Slashdot Mirror


Congress Considers Forcing Travel Registration

macduffman writes "Congress and the Department of Homeland Security are considering several new visa restrictions, including forcing some foreign travelers to register their travel plans online 48 hours in advance. Business advocacy groups are worried about both foreign relations and the economic impact of such legislation, while privacy concerns see this as another possible 'in' for identity thieves. From the article: 'Along with online registration, the updated program would require new and existing member countries to improve data-sharing; more rigorously report lost and stolen passports (not just blank passports); and guarantee they will repatriate nationals if those people are ordered out of the United States. "It's really a 21st-century model," said James Carafano, a Heritage Foundation analyst who specializes in homeland security. "It'll all be done electronically and biometrically. And it really doesn't compromise your privacy."'"

62 of 321 comments (clear)

  1. "It's really a 21st-centry model." by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "It's really a 21st-century model," said James Carafano, a Heritage Foundation analyst who specializes in homeland security.
    It's really a 21st-century police state.
    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
    1. Re:"It's really a 21st-centry model." by Original+Replica · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But it's only being applied to foreigners, so it will be ok with enough short sighted fools to get pushed through before there is any real thought or debate on the issue. Then it will be extended to include Americains who are considered "threats". Then the definition of who consistutes a "threat" will be expanded. Then it will include everyone, but likely be automated, via the purchase of your plane tickets being automatically entered into a Homeland Security tracking database.

      I wish this all sounded more paranoid than probable.

      --
      We are all just people.
    2. Re:"It's really a 21st-centry model." by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's really a 21st-century police state.

      Yeah, and like most police state tactics, it completely fails to address the actual problem they claim they are solving. Which is ultimately good for them, because the continuation of the problem justifies them taking even more power (that also won't solve the problem).

      In case anyone dosen't remember, all of the 9/11 hijackers travelled with valid ID.

      So now the hijackers will register their names two days in advance. BFD. They aren't going to use anyone on our known list of terrorists, they aren't going to use anyone who our pointless profiling picks up. They will be completely legal, record-free, and unknown to any law enforcement or intelligence agency. They will walk right through the security checkpoint, grumbling just as loud as the guy behind them about the inconvenience.

      This shit is useful for catching Cat Stevens, providing a false sense of security, more power to the police state, and not a damn thing else.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    3. Re:"It's really a 21st-centry model." by mormop · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "It's really a 21st-century police state."

      It's really a 21st century way of fucking your own tourist industry. Let's see, I can take a holiday in Spain, Italy wherever or I can submit all my personal information to a foreign government and apply in writing two days before departure risking deportation if the customs guy doesn't like my face. Tough choice......

      --
      Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    4. Re:"It's really a 21st-centry model." by Shag · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Regardless of how poor these watch lists may be implemented, some real terrorist threats will make their way on them. Fascinating bit of logic you've got, there. Let me generalize it a bit:

      Any sufficiently long random string eventually includes the name of a terrorist.

      If you give a bunch of monkeys typewriters, sooner or later they'll type "Osama bin Laden."

      Now, maybe you can argue that the methodology being used to create and implement these lists is superior to that of giving typewriters to monkeys... or then again, maybe you can't.

      Personally, I don't look forward to what I expect will be the eventual inevitable expansion of this program to include US citizens. I fly to about four continents a year, and go to US-friendly, popular-with-US-tourists places like Indonesia (CIA: the world's largest Muslim population) and Turkey (CIA: Muslim 99.8% (mostly Sunni)). Thus far I haven't developed much faith in DHS's ability to keep friends and foes straight.
      --
      Village idiot in some extremely smart villages.
    5. Re:"It's really a 21st-centry model." by 24-bit+Voxel · · Score: 4, Interesting
      Actually it's Committee for State Security, if you are talking about the KGB.

      "Ministry of _____" is 1984.

      I can't imagine why you would be worried enough to post AC because you talked about the ex-USSR. You even got modded Informative and misquoted.

      I'll grant that the GP is right about disbanding the DHLS. There is no question that this will end up being a pox on a "free society". You are also correct that the DHLS encompasses some of the powers of the ex-KGB. With with torture camps in foreign countries and Halliburton building internment/containment camps within the continental US, there is no doubt that it's going to get worse before it gets better. The fact that you are too paranoid to talk about it in a public forum already speaks volumes about how far we've come in such a short time if you otherwise would have posted.

      I'm not offering up conspiracy theories, I'm just watching what is happening around me. You have to admit, it's very odd.

      Posting normally for obvious reasons.

    6. Re:"It's really a 21st-centry model." by Sancho · · Score: 2, Funny

      We clearly can't work off of names, as they aren't unique. Every person on the planet ought to be assigned a number. Since terrorists would just refuse to give up their number, we'll just implant a chip containing that number. Then, our watchlists will be perfect.

      Digital Angel, here we come!

    7. Re:"It's really a 21st-centry model." by mjwx · · Score: 2, Funny

      Convert to my religion, where when you die you get 73 virgins. However, we also punish evil women by giving them 73 virgins.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
  2. My Prediction by SRA8 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Just watch, I predict:
    TSA: "no sir, we cannot allow you back into the US -- we have no record of you leaving."
    You: "but i did register, here is the printout of the confirmation page"
    TSA: "sorry sir, its not in the computer."

    Other predictions: such predicaments happen more often to Arabs, Muslims, minorities, and members of the ACLU

    1. Re:My Prediction by Kabuthunk · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Without a doubt it'll happen more to any minority. No matter how unbiased the border crossing between for example Canada and the USA is supposed to be, if I (random white guy) am crossing it either alone, or with other random white people... I have never ONCE been stopped. Ever. Should I be travelling with a black and/or chinese friend... not a SINGLE time have we been let through without being stopped.

      Now... coincidences can happen... but once you start flipping a coin a hundred times and every single flip is 'heads'... you're going to start to think something's not quite right about that coin.

      --
      Planet Zebeth - Metroid with a twist
    2. Re:My Prediction by krist0 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I had exactly that happen to me.

      Background: I'm an Australian living in the Netherlands (Amsterdam actually) and I was in San Francisco for work for the second time. Turns out the first time I was there, the little green ticket they staple onto your passport that the airline takes out when you fly back got lost.

      So the custom guy at the arrivals counter scans my passport. Red text on his screen. He checks me out, tells me to wait, goes off. Two cops come, take me to a side area, I get fingerprinted, photo'd and told to wait to be dealt with. 3 hours later or so, someone comes to help with my case.

      I says, look, I am here for work, I am an Australian citizen, let me go please. He says there is no record of my leaving the US so I could have overstayed my last visa. I says, well look, my wife and my boss can vouch for my wareabouts or you can look in my passport and see I have travelled more than just your country. So he asks for my home number and my bosses (no shit) and calls them both. My wife freaks out cause she told me later she thought something bad happened to me (I mean, come on, "Hello, this is the United States Government, are you the wife of ...." ) and they called my boss. Finally after 5 hours, I'm out.

      When leaving, I almost force the green thing in my passport onto the airline girl and vow never to return.

      Seriously, american airports are the asshole of that country and as far as traveling goes, I will never set foot in America again.

      Fuck that.

      --
      all you are, is all you are, i'm so sorry for you.
  3. Like Predicting the Sun Rising in the East by sehlat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sooner or later, this will be applied to ordinary citizens, as well.

    "I'm sorry, sir, but you didn't register your travel plans to go from Oakland to San Francisco."

    "But my wife's having a baby and that's the nearest hospital!"

    "Then where is the BABY's travel registration."

    1. Re:Like Predicting the Sun Rising in the East by maxume · · Score: 3, Informative

      You realize that people from countries other than the United States generally are ordinary citizens right? Just not of the U.S.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
  4. Re:won't compromise your privacy? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    "...won't compromise your privacy."

    Really? and i suppose the new passports won't, either.
    What privacy? Hard to compromise something we no longer have by any meaningful measure, be ye foreign or domestic.
    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  5. Godwin by MadUndergrad · · Score: 3, Funny

    Vhere are your papers?

  6. Newspeak and Doublethink by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny
    > It's really a 21st-century model", said James Carafano, a Heritage Foundation analyst who specializes in homeland security. "It'll all be done electronically and biometrically. And it really doesn't compromise your privacy."'

    Spectacular. In the 20th century, of course, that sort of thing was the opposite of "not compromising your privacy", and the sort of thing we used to think of as the domain of the Soviet Union.

    But in Newspeak, we have the advantages of doublethink and duckspeak, and it no longer feels as weird. Thus: "20thinkers unbellyfeel Amsoc. 21thinkers bellyfell Amsoc! Carafano doubleplusgood HomeSec doublethinking duckspeaker!"

    Speaking of the Soviet Union, from TFA:

    > Applicant countries say U.S. officials are living in the past if they are worried about a flood of East Europeans entering - and not leaving.
    >
    > "Many people in the U.S. seem to believe it is a natural instinct of every Pole, Hungarian or Slovak to want to stay in the U.S.," Reiter said. "This is totally wrong today."

    No Newspeak translation available:
    "In Soviet Russia, people fleeing from tyranny wanted to stay in America!"

  7. Tourism revenues by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Insightful

    There are figures that your economy is losing out in the magnitude of tens of billion dollars due to decreased tourism to the USA because of stupid procedures. I know that I'm not willing to go to the USA as long as I'm treated as a criminal and I'm not alone with that sentiment.

    These new plans are just bound to make it worse.

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
    1. Re:Tourism revenues by robably · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I know that I'm not willing to go to the USA as long as I'm treated as a criminal and I'm not alone with that sentiment.
      Amen. I feel the same way about the USA now as I do about Stonehenge - I'm glad I visited it years ago before it was spoiled by the barriers they put up.
  8. Re:Umm, RTFA? by chris_mahan · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ah, I forgot, the sub-human foreign travelers. Nice. My Japanese citizen wife and mother of my son will really appreciate your point.

    from TFA: Paragraph 2:

    The requirement, proposed by the Homeland Security Department...

    Pass the tomatoes.

    --

    "Piter, too, is dead."

  9. As a european.... by sjwest · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Visiting the usa again got less desire-able. No i don't think i will be doing that conference in the US this year again.

    While i respect the feeling that getting blown up by saudi arabian (bin g. w. bush relative) is a valid fud for the american public i don't like the aspect that all 'aliens' go to America to cause trouble.

    I'm not of middle eastern origin etc but I'd still rather not visit. A thing in a national newspaper in england recently from a Journalist said that even stopping in america to jump on another plane (two hour stop-over) at Miami was the pits.

    Republicans seeking tax cuts might like to know that the tourist promotions e.g. 'visit usa' might be got rid of on the basis that america it seems does not really like the concept of 'short term visitors*'

    * a month or less.

  10. Re:Umm, RTFA? by HTH+NE1 · · Score: 4, Informative

    It mentions foreign travelers inbound to the US, not US citizens outbound elsewhere.
    Beware shifting definitions. A foreign traveler can be read two ways: a foreigner that travels here or anyone that travels to foreign places.

    Be sure they note when citizens travel to unfriendly places and seek to return. Declaration of someone as an "enemy combatant" is effectively the same as revoking someone's citizenship, even a natural-born citizen.

    Yakov Smirnov should update his act: "American Express: Don't Leave Home."
    --
    Oh, say does that Star-Spangled Banner entwine / The myrtle of Venus with Bacchus's vine?
  11. They don't understand what data security is by MonGuSE · · Score: 3, Insightful

    "It'll all be done electronically and biometrically. And it really doesn't compromise your privacy."

    Someone should shoot these people that come up with these concoctions for security solutions. Need to fly last minute to Toronto or vice versa sorry you didn't schedule it 48 hours in advance so you must be a terrorist. Give me a damn break. Then don't get me started on his convoluted assertion that it doesn't open people up to invasions of privacy or identity theft. Every additional time you have to transmit your information, every additional database with your information, every additional set of eyes that gets to look at your information is just another spot in the chain at which point information can be stolen and/or misused. We should send this guy through dressed as an Arab with a head scarf a few times and see how he feels after getting a few rectal exams for foreign objects and the verbal abuse at every stage along the way that 'suspicious' people take.

    Contrary to what Bush thinks the terrorist did succeed in setting into motion the process of destroying our freedoms that this country used to stand for. After that we should put his personal information up on the bulletin board at the post office for everyone to see and ask him how he feels after someone empties out his bank accounts and owes thousands of dollars in back taxes.

  12. So funny... by FatSean · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Growing up, I graduated highschool in 1992. I was fed a whole bunch of crap about how the 'bad soviets spy on their people' and the 'bad soviets imprison people with no chance of trial' and 'bad soviets take their peoples' rights and tell them it's for security'/

    How ironic that those adults who were so frothy about the USSR==bad and USA==good based on those claims, are now supporting the use of those tactics in the USA!

    I asked a few of them to explain the contradiction. They said that it's better to be safe than sorry! How funny!

    --
    Blar.
    1. Re:So funny... by Chris+Burke · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Growing up, I graduated highschool in 1992. I was fed a whole bunch of crap about how the 'bad soviets spy on their people' and the 'bad soviets imprison people with no chance of trial' and 'bad soviets take their peoples' rights and tell them it's for security'/

      Exactly. When I was a kid the USSR was bad because of all those things they did, and the USA was great because we didn't do any of those things.

      At some point, I'm not sure when, it no longer became about what we did The USA was just magically the best no matter what simply because it's the USA. I think maybe it happened around the same time you started seeing those bumper stickers with the flag and "The Power of Pride". Because apparently if you just believe that your country is super-awesome, it will do great things. Via magic.

      How are pride and wishful thinking working out for us in Iraq? Maybe if I just have more pride we'll win...

      BTW, someone needs to mod the OP up some more, because that was hilarious.

      --

      The enemies of Democracy are
    2. Re:So funny... by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What's important is that the excuses are the same: the USSR had nothing against the hard-working fellow comrade, it was the enemies of socialism that were the problem. And, there really were enemies of socialism, very well-organized, funded and armed ones supported by the West, from the very earliest days of the Russian revolution. Just as in the US, the excuse happened to be based on a truth.

    3. Re:So funny... by scsirob · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And since you show so clearly the repetition of history, check out how the USSR is doing these day and think about how that would translate into the USA situation a couple of years down the road..

      Either the next establishment will radically deal with the stupidity of the Bush administration and clean it up, or at some point the people will revolt and the USA will become a lot less United..

      --
      To Terminate, or not to Terminate, that's the question - SCSIROB
  13. Re:Umm, RTFA? by grcumb · · Score: 5, Informative

    It mentions foreign travelers inbound to the US, not US citizens outbound elsewhere. US Citizens travelling abroad (or internally, or etc) are obviously not affected by this. Also, it's not as if we'd be the first to implement such a plan in either case.

    Oh! Foreigners! Well, that's all right, then!

    I guess we won't be needing the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, then. Silly thing says all humans are created equal. And Article 13, the part about freedom of movement, is clearly a quaint antique, a relic of a bygone era when Americans actually cared about others.

    --
    Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
  14. USSA by dogsbestfriend · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Yeah, this was a requirement for visiting the old communist countries, wasn't it? And that was the differentiating factor between the 'free' countries and the rest of the world. Whats next? Secret police and wiretaps without warrants? Prison sentences without trial? Gulags? oh wait..

  15. Try visiting Australia by cdrguru · · Score: 2, Informative

    You need an "electronic visa" to get in.

    Try leaving Japan sometime. They charge to leave.

    The US so far hasn't been doing much in this area and it certainly high time we start. $1 entrance fee would easily pay for lots and lots of border inspectors.

    1. Re:Try visiting Australia by Brobock · · Score: 2, Informative

      Try leaving Japan sometime. They charge to leave.

      I just left Japan about a week ago, I was not charged. I do this annually and never been charged to leave. I am also a US citizen however.

    2. Re:Try visiting Australia by amuro98 · · Score: 4, Informative

      *sigh* that's an AIRPORT TAX. Other places have them too. Even the locals/citizens have to pay it. It has nothing to do with your visa, your travelplans, you being a foreigner (or a citizen) or your privacy.

      Now if you want something identical here, why not attack the "gaijin card" ID they make all longterm foreigners get, now with mandatory fingerprinting. Even then, you weren't required to tell the government that you wanted to go visit Kyoto over the weekend... Sheesh.

  16. Re:Umm, RTFA? by Dionysus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    It mentions foreign travelers inbound to the US, not US citizens outbound elsewhere. US Citizens travelling abroad (or internally, or etc) are obviously not affected by this. Also, it's not as if we'd be the first to implement such a plan in either case. What makes you think other countries won't retaliate by implementing the same rules for US citizens? And what makes you think the information collected won't be shared by the different intelligence agencies?
    --
    Je ne parle pas francais.
  17. Sorry if this sounds like a troll... by adnonsense · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ... but the way things are going, in a few years time the only foreigners visiting the US will be crawling up over the southern border, or brought in on CIA charter flights.

    Me, last year I had an invite to go to the US - I've never been but would truly like to go - but was in two minds because it overlapped with something else - and after taking a look at what it might involve in terms of proving I'm not a terrorist (I have an old-fashioned paper passport) I gave it a miss.

    And purleease, when I fly long-haul I like to take a big bottle of water to stop me dehydrating. A effing bottle of HO for chrissake. Whaddy think I'm gonna do with it, split out the hydrogen and ignite it? Yet I can buy a bottle of whisky at the duty free.

    (sorry about the rant, feel free to mod me down, but I have to get it out of my system before I go on a rampage on my next flight).

    1. Re:Sorry if this sounds like a troll... by Petrushka · · Score: 2, Interesting

      after taking a look at what it might involve in terms of proving I'm not a terrorist (I have an old-fashioned paper passport) I gave it a miss.

      Out of interest, I've been warned by an immigration official in my own country to avoid travelling to the US because of the type of passport I have. That startled me.

      And purleease, when I fly long-haul I like to take a big bottle of water to stop me dehydrating. A effing bottle of HO for chrissake.

      Be fair, now, it was the Brits that started the business of prohibiting water on aeroplanes, not the Americans. And it was they that forced it on the rest of the world (as the Americans so often do). Though, not that it matters where the paranoia originated, really. I just miss being able to go on domestic flights in my own country without having to go through any security checks whatsoever, other than the flight staff checking that I have a valid ticket, which was the case just two years ago. Alas, no more.

  18. Well... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have just one thing to say:

    "Papers, please."

    1. Re:Well... by Profane+MuthaFucka · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ausweis bitte! in the original German.

      --
      Fascism trolls keeping me up every night. When I starts a preachin', he HITS ME WITH HIS REICH!
  19. Russia's Old Fashioned by slarrg · · Score: 4, Insightful

    In Russia's old-fashioned system, as an American I have to register my travel in Russia as I travel. But in the USSA they're going to require 48 hours advance notice. What an improvement.

  20. Where to travel? by freedumb2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This would be even more restrictive than it used to be travelling to East Germany, which was not really fun either. I feel less and less a free human who can move around this world, that i was born into, freely. Just when you thought it couldn't get much worse (so soon!)...

  21. Re:Umm, RTFA? by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Something I've always admired about Brazil: they have a policy of reciprocity that makes it just as big a pain in the ass for Americans to go to Brazil as it is for Brazilians to go to America.

    Some international academic organizations that I'm involved with, which move their conferences from one country to another, have begun skipping the US and choosing to host their North American conferences in Canada instead. I expect this trend to continue: I'm going to encourage conferences in Brazil.

  22. This nonsense is costing us jobs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    People don't want to travel to the US of A anymore because they're more afraid of the customs goons than the terrorists.

    Scientists don't want to come to conferences. Families don't want to go to Disney World.

    http://www.nzherald.co.nz/section/2/story.cfm?c_id =2&objectid=10436518

    In a recent poll of international travellers, commissioned by Discover America Partnership, a coalition of US tourist organisations, 70 per cent of respondents said they feared US officials more than terrorists or criminals. Another 66 per cent worried they would be detained for some minor blunder, such as wrongly filling out an official form or being mistaken for a terrorist, while 55 per cent say officials are "rude."


    Are we safer? There's no data to prove it. Are innocent people suffering? Yes. Even Senator Kennedy got on the no-fly list.

    It's stupid. It's costing us jobs. It's costing us the liberty our fathers died to preserve.
    1. Re:This nonsense is costing us jobs by commodoresloat · · Score: 3, Funny

      Are innocent people suffering? Yes. Even Senator Kennedy got on the no-fly list. Jeez, you could have picked a better example of an "innocent" person...
  23. ...but does it compromise my privacy? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    And it really doesn't compromise your privacy.

    Wow, I'm convinced. Sign me up.
  24. WTF happened to the Shining City? by lelitsch · · Score: 3, Interesting

    But in my mind it was a tall proud city built on rocks stronger than oceans, wind-swept, God-blessed, and teeming with people of all kinds living in harmony and peace, a city with free ports that hummed with commerce and creativity, and if there had to be city walls, the walls had doors and the doors were open to anyone with the will and the heart to get here. That's how I saw it and see it still.

    Ronald Reagan
    Farewell Address to the Nation
    Oval Office
    January 11, 1989

    Amazing how far the Republican Party has moved in 18 years.

  25. Re:Umm, RTFA? by lahvak · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Also, it's not as if we'd be the first to implement such a plan in either case.

    You are right! All those nice communist countries used to have very similar system in place.

    --
    AccountKiller
  26. Reply to previous posters by deblau · · Score: 4, Interesting
    This is for those who say that soon US citizens will have domestic travel restrictions. You'll be happy to know that the Privileges or Immunities Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment,* while long the laughing stock of the other Clauses for being largely read out of the Constitution entirely, was resurrected in 1999 by the Supreme Court for the very narrow purpose of, you guessed it, guaranteeing the right to travel. Any law passed by Congress that infringes this right would likely be found unconstitutional.**

    * Not to be confused with the Privileges and Immunities Clause from Article IV.
    ** For those of you paying very close attention, the doctrine was revived in obiter dicta, at least insofar as it applies to travel between the States. Still, even under the rationale of the Slaughterhouse Cases, I think it likely that the Court would find this a fundamental right. Of course, we won't know for sure until and unless the law is passed and a case tried...

    --
    This post expresses my opinion, not that of my employer. And yes, IAAL.
    1. Re:Reply to previous posters by element-o.p. · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Be that as it may, our current president seems intent upon trampling all over the Bill of Rights and the articles of the Constitution itself. Maybe I'm just cynical, but somehow I don't think that a government that:

      1) allowed the NSA monitoring program to continue in spite of the fourth amendment, and
      2) determined that since the Constitution only prohibits suspending a writ of habeas corpus rather than explicitly granting a writ of habeas corpus, then a writ of habeas corpus is not guaranteed by the Constitution

      ...is going to get all worked up over a (relatively) obscure interpretation of the 14th amendment.

      I hope I'm wrong, but the evidence so far suggests otherwise.

      --
      MCSE? No, sir...I don't do Windows. Yes, I am an idealist. What's your point?
  27. No travel plans in China by spooje · · Score: 2, Informative

    I'd just like to point out as an American living in China I've never been required to tell the government where I plan to travel other than to tell them where I work, but that was only to get my visa. When I want to go on trips I just take off. I've never had a waiting period to buy plane or train tickets.

    --
    Tea and kung-fu. Life is good. Rising Phoenix
  28. This is great idea for stopping terrorists. by Morky · · Score: 2, Funny

    If we just ask the terrorists where they will be staying and what their plans are, we will have no difficulties thwarting their plans. These are pious folk - they wouldn't lie.

  29. "And it really doesn't compromise your privacy" by cwaters · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Anytime you see the word "really" in a statment like that, I find it generally to be false. "I really didn't think it tasted that bad.", "I really wanted to help that homeless person but all I had was a 5.", or "I really didn't mean to be rude but I was just really pissed off." You get the point.

  30. Oooh, that makes it sooo much better... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    * Non-US Citizens have never (as in, "ever") enjoyed the full protection of US law (save for illegal immigrants, but that's a whole other argument, as we're talking only ostensibly here).

    Right, mostly because we made forced internment camps and whatnot as knee-jerk reactions in times of war. While true, that doesn't mean it's a good idea, or even that it was legal.

    I mean, if you were talking about, say, welfare rights or something, I could understand why foreigners don't get those. When we're talking about human rights (freedom of association, a 1st amendment right), or habeas corpus and due process, I get a lot less agreeable about denying them to anyone. Even denying them to the damn terrorists, who I'd like to gut with a rusty spoon for having caused all this crap.

    I really, really am not going to agree with anyone who wants to create a class of 2nd class people in our legal justice system.

    * Proposed? Great - so what branch of government is DHS again, and when did they get to create/codify law?

    It's usually better to object before a bill gets voted on than after. As for when they got to create law, I don't know, but they seem to have a great record of ignoring it when convenient. Otherwise, we wouldn't have the courts constantly trying to coerce the DoJ into following silly anachronisms like the due process clause of the US Constitution.

    1. Re:Oooh, that makes it sooo much better... by Original+Replica · · Score: 4, Insightful

      "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, "

      hmmm I don't see any mention of citizenship there. The GP must not have read the writings that inspried our becoming "the US" or he would understand that those rights and protections under the law are granted to every one. Of course it took our country a long time to recogize that those rights (naturally) belong to blacks and women and gays. Maybe someday they will belong to foreigners too.

      --
      We are all just people.
  31. Re:Umm, RTFA? by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And some people in America wonder why so many people in other countries don't like America. Get a clue. You think treating people from other countries like shit doesn't affect Americans. There are many other countries as free as America... and now-a-days, certainly many are more free. So this B.S. that terrorists attack America because they don't like freedom is just that, bullshit. Why not practice some of that Christian philosophy that President Wanker professes to espouse: do onto other as you would have them do unto you. The practice of screw everyone for the money sure hasn't worked for your safety has it? And if you are going to say how safe the country has been with the new stasi... there were more Americans killed by American terrorists against Americans (Oklahoma City) than by foreign terrorists in the ten years before 9/11. Meanwhile there have been more than 3000 killed since. And those were killed by the actions of another American: the president. I happen to know that there are many Americans who don't share your view. It is why I think there is still hope for the country.

    --
    -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
  32. Another reason I invest in foreign stocks by AK+Marc · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I traveled to China last year. I talked to people there that tried to buy things from companies in the US but were unable to go to the US. They bought from Europe instead. One of the largest makers of networking gear got that way because the prices on US produced gear was high, and the import/export restrictions pretty much made it illegal to sell many versions of the products in foreign countries (encryption and such). The business travelers can't get in. The US sets up artificial barriers to prevent foreigners from buying US made gear. The end result is that money just flows out of the US, increasing the trade deficit and harming domestic companies. It just seems like such moves are economic suicide. I can't understand why we continue hurt ourselves with our immigration policies.

  33. I just recommend reading Bruce Schneier's opinion. by chiraz90210 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Rare risk and overreactions. A great article on human psychology and our "failures" inside our own brain: http://www.schneier.com/crypto-gram-0706.html

  34. Re:Umm, RTFA? by sasdrtx · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I am a US citizen, and I'm fairly enraged every time I return from abroad. In Europe or Japan, security, passport checks, and customs are typically quick and painless.

    When returning to the US, you're typically screwing around for at least an hour. If you're a US citizen. Processing of foreigners takes longer, and is very similar to in-processing at a county jail. I wonder how many visitors think they've been arrested when they get here? I wonder whether entering the Soviet Union was ever so ridiculous.

    --
    Most people don't even think inside the box.
  35. Re:Umm, RTFA? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    If it's so basic, could you please show me the part of the Constitution where it says that all this stuff only applies to citizens? It would clear up a great deal of confusion and I would be much obliged.

  36. Re:Umm, RTFA? by ignavus · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I travelled around the world in April. The US was the only country I passed through (and I was only transiting through - I never went outside the airports) that wanted to photograph and fingerprint me, and my wife and *children*. And I am an Australian of British ancestry - a more WASP-ish Australian family you could not find. Not a group of people given to terrorist attacks on America.

    Many of the countries I visited didn't even look at my passport (*cough* *cough* Europe) - I just drove straight over the borders quite legally and kept going (rather like an American crossing state borders). We even flew in and out of a one-party police state that treated us better as transit passengers than the Americans did. And as for New Zealand, which we visited in January 2006, they practically invited us to stay, get a house, a job and live there - no forms, applications or visas required. We had an automatic right to stay as long as we liked, and even settle there. Most hospitable and friendly and welcoming.

    America is the only place I have visited that treated me like a person being charged with an offence (that is what I would have to do in Australia to be fingerprinted).

    So about these other countries that you reckon behave like America: they are obviously not Europe or the UK or Australia, are they? China? North Korea? Iran? Is that who you are emulating?

    --
    I am anarch of all I survey.
  37. Re:Umm, RTFA? by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Informative
    More to the point how do you 'prove' you are a citizen with out access to the courts ie. you are a foreign terrorist suspect for as long as they say you are and you can not legally 'prove' you are not as you are legally denied access to a court to do so.

    Ironically once you are in this situation the only way out is to be deported to a country with a proper rule of law so that you can gain access to the courts to prove that you are a citizen and then legally return, with 48 hours notice of course ;).

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  38. Re:Umm, RTFA? by QRDeNameland · · Score: 4, Informative

    However, what you missed is that 9/11--which killed more than Oklahoma City, Pearl Harbor, and Iraq (to date) combined--was the trigger for Bush's fanatical delusions (which in turn led to the 3000+ soldiers dying in Iraq).

    Better check your math....

    9/11 official death toll: 2,793

    vs.

    Pearl Harbor death toll: 2,403

    OKC death toll: 168

    Iraq death toll to date: 3,466 (US military), 276 (other coalition military), 917 (contractors), 102 (journalists), 39 (media support workers), 88 (aid workers)

    Even without counting Iraqi deaths (estimates run from 68,000 up to 655,000), you are off by more than half.

    --
    Momentarily, the need for the construction of new light will no longer exist.
  39. Re:Umm, RTFA? by germanbirdman · · Score: 5, Informative

    And if you are going to say how safe the country has been with the new stasi...
    I will be blunt here, for I feel very strongly on this point. There is no secret police in America. The closest that we have come is with a bunch of telcoms either too chicken or too stupid to not comply with the FBI/CIA's illegal requests. However, there is no secret police in the United States.


    Stasi != Gestapo.

    Stasi; short for Ministerium fuer Staatssicherheit; translated: Department of State/Homeland Security. Existed in the former communist East Germany and encouraged spying on all the individuals by individuals.
    Gestapo = acronymn for 'GEheime STAats POlizei' - Secret State Police. This was under the Third Reich.

  40. Re:Umm, RTFA? by 2short · · Score: 4, Informative


    "so what branch of government is DHS again"

    It's part of the Executive branch.

    "and when did they get to create/codify law?"

    DHS has extensive rule-making authority. These rules have the force of law. You seem to be implying that these rules won't become legal requirements without action by Congress. In this, you are incorrect.

    As far as who deserves to have their rights protected, everyone vs. just citizens, I think Jefferson addressed that better than I could.

  41. Its pretty frightening by fantomas · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Your expression "just out of the protective reach of civilization and into something a bit terrifying" might be a bit apt indeed... .. speaking as a white 40 year old university researcher, a British guy whose lifetime criminal record is one parking ticket I guess I should have nothing to fear about your customs officers. Nevertheless your procedures and government rhetoric conspire to make the whole process slightly nerve wracking and cumbersome enough that I tend not to apply to attend conferences in the USA, and psychologically feel the idea of coming to visit my friend in Boston to be a much bigger deal than seeing my friends in Cambodia.

    You guys have told the world you maintain the right to disappear anybody you want, keep them out of contact with anybody else as long as you want, and if you really want to turn the screws on them, you are happy to ghost them off to a third country where you'll torture them. This is a bit frightening. It does put me on edge that I am visiting a country that considers this activity legitimate and is in 'siege mentality'. You just never know if the authorities might just lash out and do something scary and irrational to you too. And as you note, there is the sense of entering a country which believes itself to be answerable to nobody but itself and can do what it wants when it wants and get away with it. Umm, easier just to give it a miss, go somewhere safer instead.