Slashdot Mirror
DHS To Grab Biometric Data From Green Card Holders
An anonymous reader writes with this excerpt from Nextgov:
"The Homeland Security Department has announced plans to expand its biometric data collection program to include foreign permanent residents and refugees. Almost all noncitizens will be required to provide digital fingerprints and a photograph upon entry into the United States as of Jan. 18. A notice (PDF) in Friday's Federal Register said expansion of the US Visitor and Immigrant Status Indicator Technology Program (US VISIT) will include 'nearly all aliens,' except Canadian citizens on brief visits. Those categories include permanent residents with green cards, individuals seeking to enter on immigrant visas, and potential refugees. The US VISIT program was developed after the Sept.11, 2001 terrorist attacks to collect fingerprints from foreign visitors and run them against the FBI's terrorist watch list and other criminal databases. Another phase of the project, to develop an exit system to track foreign nationals leaving the country, has run into repeated setbacks."
Reader MirrororriM points out other DHS news that they're thinking about monitoring blogs for information on terrorists.
der heutigen Stasi.
"Kill 'em all and let Root sort 'em out"
but I'm saying tracking non-citizens is just common sense.
Of course, if it really was "common sense", then it's the kind of thing that would have been in place for decades. Ergo, it is not "common sense", but yet another "security theatre" response.
"She's furniture with a pulse"
I guess the 'small' exception to this are the 'few' illegal alien, non-citizens coming in periodically from the southern border.
So, if you want to avoid HS survellience, just come across the border along TX, AZ, CA.....and don't register. It has worked so far, I doubt they'll be changing that anytime soon....
Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright until you hear them speak.........
I disagree. Tolerating routine violations of privacy for one class of people desensitizes us to routine violations of privacy for everyone.
I would go a little further and say that systematic abuse of any class of individuals, no matter how unpopular, is something worthy of caution. Take punitive taxation of smokers, just to pick an example. I've never smoked, never will smoke, think it's a spectacularly bad idea ... but I still disagree with heavy taxes applied to cigarette sales. Why? Because if we tolerate governmental mistreatment of one group (no matter what the justification) the odds are they'll eventually do something that hits closer to home. Keep firmly in mind that a significant fraction of our leadership and senior bureaucrats are either sociopaths or have a few well-intentioned screws loose. Either way, it's best not to give them too much authority, because they'll misuse it.
The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
der heutigen Stasi.
. . . this means something like, "today's Stasi."
The Stasi were a nasty and creepy bunch of East German secret police: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stasi.
They ended collecting *so* much information, that they couldn't analyze it all:
The MfS infiltrated almost every aspect of GDR life. In the mid-1980s, a network of civilian informants, Inoffizielle Mitarbeiter (IMs, Unofficial Collaborators), began growing in both German states; by the time East Germany collapsed in 1989, the MfS employed an estimated 91,000 employees and 300,000 informants. About one of every 50 East Germans collaborated with the MfS â" one of the most extensive police infiltrations of a society in history. In 2007 an article in BBC stated that "Some calculations have concluded that in East Germany there was one informer to every seven citizens."
The lesson here is that if you are collecting a lot of data, that doesn't necessarily mean that you are collecting the right (and useful) data.
Schroedinger's Brexit: The UK is both in and out of the EU at the same time!
Every time I read about this kind of thing... more surveillance, finger printing, suspicionless checkpoints, etc, etc...
.. and you know the US border is still pretty open.
I think two things:
1. WTF. I'm not a crimial, and the majority of people aren't either and yet we're all subjected to this kind of BS.
2. Does it even work? Why are countries making all of these efforts and the citizens are the last to hear about it.
Will biometrics really make a difference at the borders? The first thing I think of are ways that a person could get around this
By water or land people cross the borders all the time.
This all started with 9/11 by people who were in the country legally... so ya, this just doesn't make any sense to me and makes me more frustrated with our governments.
The lesson here is that if you are collecting a lot of data, that doesn't necessarily mean that you are collecting the right (and useful) data.
It's like the NSA drinking from a fire hose: they are collecting so much more data than they can analyze in real time! Such data is only useful post factum, to retrace what happened (cf. 9/11). The chance to catch something useful in time and react proactively is extremely slim.
So the question is: is it worth it to undermine informational freedom of citizens (and here non-citizens) and give Government a huge database that could be used to silence opposition by blackmailing or that could leak data to third parties like, say, private investigators, just to facilitate forensic investigations? Some may say yes, others would say no.
cpghost at Cordula's Web.
I find it hard to understand why many Americans don't understand why people in the world are sick and tired of America, and have lost most of their respect for the country. Especially as this article demonstrates, they are now treating many of their friends as criminals and enemies. After years of living and working in the U.S. I no longer want to have anything to do with the place, especially after being made to feel like a criminal the last time I went down there. I know... some nutbar patriot will yell at me "so stay the f**k out blah blah blah"... this is another problem with many down there. Patriotism blinds people too much to see the flaws of the current mindset there. A good example is how after the ridiculous Iraq war started, people would label others unpatriotic if you voiced your objection to it. Now of course, most in the U.S. realize this was a bad war entered into by a lie, poorly executed, poorly managed, and a waste of people's lives. But at the time, even the media lost their objectivity. Anyway, the reasons I feel like I do should be considered a symptom of the current state of affairs in the U.S. and a cause of concern. There are a lot of people outside of the U.S. that I talk to that don't like the U.S. I used to always take the side of the U.S. in conversations with them. I like the place. I liked the place. I now find it very difficult to side with America's point of view and actions, and don't side with America nearly as much in conversations with people. It no longer welcomes people... it eyes them with distrust and makes you feel like an outsider when you arrive at the border (hi welcome to America... foreigner... smile for the camera, give me your fingers). Distrust is only marginally this side of outright dislike and xenophobia. America, get some help, take off the tinfoil hat.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
The last time I tried to cross the Canadian border was so annoying I have not bothered going back to Canada in a long time. Every since 9/11, paranoia has been reigning supreme.
Of course, tracking fingerprints and pictures will not make anyone more secure, since (a) the probability of dying from a terrorist attack is tiny in comparasion to many other daily dangers we embrace everyday without a second thought, like driving, for instance, and (b) the would-be terrorist organizations, if they are really all that inclined, need only find fresh recruits who have not been fingered by the FBI or Homeland Insecurity yet.
41,000 people die on US highways every year. How many people die in the US from terrorism every year? The attention to the so-called threat does not mesh with the actual facts and the real risk factors.
So I am not impressed in the least about any of this crap. Just another excuse for the government to stir up fear to create its own "need".
Ruby Neural Evolution of Augmenting Topologies
I will give you that. Canadian border (so called) guards are really a pain in the ass. Really, they are glorified tax collectors who will rip your car apart looking for something they can apply a duty to. They grill Canadians to see if you might look guilty and they can then have an excuse to search your vehicle. "Where are you going, whey are you going there", etc. etc. etc. My brother one time finally lost it and asked said to them, "look I'm a Canadian coming back to Canada, you can't deport me, so why are you giving me such a hard time." They searched his car for three hours in retaliation. They won't say it was retaliation, but we all know what happens when you step on a rent-a-cop's ego. And they are rent-a-cops. When they get word that bad guys might be trying to cross the border (like suspected murderers on the run), the Canadian border guards run away. This happened a couple of times in 2006 at the Peace Arch Crossing in British Columbia/Washington State (Highway 99/I-5 respectively). But at least you know they are after money and not treating anyone any different. Up until the last time I went to the U.S.A. I hated crossing into Canada more. But now, the U.S. wins the 'onerous prize'.
-- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.