. Political opponents were accused of being soft on terrorism. Fear and xenophobia against religious (Islamic/Christian) and racial (Arabic/Jewish) groups was used to greatly infringe those people's rights and persecute them. A number of undesireable people, in violation of national law, were locked up in a camp to isolate them from the rest of society (Guantanamo Bay/Nazi concentration camps). Nationalistic fervor was whipped up and whipped up again to build up a popular base. Personal vendettas were made good upon with the new power (Bush-Hussein/Hitler-a number of enemies). Other countries were invaded and occupied on poor pretexts, banking on the fact that other, less powerful, countries would not be willing to organize or do more than protest (Iraq/several countries). A primary motivation for the invasion was resources (and later Nazi invasion into the USSR was significantly for oil). Business and government had close ties, and war profiteer corporations did a number of nasty things to take advantage of cronyism with major political figures (Schindler's List is a nice example). Right now the third largest employer of armed forces in Iraq (after the US and Britain)are private corporations -- big companies that are answerable only to an extremely friendly occupational government that grants Iraqis almost no rights and consists mostly of people trying to curry favor with their US occupiers to try to get a more advantageous political position in the future. Neither leader is brilliant, but both are prone to violence and grudge-holding. Both managed to seize control of the legislature at about the time they gained office. Neither has much regard for the lives of the people they have conquered -- we have been using unarmed Iraqi guards as inspectors of cars into restricted areas before US personnel come close, making human shields out of them. Neither feels that international opinion is of much import. Both quickly established powerful police organizations with far stronger powers than their predecessors, little oversight, and the ability to bypass much of the judicial system (OHS/Gestapo). Both started their invasions based on punishing the terrorists that attacked their nation, and immediately spread out once they had the power they needed. Both had rising unemployment in their countries, and a growing degree of xenophobia towards foreign laborers.

There are some differences. Hitler respected and even idolized what Britain had done -- Bush treats Britain as a lapdog. Hitler actively physically intimidated his physical opponents -- Bush does not. Hitler invaded, occupied, and eliminated the governments of no countries within his first four years as ruler, whereas Bush invaded, occupied, and eliminated the governments of two countries within his first four years as ruler. Hitler wound up eventually killing many more people than Bush has thus far, though Bush is currently ahead for the first four years of rule. Hitler did not actively attempt to control other countries through diplomatic means -- Bush has a team that works hard to control other contries without needing to overthrow their government. Bush has computers and telecommunication monitoring systems, but Hitler did not.

Screw Goodwin's Law. The man didn't write it in 2004.

I'll leave

Re:Your identification papers, Fraulein!

[CrackedButter]

This nutcase is probably right, some people care not to admit it.

Re:Your identification papers, Fraulein!

[Animats]

Bush has computers and telecommunication monitoring systems, but Hitler did not.

Joseph Goebbels, the Third Reich's equivalent to Karl Rove, was a pioneer of the "wired office". He used radio, phone, and teletype links extensively. German had a very good switched teletype network in that period, and the Reich used it to control much of the country from Berlin, rather than delegate to local authorities.

Re:Your identification papers, Fraulein!

[HeghmoH]

Right now the third largest employer of armed forces in Iraq (after the US and Britain)are private corporations

I saw this statement in a news story the other day and it still strikes me as highly bizarre. What else would be number 3? The US and Britain are the only countries with any significant troop presence. You have to have a number 3 somewhere, were you expecting it to be "Iraqi gun nuts"?

Re:Your identification papers, Fraulein!

[0x0d0a]

Genocide was certainly not a goal of Hitler that was clear to the public four years into his rule (it was not until well into World War II that genocide became a goal), though he exhibited stronger anti-racial standpoints at that time than Bush currently is.

Exile was the proposed answer instead.

I have, on my refrigerator, a picture of a man in the Netherlands. The picture dates back about a month ago. He has sewn his own eyes and mouth shut with heavy thread. He is being held his tearful Dutch wife. He is one of thousands of Iraqis that is now being forced out of the country, to go back to Iraq, thanks to pressure from Bush. I would like to know what more people have to do to get their message across -- that they they are desperate and being treated horribly badly.

Purpose to limit foreign visitors

[dogfart]

Maybe the whole point of this is to reduce contact between US and non-US citizens. Maybe too much interaction between the US and the rest of the word is thought to be threatening. We have already managed to stifle international cultural programs. Non-US journalists have been detained and deported fo failing to obtain a special little-known journalist visa (which by the way can take weeks to get, preventing foreign journalists from covering breaking US news).

If you think I'm being paranoid, consider that the 20th century's worst dictator's unleashed their fury against "cosmopolitan" elements in their societies. Both Stalin and Hitler considered "foreign" elements a threat to their rule and crushed them without mercy. Part of keeping your own population docile in ensuring they never have the opportunity to see how citizens of other countries live.

Re:how would you feel?

[sahrss]

Guests...maybe we should treat [b]guests[b/] with some respect? Or else give them a different name, like...intruders? :-P

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[harikiri]

Cool, so my country (Australia) who sent troops to Iraq - now has its citizens treated the same way suspects are when brought into a police station.

I just can't wait to plan my next holiday to Disneyland!

Wait for 911 commision

[bstadil]

Maybe it would be better to wait with this nonsense until the 911 report is issued.

Their Congressional charter is after all to make recommendations for how to strengthen security and avoid terrorist attacks in the future.

Fingerprints == phlogiston?

[Murmer]

One question that I've had for years that I've never heard a satisfactory answer to is: how do we really know, beyond reasonable doubt, that fingerprints are unique identifiers?

I mean, I've been told that - we've all been told that for at least a century, maybe two. But has there ever been a significant study that actually checked that?

I'd love to see that, just to put my conscience to rest. The biggest assumption that biometric identification makes is that it is actually a unique identifier, but I haven't seen any evidence that this has been proved to be true.

Anyone who wants to point me to such a study would put my mind at ease.

The irony of this is ...

[John Jorsett]

... a lot of the people complaining are coming from societies that are just as intrusive if not more so. The UK, for example, is rapidly covering itself in surveillance and traffic cameras, and refusing to divulge an encryption key when demanded by the authorities is a jailable offense.

It's easy to get fingerprinted.

[blair1q]

Want to be fingerprinted?

Join the military.

Helps them identify the 1-2 kg of your remains after you step in the wrong place or stand under a 2000-lb bomb.

Being fingerprinted is not a big deal.

Unless you plan to be a criminal later in life.

Seriously. I feel better knowing they can identify me from the smudges on the inside of the trunk of the car I was buried in.

just got from an amazing race style of holiday

[john_uy]

went from thailand and last minute to malaysia and singapore for a vacation. those three countries did not fingerprint or mugshot people coming in the country.

generally, i view their country peaceful. i don't see any necessity with it. i view that the people in malaysia and thailand are particularly friendly and that reduces terroristic attacks to them, imho. they are also very friendly to tourists and others. :) people would treat them more the same or even better.

on the other hand, the usa keeps on irritating people entering their country. the only thing it affects is tourism. i have a us visa. i have plans to go to the usa for some vacation but given this, i'll probably go to china, japan and korea instead.

usa is indirectly challenging the terrorists. it's like we keep our systems secure so crackers/hackers would not mess with us. of course, someone will be able to break in stealthily and the us government will not have any clue (just like the 9/11.) after something happens, the us government will patch some things up and the thing repeats all over again.

i would like to say that maybe if the usa will be more friendly (i'm not saying they are not, but i don't see it) to others, then maybe other parties will be open. much like fighting, you will not achieve anything by hitting the other person. it just aggravates the situation. though i cannot provide any contrete examples now, maybe they can start by being friendly to countries and opening and increasing dialogue talks. you wouldn't know the problem unless you ask the party about it. :)

Re:just got from an amazing race style of holiday

[KD5YPT]

US being friendly would be nice... unfortunately for two things.

1. A big brother mentality, or maybe now is more of a big bully. Anyone who have power (US, and previously, the Soviet Union) all wants to either be the big brother (we must protect the weak) or a big bully (do what we say, or we beat the crap out of you).

2. For above reason, other country generally look upon US with skepticism.

prints

[zogger]

Here in georgia, you must take a print for a drivers license now*, and most banks have a print pad for cashing checks. All states will have it for DL's soon, it's the non declared but defacto national identy card. Internal passports will be next.

*I also suspect, really just suspect, they've been doing a closeup retina scan print during the picture taking part of the license, if that's possible at a distance of a few feet. I don't know, though. I can't prove it, but last time I got mine renewed it sure was suspicious, EVERYONE in the line had two pics taken, and I asked about it, because before for years and years it was "one snap, sorry, you're stuck with that one, move along now" and the lady state cop gave me quite a squirrely answer and looked chagrined about it, like she was embarrased/angry at the same time.

And I mean really, what a scam anyway, prints and pics at the OFFICIAL border crossings, yet they turn a blind eye to the MILLIONS who cross illegally, and it's not all "out of work poor hispanics" who cross over, there's all kindsa folks sneaking across. Tell me this ain't weird..

The whole "war on terror" stuff is being taken advantage of in this stealth coup that's been going on, IMO. Look at all the 9-11 government prior knowledge stuff that is FINALLY making the mainstream news the past few weeks.

Re:prints

[surprise_audit]

Doesn't the constitution also prohibit imprisonment without due process?? That's been happening to both citizens and non-citizens

Political origin.

[OgGreeb]

There are many problems with this policy, not the least of which is the good ole' "doesn't fix the perceived problem".

This policy does however, provide an excellent solution to the problem of "politicians in charge need to appear to act decisive to gain re-election". Particularly when the government is running breathtaking budget deficits -- whats a few more billion to implement this?

Re:how would you feel?

[thomastheo1]

thats the point. we won't. I won't, thats for sure. and I lived in the US for 5 years, have a many american friends there. I used to have diplomatic immunity, but not anymore. I have no rights in your country. I can be locked up for no reason.. I will not be part of that parade. what confuses me is the claim that a guest in some way is not worthy some of the most basic rights outlined by your legislation, such as right to privacy and right to a fair trial... does it not say something about your moral conviction concerning these rights if they are applied with discrimination? non-americans are humans too.

Business dollars

[Bodrius]

Far more important than tourist dollars are business dollars:

Until recently the US was the undisputed center of the international economy. Recently the EU has risen as a potential threat, and in other fields so has China.

Despite all claims of telecommunications and ecommerce, big business deals are still made in personal meetings, and have more to do with social processes than with economics.

Given these measures, where do you think the business will go?

If you had to choose between making a deal with someone who deals with you as an equal, or someone who treats you like a terrorist, which one would you choose?

Many a good business proposal has gone down because of more trivial reasons: bad personal chemistry, bad food in a business dinner, personal dislike for a national stereotype, etc.

In Latin America, for example, people have been typically happy to do business with Americans:

The stereotype says that Americans like to do business, have money, and keep things straightforward. The US was normally seen as a nation that welcomes you and treats you like a king as long as you bring money to pay for it.

The whole US was for most middle-class businessmen of the region like a mix of Disneyland and a Giant Shopping Mall is for a teenage girl. A business meeting in Atlanta, New York or Florida is a half-vacation.

In short, they're happy and receptive to a pitch while the other team has 'home advantage'.

More recently, it's easy to find people feeling personally insulted by new measures post 9/11. Now this can make them feel like criminals.

People will start to simply refuse to go to the US, for business or pleasure: "if they want to do business, let them come here". And the stereotype will be different as well: Americans are paranoid, make things difficult, think of everyone else as criminals and terrorists.

It wouldn't take much for a friendly European or Asian competitor to take the business. It's not like they have to dazzle them with a better offer, they just have to make them feel better about the deal.

Bushies are fscking idiots

[Anonymous Coward]

Now that I've got your attention, consider this:

1. Most of the 9/11 bastard hijackers were Saudi
2. Most of the money flowing to terrorist organizations is Saudi.
3. Most of the "brains" behind all this are from Pakistan.

So what do the Bushies do?

1. Ignore Saudis
2. Invade Iraq - something which could have been done anytime.
3. Promote the pakis to "non-nato" ally status
4. Jerk off visitors to the US with their dumbass US-VISIT program.

Fscking idiots. But hey, you get the government that you deserve and most Americans are fscking idiots anyway.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[WaterTroll]

Watch out for the "I hate Bush, I'm voting for Nader" effect, which of course virtually assures that you will spoil the democrats chance at plurality and allow the Republicans to win.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

" Terrorism isn't about what country you come from. A terrorist is a person who acts out due to their insane beliefs. A terrorist could come from Australia, or the UK, or even the US."

Even the USA?!!!!! Surely not?!

Re:how would you feel?

[kfg]

Interesting interpretation of how to be a good HOST. Sometimes, in civilized countries that is, the word "Honored" is often prepended to GUEST. Especially if they come bearing gifts that you depend upon for your well being.

Ya know, there were things I didn't like about being behind the Iron Curtain during the hight of the cold war, military officers armed with automatic weapons boarding the train at the border crossing and such, and I vowed not to go back until the curtain lifted, but at least, In Soviet Russia, they didn't strip search me and they didn't photograph and print me. They checked my passport. That's what a passport is for. You should read the fine print on your own American issued passport.

Mine goes something like this:

"The Secretary of the United States of America hereby requests all whom it may concern to permit the citizen(s) of the United States named herein to pass without delay or hinderence and in case of need to give said citizen(s) all lawful aid and protection."

Clearly that must have been written by some former Secretary of State who had read his Homer.

As I might commend you to do.

The Odyssey is an allegory of how to treat guests in a civil manner, especially those of a foreign land.

Reading with careful attention might increase the turnout at your next soiree.

Civility breeds civility, and this step will do nothing to further the cause of our self-appointed leadership of the civilized world.

It will also do nothing to combat terrorism, thus making the injury even more insulting.

I fully expect people to not visit in droves.

KFG

Re:how would you feel?

[thomastheo1]

I lived in DC as a child/teen. My father was a diplomat at an embassy. Please understand that I very fond of the US, and still miss it. I like north america, and I plan to move to Canada. What you say is true, most people couldn't care less. However, if i go somewhere, especially settle down, i would like to have some un-alienable rights to call my own, regardless of my status. and those asses in positions of power happen to be the MOSt powerful asses one can find, probably for years to come. I value my freedom, and my rights, and wont forfeit them so easily, especially looking at what the near future could bring for you guys. PS, as a continental european, I prefer canada's more social approach to society anyways.. :) Imagine, people avioding the US, the land of the free, for the sake of their freedom... hmmm... it's no longer a rare ocurrence. trust me on that one. Besides, it's like everyone says, you don't feel welcome anymore. It's the pricey visa application with the corresponding intense questioning-bordering on interrogation, before even leaving your own country, that will put you off a vacation to the USA even before you pick up your credit card.

As a canadian...

[abysmilliard]

I grew up less than 15 minutes from the US border. My family kept a mailbox in Northport, Wa., where my grandmother was born and raised. She later moved to Canada to marry my grandfather. My family has many friends in the United States of America, and I have relatives down there to this day. I spent nearly every summer of my childhood near Kettle Falls, swimming on the shores of the Columbia river, flying kites and catching june bugs. From the mountains near my hometown, you can see the United States. It's absolutely no different from the landscape in Canadian. All you can see to distinguish the two nations -- if you're lucky -- is a cutline less than twenty feet across. When we used to go across the border, my father was waved through. The border guards knew him well. As I got older, that slowly changed. Border checks took longer, the guards were more insistent on searching him, and even though they all expressed regret, asking how we kids were, much of the time they still spent time checking him out. The last time I went to the US, I spent an hour at the border while the car I was driving in was searched top to bottom. The border guards were rude, humorless and in-your-face. Canada is still exempt from this change in the laws, and I love the USA. But I can honestly say that if the laws ever change to require that kind of invasive documentation with respect to Canadians, I will never go back to the USA again. Watching the US over the last four years has been very much like watching a family member go crazy. I sincerely hope things change, soon, because I would really like to take the kids I will someday have swimming in the river down there, and show them what awesome neighbours we were lucky enough to have. Right now, I think it's even money that that will happen.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[mlilback]

That is pure myth. The only adminstration in the last 25 years to not run a deficit was Clinton. The Clinton adminstration is the one that saw the smallest increase in federal employees in the last 25 years.

Republicans are not for smaller government. They are for having government intrude in my bedroom and personal life. They are for giving big tax cuts to their rich buddies. The are for gouging the government with fat contracts to their contributors (Haliburton).

And I'm saying this as a Libertarian, not a Democrat. Republicans claim to be better for the economy, but the past 25 years show that to be wrong. At least the democrats aren't as happy to take away my rights.

Notice how the Republicans are the ones always proposing constitutional amendments to take away people's rights. Smaller government my ass.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[uradu]

> The new Spanish leader thinks that by removing troops
> from the middleast his country will be safer.

Bull, bull, bull! Will you quit beating up this oh-so-convenient strawman? That is NOT why he is planning on pulling the troops back, but rather because he (and the Spanish majority) opposed putting them in on principle from the start. Now he gets a chance to act on his principles. The media and their willing followers can spin this whichever way they want, but this straw ain't gonna turn to gold.

You'd be VERY surprised.

[lysium]

The Canada/US border is vast, but people *are* watching.

Yet strangely enough, ton after ton of high-grade marijuana flows across the border to New York City alone. Laugh if you will, but if bales of aromatic plant matter can enter the country on a routine basis, then a few clever men will certainly be able to do the same.

====---====

Re:how would you feel?

[mobiux]

see the problem I have with this statement is that when people visit my house, i usually know them, and if i don't know them, i at least get a name and reason for visiting before they come into my home. and if i don't know them, I sure as hell aren't going to let them roam around my house without me.

And if you say you don't/wouldn't do the same, you are full of crap.

Have you ever traveled to a foreign country?

[Sycraft-fu]

I mean other than Mexico or Canada (who wer are on special terms with). It has ALWAYS been "Your identification papers, please". You MUST have a passport and not having one will cause you real trouble. They demand you give it to them, fill out a form declaring the reason and length of your visit, as well as what you are bringing. You must then obtain their official permission (usually in the form of a stamp) to be there.

The document they require is nothing simple either. It's an official federal proof of identity. Getting it requires proving citizenship and identity. It's actually much harder in many countries. I'm a US/Canada dual citizen. My US passport was easy, just prove I'm my parent's kid that was that. My Canadian one is a bitch. They need lots more ID (copy of my driver license and US passport, and my physical citizen ID card), a sworn statement testifying to my identity by a notary public (or doctor, lawyer, etc) who has known me for a few years, etc.

Know what? They STILL want me to go through all the shit when I go to the US or Canada from the other. I can get away with less than a passport since I'm a citizen and the countries are on good terms, but it's more difficult. To any other country, forget it. It's a passport or nothing.

ID checks at the border are nothing new, and have needed official ID for a LOOOONG time.

No more US visits for me

[abelsson]

Unfortunately this means I'll have avoid visiting the US from now, which is a shame, because I was planning a trip to visit a few friends fairly soon.

Most americans I've met are friendly, open, decent, people whom I've really enjoyed meeting and getting to know in my past visits. It's a shame that I can't come and see them any more, or visit any of the great places in the US, but I refuse to be treated as a criminal and have my photo and fingerprint in some foreign nations database over which i have absolutely no control.

So, I'll do the only thing I can and try to stay out. Hope you won't miss my tourist dollars. I'll sure miss the friendly and nice people.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Fermier de Pomme de]

Look on the bright side: The next time a group of terrorits blows something up the media will have some decent pictures after the fact instead of blurry surveilance photos.

How does this help protect me again?

Oh look bread and circuses...what was I saying?

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Brandybuck]

Are you serious? Every administration in the last 25 years increased the size of government. Some may not have grown it as fast as others, but none have decreased it. Clinton oversaw the smallest increase in federal employees, but he still oversaw an increase.

Democrats don't want a smaller government, they want a more efficient big government.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[js3]

yea isn't it funny, we used to laugh at those germans for putting up a wall and having checkpoints everywhere. They didn't know what is was to be free we thought. tear down that wall regan said. now we see israel building one. fingerprinting visitors? oh god no.. now we do the same.

I Just Cancelled My Ticket.

[Anonymous Coward]

My wife and I were all ready to head to Hawaii inearly May to work at an observatory on Mauna Kea but after discussing it with her I've cancelled our flight. Instead we'll fall-back on some time promised us on a telescope in Chile.

This was not a decision taken lightly, but we just can't bring ourselves to donate any of the little money we have to a nation rapidly becoming the Fourth Reich and which treats its guests and visitors as if they are apprehended criminals undergoing processing down at the jailhouse.

Re:I Just Cancelled My Ticket.

[bwy]

You're all wrong!

We granted visas to some of the 9/11 hijackers months after 9/11. Now, how is that for service. You can't say that we treat our visitors like criminals. Apparently you're allowed in even if you've been part of the worst terrorist attack of all time. Of course, luckily the bastard was already dead so it was just an "honorary" status.

Re:I Just Cancelled My Ticket.

[Beetjebrak]

You're right, "Fourth Reich" goes too far. However there are some frightening parallels to be seen with pre-WWII Germany.. Depending on where you put the exact starting date it took between 10 and 20 years for the situation in Germany to escalate into what we now call the Holocaust.

We're now approx 2.5 years away from 9/11/01 and the USA is at this moment showing parallels to Germany in the early 30's when Hitler obtained power even though he had didn't have the majority of votes (Bush also didn't have majority), and laws like PATRIOT put large restraints on civil liberties just like many of the early Nazi laws did.

Now I'm not saying the US can't be corrected in its policies and I certainly won't put the Nazi party at the same level as the current administration but still.. it gets you thinking. I can imagine people are worried.

People will always be people. Germans aren't especially cruel compared to any other country so there's always the danger of a new Holocaust occuring. The Holocaust wasn't carried out on US soil so the memory of it may be less lively there. I just hope sometime soon the US government will see the error of its ways. There's no such thing as a "land of the free" with a big electrified fence around it. Many jews behind the Nazi ghetto walls thought they were safe then, many Americans think their modern "walls" will secure them now..

FYI I'm European and worried about developments in the US, Russia AND the EU at present.. the world is a mess and it rapidly got worse when Bush became president of the USA.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[eyeye]

Asyslum seekers from Uganda and Someone from the UK who fancies going shopping in New York aren't exactly the same thing are they?

I wanted to go to the US but will not do so, even though my GBP will go a long way over there. But I wont be treated like a criminal for daring to travel there.

Where the aid goes)

[Angostura]

You might find it interesting that although the U.S is indeed the largest spender on aid (though 20 something-th in terms of % of GNP) the lions share goes to just three countries - from the top. Russia, Israel, Egypt. Oh - Pakistan is at number 4.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Anonymous Coward]

It's only the foreigners who are having civil liberties violated

Let's see... I used to be able to fly anywhere within the U.S. without having to show picture ID. Now, I must carry my papers and be prepared to show them at U.S. government checkpoints.

I feel much less safe than I ever did before since my life and the lives of all U.S. citizens will be affected far more by the U.S. government and the laws and rules it imposes on its citizens than by all the terrorists in the world. I'd rather be able to travel where I wished and read whatever books I wished without the government tracking my every move than have a false sense of being protected by the occasional loon who is hell bent on loading a rental truck full of fertilizer and blowing it up in front of an IRS office. There will always be terrorism as sure as there will always be the human emotions of anger and hate, and it's asinine to erode civil liberties in the name of either.

Anyone who thinks U.S. citizen's civil liberties aren't being violated is either not a U.S. citizen, or they have a poster of Ashcroft on their bedroom ceiling.

Another database...

[eloquent_loser]

Aside from the evidently perspicacious observations made by most here that the measures won't be terribly effective, and will certainly prevent freedom-lovin' tourists such as myself from crossing a U.S border, what about the risks associated with the expanding and increasingly cross-referenced network of databases (biometric and otherwise) that pervade modern society??

It seems to me that there are really good reasons why fingerprints have not, until now, been summarily taken from people at birth. One of those is civil liberties/preservation of individual dignity and individual volition etc, but one is pragmatic: a repository of such information can be abused, or used by criminals for some illicit purpose.

In the past, this would't have been much of a problem - but with biometrics imbedded in many common documents, and modern technology (say the ability to credibly 'put' someone's fingerprint on a gun) it's going to be.

Every police force and public service has corrupt elements or people with criminal tendencies, no matter how careful they are. The more data held by these sources, the more enticing it will be for terrorists or common criminals to find some way to utilise it. I don't think terrorists, perhaps because of their rather luddite backgrounds, have fully comprehended yet what damage they could wreak through attacks on the very electronic systems we are falling over ourselves to put in place for their benefit.

As the citizen of another country, however friendly, I have no rights AFAIK under U.S law with regards to the way my personal data is treated. Who is to say they won't sell or otherwise distribute that data? Who is to say they won't provide it to my own Government in circumvention of our own Laws? (Remember Echelon?)One can only imagine the ghastly scenarios of identity theft and the consequent tribulations endured by the luckless individual whose personal data has become the plaything of some criminal.

Not sure I follow the logic

[gidds]

Problem: the rest of the world doesn't like us very much.

Solution: insult them and tell them they're all effectively criminals. Then they'll like us more!

Do you ever get the feeling that someone important just doesn't Get It?

Re:I, regrettfully, have to agree with this becaus

[leomekenkamp]

We live in a world that changed a few years back and one that will never be the same.

And why do you think this happened? Because terrorists do not like Mickey Mouse?

I am an independent/idealist who operates on common sense.

Then please, use that common sense.

We, as people in the US, are walking around daily as the biggest targets in the world.

Why not do something about it? Why not find out why you are hated so much by groups of people? Why not try and step into the shoes of a 16 year old palestine boy who had his brother killed simply because he was at the wrong place at the wrong time? Why not try and see how supporting a dictatorship (Cuba before Castro, Persia (Iran) when the Shah ruled there, Irak!!!) makes the people under that dictatorship view the US as a whole? Years and years of dirty tricks and interfering and meddling in other countries' are causing what you see now. Why not criticize your government and tell them to order the CIA to keep its nose out of other people's business?

I love my country and I love my life.

Why in that order? Why do you put your country before yourself or your loved ones? Do you know that 'training' people in pre-WW-II Germany to 'love' their country no matter what (Blut und Boden, blood and ground) let to the rise of nationalistic fascism?

(...) kill for twisted beliefs (...)

Sure. Whatever you do, do NOT try to understand the other side. Just call their believes 'twisted' and be done with it. Thats so much more easy than having to think about why the status quo is as it became.

They were bombed, the innocent died, and they came together as a nation.

The innocent died; yes, this is exactely what the terrorists want. In their eyes innocent people on 'their side' die every day, while the 'civilised' world actively supports their killers. They see no way out, except by terrorism. And as I see it, the spanish people did not come together as a nation, but they 'rewarded' their right wing government with a clear defeat in the elections, resulting in a left wing government.

I hope people can understand and Turn-about is fair play if they want to mug/print me.

Either you never read 1984, or you did not understand it fully. This is exactly what Bin Laden wants: he wants the people in the west to have to go through road blocks, random searches, an overall loss of personal freedom. Why, because in his eyes we then suffer the same as a lot of muslims under US-backed governments.

Extremism is a world wide infection that if we don't squash it then we are all doomed as are our freedoms.

Sure! Squash 'em all. Just like the ETA, they should be squashed! Yeah, that's what really works! Just squash em long enough, and they will stop. Know what? Spain has been trying to squash the ETA for > 35 years now. Guess they haven't tried long enough, ey? Same goes for the IRA; they are illegal since 1936. Yup, kill them all. Once the current generation of terrorists has been killed, there will not ever be a new generation of terrorists, no sir.

Please get me straight: I strongly dissapprove of terrorism; I have no sympathy whatsoever for people who kill or injure innocent people. There is however no way we are going to get rid of this by the kneejerk reactions seen in the US and some other countries. Trying to understand terrorists and seeing how and why they came to be terrorists in the first place might just be more useful than fighting them, because you simply cannot win. History has taught us that. Please, for the love of freedom, open your eyes and your mind; do not let yourself be brainwashed by power-hungry politicians and their media. You seem like an intelligent person, please use that intelligence to try and look further than what you are being shown.

Hassled at Airport

[mcbunny29]

I recently went to the US for a job interview. At immigration, they asked me to justify why I was staying for only two days. As soon as I mentioned I was here for a job interview, I was taken to the police center where a couple of ex-convicts without appropriate visas were also waiting.

I had to wait 30 mins for a police officer to take me to a small room for questioning! He was concerned that I might be working illegally and reminded me of the visa procedures.

As a british citizen, I have never dealt with the police and usually never get stopped for anything. This was a first for me. I felt accused, unwelcomed, rejected and insulted.

Also, the skilled worker H1B visa have run out this year, which means I can't start working until November earliest. This means that I'll probably look for a job elsewhere. In my opinion this is a loss to the US, since they should try to attract highly educated people like myself (in all modesty of course ;) ).

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[DreamerFi]

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

Tourism?

[SillyNickName4me]

The fact that the USA has a few hundred non citizens locked up with no access to the legal system is a much bigger issue then the USA wanting more solid id info on visitors. The first is a violation of human rights, the 2nd is an understandable tho futile attempt at keeping the wrong people out.

Fingerprints are not as infallible as people think

[mark2003]

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?

US border control is already bad enough without...

[NewtonsLaw]

I've travelled internationally quite a bit in the past few years and although I've yet to find a country with "pleasant" border control, the USA counts as the worst first-impression I've ever experienced.

You're warned that getting the slightest thing wrong on your declaration card will see you thrown into jail and the staff appear to have manners and an abrasive attitude that are certainly the worse than Australia, New Zealand, Singapore or the UK.

You can't help but get the overwhelming impression that, as a tourist, you're not so much welcomed as tollerated as a temporary visitor to the USA.

With all the new measures in place, and the presumption of guilt that accompanies them, I certainly wouldn't put the USA very high on my list of places to visit again.

Once you're through the airport it's a nice place and the people I met there were great -- but that border-control is a *real* turn-off.

Besides which, what's with LAX? I've never had to queue on the sidewalk to get to the check-in counter before -- it's crazy!

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Charlotte]

At least we don't lock away people and then deny them the right to counsel, visits or trial, and then claim that that's ok because they're sub-humans anyway.

Fourth Reich indeed.

Gore irony LT 50% when he won GT 50% when he lost

[AHumbleOpinion]

Remember - half of the US voters voted for Gore

That is merely amusing trivia. Neither Bush nor Gore were going for a numeric majority. Both were going for an electoral college majority. You run campaigns quite differently depending on whether or not you are going for a numerical or an electoral college majority. The "Gore won" argument is not unlike a losing football team pointing out that they moved the ball a greater number of yards during the game. That is interesting and all but that was not the victory criteria agreed upon before the game.

It is also interesting to note that with the three way races the two Clinton/Gore victories had a minority of Americans voting for Clinton/Gore, a majority voted for the other guys. In short, Gore received a minority the two times he made it, a majority the one time he did not. Again, nothing more than amusing trivia.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[ax_42]

I just can't wait to plan my next holiday to Disneyland!

You won't need to be fingerprinted when you go there, there is a significant amount of culture within 50km, and the food in the area is excellent.

You did mean Disneyland Paris, right?

OK, but what happens if....?

[s7uar7]

I'm British, and in October this year someone enters the US with a faked copy of my passport. Their fingerprints and photo will be added to the database as me. Unaware of this, I then visit the US some time after. As soon as they take my fingerprints it is going to be flagged up that I've visited before and the fingerprints don't match. Imagine the hassle trying to prove you are who you say you are, and that the first person was the imposter. This just won't work unless other countries share information; as far as I know the UK government doesn't have my fingerprints, and even if they did, there is no plan to share it.

Re:OK, but what happens if....?

[Fulkkari]

Wouldn't your case prove that this new system in necessary? At the time the authorities notice the mismatch in the fingerprints and photos, they know that a person with fake identity has entered the country + they have the fingerprint AND the photo of this person, so they could probably identify him or her. The only problem is to solve out which one is the person. But if this system doesn't exist this people would go unnoticed.

I wouldn't like to give my photo/fingerprint to a foreign country, but as long as secure passports doesn't exist I think this solution is acceptable. Too many people can enter a country with faked passport nowadays.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[slipgun]

I think that it's well worth remembering that terrorism is still a very new concept to the Americans, whereas in Europe many countries have been living with it on a smaller scale for decades.

And as you say, many Americans are very very good at overreacting (look at Slashdot ;-), and in general are going to be more trusting of the government because they don't have Europe's history.

Re:I, regrettfully, have to agree with this becaus

[leomekenkamp]

I think you missed my main point-I don't give a fuck what a terrorist says to justify his/her acts of terrorism.

When you know what 'justification' a terrorist uses to kill innocent people, then maybe you understand that this and previous US governments have provided both wood and sparks to ignite this fire. US governments have shown in the past not to give a damn about people in other countries; US governments support whatever regime as they see best for their own plans. THAT feeds terrorism. If you want to put a stop to terrorism, take away its breeding ground: change US foregn policy.

Fuck excuse me for not giving a fuck about someone who murder INNOCENT people and has a reason for it. I don't give a shit.

Does this mean you are willing to let the reason a terrorist became a terrorist keep on existing? Kill one terririst, another will take its place, as long as that other thinks it's the only way. Take away the breeding ground for terrorism, and it will fade away.

People who kill innocent people should follow the same fate!

No, they should be put on trial in a court of law.

Tell you what the next time someone shoots, burns, mutilates someone from my country (...)

And here lies a mayor source of the problem. Why should it be limited to someone from your own country? Why not have the same feelings for a 14 year old palestine girl who was shot without reason? Or an old lady sitting in a bus in whatever Israelian city? Why do you not ask your government to put more pressure on Isreal to make peace, and not war?

They want the world to be ISLAM-ONly

Sure, some fundamentalists want that. Just as there are fundamentalist christian nutcases who want the whole world to be christian. Just like the US educational system wants to have all students swear an oth to some deity. The fact is, most muslims just want peacefull coexistance, as long as they may hold their own beliefs. Look into history: Spain was once occupied by the (muslim) Moors; under their reign christians as well as jews could openly have their own religion.

You should open your eyes and understand they have one objective and that is convert the world to Islam. Just like the Palestinians want to wipe Israel off of the map and not live with them.

Yeah, right. Most palestines just want to have freedom, food on the table, a house to live in, and decent education for their children; most of these things they do not have. The main reason they are opposed to Israel is because in their eyes Israel is keeping them from their basic human rights and needs, and I cannot blame them for that view.

I'm all for a discussion with groups not out to destroy mine or any others way of life but they wouldn't talk to us if we begged.

??? They tried and talked, but we did not listen. That pushed the extremists among them into terrorism.

They want all of us dead or converted but we know they prefer dead.

Nope, they just want to be left alone, in peace.

They have no value of life period.

And US governments do, right? You stated yourself: you want to put a bullet through the heads of terrorists. Ever thought that those terrorists looked at the US and thought: "Well, they are so peaceful, they have never illegally overthrown a democratic government they did not like, they never invaded another country the last 40 years, they have never lied to their own people."? Large groups of people around the world see the US as a bullying oppressor (even a large number of people in Europe see it that way). Change US government actions, and you'll change that view and take away the breeding ground of terrorism.

The only thing they understand is violence so that's what they'll get.

You did not react on my arguments that this did not help with the IRA, nor with the ETA. You simply repeat your mantra.

Lastly we can try to understand all we want but it w

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[nickos]

"US == Evil ; Any EU nation == Can do no wrong"

That's probably because many EU countries (I'm thinking of the nordic ones and the Benelux) are fundamentally more decent and liberal than the US. Just because the UK (with it's dodgy un-written "constitution") has regressed, it doesn't mean that the rest of the EU member-states have.

For example many of us have civil codes that are built on fair, just and easily understood principles rather than arbitrary precedant, proportional representation that means that every member of the electorate's vote counts, and a respectful approach to the environment.

Freedom of speech

[pubjames]

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!

Re:Freedom of speech

[pubjames]

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.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[nickos]

This isn't going to happen, and in a first-past-the-post system you're wasting your vote if you don't vote for one of the 2 front-runners in your area.

This tendency for first-past-the-post systems to create 2-party systems is called Duverger's Law, and a common consequence of it is the spoiler effect. For example, in the last US presidential election Nader's candidacy "spoiled" the election for Gore, by taking away enough votes from Gore in many states to give Bush enough votes to win the electors in those states.

No matter how appealing a third candidate may be and how unappealing the 2 front-runners, you must vote for one of the 2 front-runners. Often this means voting against the front-runner you dislike most rather than voting for the front-runner you prefer.

If you think this situation sucks, campaign for proportional representation, where everyone's votes count.

Hearing this on the news in the UK was amusing

[oolon]

The US offical said we are just closing a loop hole for visa wava countries. "At the moment, someone can just fly to a wava country and get a passport and get straight into the US without checking.". Just get a passport? Strangly enough they are pretty hard to get here, you don't get one at the airport with a Big Mac. You either trust countries or you don't if you don't trust our systems here in the EU (fair enough). Require visas for those countries.

James
PS I think gloves will be an important travel accessory in the future!

Repeat after me:

[theolein]

Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11.

Everyone else knew this and yet you yanks still went ahead and invaded the place, thereby giving the Islamic fanatics yet another battle cry. Well done.

Next time, try actually making up your own minds instead of letting the garbage that passes for mass media in the US do it for you.

Now I know I will never visit...

[thrill12]

...your country.
Please don't start with the "I have nothing to hide so what" comments, because they mean nothing. The fact that people are treated like a criminal before they ever committed a criminal offense is plain wrong. This, apart from the possibility that people are wrongfully accused.

I think the European parliament agrees, they didn't whistle Bolkestein (yes, the same person that loves software patents) back from his deal with the US for nothing.
Time will learn whether perhaps a mass drop in tourism and business-trips to the US will have an impact on this decision.

Bye Bye America

[doctor_oktagon]

Sorry, but myself and friends here in Scotland have been talking about this a lot with regards to the Visa situation, etc. and it's plain and simple: we don't plan on visiting anymore, or at least until this current wave of paranoid nonsense stops

It's you guys I feel sorry for - your entire country is being branded as insane because of your government. In some ways we are suffering it in the UK as well, but in only a fraction of the extremety.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[Saiai Hakutyoutani]

Excuse me?

We foreigners are lucky because we live abroad. If you think you've got civil liberties over there, perhaps you should read up on the civil liberties you (allegedly) had a hundred years ago.

You've got nothing.

Re:Alright, this isn't even funny.

[lga]

You'll be grateful if it keeps one of the nut jobs with bombs in their backpacks off the
bus/train your're riding on when you visit

Do you really think that someone who is prepared to die to kill people will care if the government knows their identity? I'm sure it's really usefull when clearing up the bodies to know who did it.

This book is also good

[Julian Morrison]

"Expedient Homemade Firearms : The 9mm Submachine Gun"

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/087364983 4/

Data Protection Act

[arevos]

As someone else mentioned, the UK has the Data Protection Act (DPA).

The DPA basically states that I can ask any public or private institution for any information they have on me, and they have to give it. With exceptions, if I recall, relating to police investigation and national security.

The DPA also limits what people can do with that information. No passing it on to third parties without permission. No processing the information if I don't want them to. Interesting little things like that.

The UK does have a lot of cameras, but there are also a lot of safeguards. Even if the US had those safeguards, I'm not a US citizen, so I couldn't require them to do anything about it.

Re:That isn't necessarily decisive

[westlake]

The survivalist fantasy is a bunker in Montana packed small arms, a cache of ammo, and maybe some surplus military grade weapons from the '80s. The reality is a 21st century army with stealth technologies, robots, air support and BFGs that will turn your dug-out into a smoking crater before you can fire off a single one of your worthless cap pistols.

Re:I, regrettfully, have to agree with this becaus

[chialea]

You make some very good points, I just wanted to comment on one thing:

>Look into history: Spain was once occupied by the (muslim) Moors; under their reign christians as well as jews could openly have their own religion.

Under the Moors, the Jews were allowed practice of their religion and so forth. Under the Christians, we had the Spanish Inquision, and mass slaughter of Jews. If we're going for interolerance, in this case the Christians come out quite far ahead. Of course, there are examples to the contrary as well.

Lea

Degrading and useless

[HangingChad]

It is truly sad when fear leads us to acts that insult and degrade our guests. Out of the millions of people a year who visit the US, how many actually mean us harm? A handful. And they have other ways in and out of the country besides the major ports.

I really don't blame anyone for not wanting to come here. When visiting other countries the worst part of the trip was coming home through US Customs. It was bad before 9-11 and that was for US citizens.

It does feel more right wing and intrusive lately. I love my country, but I'm really concerned by the spread of quasi-religious angry dogmatism of the right. We're losing the image of the US being the greatest place in the world to live. More people are now thinking, "Whew, glad I don't live there." And for many here the American dream has gone from a house in the country to a house in another country.

We were seriously thinking about moving to NZ before 9-11. The other day I saw a bumper sticker that said, "If you don't like it, get out." It reminded me to get my application of interest ready.

Re:No way !

[PhB95]

You got this wrong :
- I'm not sure the US of the 40's and the US of today are really the same country. The first was a country with strong principles, and applied them, well better than we applied ours. I can't count how many times I was admirative. The last, well, leaves somewhat to desire. Speaking of 4th reich like a previous post is of course BS, but what I admired in the 40's US is for the best part gone with the years...
- We (the whole EU) have as high standards as the US for delivering IDs and passports. The US administration today has full acces to all data from the airlines, comprising passport data and even credit card numbers, so why take it again if it isn't for not trusting us ?
- If you consider my post is "anti-american rethoric", please listen to Gaza or Tehran or a couple of other places in the third world for an example of what "anti-american rethoric" means. Or is it no longer allowable to write the faintest criticism against any US policy without being considered and enemy ?
- If we did the same at Paris airport with US citizens, how would you feel ? honestly ? I too got fingerprints and picture taken for my job, but until now we do not take them from US tourists and I did not hear we plan to do it. Altough some kind of "retaliation" could now emerge.
- About being there when we need you : We sure had an absolute need to join against Irak in 1991. We sure had a deep need to follow to Kabul en 2002. In both cases the reason for going to war were obvious and we followed you. For Irak in 2003 the reasons were, let's say, not so obvious.

I know where the ennemies of my country are, and I do NOT think they're in the US. If you look for someone "spewing anti-american rethoric" you're wrong, but I'm not willing to blindly applause on every american decision, and I can and will "vote with my feet" against this one.

Re:I, regrettfully, have to agree with this becaus

[leomekenkamp]

(...) Al Qaeda is fighting for the "peace" and prosperity of a select few at the expense of many (...)

Bingo! I take it you mean the Al Qaeda _leadership_. The leadership of such 'organisations' are likely to be the most extreme. The mass of followers are likely mislead and (ab)used by the leadership, which brings us to my original point: the US should change it foreign policy, force Israel to make peace with Palestine; this will take away the power the extremists have over the masses.

To say that Al Qaeda is interested in "freedom" or "peace" is a semantic flaw. Their definition of these terms are incompatible with the western world's at all.

If we were to meet face to face we would probably end up argreeing with each other for 99% about this subject. Al Qaeda, like (almost) all extremist movements, is abusing words to manipulate followers. I used these terms as a sort of devils advocate.