Slashdot Mirror


Did Chicago Lose Olympic Bid Due To US Passport Control?

An anonymous reader writes "Yesterday, Chicago lost its bid for the 2016 Olympics (which went to Rio de Janeiro instead), and it's looking very likely that US border procedures were one of the main factors which knocked Chicago out of the race: 'Among the toughest questions posed to the Chicago bid team this week in Copenhagen was one that raised the issue of what kind of welcome foreigners would get from airport officials when they arrived in this country to attend the Games. Syed Shahid Ali, an I.O.C. member from Pakistan, in the question-and-answer session following Chicago's official presentation, pointed out that entering the United States can be "a rather harrowing experience." ... The exchange underscores what tourism officials here have been saying for years about the sometimes rigorous entry process for foreigners, which they see as a deterrent to tourism.'"

1,040 comments

  1. I'm sure it didn't help. by jcr · · Score: 5, Informative

    Everyone I know who visits the USA these days tells me what a pain in the ass it is to travel here now. I'm sure everyone on the IOC knows all about that.

    -jcr

    --
    The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    1. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rotide · · Score: 5, Interesting

      We once took pride in saying we were a melting pot of nations (racism aside). Now we're about the same, except we're a melting pot of xenophobes (maybe not at the citizen level, but definitely at the administrative/political level.

      Sad to see the great American nation turn from something I was once very proud of to one that I've considered, quite a few times, to up and leave.

    2. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Ambient+Sheep · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It doesn't surprise me. I'm from the UK, and "Visiting the US" was always one of those things on my life's "to-do" list - seeing New York, going to the West Coast, visiting friends in Washington state, maybe even driving Route 66 one day if I had money enough and time.

      But now? Well, I've heard enough horror stories by now from friends and colleagues about entering the USA that, despite me having no criminal convictions whatsoever, I'm afraid it ain't on my "to-do" list any more.

    3. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      This European long ago decided to stay the hell out of xenophobia central, only to find that our beloved MEPs followed its lead and demands and did a good copycat of the whole security theatre, and thorougly exceeding in roll-out of mandatory RFIDed passports (without tin-foil to boot) with fingerprints and so on. Oh, and all that talk about "data sharing"? It's one-way, all the way, baby.

      If Europe had a spine they'd've "reciproced" (see the relevant department of state website) the whole encilada across the entire EU, but instead they thought it a good idea. We're still thorougly protected against rogue nail clippers and exploding bottles of water. Useful, that.

    4. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by h4rm0ny · · Score: 5, Informative


      And let me tell you, if people from the UK are telling you that your border-control is unwelcoming, then it must be! I also live in the UK. You can bounce around Europe crossing borders with little more than a wave of your passport and a friendly nod. Then when you come back to the UK, it's a bit of a shock. Most of the EU find Britain rather silly with how worked up about its borders it gets, given that the rest of it manages with less pomp *and* has direct land passage to outside countries. I've also heard some strong complaints from people I know about entering the US. Aren't they asking for retinal scans or fingerprints in some places, now?

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    5. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by gilgongo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Everyone I know who visits the USA these days tells me what a pain in the ass it is to travel here now. I'm sure everyone on the IOC knows all about that.

      -jcr

      I flew 8 hours from London to Dallas this year. On arrival, I then waited 2 hours at the airport, along with about 300 other aliens, while sullen border guards slowly checked passports, took photos and fingerprints (this often took several attempts per person), and asked seemingly innocent questions in slow, menacing voices. If I didn't know better, I would have thought they'd been trained in military interrogation techniques.

      --
      "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
    6. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by roystgnr · · Score: 5, Funny

      We once took pride in saying we were a melting pot of nations (racism aside).

      Yeah, but that was before we realized that the tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free might take our jobs!

    7. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by z_gringo · · Score: 5, Interesting

      entering the US. Aren't they asking for retinal scans or fingerprints in some places, now?

      no. not some places. Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident.

      There is also some pain in the ass procedure that people have to do online. 24 hours before they get on the plane.

      The US has just totally lost it both on the entry procedures AND airport security. The only place where the airport security is more of a useless pain in the ass is the UK, but it is a close race. The UK and the US seem to be competing with each other on who can make the most worthless security procedures.

      --
      -- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
    8. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by easyTree · · Score: 0, Troll

      It seems only fair that if it's so difficult to get in, it should be just as difficult to get out! Just say no to USAnians travelling around the rest of the world!

    9. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Do you any pattern here? UK and the US. Two countries with stupidest border security checks at the ports. Both leading "war" against terrorism.

      Looks to me that the "war" is already won - by the terrorists.

    10. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Snarfangel · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We once took pride in saying we were a melting pot of nations (racism aside).

      I've always preferred the image of a multicultural tapestry. Better a colorful display of individual threads than a gray, undifferentiated mass.

      --
      This tagline is copyrighted material. Please send $10 for an affordable replacement.
    11. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      We once took pride in saying we were a melting pot of nations (racism aside). Now we're about the same, except we're a melting pot of xenophobes (maybe not at the citizen level, but definitely at the administrative/political level.

      That's before crazy fuckers decided it was a great idea to try to blow us up. Not wanting to get blown the fuck up is not the same as xenophobia.

    12. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by JDevers · · Score: 1

      Israeli border crossings are a bit of a pain too...without a doubt.

    13. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by E+IS+mC(Square) · · Score: 2, Informative

      If we take facts into account, I think you are wrong. (Hint - spain)

      And in no way I am in favor if killing a single human, but I think whatever happened was reciprocation (right or wrong, I am not in favor of any) of certain foreign policies of certain western nations. Nobody is innocent here.

    14. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by cheesybagel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Spain was also attacked by Al-Qaeda and have ETA bombings every now and then. But they actually care about their tourist industry.

    15. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by tim_uk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Getting into Israel is no more difficult than anywhere else. Leaving is another story altogether ...

    16. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Not wanting to get blown the fuck up is not the same as xenophobia.

      And the appearence of security is not security.

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    17. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rotide · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You'll have to explain to us who the "crazy fuckers" are. Because I seem to remember it was a group of mostly Saudi's who happened to be fundamentalists (notice how I separate the two?!) that decided it would be a good idea to hijack our airplanes and ram them into our buildings.

      This wasn't the work of a government who sent an army after us. This isn't WW3.

      It was a group of sick individuals who meant to destroy us to fulfill their _personal_ and fundamentalist religious ideals.

      This is _not_ how to act after a _small_ group of people do something terrible.

      Lets also enact broad stroke laws any time a single child gets hurt. Oh wait. God damnit.

    18. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by gangien · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The thing is, we had all the intelligence to know what was going to happen, but didn't. I don't think clamping down on border control helps anyone. It hurts the tourism industry at home, and give people a worse impression of us. And it certainly would not have caught the terrorists. What we should have done is looked at why they attacked us and figured out why the intelligence failed. But instead we'll add on a huge bureaucracy that just complicates things and increase the policing of innocent people. Fuck the terrorists were all here legally for something like 5 years? they certainly could have passed just about any checkpoints we might put up.

    19. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by oh_bugger · · Score: 1

      There's a pretty much un-ending list of things you could do to the population under the reasoning of "not wanting to get blown the fuck up"

      --
      Go home and shave your giant head of smell with your bad self
    20. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Winckle · · Score: 1

      Yes, but you have to remember the IRA as well. Flying from Liverpool or Manchester to Dublin I still have my photograph taken at departure for security reasons.

    21. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      I fail to see how having the IRA is worse than having ETA.

    22. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rotide · · Score: 1

      Quick edit: Damnit, I meant to put the emphasis on fundamentalists rather than Saudi's.

      .. remember it was a group of _fundamentalists_ who just happened to be Saudi's .. emphasis on _fundamentalists_!

    23. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by pjt33 · · Score: 4, Informative

      According to Wikipedia, ETA has killed "over 800 individuals" since 1968 and the IRA has killed "around 1,100 members of the British security forces, and around 630 civilians" since 1969. On that measure having the IRA is twice as bad as having ETA.

    24. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by MeNeXT · · Score: 1

      You could but would be misinformed or how you see it Western centric.

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    25. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by cheesybagel · · Score: 1

      There are more people to kill in the UK in the first place. What has IRA done since they supposedly gave up their arms a couple of years ago? ETA actually still bombs people.

    26. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by horza · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Same here. I've always wanted to visit the States, especially New York and Las Vegas, but it was knocked indefinitely off my to-do list by the biometric controls. I don't see why I should be treated like a criminal when I haven't done anything wrong. UK is now attempting to be the least friendly place in the world, with every person entering and leaving cataloged by the government eBorders system. I even have to enter my passport number when I book a plane ticket online. Much as I love London, if it wasn't for my family being there I wouldn't go back to the UK any more. I am English through and through, but for now I will try and change things from a distance. London in the 90's was one of the best places in the world to be. The government has taken it on a roller-coaster downhill and now the place is barely recognisable.

      Phillip.

    27. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think it was in Gatwick, I was passing through the airport and I noticed that you could purchase a "token" for an express passage. When you used this token, it skips one of the checkpoints.

      This was not so much of a security checkpoint, but a cash-grab checkpoint. I had my computer in my arm and a wheeling suitcase, which sums up to two pieces of luggage. This not only exceeds airline baggage allowance, but it violates a security policy.

      Fortunately, there was a coffee shop next to the entry point, so I deeked out the lady working security and had a coffee while thinking about how to squeeze my laptop into my carry-on.

      She was working alone and couldn't do much when she was trying to explain the one-bag policy. It seemed lots of people could slip past her, some had more than one bag.

      So I waited for somebody to get stopped...

      ... then I slipped through the turnstile.

      Next time, I pay for the token.

      Of course reporting this or complaining about this could get me banned from flights and labelled a terrorist.

    28. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      getting into Israel is the same as any other nation. Some police officer sits in a box, checks out your passport, looks at you, and stamps a visa into your passport.

      The biggest bitch was getting an international passport from my local city. Damn, they make that difficult in the EU. And why does that stupid piece of paper has to cost over 100 euros ? (Yes I could get it at 50 euros if I'd waited "at least 4 weeks", great)

    29. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Before, it was both fun and funny: I've visited the US once and that was as a kid in 1992 and at the time, I, as a European, didn't need a visa but one did have to fill out a form which was pure comedy gold. It actually had questions such as "Have you participated in terrorist actions against the United States of America prior to 1986?" and then "...after 1986?" That's the one I remember clearly since I was wondering why 1986 was such a pivotal year but the rest were just as ridiculous. I think I have a copy of it somewhere since my mother, who was also on the trip, accidentally checked yes to some terrorist organization membership question and had to request a new one from the flight attendant but we could keep the other one. Maybe I should scan it in and post it somewhere for the amusement of everyone.

      One question on it, however, did cause us some trouble since it was about how much money we brought into the country and what we estimated the value of our belongings to be and we had just bought a new, fancy camcorder. Since we tried to be honest, we probably overestimated everything a little and the customs agent actually asked why the total value of our belongings and cash was so high. Later on, it became clear to us that Americans probably don't carry as much cash on them as we usually do in Europe since at a shopping mall during the first day of our trip, a cashier almost told us we were nuts when we paid for ice cream with a $ 100 bill. My impression has become that Americans are much more fond of paying with credit cards than we are in Europe since noone I know thinks it's unusual to have 100-200 euros in your wallet.

    30. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by FonzCam · · Score: 5, Informative

      US immigration and security go beyond being serious to the point that they come across as rude and unhelpful. UK airport security have pulled me aside for a random search whilst joking that it was due to the sports team jersey I was wearing. On a quiet day arriving in amsterdam I've had a guy call over his supervisor just so they could make make stern faces make me worry and then crack a joke about my passport photo. I've chatted with Polish boarder guards about their visits to my home country and had a French immigration officer laugh at my appalling French. Entering the US I've see people infuriated by officers who will tell them only that they have filled in the wrong green form, or filled the right one incorrectly but will offer no more help to non-english speaking visitors then to send them back to the back of the line. I've waited hours whilst people attempt to have their fingerprints scanned whilst having orders barked at them because they misunderstood the instructions. Most immigration officers I've encountered try to ask questions in a friendly conversational style but in the US it's a cross between an interrogation and a telemarketing script. After a few visits you learn the keywords for your answers and they let you through no problem!

    31. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Nicopa · · Score: 4, Funny

      There is also some pain in the ass procedure

      Eww... I won't be travelling there soon....

    32. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      There are no requirements for fingerprints or retinal scans in the US, at least not from canadians.
        As a Canadian, I have to admit that border requirements have definitely been tightened up to the point of ridiculous long wait times at entry points, but it still just consists of waving a passport and answering some grade school bullies questions about your travel plans.
      The biggest downside to the strengthening of the US borders is that the CDN gov't has seen fit to up their q&a at entry points as well. Major PITA

    33. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by RDW · · Score: 2, Insightful

      'It doesn't surprise me. I'm from the UK, and "Visiting the US" was always one of those things on my life's "to-do" list - seeing New York, going to the West Coast, visiting friends in Washington state, maybe even driving Route 66 one day if I had money enough and time...I'm afraid it ain't on my "to-do" list any more.'

      If you've crossed these off your list then you're really missing out. New York alone, even to someone used to big cities like London, is an extraordinary place to visit, and the West Coast has some absolutely spectacular scenery and great cities. I'm sure that bad things occasionally happen (I've also read a few horror stories) but frankly US Immigration (usually polite enough, or at least efficient) has so far ranked pretty low on my list of annoyances. The airlines, with their unexplained multi-hour delays, double booked seats, arbitrary baggage charges, lost luggage, broken entertainment systems, and strange and terrible food, I'd rank much higher. Airport security (everywhere) isn't much fun either, while even returning to the UK as a citizen can be a bit of a pain (particularly the interminable queues at Heathrow). But none of these should put you off travelling. Getting to the US is no longer a 6 week ordeal in a sailing ship with a 1% mortality rate, after all.

    34. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rubycodez · · Score: 1

      and you imagine stupid things like "no-fly" lists based on *names* or all that hassle at the airport somehow keeps "crazy fuckers" from blowing ypu up? Or maybe you think the FBI actually accomplished something recently when it recruited loser punks, riled them up to have anti-american viewers, helpfully suggested plans and targets, gave them fake supplies and then arrested them? haha! get a clue, that's just useless security theater, does nothing.

    35. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by JasonBee · · Score: 1

      Unless of course it turns out that many of them actually start lots of large companies that employ lots and lots of people. Nah...I guess that never happens eh?

      Here's a nice link that easily explains how immigrants only ever take away jobs.

      http://onstartups.com/tabid/3339/bid/249/Why-Immigrants-Are-More-Likely-To-Start-Companies.aspx

    36. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Joce640k · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Me too. I went there a couple of times in the early 90's and security was a complete pain (they took everything out of my luggage and every last little paper out of my wallet to read it), and a couple of minutes asking dumb questions. Not just me, everybody on my flight.

      If it's got worse than that then count me out. I'm not going through fingerprinting and having my laptop/iPod confiscated when there's plenty of other countries in the world who'll just check whether my passport's valid then wave me through.

      --
      No sig today...
    37. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Joce640k · · Score: 1

      You really think people are going to try to smuggle explosives into the USA in their hand luggage? With all those thousands of miles of unguarded coastline/borders???

      You're part of the problem...

      --
      No sig today...
    38. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Lumpy · · Score: 5, Informative

      Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident.

      Incorreect. there are at least 20 entry points at the northern border that are unmanned and simply have a phone there asking you tell them you are crossing the border.

      If you fly into Canada and then drive to the USA, you can bypass all that crap, hell you can easily enter and leave without anyone knowing you were here in a few places.

      Our security is a complete and utter dog and pony show that is 100% worthless in stopping the Evil-guys.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    39. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by conureman · · Score: 1

      Reminds me of "Jay and Bob Strike Back". Boom times for the Latex Glove Contractors.

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    40. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jedidiah · · Score: 0, Troll

      Japan also has similarly annoying entry procedures. What do they really do in Rio that's all that different?

      Do they not make you wait in an annoying line?
      Do they not have some INS official rubber stamp your passport?
      What exactly is the FUD-miester from Pakistan complaining about.

      I've seen people who look like his grandma go through customs at O'Hare. So I'm really curious what he's complaining about.

      They were in the same annoying line with everyone else. It was the same kind of line in the UK, France, Japan, the Netherlands or Canada.

      --
      A Pirate and a Puritan look the same on a balance sheet.
    41. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by welsh+git · · Score: 1

      I'm also from the UK, and this mirrors my opinion exactly

      --
      Sig out of date
    42. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Ilgaz · · Score: 1, Informative

      You know what? If you are lucky to come from certain "non aryan" place and do couple of things very wrong, that "pain in the ass" could become literal.

      I have no clue why people travel to USA from certain areas, it is like visiting Germany as a Jew in 1939. Goodwin or not, it is the truth for some. If people with thousands of dollars in their pockets and way better education/personality than that customs nazi guy keeps taking all that treatment, it will never, ever fix.

    43. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by tunapez · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Not wanting to get blown the fuck up is not the same as xenophobia.
      And the appearence of security is not security.

      The use of fear mongering is not fear.

      I say "Good" to the Olympics not coming to the US, we don't deserve them. Maybe our political system can be fixed, but until then let the camps on either side of the aisle drool in hunger as the big ticket items of the world go elsewhere. They shat on us, the people, for the last 8+ years it's about f'in time they see the fruits of their selfish deeds. VOTE OUT THE INCUMBENTS! Red, Blue or pink: Those who value the power more than their duty deserve neither.

      --
      Imagination drew in bold strokes, instantly serving hopes and fears, while knowledge advanced by slow increments...
    44. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      The 'Real IRA', as they call themselves, are still killing people and making bombing attempts.

    45. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm afraid it ain't on my "to-do" list any more.

      It may be faint consolation, but TSA and DHS are just as thugish and dickish to US citizens as they are to our guests.

      I remember coming back to the U.K. from France and one of the customs guys dashed over to me. I thought it was a passport check, even though everyone else was just walking by. He wasn't checking my passport, he was running over to open the gate for me because I was dragging a suitcase and had my hands full with my passport, which he didn't even look at.

      Fingerprints, retinal scans, confiscating laptops and other portable data devices. The way we treat people coming here, I don't blame them for not wanting to visit. Not one bit.

      What I think is astounding is the pure gall of the conservatives, blaming president Obama for not getting the Olympics when it was their crap ass policies and politics that put in place the anal probe, 3rd world border treatment afforded our guests these days. Like we're going to forget who was behind it all. But that's been the pattern right along. Absolving themselves from any accountability by trying to pin it on someone else. Pathetic.

      I really don't blame you for not wanting to visit. We've brought this on ourselves.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    46. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by conureman · · Score: 1

      Just stay the fuck away from Chicago. If you read the Papers you'll note that neighborhood youth thuggery is completely out of hand. Probably more dangerous for innocent bystanders than Ciudad Juarez, which I hesitate to go back to.

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    47. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The difference is that Spain capitulated to terrorism.

    48. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Plunky · · Score: 4, Funny

      Of course reporting this or complaining about this could get me banned from flights and labelled a terrorist.

      Not to mention admitting actually being "Dr. Evil"

    49. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Kizeh · · Score: 2, Interesting

      US Residents are also fingerprinted and photographed routinely upon re-entry.

    50. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ztransform · · Score: 1

      Everyone I know who visits the USA these days tells me what a pain in the ass it is to travel here now. I'm sure everyone on the IOC knows all about that.

      It's not the entry procedures that are troublesome, actually. I flew into Los Angeles last week and they were pretty good at getting everyone in queues and cleared (although each individual took around 3-4 minutes to process).

      What is apparent at US airports, however, is that staff throughout appear to be the cheapest. This results in inefficiencies as it is obvious staff just aren't thinking.

      I'm still annoyed with having staples put in my passport and the staples ripped out tearing my passport pages on exit from the USA. Even with a modern chipped passport! What was the point of all that tech upgrades if they're still going to rip holes in your passport?

    51. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Arthur+Grumbine · · Score: 1

      Here's a nice link that easily explains how immigrants only ever take away jobs.

      Well here's a nice link that easily explains the GP's point:

      http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6610212795155043011#

      --
      Now that I think about it, I'm pretty sure everything I just said is completely wrong.
    52. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by kju · · Score: 1

      I dont believe that you are right with your claim that two pieces of hand luggage are against a general policy. Some airlines officially allow you to carry two pieces, or one piece and a laptop, or ... It all depends, and this lady either knows all the various rules of all the various airlines, or she knows nothing.

    53. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by apoc.famine · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I'm from the US, and I worry about crossing the border! Should I bring a laptop? Do I need to delete all personal information off it in case they take it at the border? If I get harassed at the border, and stick up for my constitutional rights as an American citizen, will I get tossed in jail?
       
      When citizens have those sorts of concerns, I don't blame non-citizens for not wanting to come here. We've made the US completely hostile to tourism, because a dozen people came in LEGALLY, and launched a terrorist attack. which killed less people than a month's worth of auto accidents in this country.
       
      Really, I wonder if it wouldn't be better for tourists to land in Mexico and just illegally enter the country. A ten hour hike through the desert seems less painful than trying to deal with the Border agency legally.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    54. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 4, Interesting

      You can bounce around Europe crossing borders with little more than a wave of your passport and a friendly nod.

      A little less, in my experience. While walking around in Basel last December, I didn't even realize that I walked all the way to Germany, until I saw a sign that read "France this way," "Switzerland that way." I used process of elimination to discern my location. On my way back, I located the border by observing the changing proportion of license plates, and finally a change in street sign styles. The only distinctive feature at the frontier was a section of sidewalk being replaced. I wondered if there had been a little shack for border agents once on that spot.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    55. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by lysergic.acid · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I think they should have 2 sets of flights/gates/check-in lines at the airport: one for regular people who would like for their total check-in time to take less than their flight time, and one for the paranoid "OMG! that brown person is speaking in something other than English!" crowd.

      This would greatly improve the traveling situation in the U.S. in several ways:

      1. Air travel could once again be painless for those who value convenience/dignity/privacy over the negligible improvements in safety provided by excessive security procedures. (Especially if you don't want your wife/children to be virtually undressed by airport security.)
      2. As a corrolary to #1, there would be less lawsuits and complaints filed against retarded airport staff (e.g. from a TSA goon forcing a mother to drink her own breast milk) since those subjected to these ridiculous security procedures are now willing participants.
      3. If you're a busy person or you're in a rush to get somewhere, you can always hop on a "less secure" flight and skip the 2-hour check-in time caused by someone leaving a nail clippers in their check-in luggage.
      4. If the TSA inspectors have less people to search, they can be much more thorough. (mandatory strip searches and cavity checks, anyone?)
      5. Since a terrorist is more likely to choose one of the "less secure" flights to hijack, those who are taking the "high security" flights can rest a little easier knowing that their chances of being hijacked have dropped from 0.000001% to 0.0000001%. Also, since those belonging to profiled social groups would likely opt for the less intrusive check-in lines, those on the "high security" flights would also feel safer sharing their plane with fewer Arabs/Egyptians/Persians/Mexicans/etc.

      This way, airline passengers get a choice in whether or not they want to take part in the elaborate security theater, and everyone is happy. Heck, even the airlines will be happier since fewer people would be deterred from traveling so their profits would go up.

    56. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by erroneus · · Score: 3, Insightful

      We're not xenophobes. Our government, or more specifically, the closed group of people that run the government and their keepers, are responsible for the state of things. Most people in the U.S. merely parrot what they hear on Fox news and simply don't care about anything beyond their favorite TV shows. Most people I know generally agree that even early on, the reaction to the events of 9-11 were simply too much of an overreaction and characterize the responses as little more than a power grab leveraging fears of the people which was spread effectively by added security measures and, of course, Fox news.

    57. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Not wanting to get blown the fuck up is not the same as xenophobia.

      However, assuming that the way to avoid getting blown the fuck up is to tighten your border controls is the same as xenophobia.

      How quickly you've forgotten Oklahoma, Columbine, and all the other all-American atrocities perpetrated by natural-born citizens.

    58. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Duradin · · Score: 1

      Touring around England and having the train and underground stations shut down by some wannabe group is annoying.

      If someone is going to leave suspicious packages around to shut down all the stations in London on the Queen's Jubilee or whatever it was it had damn well better be the real IRA. I hate having to asterisk my terrorism experiences when recounting my travels.

    59. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Vellmont · · Score: 4, Interesting


      You can bounce around Europe crossing borders with little more than a wave of your passport and a friendly nod.

      Sometimes even less than that. I visited The Netherlands and Germany in 2008. When crossing from The Netherlands into Germany I expected some big stop to at least check my passport. Nothing. The train was out between the countries (track work), so they had a bus. It never stopped, nobody asked me anything, and I got on the train in Germany without so much as a peep.

      Meanwhile I took a separate trip to Tuscon Arizona this past spring. Driving around in my own country I was stopped at least 4-5 times by Homeland Gestapo to make sure I was still an American. They were nice and all, a friendly wave and "Are you a US Citizen?". Being a white guy with a US accent they just waved me through.. but still. For those of you that don't know, Homeland Gestapo sets up stops on northbound highways perhaps 20-30 miles from the U.S. Border (at least they do in Arizona). I find it absurd to be stopped IN MY OWN COUNTRY just to make sure I'm still a US Citizen.

      --
      AccountKiller
    60. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 5, Funny

      It's not that bad. The U.S. threatened to tighten the Canada/U.S. border with the claims you describe.

      The trouble is that Canada depends on trade with the U.S., so when faced with the option of tightening up the ten or so major international airports v.s. the 49th parallel, the great lakes seaway and Quebec/New England states, Canada opted for the former.

      So now Canadian border guards also ask stupid questions, but they're less overworked, better educated, better trained and better paid, so they tend to be more sane about border crossings. You still get checked carefully at Canada/U.S. border crossings if you don't have Canadian ID... and it's not quite so easy to get over the 49th as people might think. Sure you can throw a backpack on at night and walk along a dirt road for a while, but people do look for that sort of thing, and you have to know the area really well and blend in so as to pick the right place to cross and not upset the land owners.

      Terrorist: "Hello Greyhound, you drive busses right?"
      Greyhound: "Yep"
      Terrorist: "I want to go to this place."
      Greyhound: "Is that a satellite photo?"
      Terrorist: "no, Google maps"
      Greyhound: "What's it called? that place?"
      Terrorist: "Canada"
      Greyhound: "No the place on the map"
      Terrorist: "It's a place in Canada, near the U.S. border, how do I get there?"
      Greyhound: "I think you can take the bus to Sherbrooke and find a taxi maybe, but it will be expensive"

      Terrorist: "Take me to this place on the map.
      Taxi driver: "Pardon? Ques-ce Anglais, Pourquois? Ou?"
      Terrorist: "Eee Cee?"
      Taxi driver: "Ou?"
      Terrorist: "Tabernac!"
      Taxi driver: "We have er, English, er where is the um map?"
      Terrorist: "I am travelling to the U.S. to do nefarious things, like... I'm not quite sure, but I'll know when I get there, and I won't be able to get into the country because... umm, because... I don't know why exactly, but I decided to walk the Appelacian trail or something"
      Taxi driver: "oh kay!"

      Point is, if you know enough to get over the border through a backcountry crossing, you're probably not going to be stopped by the U.S. border guards anyway.

    61. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone I know who visits the USA these days tells me what a pain in the ass it is to travel here now. I'm sure everyone on the IOC knows all about that.

      -jcr

      What's so stupid, too, is that while the procedures at the air terminals are "secure" to the point of being obnoxious, the northern and southern borders are wide open, and where all the bad guys actually get in. :(

    62. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Linux+Ate+My+Dog! · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident

      Strike that last part: I am a Legal Permanent Resident, and the last time I came in they wanted my picture and fingerprints too.

    63. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chavs of a different colour.

    64. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by msuarezalvarez · · Score: 1

      Boo hoo. "Tough to enter the United States". "No longer a melting pot."

      On the first issue, so what? We're still the freest country on the planet (at least of any consequential size). Ambient Sheep, you have no first and second amendment rights in the UK, right? The two most important freedoms devised by the people who revolvted against your government - freedom of speech and to bear arms to protect that freedom - are still, 200+ years later, NOT expressly rights in your country. If I was you, I'd not just visit the US, I'd move here. In fact, you can't even OWN a gun - a convenient thing for any government wishing to oppress - except a pea shooter in the countryside for plinking rabbits. James Bond, license to kill. Big deal. All our law enforcement has a license to kill. And, in the US, citizens can clearly exercise the right all liviing things have to self-protection. As Heinlein said, "An armed society is a polite society."

      Please tell me this is satire...

    65. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by blincoln · · Score: 1

      If I didn't know better, I would have thought they'd been trained in military interrogation techniques.

      I'm sure that being a border guard is like any other job that involves dealing with the general public in large numbers (tech support, working at a restaurant/coffee shop, etc.) That is, just due to volume most of them are probably going to have dealt with enough weird situations that they become cynical and assume everyone is going to be doing something dumb.

      For example, I'm from the US but I went to university in Canada. While I was there, I worked at the student newspaper. One of the writers there had driven down to the US with some friends and was honestly shocked that the border guards had done a search of their car. The reason was that one of the people in the car was wearing some sort of militant pro-Palestinian shirt - I don't remember the specific wording, but I remember it had a picture of an AK-47 on it. A couple of the rest of us at the paper tried to explain why that wasn't really the greatest idea ever, but it didn't ever sink in.

      One time I was taking the train back home, and at the border there was a lady who not only didn't have a visa, but what she had was a letter from the US government explicitly denying her request to obtain one.

      Thousands of people travel through the US borders every day, so that sort of thing must be commonplace enough that it's the "caller was using their CD-ROM tray as a cupholder" or "user clicked on the Megan Fox Naked.exe attachment and now their PC isn't working correctly" of the Customs and Immigration world.

      --
      "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
    66. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by 2phar · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident.

      Actually, the DHS at Chicago O'Hare electronically fingerprint all fingers of both hands and take a face photograph of returning legal US permanent residents.

    67. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The idea of "melting pot" was that people would come here, become "Americanized" and melt into the culture, which seems to be what you despise.

      Not sure where you get the "xenophobe" idea, but if you want to leave please, get the hell out.

    68. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Obvious lie and you know it. The withdrawal of the Spanish troops of Iraq was planned by the president (then candidate) BEFORE the attacks.

    69. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Bigjeff5 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You know what? If you are lucky to come from certain "non aryan" place and do couple of things very wrong, that "pain in the ass" could become literal.

      You're actually more likely to have an easy time than us "aryan" types, at least in the airports, as racial profiling is pretty much illegal in the US, and the ACLU is even fighting to allow burkas for photo ID's.

      Since you can't be racist to a white man in the US, grandma gets strip-searched while the nervous looking arab with full beard and head wrap coasts on through.

      All of which ignores the REAL security breakdown that day, which was that 19 people managed to sneak box cutters onto airplanes. And you know what? You can -still- sneak box cutters onto airplanes, I know because a former co-worker of mine who traveled frequently left one in his bag for several trips and was never tagged. He did a major "oh shit!" when he realized it was in there.

      Harassing foreigners happens because for some reason Immigration hates immigrants, and anybody who could potentially become an immigrant, regardless of your intentions or value to society. I don't know why, 90% (at least) of the people in this country are descended from immigrants, you'd think we'd love them. Apparently we only love the illegal immigrants, legal visitors can go screw themselves.

      --
      Security is mostly a superstition... Avoiding danger is no safer in the long run than outright exposure. - Helen Keller
    70. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Nevyn · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Do you have a really old green card? Because my green card has my picture and fingerprints on it already.

      --
      ustr: Managed string API with ave. 44% overhead over strdup(), for 0-20B
    71. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by __aamnbm3774 · · Score: 1

      oh well.
      i would consider those silly reasons not to make the journey.

      It's your loss, not ours.

    72. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Cassini2 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Incorreect. there are at least 20 entry points at the northern border that are unmanned and simply have a phone there asking you tell them you are crossing the border.

      In times past, that might have used to be the case. Nowadays, people near the border are reporting that those "defenceless" border posts aren't completely defenseless. If you cross-over and do not call, then you get pulled over by U.S. police or border patrol shortly afterwards. Granted, it isn't perfect security, but it is enough of a deterrent to make sure you use that phone.

      The serious drug runners have other routes that they use. The U.S.-Mexico border has scary levels of security, and both drugs and illegal immigrants get through. The U.S. Navy patrols the sea routes into the U.S., and both drugs and illegal immigrants get through. Additionally, on a smaller scale, the U.S. can't even keep drugs out of its own jails.

      More crime occurs across state lines than across the Canada-U.S. border. From a statistical point of view, the U.S.-Canada border is the safest border in the world. After a certain point, I think you need to ask: With all the security proposals, is anyone actually getting protected?

    73. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>seeing New York

      I'm American. I've vistied NYC twice and hated it both times. (Sorry New Yorkers.) I'd recommend visiting Baltimore or Washington instead.

      >>>going to the West Coast,

      Other than a narrow strip of green along the ocean, the west coast is mostly barren. Go see the east coast instead. Maybe a nice scenic drive along I-95 from D.C. to Atlanta would be better.

      >>>visiting friends in Washington state

      Washington State is not bad.

      >>>maybe even driving Route 66

      Been there; done that; it was boring. Route 66 gets a lot of hype that it doesn't really deserve unless you enjoy looking at cows and desert. The best roads in the U.S. are I-95 (the entire length of it), I-81 (through the appalachian mountains), I-70 (through the colorado rockies, past the St. Louis arch, and along the original national highway into D.C. or Baltimore), and I-90. I also recommend the Alaskan Highway. starting in Alaska and heading south through the Yukon.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    74. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Dr.+Evil · · Score: 3, Informative

      It was a security policy. The implication was that by reducing the volume of carry-on, they could examine carry-on luggage more closely. The U.K. has been diddling with this policy on a daily basis, it's hard to know what the rules are on any given day.

      Last I checked it was one bag, and nail scissors were approved the day after thye were taken away from me.

      Can I take a handbag and a piece of hand luggage? Yes, but not yet at Stansted Airport, where the airlines continue to implement the 'one carry-on bag rule'. At Stansted, your handbag does count as the single item of hand baggage, unless you put it in your cabin bag.

      link

      It's lunacy. Normally I just throw up my arms and let them do what they like to my luggage.

      So Gatwick is okay now. Stansted is still broken.. at least according to gatwickairport.com, which well, probably isn't updated frequently on Stansted policies.

    75. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by misexistentialist · · Score: 1

      As an American the UK used to look pretty interesting too until your massive surveillance programs made it look like some sort of hell. Your mock-disappointment seems to indicate a strange satisfaction, however, as if losing large pieces of your planet and being imprisoned by politics and stupidity wasn't an outrageous tragedy.

    76. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and asked seemingly innocent questions in slow, menacing voices. If I didn't know better, I would have thought they'd been trained in military interrogation techniques.

      They asked you the questions while you were naked?

    77. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's bad enough traveling from US airport to US airport as a US citizen. My how we've given up our rights.

      I feel a Benjamin Franklin quote/paraphrase coming on (here):
          He who would trade liberty for some temporary security, deserves neither liberty nor security.

    78. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 0

      >>>You can bounce around Europe crossing borders with little more than a wave of your passport and a friendly nod.

      Uh. You can do the same thing in America. I routinely drive across borders without needing anything. California has a checking station to control the import/export of food, but that's about it. So when it comes to crossing the member states of the EU, it's actually more difficult than crossing the member states of the U.S.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    79. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The UK is not that different in their way how to treat travelers from abroad.
      I have found traveling from the EC mildly unfriendly, friends from South America are treated as criminals.
      Xenofobie is not solely found in the USA.

    80. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 0

      This won't be popular but I'm going to say it anyway:

      - We are on the verge of an oil drought. If you thought last summer's $150/barrel was bad, just wait. When the Arab countries start running out of black crude, the price per barrel will skyrocket.

      - Food shipments are directly tied to oil. If oil is scarce, there won't be any way to get the food to the market.

      - The best way to handle a crisis like that is to have as few mouths to feed as possible. The U.S. (and te EU) rather than growing their population via immigration, should be working to close the borders and say, "We're full. No more room. We don't have enough food to feed any more persons."

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    81. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by inicom · · Score: 3, Insightful

      One glaring hole in the pseudo-increased-security is the major vector for most smuggling - Airline and Airport employees. Baggage handlers, flight crew, cleaners, food service and ground workers all have less per entry security screening than you or I. "Oh", I hear some of you, "They passed background checks!". So did every terrorist or would-be terrorist at least once.

      --
      -a.e.mossberg
    82. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Japan would like to enter that race too.
      Fingerprints at immigration (managed by a US company, subsidary of the former A.A. Acounting firm), xenophobic customs patting you down then a line of Keystone Cops stopping all non Japanese looking ppl at the train station.

    83. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1

      Oh, not to worry. Us US citizens get the same deal.

      You pop up to one of the automated ticket kiosks to get a boarding pass.

      It asks "Do you have any unchecked firearms? Bombs? Nuclear or otherwise Hazardous Materials?

      I've never had the inclination to check 'yes' on any of them, but it's getting close. Next business trip that I really don't want to go on....

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    84. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Feyr · · Score: 1

      no retinal or handprint for canadian citizens at least. i just came back form a trip last thursday. i drove over the border to a small airport and flew the rest of the way to my destination. i got waved through after a very minor look at my passport: crossing customs at land borders is much less strict for some reason

      now flying to the US is a bit more annoying, the last two time they sent me out for secondary interview (thankfully no full body search) but it didnt add any delay to my schedule.
      the first interview was mostly because it was my first time in the us, i was carrying tools in my checked luggage and was going to "help" one our rep to install our product. the guard thought it was odd (not without reasons) and kept asking for my work visa (which i didn't need)
      the second one they got ticked about my tools and their values (carrying a scopemeter worth 4000$)

    85. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 5, Insightful

      >>>US Residents are also fingerprinted and photographed routinely upon re-entry.

      I'm surprised no one's discussed the *internal* border checks... even if you've never crossed an international border you can still be stopped and forced to submit to a search (in contradiction of constitutional law). It's ridiculous. http://www.aclu.org/privacy/37293res20081022.html

      MAP of Constitution Free Zone: http://www.aclu.org/privacy/spying/areyoulivinginaconstitutionfreezone.html

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    86. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah, ya know I really don't understand why American customs agents ask questions, take photos or even take fingerprints. Yeah, that's military interrogation. If I didn't know better, I'd have to guess that there were people coming in the country to blow up buildings or hijack airplanes or something! Oh wait.............

    87. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you need to hear horror stories from your friends? For me, the idea that you can't enter without those guys taking your fingerprints, having the Patriot act to put you away for seven days for no reason, confiscating any electronics they'd like, and as a collective being totally OK with torture, is pretty much reason enough to stay away from this place.

    88. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 4, Interesting

      The Homeland Gestapo wanted to search the trunk of my car. Why I have no idea. Maybe because it was 10 o'clock at night and they thought it odd a Marylander was driving through Texas, and just assumed I was transporting Mexicans. (shrug)

      In any case the bastards made me stand in the cold night air for an hour while I steadfastly refused to open my trunk, and then finally let me go.

      I should have filed a lawsuit - C64love v. United States

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    89. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by fredjh · · Score: 1

      Now we're about the same, except we're a melting pot of xenophobes (maybe not at the citizen level, but definitely at the administrative/political level.

      That's such crap. Illegal immigration IS A PROBLEM, believe it or not, but the higher safety measures are in place since 9/11, not because we've suddenly become xenophobes any more than we were before (as citizens or government).

      I agree the process sucks and doesn't help anything but piss off honest people who want to visit here, you'll get no argument from me, it's like VRM (visitor rights management) instead of DRM - the dishonest people get around it anyway, and end up having a much easier time than the people who try to do things the "legal" way.

      --
      Stupid, sexy Flanders.
    90. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      entering the US. Aren't they asking for retinal scans or fingerprints in some places, now?

      no. not some places. Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident.

      When did that start? Last time I entered the US all I had to do was show my (Canadian) passport. If they scanned a retina, or took my fingerprint then it was done very discreetly.

    91. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by andydread · · Score: 1

      Xenophobes is correct, unfortunately. We are not even a melting pot. More like a partitioned salad dish. Everyone goes to their own corner.

    92. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 2, Informative

      There are no requirements for fingerprints or retinal scans in the US, at least not from canadians.

      There are, they just aren't enforced against Canadian citizens and permanent residents . However, citizens of others countries residing in Canada will be forced through a fingerprint scan if they try to cross that border (I know from personal experience, I did that twice myself, and I know quite a few people on work visas in Canada who also cross relatively frequently).

      However, they still can require any Canadian citizen to go through a scan if they deem you suspicious or something. That said, since you're still on Canadian soil before they let you through, you can refuse the scan and walk away undisturbed (under Canadian privacy laws), and they cannot detain you for investigation - only prevent you from crossing the border.

    93. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nice story, but this is Sherbrooke you're talking about, one of the parts of Quebec which has the biggest english minority out of Montreal and was, 60 years ago, still dominated by english landlords.

    94. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      With all the security proposals, is anyone actually getting protected?

      Or maybe it would be time to ask, seriously, how many of the lobbyists and congressists behind them happen to get a cut.

    95. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      That's before crazy fuckers decided it was a great idea to try to blow us up.

      You think there are no Islamic fundamentalists among U.S. citizens?

    96. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by laci · · Score: 1

      Just to let you know: as of this spring even legal US residents (green card holders) get fingerprinted...

    97. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jcr · · Score: 1

      Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident.

      Any way they try to spin it, that's pretty damned hostile.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    98. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Excluding people prosperous enough to afford air travel while failing to control the poor variety at our southern border is stupid.

      Too bad the 9/11 hijackers didn't cross the Rio Grande.

      BTW, we were never a "melting pot". That has always been a lie to amuse the simple. What we DID have was aggressive rejection of people who didn't assimilate and play by house rules, which was healthy. The idea that
      we should blindly let everyone in as if we owed them something is as silly as blind xenophobia.

      "Sad to see the great American nation turn from something I was once very proud of to one that I've considered, quite a few times, to up and leave."

      If you were serious, you'd be gone already. There are fun and profitable reasons to be an expat, BTW, and those are the most common. It's a fascinating world, go enjoy some of it! Don't get the idea that leaving in protest makes anyone else give a shit, because losing those who won't fight is no loss at all.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    99. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by failedlogic · · Score: 1

      Passing the border using other methods to get into the US from Canada is more difficult now. AFAIK from media articles, the Great Lakes are now patrolled by US Coast Guards with .50 cal guns on board. And if you choose to walk across the boarder, there are apparently drone planes monitoring the border. I don't think these are equipped with Hellfire missiles (yet?) as their cousins in Iraq and Afghanistan.

      I'd just like to see some resemblance of security on buses and trains. Buses certainly never check for guns or sharp pointy things. Some nutjob a few years back decapitated - yes cut the head off of the passenger sitting next to him. Why? We don't know except he's a nutjob. He's in a nuthouse now. http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/07/31/greyhound-transcanada.html

    100. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Artifakt · · Score: 1

      The term fundamentalists isn't really the best either, but it's become so entrenched it would be effectively impossible to change. The Wahhabiist movement has really only developed over the last 260 years, and is in some ways a reform movement like Martin Luther's was for Christian sects. It just so happens that one of the 'reforms' is a claim that if enough people go back to the movement's particular interpretations of Islamic law, Islam as a whole will also get back the political and economic power and position of the Califate era. This makes it (at its worst), like some of the 'pray it and claim it' Christian sects, writ very large. That doesn't mean many Wahhabiists become fanatics, but rather that anyone who does become a fanatic will tend to think that Allah approves of any steps that look like they will restore the secular power of early Islam.

      --
      Who is John Cabal?
    101. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jcr · · Score: 2, Informative

      19 people managed to sneak box cutters onto airplanes

      No, it was permitted at the time to carry a box cutter onto an airplane. Nobody had ever attempted a hijacking with a knife before that.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    102. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by DaHat · · Score: 2, Informative

      What I think is astounding is the pure gall of the conservatives, blaming president Obama for not getting the Olympics when it was their crap ass policies and politics that put in place the anal probe, 3rd world border treatment afforded our guests these days. Like we're going to forget who was behind it all. But that's been the pattern right along. Absolving themselves from any accountability by trying to pin it on someone else. Pathetic.

      Actually the pathetic thing is you doing just what you are accusing conservatives of doing... blaming someone else.

      Were US entry policies to blame... perhaps. Has President Obama done anything to make things easier? Not really.

      The President does get a fair bit of blame for spending something on the order of $1.2 million dollars for the quick day trip involving several planes (why can't he and the wife carpool anyway?), obviously contributing to global warming along the way while spending millions of US tax payer dollars for transportation and security (in the middle of a recession when unemployment continues to rise) and trying to leverage his much touted international appeal... all to an embarrassing end.

      Had the President been as experienced as some like to think he would know that one does not lend his stature to negotiation of this type, instead only appearing when the deal was done and lending his stature to the final successful closing of it... because anything else is a waste of his time and credibility.

      Face it... the President failed at something he decided to inject himself into. Do other parties and other reasons share some blame? Perhaps. However that does not change the fact that the President of the United States decided to inject himself into yet another issue that he had no direct responsibility to (as his is pattern), and once again failed miserably to deliver.

      Say... how's that Gitmo closing thing going? Or the economy? Iran? Jobs? I'm sorry friend, but the past 9.5 months have not exactly been a bunch of wins for this new administration... and the sooner you realize the actual cause of many of these things, the easier you will sleep at night because HopeNChange... have failed.

    103. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Xenophobia. Yeah, I see it. I don't much like it. It is a symptom of ignorance, and it's quite hard to cure. BUT - maybe it's fair to point out that xenophobia may be a valid reaction to what has been going on over the last few decades. NAFTA, CAFTA, whoring ourselves out to make China a "most favored trading partner". Outsourcing, immigration (both legal and illegal), hiring of foreign nationals (work permits, as opposed to immigrants), as well as corporations shipping production jobs overseas wholesale. All these things, plus terrorism, have taken their toll. America's wealth is being drained, people are afraid, and people are reacting.

      Xenophobia? Again, I see it as ignorance, akin to paranoia. But then again, it's not paranoia if everyone really IS out to get you, is it?

      Our government is almost willing to admit that unemployment is at 10%. For a more accurate picture of unemployment, visit http://www.shadowstats.com/article/employment Depending on the methods used to figure unemployment, the figures vary. SGS places it at 21.4% for September.

      Browse around shadowstats to get an idea how and why the government fails to make accurate reports on the economy.

      The administration apparently had hopes that capturing the Olympics would help the economy. That's the only reason I can think of for our head of state to lobby so hard for it.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    104. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 1, Informative

      I will be driving across America this coming spring (I-90, I-5, I-10, and I-95).

      This is actually the third time I've done this. If any UK citizens or other Europeans would care to join me, I'll show you the *real* United States. No not New York City and its claustrophobia-inducing skyscrapers (yuck). The real United States is a giant expanse of mostly grass with lots of cows, and just a few oasses of civilization (cities) dotting the landscape.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    105. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      If you read the Papers written by middle class idiots who'd be afraid of their shadow in most working class neighborhoods of the world

      There, corrected for ya, I grew up in a neighborhood the newspaper like to describe as "omg violent gangs shooting each other" and yet, the ministry of justice's statistics hint (let's face it they wouldn't tell it) at the very well known fact that there's more police brutality going on than actual violent crime.

    106. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Alioth · · Score: 1

      If you have to go to Texas, it's best to fly via Houston. The immigration people are actually friendly, they have enough immigration desks, and typically even if you're getting off the plane near to last you'll still be through immigration and customs in half an hour.

      I went through Dallas once. Never again. This was also before 11/9. Surly immigration official who demanded to see *all* my paperwork (for my L1 visa) - the Houston immigration officials never asked for it, then accused me of carrying a "copy" instead of the originals despite the paperwork bearing the original stamp from the US Embassy in London. If I'm in the US and travelling internally, I also avoid DFW. It's the world's most chaotic airport.

    107. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by theshowmecanuck · · Score: 1

      Please provide an example or reference.

      --
      -- I ignore anonymous replies to my comments and postings.
    108. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      If I didn't know better, I would have thought they'd been trained in military interrogation techniques.

      No, the person wasn't begging for his life after being waterboarded.

      These guys were not trained by our honorable military.

    109. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Teun · · Score: 1

      My impression has become that Americans are much more fond of paying with credit cards than we are in Europe since noone I know thinks it's unusual to have 100-200 euros in your wallet.

      I'm curious where you are from in this Europe.

      I live in The Netherlands and travel extensively, especially at home everything but the ice cream is paid with a debit card (PIN).

      Even in places like the USofA you can find ATM's everywhere and carrying a lot of cash is not needed.

      A small difference is maybe that having a Dutch banking card I pay nothing for withdrawals.

      --
      "The likes of Facebook and WhatsApp are free to those whose privacy is of zero value."
    110. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by mauriceh · · Score: 1

      Agreed.

      I am a Canadian, with no criminal history or similar.
      I am white, of obvious (blonde) european ancestry and middle aged.

      I find it almost too much of a nuisance to bother going to the US any more.

      --
      Maurice W. Hilarius Voice: (778) 347-9907
    111. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by daivd · · Score: 1

      I have a friend who is Indian/Pakistani (but with a Swedish passport). He is stopped by customs and strip searched more or less every time he flies to the US. That cannot be a coincidence, he must fit some profile.

      Of course you can still sneak weapons on board. I had no problem getting a small knife past security. Had it attached to the rest of my keys. With that and a tooth brush, I figure you can make a nice shiv :). Or perhaps swallow explosives in a condom. Or make some space inside a laptop. Or get a doctor's certificate that you have a metal plate in your body (quite common). Or get breast implants, but fill them with explosives instead of silicone (then wait a month, so you don't have any smell). Or, if you are a guy, get a stomach implant. Guard #1 to guard #2, "Hey, suspicious - a slightly fat guy. In the US!" I expect someone who actually knows what he is talking about to have a thousand more suggestions.

    112. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ImdatS · · Score: 1

      Check out Wikipedia on the terrorism in Turkey:

      -snip-
      According to official figures released by the Turkish military for the 1984-2008 period, the conflict has resulted in the capture of 14,000 PKK members, and the death of 17,000 PKK members, 6,482 soldiers, and 5,560 civilians.[5] The conflict particularly affected the tourism industry.
      -snip-

      And still traveling to Turkey is as easy as to most other European countries, especially as a EU-citizen, you only need an ID-card, nothing more.

    113. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ImdatS · · Score: 3, Informative

      Actually, throughout Schengen countries (this is around 23 in Europe), you don't need any ID to travel except for airline travel where they check your name on your boarding pass against your name on a photo ID (but this could also be just a drivers license, or any other official looking photo ID) - and this check is done by airline personnel only.

      When you travel by car, feet, train or ship throughout Schengen countries, you will notice the border crossing only by change of street signs, language or car plates - or by the ratio of beer:wine, good cuisine:bad cuisine, and so on.

    114. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by m.ducharme · · Score: 1

      I don't think it is...more's the pity.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    115. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      The best satire is usually unintentional.

    116. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by maxume · · Score: 4, Informative

      There won't be an oil shortage any time soon, but if there is a shortage, the problem will be more severe than you think, tractors are currently machines that turn diesel into food, with no oil, getting food to market won't be the problem, growing it at all will be the problem.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    117. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by HangingChad · · Score: 4, Informative

      Were US entry policies to blame... perhaps. Has President Obama done anything to make things easier? Not really.

      He's had 9 months, inheriting a cratering economy, failing banking sector, automotive sector and a health care crisis. I think he's done damn job with what he was given to work with. You don't change direction in a bureaucracy like DHS overnight. Besides, as soon as he starts looking at it or proposing changes, you'll be screaming about how Obama is leaving the country open to attack.

      Pathetic AND predictable. Maybe you noticed it was people from outside the US raising this issue? No? That's not surprising.

      Nothing but criticism and negativity. I'm sick of it, sick of you. This country would be farther ahead if we carved off a section and let you have your own space. I'd be all for that. You already have a propaganda cable channel and chain of newspapers you can take with you. Vile, disgusting, angry, small-minded, pathetic people. It sucks to have to call you countrymen.

      --
      That's our life, the big wheel of shit. - The Fat Man, Blue Tango Salvage
    118. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bmsleight · · Score: 1

      has direct land passage to outside countries

      So does the UK. From Northern Ireland to Ireland!

    119. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Latinhypercube · · Score: 0

      I don't think it's xenophobia, and I would definitely be one of the people that would feel that. Instead I think it's the result of a decade of FEAR MONGERING by a republican run government. They got their 2nd pearl harbour in 2001 and ran with it. The whole republican philosophy is to keep the population scared, self absorbed and divided, in which state they are much easier to control and are far more predictable.

    120. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm betting most Americans don't even know that this is standard procedure. I'm American and I sure didn't; but, I live in my own small world away from international borders. From what I hear the Canadian Border is still swiss cheese and I'm not inclined to think otherwise. Our Southern border receives far more attention what with the illegal immigrants constantly pouring over and the drug wars spilling into Mexican/American cities with kidnappings happening more and more.

      That being said, American's have largely been shielded from dealing with international border crossings and thus don't think about how negative an impact it is having on the country's image. It's certainly not my intent to hinder others from visiting my fine country.

      In general, though, I believe that the terrorists have won a major objective of theirs - to intimidate American political figures and cause those figures to impose strict movements of citizens. The result: causing America to lose face in the international community. Christ! It's gotten so bad that Homeland Security (An organization that should be banned, IMHO) is calling US Veterans the most grave threat to national security there is. ( http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2009/apr/16/napolitano-stands-rightwing-extremism/ )

      I'd better stop before I get too far off topic.

    121. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Latinhypercube · · Score: 0

      I'm also from the UK which I would have to admit is increasingly xenophobic (in a way I do not believe America is). It has always astounded me that the UK has such a hatred of non white people. But then, when you consider that they also have a hatred of other Englishmen wearing different colored football shirts, it starts to become clearer. All the pomp and bull about the UK being overrun with immigrants is so obviously National Front material regurgitated through so many different tabloid papers. The UK is AND ISLAND FOR GOD'S SAKE. It is extremely difficult to get into the UK, let alone exist there. Further more the UK needs immigrants to fill all the jobs vacancies left by the huge mass of non working class white families on benefits. If there is any one group that is sucking up tax payers money and leeching off it, it's the masses of mainly white council estates full of 16year old single mothers.

    122. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by chitokutai · · Score: 1

      What makes this funny is that after a recent trip to New York, I was asked zero questions about my bags during check-in, and the individual checking bags on the x-ray monitor was talking to a fellow co-worker while people went through the metal detector. But at least I took my shoes off and didn't have any large bottles of liquid with me.

      What exactly is the point of this increased security?

    123. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by TheSoepkip · · Score: 1

      If you'd like to visit Washington state and don't want to be harassed that much you may want to consider booking a flight to Vancouver. The border procedures of getting into Canada are generally much better here as long as you speak English and don't start throwing chairs around. Hang out for a bit, then rent a car and go South along the coast. I've heard some bad stories about the Peace Arch / Pacific Crossing borders here too, but in general the officers are much nicer than the porkers you find at the airport. I'd highly recommend doing a road trip from Vancouver, Seattle, Portland, something in between Portland and SF, SF, LA and finally to San Diego.

    124. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Z00L00K · · Score: 1

      I can agree. A lot of stupid questions asked that doesn't really have any meaning at all since someone entering for the wrong purposes would answer them in the same way as someone visiting as a tourist.

      Add to that the risk of having your computer and other electronic equipment seized in the hunt for potentially pirated music or whatever. (how they now can tell if the music on the devices is pirated or not is a question beyond me...)

      And the rather incompetent way of catching people by running names against a list. Just consider that names can be changed and there may people with the same name with similar origin that are delayed or refused entry just because the name is on a list.

      It may even be enough to look like someone. I have an uncle that had some problems during the 70's since he did look like someone involved with the "Rote Armee Fraktion".

      So much of the efforts put into place are more a show of power than having anything to do with the safety and security of people.

      --
      If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
    125. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      As someone who grew up in the part of Canada that's actually north of the 49th parallel, I think it's kind of funny you mentioned crossing the 49th and then picked somewhere near Sherbrooke for a setting.

      On the other hand, as a fairly new Quebec resident, your post was hilarious.

    126. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>Now we're about the same, except we're a melting pot of xenophobes (maybe not at the citizen level, but definitely at the administrative/political level.

      Citation, please. Both parties love having open borders - Republicans get cheap labor, and Democrats get votes. That's why we still don't have a border fence in San Diego, after 20 years of trying to get one, and a bill actually being passed authorizing it.

      There's a difference between trying to control the borders of a country and xenophobia. (And if you think America is particularly bad, consider what happens to you if you try to enter China illegally.) Illegal immigrants crossing the border are a significant problem to people in San Diego. When the fence was partially built, it worked - but since they didn't complete it, it ended up funneling all of the people through my buddy's farm out in Descanso. It is easy for people like you to cry xenophobia, whereas he's really just tired of having the locks broken on his barn and finding 40 people huddled inside.

      Or in other words, people tend to be awfully generous with other people's time and money, but if it happened to them, they'd be just as "xenophobic" as the rest.

    127. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Angostura · · Score: 1

      In the Portes du soleil ski area a single lift pass lets you roam freely across the Swiss-French border. Again. virtually impossible to tell what country you are in.

    128. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      But none of these should put you off travelling.

      Too many good alternatives. The US is just not worth the extra hassle.

    129. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I don't recall any Olympics in Japan recently either.

      Brazil doesn't fingerprint visitors (well, they were fingerprinting Americans for a while as revenge), and getting an entry visa is much easier, particularly if you're from certain parts of the world that the US doesn't like.

      I have colleagues who can't travel to the US for scientific meetings because they can't get a visa, because of where they were born. Some others can get in, but they have to apply six months in advance and then it's kind of a crap shoot whether they actually get it in time or not.

    130. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When I wandered around western Europe in 2005 the only crossings where I needed a passport were into and out of France, to (from) the UK.

      I've actually flown into Spain (from Canada) twice, and the booth for the passport guy was empty. Straight off the plane and onto the street with no passport check.

    131. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Angostura · · Score: 1

      The family and broke a flight from New Zealand to London at LA last year and I have to agree. I didn't mind the security measures one bit. What I did mind was the brusque, humourless, discourteous way it was handled. Not by the customs officials - they were fine, but by the guys herding you into line to go through security. I *get* that it's a serious business, but it doesn't have to be threatening.

    132. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1


      Heh! I'd probably be up for seeing the *real* USA! Am supposed to go over there at some point and visit a friend. I think you and I keep having arguments here on /. so it could be intellectually stimulating. :)

      Regards
      H.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    133. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That has never been the case with me. One time when I entered the UK, I couldn't find my UK passport, so I used my US passport (dual citizen) and I literally just got waved in. Another time, I had a problem with trying to get the immigration guy to stamp my passport; he just wanted to wave me in, but I insisted on getting a stamp on my passport just in case anyone decided to check up on me, and decide that I was an illegal immigrant or something (you can't be too sure with these things, I say). He didn't understand why I wanted to do it, but eventually did stamp my passport for me.

    134. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rve · · Score: 1

      It doesn't surprise me. I'm from the UK, and "Visiting the US" was always one of those things on my life's "to-do" list - seeing New York, going to the West Coast, visiting friends in Washington state, maybe even driving Route 66 one day if I had money enough and time.

      But now? Well, I've heard enough horror stories by now from friends and colleagues about entering the USA that, despite me having no criminal convictions whatsoever, I'm afraid it ain't on my "to-do" list any more.

      If you're from a Visa waiver country, you'll find entering the US in Atlanta or San Francisco is only a bit of trouble; nothing close to the soul destroying experience of having to run the gauntlet at Heathrow. I'll never set foot at that place ever again. If you're going to the UK, fly to Paris and take the train, it's an infinitely less depressing experience. I don't have anything nice to say about entering the country at JFK airport either. If you have to make a change over there, allow two or three hours for 'Homeland Security', and an almost realistic danger of developing the delusion that Heathrow isn't so bad after all in comparison.

    135. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1

      I have a friend who is Indian/Pakistani (but with a Swedish passport). He is stopped by customs and strip searched more or less every time he flies to the US. That cannot be a coincidence, he must fit some profile.

      This is just supposition, but if it could be that he rather doesn't fit some profile. Given the number of confused comments on here the other day thinking Iranians were predominantly Arab for example, it may be that there's a considerable level of ignorance in US of the ethnic make up of a lot of countries generally. It may be that they are simply suspicious of someone who looks Indian / Pakistani but comes from Sweden. True - you'd hope customs officers would have a better idea, but that may not be the case.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    136. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is fairly unusual for Americans to pay for $3/person ice cream with a single $100 bill, yes. Carrying a couple hundred dollars isn't unusual for travelers.

    137. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 5, Interesting

      A few months ago a friend of mine decided to take his family (wife and two little kids) to the USA for a day of shopping. They recently moved to a town in Manitoba, not too far from the US border.
       
      When he got to the border there was nobody at the checkpoint. He sat there for some number of minutes, nobody seemed to be around and nothing moved at all, so he continued on his way into the USA.

      A couple of miles further along the highway he saw a large truck stopped on the shoulder of the road ahead of him. As he approached it, the truck suddenly swung across the highway to block it and three unmarked police cars came roaring up from somewhere behind him and boxed him in. His car was surrounded and he was ordered out at gunpoint (which terrified everyone in the car, of course).

      He was ultimately taken back to the checkpoint in one of the police cars while his wife had to drive their car with the kids in it back to the checkpoint behind him -- she had a police car in front and behind all the way. They questioned them there for a couple of hours before they decided they were just dumb and not terrorists, then they released them at the border and they had to return home. (It was too late in the day for any shopping and who's in the mood after that, anyway.)

      He asked them if he would be allowed back into the USA in the future and they said he would be, but never go through an apparently unmanned checkpoint again. I don't think he's ever gone back, though.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    138. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by innocent_white_lamb · · Score: 1

      Buses certainly never check for guns or sharp pointy things.
       
      There is a notice on the wall at the bus depot here stating that all passengers and luggage are subject to search. I've never seen or heard of it actually being done, though.

      --
      If you're a zombie and you know it, bite your friend!
    139. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by EsbenMoseHansen · · Score: 1

      getting into Israel is the same as any other nation. Some police officer sits in a box, checks out your passport, looks at you, and stamps a visa into your passport.

      The biggest bitch was getting an international passport from my local city. Damn, they make that difficult in the EU. And why does that stupid piece of paper has to cost over 100 euros ? (Yes I could get it at 50 euros if I'd waited "at least 4 weeks", great)

      You can get it for 50 euroes? You lucky bastard! The price here (DK) is 80 euros, to delivered in perhaps 2 months (no garantees). Usually, it's only a week, but you never know.

      --
      Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false, and by rulers as useful.
    140. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by AlamedaStone · · Score: 2, Interesting

      That all sounds good - let the Neocons and the psychotic Religious Right fight it out - until you try and figure out the geography of such a move. The country is just too purple to carve off some red states and let them have at it.

      Maybe we could send them all "Free Boat Winner!" postcards that can only be redeemed in Alaska, and then shut the border?

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    141. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by suntory · · Score: 1

      Not sure if we have the same old border controls because we care about tourism, but rather that we know that the bad guys know how to hide their identities, and that paranoic controls such as those in the US now (was there a month ago) are close to useless.

    142. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Now THAT is a seriously long drive. You ought to give I-40 a try some time.

    143. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      I think you're wrong about hijacking with a knife, but the really distinct thing about 11 September 2001 was that they hijacked the planes for use as weapons rather than bargaining chips.

    144. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Jesus_666 · · Score: 1

      They're not only asking for biometric data, they've also managed to force the EU (by theatening to make all travelers from the EU get a visa before being allowed into the country) to require them in order to get a passport. Yes, thanks to the States' paranoia, my own government now treats me like a criminal if I want to travel abroad. Gee, thanks a lot.

      --
      USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
    145. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by plsavaria · · Score: 1

      I'm from Canada. I've been in the US dozens of times (last time being two weeks ago) and my fingerprints were never taken from a border patrol. I had some bad stories at the borders though.

      --
      The answer IS 42.
    146. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      misread as "But they actually care about their terrorist industry." :P

    147. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I just travelled in and out of the US in September with a trailer full of household items. I read up on what to expect and prepared myself for the horror to come.

      Getting into Canada was far more harrowing than entering the United States. It might have been because I entered at the high traffic port at Milepost 1221.8, but still coming into the US with a 12 foot trailer was easy as all heck.

      Entering Egypt and Pakistan in my youth were much more difficult.

    148. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by AlamedaStone · · Score: 1

      VOTE OUT THE INCUMBENTS! Red, Blue or pink: Those who value the power more than their duty deserve neither.

      If there's a lesson in the current logjam in congress, this is it. The Rs will likely grab some seats in 2010, which gives the Ds a couple of years to scrub the incumbent twats that stand in the way of cleaning up some of this garbage because they can't get political coverage.

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    149. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      I like when sometimes they have two spots where they interrogate you with the same questions or similar ones. And if your story doesn't line up they freak out. Plane ones they treat you like super villians. Bus ones are interesting they treat you like refugees or cocaine dealers. Why would I be attempting as a Canadian citizen to escape to the states because I'm poor? That makes no sense at all.

    150. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a green card holder originating from western europe ... when i come back ... fingerprints and photos it is.
      AFAIK only US citizens are exempt from this procedure.

    151. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by plsavaria · · Score: 2, Informative

      Correct me if I'm wrong, but at least when entering the US by car, you're already on american soil when talking to the border patrol. On a ski trip to Jay Peak, two stupid heas brought marijuana with them. But was searched, border patrol found it. All three were then detained for investigation.

      --
      The answer IS 42.
    152. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have been to the states a few times and it is a right pain...now if work offers a training course in the states or wants some work doing there, with a few days holiday thrown in, I say thanks but no thanks....sums it up.

    153. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by mikael · · Score: 2, Informative

      Stansted and Edinburgh airport do that as well (perhaps all airports). You go into the airport, check in your hold luggage and keep your laptop with you using a laptop bag. No problem. Go shopping, buy a newspaper, a Wired magazine and some shortbread biscuits for gifts. Still no problem. Put these items into a plastic bag. Now, we have a problem. You now have *TWO* bags.

      Normally, security would just put these into separate plastic trays and scan them separately. Now, the airline companies like Virgin and Easyjey employ some smart-asses (usually in yellow or orange T-shirts) to *ENSURE* that *EVERYONE* puts everything into the largest bag before being allowed through to
      security, so that everyone is carrying only one bag. What do the security people do? Require that everything is taken out of the bag and scanned separately.

      --
      Vintage computer adverts: http://www.vintageadbrowser.com/computers-and-software-ads
    154. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      1998 Winter Games were in Japan.

    155. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Frostalicious · · Score: 2, Informative

      In the crossing points I've been through, you are on US soil when questioned by US guards. So if they don't like something you can be detained.

      I find it somewhat strange that US guards could operate on Canadian soil.

    156. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1


      How open are the borders generally though. That's a very, very large border. I presume it would be pretty easy to just hike across somewhere and travel round the USA that way? What about driving? Is every road really guarded or are there just not that many roads?

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    157. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      "Other than a narrow strip of green along the ocean, the west coast is mostly barren. Go see the east coast instead. Maybe a nice scenic drive along I-95 from D.C. to Atlanta would be better."

      Seattle, Las Vegas, Portland, Pacific Coast Highway, Yosemite, Crater Lake, the Cascades parks, Columbia Gorge, Lassen, Tahoe. Yep, "barren".

      You can't recommend the Alaska Highway and dig the west coast as "barren". The Alcan is magnificent desolation.

    158. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Larryish · · Score: 1

      They took our jerbs!

    159. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by timeOday · · Score: 1

      Actually there was no airport security breakdown on 911. Sure, they had boxcutters, but I don't think those were instrumental. I'd just as soon brawl using a fork. If there had been an airport security breakdown on 911, they would have had real weapons. I think most of the hijackers had entered the US legally, too.

    160. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bXTr · · Score: 1

      I say "Good" to the Olympics not coming to the US, we don't deserve them. Maybe our political system can be fixed, but until then let the camps on either side of the aisle drool in hunger as the big ticket items of the world go elsewhere.

      If political systems had anything to do with it, they never would have been held in China, Russia, Yugoslavia or Nazi Germany.

      --
      It's a very dark ride.
    161. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by init100 · · Score: 1

      it is like visiting Germany as a Jew in 1939. Goodwin or not, it is the truth for some.

      It sure is. When my dad had a stopover in the US on the way home from a two-year project for Ericsson in South America in the 70's, he half-jokingly thought that he'd landed in the Soviet Union, because of the strict border controls. And it hadn't gotten better when I visited the US in 2001 and 2002. Still the silly forms asking if I was a member of the German Nazi party during WWII (yeah right, some forty years before I was born), etc, not to mention several hours waiting to pass first immigration and then customs. The latter reminded me of the long waiting times entering communist Poland in the 80's.

    162. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Joao · · Score: 1

      Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident.

      Don't tell that to the border patrol.

      I'm a Brazilian, living in New York for many years as a legal alien. I travel quite often to Brazil and Canada. Whenever I enter the country via Canada, they ask to see my passport and my visa, then wave me right in. Yet whenever I fly in from Brazil I'm fingerprinted, they take my picture, ask me all kinds of silly questions about the reason for my "visit" (been working here 26 years), where I plan to stay, do I plan to get married to an American, do I plan to get a job other than the one my visa allows, am I carrying any weapons, criminal background, association with any terrorist organizations, have I ever attempted to overthrow a government, do I plan to overthrow the American government, etc. And quite often they go through my luggage with a fine comb. Its a completely different treatment.

    163. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by CohibaVancouver · · Score: 1

      Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident

      Not if you're Canadian... No fingerprint / retinal requirement for us Hosers.

    164. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Think again. Just last week, they left out a girl that came with both her parents (and both were foreign but legal residents) since she lacked an "invitation letter".

    165. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by init100 · · Score: 1

      there are at least 20 entry points at the northern border that are unmanned and simply have a phone there asking you tell them you are crossing the border.

      Sounds like the customs booths at the Swedish terminals for the cruise ships between Sweden and Finland. Several times when I have passed, the booth has been unmanned, with a note asking you to call them if you have anything to declare.

      But except for the note, that isn't really remarkable for the intra-Nordic borders, or even borders between countries in Europe in general. Traveling by car into Norway from Sweden, the only sign that you are passing a border is an unmanned hut and a road sign. Pretty much the same applies for the Sweden-Denmark border. The Denmark-Germany border was only a tad less nonexistent, there was a border guard but you only had to wave your passports at him to let you pass (a Sweden-registered car might have contributed though). As far as I can remember, the same roughly applies to the rest of western Europe.

      Until the fall of the communist regimes in eastern Europe, crossing into or out from the east bloc was a quite different experience, somewhat like entering and leaving the United States actually, except the waiting times were even longer and the customs inspections were very thorough. Six hours after the ferry from Sweden had arrived, we finally passed customs.

      In hindsight, the visits to communist Poland resulted in a few pretty hilarious memories, such as the one where we photographed an antique (compared with then-current Swedish standards) steam engine on the rail yard, only to be approached by a guard warning us that taking photographs of military secrets was forbidden.

    166. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by conureman · · Score: 1

      I used to live in South Berkeley, hung out in some pretty shady parts of Oakland, &c. I never thought to pack a revolver until I got to Los Angeles. It's true the most dangerous fuckheads I ever met were L.A. County Sherrifs. (I did have to play chicken with about twenty vatos trying to run in front of my car once when I took the wrong short-cut in South Central, they chickened out and I didn't have to grab the .357 out of my lap). A friend's brother got lynched for being black after dark in Concord, California back in the seventies, but the whole get outta my neighborhood/if you can still walk after me and the homies beat your ass thing is happening more in Chi-Town than anywhere else that I've heard of recently. The chickenshit whingeing in the bourgeois press is laughable, most times, but it does have a basis in reality.

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    167. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was on a summer internship to the U.S. this year. I hated the fingerprinting part (both at the embassy where I got my visa, and at O'Hare), but other than that, I didn't find it to be too over the top. Coming from a former communist country might be influencing my opinion though.

    168. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Ducaquis · · Score: 1

      no. not some places. Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident.

      Not completely right... only US citizens get to enter the US without fingerprinting and a picture of your face taken. US Residents (Green Card holders) used to be able to get in without the fingerprints/picture, but they changed the rules recently. After getting it, I only managed to get into the US once without being fingerprinted using my GC before the rule change. And it only got worse. At first it was only the index finger that was fingerprinted, now it's all ten fingers.

    169. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by init100 · · Score: 1

      From a statistical point of view, the U.S.-Canada border is the safest border in the world.

      Excuse me, but there are other safe places in the world than the US, so until you have something to back that up, I'll take that as just another unsubstantiated claim based on the standard US-centric worldview.

      I can really agree that it is probably the safest border in the US, or maybe even in North America. But how would it compare with e.g. the Sweden-Norway border? Or any intra-EU border?

    170. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      Final point granted - I guess I have too many friends in Chicago who tend to just shrug it off and divide their scorn between Chi-town popo and the gangs themselves too.

    171. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Unlikely. They made a big stink in the 90s about requiring everybody to get new Green Cards (which actually stopped being green a long time ago). They told everybody that, in essence, the old cards had "expired"...which caused a huge hubbub because, of course, permanent resident status is supposed to be permanent. Eventually they settled on some legal language that says your status doesn't expire but your green card has to be up-to-date, but I've since become a citizen so I dunno what the exact rule is.

      To be fair, they had a point. At the time they switched to the new green card format with the fingerprint on it, the photo on my then-current green card was taken when I was five years old. Worse, it actually had a cancellation stamp over the photo -- not like a thing that said "canceled," but like canceling a postage stamp. For some reason, they had printed a pattern of wavy lines right over the photo, so even if the photo of me as a preschool child didn't look sufficiently like my 19-year-old self, you could barely read the photo to begin with.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    172. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by init100 · · Score: 1

      I'd just like to see some resemblance of security on buses and trains. Buses certainly never check for guns or sharp pointy things.

      Unlike aircraft, which can be used as missiles, especially trains have no such potential, and even more so if they are equipped with ATC. Sure, you can blow them up, which would be very bad for the passengers, but you can't drive them wherever you want. With ATC, you can't even run a red light, as the train is automatically braked before it can pose any harm to other trains. And with electric trains, even if you manage to bypass the ATC, the power can be disconnected by the press of a button.

      Actually, I'd say that onboard security on trains won't do a thing, as you also need to protect the vast expanses of track, which is a pretty significant task. If malicious people cannot get on the trains themselves, they can cause disaster by dropping foreign objects on the tracks, or throwing rocks, etc, at the trains themselves. The problem of foreign objects on the tracks doesn't apply to buses (since they can steer around them), but just like trains, they can be attacked directly. These kinds of cases are much more common than the "terrorist on the train" (which is actually exceedingly uncommon), so efforts to increase safety for trains and buses have primarily been focused on increasing security in the areas that the trains and buses travel through.

    173. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's before crazy fuckers decided it was a great idea to try to blow us up. Not wanting to get blown the fuck up is not the same as xenophobia.

      There have been plenty of white, American born crazy fuckers that like bombs and have been successful at blowing people up. Before 9/11 it wasn't strange to hear the term terrorist and think of Timothy McVeigh. Though for some reason the US prefers to think of its extremists as "militants". Proud traditions of rebellion, one would assume.

    174. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Not trying to make any particular argument here, but I'll just give a counter-anecdote.

      I am a single white male who travels alone with a very small amount of baggage. The last time I crossed the U.S. border was in March, when I went to Mexico.

      I realized only after leaving for my trip that I had planned my return trip poorly. I had a flight from Mexico to JFK airport in New York, and then a separate connecting flight that would take me back to San Francisco. Unfortunately, I didn't leave enough time between flights.

      What that meant was that I would need to deplane at JFK (I was in something like row 28 out of 30), travel through the International terminal (JFK is a high-traffic airport, so distances are far) to the immigration line, wait in a line of travelers coming from all over the world (including MANY from Israel and the Middle East), show my passport and clear immigration, move on to customs, tell the guy I had nothing to declare, continue on to the monorail that would take me from the international terminal at JFK to one of the domestic terminals, find my gate, clear security again, then make it all the way through the terminal to my connecting flight -- all in about 55 minutes.

      And you know what? I made it. I arrived at my gate right as they were calling pre-board passengers.

      So while I agree that U.S. border security is completely overblown and does little to protect anybody, it's not totally broken.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    175. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      How open are the borders generally though. That's a very, very large border. I presume it would be pretty easy to just hike across somewhere and travel round the USA that way? What about driving? Is every road really guarded or are there just not that many roads?

      If you do not care about legality of it, US-Canadian border is extremely easy to cross. There's just too much of it, the surrounding area is often wilderness, and it is simply not of any significance for either US or Canada to spend much on securing its entire length.

    176. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by init100 · · Score: 1

      which killed less people than a month's worth of auto accidents in this country.

      Not to mention common seasonal flu. In Sweden, 1000-2000 people die from seasonal flu annually, so if we multiply that with roughly 30 to compensate with the population difference between Sweden and the US, we get 30000-60000 annually, or some 2500-5000 a month. Those numbers may be very rough, but the order of magnitude should at least be pretty accurate.

    177. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by neurovish · · Score: 1

      So you're proposing that somebody sit on airplane for 8 - 10 hours to meet up with you in order to not so much do something interesting, but drive along the interstate and look at grass plains and cows? I'm pretty sure they can do that in France and save a lot of money. The interstate corridors are probably the parts of the country I *wouldn't* want to show off. "Look at how desolate our country is...hey there's another Wal-Mart, lets stop in for some souvenirs and get lunch at the McDonald's inside!"

    178. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by The+Grand+Falloon · · Score: 1

      New York alone, even to someone used to big cities like London, is an extraordinary place to visit, and the West Coast has some absolutely spectacular scenery and great cities.

      Seconded. I'm from California, which is (mostly) awesome. Oregon and Washington State are mighty nice as well. I'll forgo my usual vitriol and simply say that I cannot recommend Los Angeles at all. Recently visited New York City for Pete Seeger's 90th birthday concert, expecting to hate the place. My wife and I were astounded at how much we liked it. We weren't there for very long, but we both left thinking, "this is how cities should be run."

    179. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      An undercover Fed acting as an illegal alien was able to bypass the Mexican border by simply bribing the guard 50 dollars. The guard left the illegal into the U.S.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    180. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by MurphyZero · · Score: 1

      Hell even a lot of people in the FAA (Federal Aviation Administration) fly only when necessary, and many of them are able to fly for free (on a space available basis). I am considering a 1000 mile trip next summer, and I will either drive or take the train. There will be no flying, not when 2 children will be involved. And the reason is purely the hassle involved. Driving will be an 18 hour or so ordeal; train 25 hours, but no ordeal. And those options are still better than flying.

      --
      Our founding fathers removed the guys in charge. Be American. Vote incumbents out.
    181. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by neurovish · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Switzerland isn't in the Schengen zone though. I went through the swiss "border control" coming from France and it was basically a couple of border officers grabbing every few people out of the crowd rushing by and checking their passport. On the train from Switzerland -> Germany, somebody came through and checked our passports, but no stamps or anything. Driving between Belgium and Germany, I couldn't even find where the border was since the area on the Border is germany speaking anyways. The other Schengen areas are the same...it's just like going from one state to another except the language on the signs change.

    182. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by init100 · · Score: 1

      US Immigration (usually polite enough, or at least efficient)

      Unless you happen to land just after two 747s, one from Bombay and one from Islamabad. That wait too me three hours, and we had to really run fast to catch our connection. Our luggage didn't make it though, so it came with the next flight.

    183. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by m0! · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Ditto. And it's not just once but every time you re-enter. I've re-entered the US about a dozen times in the past few years with a green card and photo and fingerprints are taken every time.

    184. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We once took pride in saying we were a melting pot of nations (racism aside). Now we're about the same, except we're a melting pot of xenophobes (maybe not at the citizen level, but definitely at the administrative/political level.

      Sad to see the great American nation turn from something I was once very proud of to one that I've considered, quite a few times, to up and leave.

      Nope your wrong. Were a clumping pot where everyone is a hyphenated American. Immigrants use to come to America and become American now they just come here to live and want America to conform to the old country.

    185. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      I dont believe that you are right with your claim that two pieces of hand luggage are against a general policy. Some airlines officially allow you to carry two pieces, or one piece and a laptop, or ...

      AFAIK, it's always been one carry-on item (up to 28 lbs. and within certain dimensional requirements) and one "personal item" (something smaller than your carry-on, like a notebook bag, backpack, or whatever) on every airline I've ever flown. Generally, the carry-on needs to be able to fit in an overhead bin, while the personal item needs to be able to fit under the seat in front of you.

      Then there's checked baggage, but with many airlines charging for that, more people are trying to avoid it. (Southwest lets you check two bags for free. JetBlue lets you check one bag for free. Pretty much everybody else charges for all checked baggage.)

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    186. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      I will be driving across America this coming spring (I-90, I-5, I-10, and I-95).

      Those numbers suggest that you're traveling around it, not through it. :-) Still, you're probably going to hit lots of places I've never been (and a few that I have), and I've lived here nearly all my life (two years each in England and Germany back in the '80s). It sounds like fun...wish I had the time for a trip like that, as I'm guessing what you're planning would probably take at least 3-4 weeks to cover.

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    187. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by SirAstral · · Score: 1

      Once we stopped forcing citizens to use the English language it was not possible to melt. Now that everyone and their dog can sneak in without much resistance or having to learn english, they just startup little versions of their origin nation. Little Mexico's, little China's, little Vietnam's, little Japan's.

      If you can't speak their language it is IMPOSSIBLE to melt, integrate, or assimilate. You will only become more segregated, rigid, intolerant. Compound that with the fact that the US treats it citizens worst than illegals.... and well, you have what is going on now.

    188. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ianturton · · Score: 1

      and from the same BAA site - if you fly from Heathrow you can have as many pieces of carry-on as your airline allows. How can you have a policy that varies from airport to airport?

    189. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>The interstate corridors are probably the parts of the country I *wouldn't* want to show off.

      Perhaps not, but driving the interstate is something I do almost every day. So do most Americans. Also the interstates are how we get our bills in the mail, our packages ordered off amazon.com, our food shipped from the farms to the stores. That's our real culture, like it or not. (shrug)

      As for France, it's been almost twenty years since I've been there so maybe things have changed, but my impression was one giant suburb. Definitely not the same as driving across the states. Perhaps if you were driving across southern Russia, then that would be closer. ;-)

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    190. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But none of these should put you off travelling.

      I myself will decide what puts me off traveling, tyvm. Being treated like a criminal, with arbitrary displays of gratuitous "We ask the questions, ma'am," and "Why do you ask the reason we took your laptop to our back office for an hour and a half? That in itself is proof you've got something to hide. Please come back there for a full body search. Also, you're on the watch list from now on," is pretty high on that list.

    191. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jhylkema · · Score: 1

      I think most of the hijackers had entered the US legally, too.

      They all had. In fact, the American immigration authorities issued student visas to the hijackers AFTER 9/11!

    192. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ObsessiveMathsFreak · · Score: 1

      In a society where perception has become reality; what's the difference?

      --
      May the Maths Be with you!
    193. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by xelah · · Score: 1

      I find it somewhat strange that US guards could operate on Canadian soil.

      IIRC, at both the port of Dover and Channel Tunnel the French frontier control is in the UK and the UK border control in France, so it's hardly unheard of. But they do it that way here so that the traffic queue clogs the approach roads and not the port/terminal, which hardly applies at the US/Canada border.

      The UK border control still send you through a concrete maze full of people in yellow jackets paid to look threatening and vehicle immobilisers ready to pop up when you arrive, though. The French don't, of course.

    194. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by VisceralLogic · · Score: 1

      It depends what neighborhood you go to. I grew up in Chicago (the city itself, not a suburb), and never encountered any problems.

      --
      Stop! Dremel time!
    195. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All of which ignores the REAL security breakdown that day, which was that 19 people managed to sneak box cutters onto airplanes.

      They didn't sneak anything onboard. Box cutters weren't prohibited back then, because wtf could you do with one? Vandalize a seat cushion?

      The problem was the conditioned passenger response to a hijacking back then: stay in your seat and get annoyed by the 12-24 hour delay in your travel plans. Those 19 people could have accomplished the same thing without any weapons onboard.

      Unfortunately, the whole thing left a shit-ton of bureaucrats looking like they had to do SOMETHING about a problem that had already solved itself. You can't hijack a plane-full of people convinced that they will die as easily as you can browbeat passengers that think you'll make them miss their meetings or first day at Disneyland.

    196. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ThatCanadianGuy · · Score: 0

      A year ago I was in Manitoba, I had to drive home to Ontario, the shortest route was through the states. So, Thats the route that I took. That was almost a huge mistake. I was stopped at the boarder, my car searched, questions were asked, "Why are you entering the US?" "Its the shortest way home" "How long will you be here?" "15-16 hours" "You said you had no weapons in your car. How do you explain this knife and axe?" "Well officer, the Knife is a fillet knife from my tackle box, Therefore its fishing gear. And the axe, (not the shampoo, but more like a hatchet) is part of my camping gear." "Oh, Ok. What is the purpose of your trip into the states again?" "To get home faster" "And where is this again?" "Southern ontario". it went on like this for about half an hour. and after that, i had to pack everything into my car again. All in all, i was stopped at the boarder for 2+ hours. I'm a perfectly normal looking (altho i'd been camping for 3 weeks and looked like grizzly addams) guy. No criminal record, no drugs, nothing. But because of my last name, i was held up. (my uncle has the same problem at that crossing). so, yeah, If Canadians (America's so called #1 friend and ally) can't get across easily, or even in good time, then its a damn good reason Chicago didn't get it.

    197. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Concerned+Onlooker · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "...a former co-worker of mine who traveled frequently left one in his bag for several trips and was never tagged. "

      Similar experience here. I had completely forgotten about a pair of scissors left in the back pocket of my laptop bag. After flying out and returning I noticed them in there and couldn't believe that I hadn't been taken down at the airport.

      On another note, I realized on my last trip that apparently they don't think terrorists will be flying first class. I noticed that when you get a meal in first class they serve it up with a nice set of stainless steel ware, including two forks and a knife (not to mention the nice little wine glass made of actual glass). I wonder how they got them past airport security?

      --
      http://www.rootstrikers.org/
    198. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by kelnos · · Score: 1

      You can bounce around Europe crossing borders with little more than a wave of your passport and a friendly nod.

      Even less, sometimes. As a US citizen, I once traveled from Munich to Venice by air, and there wasn't anyone at the Venice airport checking passports. I think the flight was treated as the equivalent of a US domestic flight.

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    199. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Burning1 · · Score: 1

      I'm a US citizen myself, and recently returned from a business trip to the UK. While there, I crossed the boarders into UK twice, and France once.

      Of my boarder crossings, heading into France was (via the eurostar) the most pleasant experience. UK wasn't bad, although it required more paperwork. What really surprised me was how much of a pain in the ass it was to get back into the United States. Boarder entry was slow and tedious, and I was stuck waiting in line while security leafed through my bags.

      I never expected the most alienating boarder crossing would be the one returning home.

    200. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by repapetilto · · Score: 1

      Two summers ago (2008) I took a train from Brussels into the UK... I had a pellet gun in my bag I won at some street game in Venice and had been carrying around for weeks. There was no problem getting in... but then when I left the UK to catch the flight back home from amsterdam (again via brussels), Belgium border security made a huge deal about it and I had to eventually just give them the gun so I wouldnt miss the train. By the way, whats the right word to describe people from Belgium? Belgians?

    201. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Burning1 · · Score: 1

      All of which ignores the REAL security breakdown that day, which was that 19 people managed to sneak box cutters onto airplanes. And you know what? You can -still- sneak box cutters onto airplanes, I know because a former co-worker of mine who traveled frequently left one in his bag for several trips and was never tagged. He did a major "oh shit!" when he realized it was in there.

      Your over-reactionary rant aside (Sheiks still get profiled, and granny is unlikely to have an anal cavity search) this comment is very much true.

      I used to keep a small utility knife attached to my keychain, even when I went flying. In 2007 that keychain knife made it in and out of Las Vegas, and then into Arazona before finally being confiscated on my way home.

      This is from the same airport security that wouldn't let me stand on a bench and blow my girlfriend a kiss before heading off to the UK, or allow me to bring a 12 oz bottle of water into a plane.

    202. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by kelnos · · Score: 1

      ... a cashier almost told us we were nuts when we paid for ice cream with a $ 100 bill. My impression has become that Americans are much more fond of paying with credit cards than we are in Europe since noone I know thinks it's unusual to have 100-200 euros in your wallet.

      It is true that we're pretty fond of paying with CCs, but I think in your case the ice cream vendor was just surprised you didn't have smaller change. Many small vendors (or anyone who sells items of very low value) will not accept bills over $50, or even $20, simply because they don't carry that much change on hand, or are afraid of getting passed counterfeit bills.

      Personally I rarely carry around more than $100 in cash on a regular basis, but even if I did, I'd find carrying a $100 bill around to be a nuisance.

      --
      Xfce: Lighter than some, heavier than others. Just right.
    203. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jeffasselin · · Score: 1

      Vote out the incumbents and replace them with whom, exactly? Your political system is so fucked up at this point anyone who can actually get on the ballot with some chance of winning in a national election is almost certainly bought out by the corporations who actually control the country while you're watching the political comedy going on in Washington.

      --
      If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
    204. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's an issue, As to have the evil empire follow you around is a human rights issue. They built the wall around them and treat the world as the enemy. Has been this way since history began. Too bad Bush and company still haunt the world and the current admin can't or won't trust the world.

    205. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Leebert · · Score: 1

      I say "Good" to the Olympics not coming to the US, we don't deserve them.

      To be honest, the olympics are a losing proposition, financially, and a major pain to the locality. I don't know who would want the olympics.

      VOTE OUT THE INCUMBENTS! Red, Blue or pink

      Pink? Leave Barney Frank out of this! :)

    206. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by lagomorpha2 · · Score: 1

      Well you can scratch driving Route 66 off your "to-do" list. Most of it no longer exists.

    207. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      How open are the borders generally though. That's a very, very large border. I presume it would be pretty easy to just hike across somewhere and travel round the USA that way? What about driving? Is every road really guarded or are there just not that many roads?

      Have a look at Google Maps, up in Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine. There are many villages that straddle the border and which have no formal checkpoints except on the larger highways at the edge of town.

      I expect locals interested in preserving their hassle-free borderlessness are probably extra-vigilant about suspicious outsiders though.

      I've crossed in some of those places on bicycle. However, I did then proceed to the immigration office where you're suppose to sign in before continuing further into the country.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    208. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by raju1kabir · · Score: 2, Informative

      As far as I can remember, the same roughly applies to the rest of western Europe.

      Border formalities have been dismantled for almost all of continental western Europe (excepting Gibraltar, where you still have to show your passport, and Switzerland, where they almost always wave you through and are often out to "lunch"). The German-Danish border you visited many years ago is now just a signpost, with nobody to even wave your passport at.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    209. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by lagomorpha2 · · Score: 1

      the ACLU is even fighting to allow burkas for photo ID's.

      Oh wow that's going to make it so easy for underage Muslims to buy alcohol with borrowed ID.

    210. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      I can really agree that it is probably the safest border in the US, or maybe even in North America. But how would it compare with e.g. the Sweden-Norway border? Or any intra-EU border?

      On a per-km basis? The claim probably stands. On a per-border basis? Surely not.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    211. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You've just been reading too much Europe news from the UK media.

      For the most part it is national governments and private industry that are going beyond the bounds of what the EU considers acceptable levels of intrusion into privacy.

      And some of the silly EU stuff is the fault of the UK government too. Fortunately the Lisbon Treaty will stop the UK from blocking as much stuff as qualified majority voting is extended to more areas.

    212. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by __aarzwb9394 · · Score: 1

      You're actually more likely to have an easy time than us "aryan" types, at least in the airports, as racial profiling is pretty much illegal in the US, and the ACLU is even fighting to allow burkas for photo ID's.

      I was sceptical regarding this given the tone of the rest of your comment.

      It is true that the ACLU defended the woman in question (a xtian convert to islam). However there is (unsurprisingly?) slightly more to it

      Their argument is that others, such as peculiar xtians who claim religous objections to photos of any kind (loonies!) and even certain random people have been granted exceptions to the requirement for photo Driver's Licences.

      My own view is that no one, whatever their strange and evidenceless world views should get exceptions based on the myths they happen to believe.

    213. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      And I can tell you that in 1988 getting into Japan definitely didn't involve fingerprinting or any of the other annoying shit that the US border patrol pulls.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    214. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by grotgrot · · Score: 1

      I am a British citizen and legal permanent resident of the US (almost a decade). The last time I came through San Francisco Airport (a month ago) they scanned all ten of my fingerprints and did a retinal scan (I don't remember if it was one or both eyes).

    215. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by raju1kabir · · Score: 3, Funny

      By the way, whats the right word to describe people from Belgium? Belgians?

      Phlegms was a leading proposal, but eventually it was determined that nothing would be more cruelly accurate than simply calling them Belgians.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    216. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by grotgrot · · Score: 1

      With all the security proposals, is anyone actually getting protected?

      Given they can't keep drugs, weapons and other stuff out of prison where they have the right to do almost any kind of search and take their time about it, why would airports and other borders be any better? In answer to your question, they'll have a small chance of catching truly stupid bad guys. Anyone determined will find many ways through the system. And when they do, the people who put up those stupid proposals will be the ones "protected" claiming they did everything they could.

    217. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Teancum · · Score: 2, Informative

      I guess I happen to live in one of those shitholes you are complaining about.

      Please, get a life. Get out and smell some fresh (and not so fresh due to cattle and other farm animals) air!

      More importantly, get out to where the only other human within 20 miles are any companions you brought with you.

      I've been to 3rd world countries and even lived in them, and you don't have a stinking clue as to what exists within this country if you think your twisted vision of the USA outside of the metro areas is anything like what you are talking about.

    218. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sad to see the great American nation turn from something I was once very proud of to one that I've considered, quite a few times, to up and leave.

      So get the hell out, I'm sure no one will miss you and the country will get along just fine. Uncontrolled immigration is what has been ruining the US for decades.

    219. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      Now that everyone and their dog can sneak in without much resistance or having to learn english, they just startup little versions of their origin nation. Little Mexico's, little China's, little Vietnam's, little Japan's.

      Which in my opinion is one of the best things about American cities - you can get real ethnic food, experience real cultures, and hear languages really being spoken. No other country has the diversity of strong, vibrant little-XYZs that the USA enjoys. Without them, the USA would be almost intolerably dull.

      (preemptive disclaimer: I've lived & worked in London, Paris, Sydney, etc.; they don't come close to New York, Los Angeles, and San Francisco)

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    220. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK I'm from the UK. Visited the US last year (entering at Charlotte before flying to Orlando). Have been several times to US from Canada via road bridge at Niagara Falls. I was once delayed and made to buy a VISA, and pleasantly entertained by US officials (I mean that - they were very nice people), and also witnessed them actually being very nice to an American guy and his wife who'd driven from Buffalo to Niagara Falls (Canada) with a Chinese Au Pair, and left her passport in Buffalo - they let her stay in the waiting room with his wife whilst he drove to Buffalo and back to get the passport. All pretty reasonable I thought, but the guy clearly couldn't see a problem with bringing over a 17 year old from a Communist foreign country without documentation - all this after admitting having entered Canada without her passport as well. As I say the passport people were sensible guys.

      Similarly last year I had nothing but praise for the passport people who were marginally friendlier than the British, and a whole lot friendlier than the French or Canadian. (Although to be fair to the French you rarely see them when travelling within the EU).

      No the reason Chicago didn't get the Olympics is as follows - the olympics tend to go from one end of the world to another - hence from London 2012 (Northern hemisphere, West) It's going to have to go either East or South - OK Chicago's so far West it almost comes back round on the East.

      However :

      Chicago - For : Rich Country, Can afford to put it on, will bring in loads of money - Against : Not South, Not East, Also US has had recent games - Atlanta, LA : Also 2 English speaking countries in succession

      Madrid - For : Rich-ish Country - Probably can afford, will get loads of visitors from W. Europe : Against - near London, Recent Games (Barcelona) - Not South Not East

      Tokyo - For Rich Country Can afford - Millions of people there will fanatically watch everything, East Against - Not South, Recent Olympics Nearby (Seoul), also recent World Cup (with Korea)

      Rio - For - big glamorous city, relatively underdeveloped and games would give city a big lift, Southern Hemisphere, Against : Not East, Also some political stuff about child labour and poverty and shanty towns.

      A bit of a non-contest really, although Tokyo had a shout - major industrialised nation, no Olympics since 1964 (although I think they've had the winter games a couple of times).

    221. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Swampash · · Score: 1

      In the past three years I've turned down three all-expenses-paid trips to the USA. "Hey, there's this conference--" "Is it in the USA?" "Yeah." "Not interested."

      I've crisscrossed the USA many times, and I dare say I've seen more of it than most Americans. And I just have no interest in visiting now. In fact it's not just that I am not interested in visiting, it's that I actively intend to NOT visit.

    222. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by daath93 · · Score: 1

      which killed less people than a month's worth of auto accidents in this country.

      Oh, so that makes everything okay then.

    223. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you. You just made "Appalachian Trail" a keyword on their lists and I'll never be able to hike the AT without an anal probe or something like that -.-

    224. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by couchslug · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "This country would be farther ahead if we carved off a section and let you have your own space. I'd be all for that"

      That idea has been obsolete since the War Between the States, when Washington decided that Americans have no right to secede. The only alternative left was for those forcibly retained to expand their political base, so they did.

      People will behave as they wish. If you let anyone into your country who wants in, expect them to make your society in their image to the extent they have the power to do so.

      If you forcibly incorporate or retain people in your country, expect them to make your society in their image to the extent they have the power to do so.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    225. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      Why don't they just add a new line to that inane questionnaire you have to fill in at the border ?
      Under "have you ever planned to destabilise the US government ?" (I think it's worded along those lines), just add the line "do you plan to blow stuff the fuck up ?".

      It should be at least as efficient as the current theatre, and much less expensive.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    226. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by zonker · · Score: 0

      The sad truth is that if you are white, have money, speak clear and fluent english, and behave yourself generally nobody will look at you sideways. Unfortunately the first two or three things rule out much of the world. And those very few that are looking for a fight will get one from customs.

      The US used to be much more lax in security than it is today. 9/11 changed that for better or worse. I think the biggest problem today is so much of the "security" is really just theatre and does little more than annoy those who understand what it really is and alienate those that don't.

    227. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Well it fingerprinting is "annoying shit" don't try to cash a check cause those are automatic thumb prints now.

      Lets see, I was thumb or fingerprinted going into Egypt (1994), leaving Israel (1994), Austria (1994), but not going into the US (2009) nor Canada (2009).

    228. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      They should already have had your fingerprints when you did the biometrics for your green card. Why did they ask for them again, if you don't mind my asking? I'm likely going to be adjusting status in the next year or so after getting my K-1.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    229. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      Err... Green cards expire after ten years now, so your argument with respect to them being permanent no longer applies. Further, you have to prove at least half your time over the last ten years have been spent physically in the US, or you lose LPR status.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    230. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by trawg · · Score: 1

      "General principles should not be based on exceptional cases."

      Robert J. Sawyer, "Calculating God"

    231. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      In fact, President Obama has revamped the USCIS website and made it a little easier to use. Not too much, but at least it's something; trust me when I say that before, it was completely labyrinthine.

      If he wants to really both increase legal immigration and simultaneously decrease illegal border-jumpers, he should authorize the hiring of more visa adjudicators. I filed for my fiance visa in February, and the US Consulate in Montreal is now saying it's unlikely I'll have my interview until November. If that sounds slow to you, consider that that's one of the fastest immigration categories: some have a wait time of several years before a visa can even be considered.

      In addition, the immigration process is incredibly hostile. I can't call the Consulate at all. They have a 1-900 number (yes, that's 1-900... $1.89 per minute) if you absolutely need to talk to someone, but they can't tell you anything directly about your case, they just give general information. The Department of State can tell you if you have an interview date yet, but nothing else. And God help you if you make a typo on any of your many, many, many forms, as that'll add at least a month, usually a few to your processing time.

      The reason that illegal immigration is a problem in the US is because legal immigration is so fucking difficult and costly (this is going to cost me over $2,000 in government fees before I'm done; expect to pay much more if you want to use a lawyer to assist with the process). Make legal immigration simpler, more streamlined, and less hostile, and illegal immigration will massively decrease. Nobody wants to risk being arrested but many feel they're in a position where they have no choice.

      PS: If I didn't have VisaJourney to help me with the process, I'd be utterly lost. Big props to them; if you ever have to do anything with USCIS, the information there is invaluable.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    232. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      If you're filing a DS-160 for a non-immigrant visa, they literally ask you if you're a terrorist about five different ways. I'm pretty sure they've got that covered.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    233. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Everyone I know who visits the USA these days tells me what a pain in the ass it is to travel here now. I'm sure everyone on the IOC knows all about that.

      And perhaps the most ludicrous is that anyone who flies through US airspace, even if the flight will not actually _land_ in the US has to hack up all the same information on all passengers.

      We're now so safe from terr'ists that, if a fully loaded plane passing over US territory crashes, we'll know which corpses to ship off to Guantanamo.

      Captcha = travels -- coincidence?

    234. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Sabriel · · Score: 1

      Was there a sign or something saying "if this checkpoint is not attended, do not pass?" and how far apart along the border are these checkpoints? Because the situation you describe smells of honeypot - one which, apparently, is easily tested by having some innocent third party cross first. Note I live in Australia, with no experience of such border checkpoints.

    235. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Err... Green cards expire after ten years now, so your argument with respect to them being permanent no longer applies. Further, you have to prove at least half your time over the last ten years have been spent physically in the US, or you lose LPR status.

      I think you're pretty much restating what I said with your first sentence. The card expires, but your status does not -- except that you put your status in jeopardy by failing to observe the laws about permanent residency, one of which is that you must maintain a valid card.

      As for your second sentence, the way I remember it, if you merely left the U.S. for longer than 12 consecutive months without obtaining special permission you could be denied re-entry at the border. The rules for permanent residency have always been different than those for citizens -- which is the main reason why I went ahead and became a U.S. citizen after living here for a number of years.

      At the time, becoming a citizen was actually easier than maintaining permanent residency. Once they started requiring everybody to keep updating their cards, the delays on processing the forms for the green cards became longer than the time it took to process a citizenship application. And the fees were about half that of the citizenship fees. Really, it was a no-brainer.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    236. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by kiwimate · · Score: 1

      I think it'd have to be almost illegally old if that were the case. My green card also has my picture and fingerprints on it already and is nearly ten years old. Which means I have to pay a visit to the lovely INS sometime soon. You have to renew your green card every ten years.

    237. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Of course reporting this or complaining about this could get me banned from flights and labeled a terrorist.

      Exactly so!

      I had spent six years in the US Coast Guard reserve long before 9/11. Most of that time, I was in a Port Security unit, so I was aware of what I thought was a serious hole in the security at the Golden Gate bridge.

      So I dutifully wrote an email to the CG describing the problem and suggesting some solutions.

      I was just about to hit send when I had this vision of MIB appearing at my front door inquiring, "Whence come these thoughts of yours, Citizen?"

      I hit delete instead of send.

    238. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by yorugua · · Score: 1

      Everyone I know who visits the USA these days tells me what a pain in the ass it is to travel here now. I'm sure everyone on the IOC knows all about that.

      -jcr

      Well, I have a Passport from a Latin American country. I have a B1/B2 visa to enter de US, and I do not need a visa to enter Europe. Having said that, I have had the less problems entering the US, or northern EU states (Germany, Sweeden), than entering southern states in the EU (Spain, Italy, France). They make you show money, your ticket back to your contry (back in the day when they were not electronic), where are you going to stay, what do you do, whatever. If Customs controlls play a role in taking Chicago down, then the same (or worse) can be said for Madrid.

    239. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      It's there for a purpose. It's to give the people with normally nothing better to do occupied. It's to give the dregs of society a way to feel good about their job, by giving them the ability to point to somebody and have them pulled out of the line for a cavity search. Most of them don't care. But if they see that your skin is a color they don't like, that's when they'll come after you like hawks on a rabbit.

      That, and it's to appease the stupid masses. Since they're usually dumb enough to accept what the television says, and the television can say anything that isn't untrue, then it's important politicians don't do anything that the television can say is unsafe, or the stupid masses will revolt and vote in the other guy.

      A functioning democracy requires a knowledgeable populace. A country where people are anti-intellectual is not one that can sustain a functioning democracy.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    240. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by nosferatu1001 · · Score: 1

      Biodiesel

    241. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by otter42 · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure which part of France you saw, but the part of it I lived in for years and years never looked like that. Nor did anywhere I've visited, which has been pretty much all over France. Not anywhere. In fact, French cities are remarkable in the way in which they just end, very abruptly. Very often, there's a city limit, and after that there's nothing else. Nothing. Just farms. Not even farm houses.

      Are you perhaps from the future, telling us about how France will be a hundred years later?

      --
      www.eissq.com/BandP.html Ball and Plate System. Amuse your friends. Crush your enemies.
    242. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by theolein · · Score: 2, Informative

      Switzerland joined the European Schengen Agreement a few years ago, which means no more direct border controls. This applies to most of the EU with the exception of the UK and a couple of other places.

    243. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Culture20 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That story sounds really fake. Why would the border patrol ever set up an "apparently unmanned checkpoint"? How many other people would have been passing through? And if it wasn't fake, then they've got the manpower to stage a block-truck and police, but not to sit someone in the checkpoint?

    244. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      I agree with everything you're saying here, and I'm likely going to become a citizen as soon as I can (which in my case is three years after I get the green card).

      Oh, how I wish I could be done with USCIS already...

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    245. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right now car checkpoints are not taking fingerprints yet. At least not the one I use. The real joke is Brazil is retaliating by taking ink fingerprints of ALL US passport holders including aircrew (remember the pilot that got arrested), using a treat other people as they treat you policy.

      Does this mean there will be a special line for US passport holders that takes 3 times as long. They will really enjoy the revenge.

    246. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by RobVB · · Score: 1

      It's not just western Europe, many eastern European countries are members of the Schengen Area. The Baltic states (Estonia, Latvia and Lithuania), Poland, the Czech Republic, Slovakia, Hungary and Greece are already members, Bulgaria and Romania joined the EU (and the Schengen Area) on January 1st 2007 and will have implemented the Schengen rules, which includes upgrading their borders with non-Schengen members, by March 2011.

      --
      I'd rather you rationally disagree than irrationally agree.
    247. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      The people committing suicide are crazy. By definition, they're criminally insane.

      But the people up top funding, organizing, and managing the whole thing are brilliant, sane, and probably more rational than most of us. There are perfectly good reasons to dislike the US enough to wage guerilla warfare on its citizens. Now, it'd be a reasonable and noble goal for the US government to stop doing things that tick other people off. However, that's now how things work here. The people who encourage such actions are not the ones who eventually pay the price by getting their asses flowing into a building or blown up. They're the ones sitting atop their mountain palaces secure in their effects while the rest of the world goes to hell. So what do they care that we're down below, getting our asses handed to us, either lightly seared by the terrorists, or wider open than the goatse guy by the people in charge as they try to stop the terrorists.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    248. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by HybridJeff · · Score: 1

      Its pretty easy if you don't plan on driving across. Just pick your spot and depending on where you live (I'm in Ontario so the great lakes mostly divide the border) cross via boat, or hike through the woods.

    249. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Veretax · · Score: 1

      Obama should never have gone to copenhagen. Unemployment is at 9.8% (Would be higher if they actually counted people who are not working but have used up their benefits). Secondly, Obama can't seem to unify his own party on healthcare, and his climate change legislation is floundering in the senate.

      I knew the minute Obama announced that he personally was going that we were going to lose it. The man doesn't know when to step aside and let a subordinate handle things. He has been one of the weakest presidents especially on foreign policy that we have had in a long time.

      To hear this notion that screening of passengers coming in to the US is why they lost it? C'mon, we had the Salt Lake games not long after 9-11. People need to wake up. Obama should never have gotten involved, and now the failure to land the Olympics will be tied to him and not the other reasons it may be. LIke it, or hate it, that's the facts.

    250. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ashitaka · · Score: 1

      You're out of date. The fingerprinting and picture taking of all non-Japanese passport holders entering the country started a couple of years ago. This includes permanent residents like myself.

      They were also going to make us PRs go back in the gaijin visitor line (we could use the Japanese passport line) but relented when the obviously discriminatory nature of the fingerprinting became obvious, especially in cases of PRs married to Japanese citizens and with kids. I tend to use the special "re-entrants" line they set up, which is actually better as there is rarely anyone there. I get to bypass both the foreigner AND Japanese line-ups.

      --
      If you don't want to repeat the past, stop living in it.
    251. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rubi · · Score: 1

      - - deleted - -But now? Well, I've heard enough horror stories by now from friends and colleagues about entering the USA that, despite me having no criminal convictions whatsoever, I'm afraid it ain't on my "to-do" list any more.

      At least you are European,and from the UK (an ally), what about us latin-americans (all tagged as possible illegal aliens) or those of arab regions. It isn't a "pain", it is a very unpleasant experience to be treated as a criminal because of the low percentage that has had a very bad behaviour.

    252. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by broken_chaos · · Score: 1

      So they have enough resources to have four vehicles chase down a single car with a family in it, but not to actually man their security checkpoints?

      Idiots.

    253. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jcr · · Score: 1

      Ok, I need some new vocabulary again. "Asinine" is simply insufficient to describe that behavior.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    254. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jcr · · Score: 1

      Got to make sure the taxpayers' get their money's worth, don't they? Putting one guy per shift at the checkpoint isn't nearly as dramatic as letting people drive a few miles in and then swarming them as if they were dangerous or something.

      -jcr

      --
      The only title of honor that a tyrant can grant is "Enemy of the State."
    255. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rubi · · Score: 1

      They are asking for most countries (except those on the no-visa list) to scan all ten fingers. You can't have any temporary marks on you fingertips (cuts, burns, etc.) so if you get cut befor the day they ares canning you then you have to make another appointment. If there are any permanent marks, they ask for a medical certificate about that.

    256. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rubi · · Score: 1

      entering the US. Aren't they asking for retinal scans or fingerprints in some places, now? no. not some places. Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident. There is also some pain in the ass procedure that people have to do online. 24 hours before they get on the plane. The US has just totally lost it both on the entry procedures AND airport security. The only place where the airport security is more of a useless pain in the ass is the UK, but it is a close race. The UK and the US seem to be competing with each other on who can make the most worthless security procedures.

      They will be including legal residents too soon. As for citizens, they now need a passport and federal photo-id (I can't understand the americans resistance to have a national ID like almost every other country) to travel. The ones that have to do the online procedure 24 hour before arriving are those from countries in the no-visa-needed program (about 10 countries)

    257. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by DaHat · · Score: 1, Troll

      >He's had 9 months,

      So how long until things become his fault/problem?

      >inheriting a cratering economy, failing banking sector, automotive sector and a health care crisis.

      It's good to see that you have mastered repeating the talking points from the White House... bravo.

      >I think he's done damn job with what he was given to work with.

      So... nearly 10% unemployment is a 'damn good job' when he was promising it wouldn't go over 8 if we passed the stimulus bill right now now now? Such a good job getting all of those shovel ready projects going (which were a myth to begin with (if they were shovel ready funding would already exist for them)) and getting the other money out into the country... we are at what? 8% spent now?

      >You don't change direction in a bureaucracy like DHS overnight.

      Really? When the executive says "We will start doing X"... things don't change? How long do you expect things to be turned around that do not require the buyoff of congress? 1 year? 4? 8? More on that later...

      >Besides, as soon as he starts looking at it or proposing changes, you'll be screaming about how Obama is leaving the country open to attack.

      Depends on what the changes are⦠and frankly I haven't heard all that many with regards to changing how one gets into the country just yet... other than the occasional hints at comprehensive immigration reform (aka amnesty).

      >Pathetic AND predictable.

      Good to see you are again repeating existing phrases.

      >Maybe you noticed it was people from outside the US raising this issue? No? That's not surprising.

      I did... but then it's one man's opinion... and unfortunate given the platitudes the President was promising with regards to making the Olympic guests feel welcome.

      I guess this means that no matter how bad things might have been due to last 8 years of Republican rule (and I'm of course being generous with the length)... you seem to be saying that the IOC didn't think that President Obama could turn things around in 8 years.

      But you are absolutely right, it's all the fault of the Republicans, Bush, Cheney, Halliburton, the neo-cons, Blackwater (did I miss anyone?) and everyone else who isn't a good little progressive... right?

      >Nothing but criticism and negativity.

      Compared to the delusional comments from you of "I think he's done damn job with what he was given to work with"... I'd rather negative and critical... or as it is properly defined in this context... realistic.

      Like it or not... things in this country have gotten far far worse since the President took office. Yes... he has taken some steps to try to improve things... and you'll notice that most of those programs were kicked off during the previous administration. Do I credit Bush with them? Heck no, most of them were mistakes and too have made this recession deeper and longer than it would have been had the govt played it hands off... or at least cut taxes as a stimulus instead of creating even greater debt (this is where you will no doubt throw in Iraq).

      In fact the only real 'win' for him thus far has been the credit card bill of rights bit... which was largely a joke given what was promised and what it actually does for those who are so irresponsible that they cannot monitor their own bills.

      >I'm sick of it, sick of you.

      I'm sorry to hear you say that, there is a flu running about I hear.

      >This country would be farther ahead if we carved off a section and let you have your own space. I'd be all for that.

      So is this the much touted liberal tolerance I've been preached about for so long? What's more interesting is you expect us to go off into our own little place... when it is us and those like us (you know, freedom loving people) who founded this country.

      Remember... the line was:

      We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created eq

    258. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rubi · · Score: 1

      Every entry point takes fingerprints of every visitor who is not a US Citizen or legal US Resident.

      Incorreect. there are at least 20 entry points at the northern border that are unmanned and simply have a phone there asking you tell them you are crossing the border.

      I think Canada is one of the relaxed requirements countries

      If you fly into Canada and then drive to the USA, you can bypass all that crap, hell you can easily enter and leave without anyone knowing you were here in a few places.

      True, and it has been that way since no one knows when

      Our security is a complete and utter dog and pony show that is 100% worthless in stopping the Evil-guys.

      Because those procedures are created more for show than to stop a determined individual; any one interested enough in entering, will. It is that way entering a country as it is about entering a house or whatever. It is more important the "sense of security" than security in itself.

    259. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Skuld-Chan · · Score: 1

      Don't forget mobile homes.

    260. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Or, you could say the two western nations that have lost the most civilians to terrorism in recent history (Israel excepted)

      Almost true, on the WESTERN part (don't forget SPAIN), they are your ally. Maybe the thousands of "collateral damage casualties" produced by the "coalition of the willing" in Irak, Afghanistan and may other places (not counting the ones done by the US supporting dictators and killers in Latin America) are just stories.

    261. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by strong_epoxy · · Score: 0, Troll

      Joe Stalin, and the Khmer Rouge implemented a solution for these "Vile, disgusting, angry, small-minded, pathetic people." Sounds like you'd have a home with them.

      Maybe consider finding common ground, assuming your opponents motives are noble, and convincing them of your ideas would be a better strategy.

    262. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by TheDormouse · · Score: 1

      a cashier almost told us we were nuts when we paid for ice cream with a $ 100 bill. My impression has become that Americans are much more fond of paying with credit cards than we are in Europe since noone I know thinks it's unusual to have 100-200 euros in your wallet.

      In a shopping mall, it's not completely unusual for an American to carry around a lot of cash. American ATMs usually give out nothing but $20 bills, so larger bills always seem somewhat exotic. Furthermore, when you tender a $50 or larger note in a situation where you'll get more than 60% of that note back in change, it usually throws off the change in the till, which may have as little as $100 total inside it at the beginning of a shift (and contain nothing larger than $5 bills).

      The look from the cashier probably wasn't so much about the $100 bill itself, but about using a $100 bill to pay for (I'm assuming) less than $10 worth of ice cream.

    263. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That may be part of it, but is not the whole story. The Olympics did not go to Chicago, Madrid or Tokyo because their countries have recently hosted games. Going to Rio was the only fair choice.

    264. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Swampash · · Score: 1

      After the fiasco that was the Atlanta Olympics, I'm pretty sure the IOC would be thinking "give the USA another chance to fuck everything up? no way."

    265. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by sumdumass · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The CDC did a study and estimated that 36,000 people in the US die from the flue each year. This estimate includes people dieing from other diseases while having the flue since the flu compromises the immunity system and allows other chronic illnesses to set in or strengthen. I'm going to assume the numbers for Sweden do the same.

      Also, the population of US is more around 33.20 times that of Sweden. 30 times is enough for a rough estimate but seeing how we got real numbers from the CDC, I figure pointing this out too could be helpful. The 33.20 cam from dividing the population of the US by the population of Sweden as reported in their respective Wikipedia entries. OF course we should know to take Wikipedia with a grain of salt but I have no reason to think the numbers aren't real.

    266. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by AK+Marc · · Score: 1

      Outsourcing, immigration (both legal and illegal), hiring of foreign nationals (work permits, as opposed to immigrants), as well as corporations shipping production jobs overseas wholesale. All these things, plus terrorism, have taken their toll. America's wealth is being drained, people are afraid, and people are reacting.

      Immigration (legal and illegal) is lower now than it has been in the past. The wealth is being drained by trade of goods, not people, and to associate the two is absurd. This is nothing more that pointing out something (immigration) that has been happening from before the founding of the nation and calling it a new thing in order to vilify it. Might as well blame Jewish bankers and invade Poland, for all the real blame the immigrants deserve. It's a smokescreen for the real cancer, the debt, but that's the 10,000 lb elephant in the room. No politician wants to touch that because it's impossible to cure within the term limits of a President (and unlikely to be cured before everyone in the House and Senate is dead, unless we default).

    267. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Kumiorava · · Score: 1

      Nordic Passport union and other multinational treaties have been working prior to Schengen treaty, besides the comparison to EU doesn't make sense. EU is not treated as one country, and it will take a while before it will be.

    268. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bored · · Score: 1

      One question on it, however, did cause us some trouble since it was about how much money we brought into the country and what we estimated the value of our belongings to be and we had just bought a new, fancy camcorder. Since we tried to be honest, we probably overestimated everything a little and the customs agent actually asked why the total value of our belongings and cash was so high

      IIRC, the line reads something like "List the value of all items being brought into the XXX". Which on first pass leads you to believe they want the value of the possessions your are carrying. In fact, most countries, the US included really mean, the value of items you plan on leaving in the country. A lot of travelers (especially business) if they computed the value of the laptop/software/suits/watches/etc they are carrying far exceeds the customs allowances. The only glitch entering the US, is cash. never carry any significant amount of cash in, and if you do, you better declare it. The stupid "war on drugs" will get you marked up instantly as a drug dealer/money launderer if you bring cash in. Get yourself a credit card and ATM card before you come.

    269. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      Your right, there will not be any oil shortages any time soon.

      However, if there was, it wouldn't be as bad as you think. Most diesel engines can be modified relatively easily to run on propane-natural gas. Also, there is bio-diesel as well as coal gasification that can be used. Not to mention that in the US, we already have coal gasification in production for electrical generation which is more efficient and cleaner then burning coal in it's natural form.Recent breakthroughs can make synthetic diesel which burns cleaner then traditional oil
      (even gasoline) cheaply and cost competitive to about $45-$70 a barrel oil.

      The Fischer Trospch (FT) synthesis process can actually be used on municipal wastes and other bio sources of carbon too. Imagine the shit factory of LA or NYC producing a majority of the nations diesel and gasoline (albeit syngas). Work is being done currently that suggest using the FT process on corn can create fuels much cheaper then conventional fermenting and distillation.

      Pennsylvania recently announced plans to purchase Diesel for their state vehicles and equipment, synthetic diesel made from waste coal from mining operations. I'm not sure if the FT plan is operational but it's likely close to being there if it isn't.

      While a lot of this is niche or in development, it will be a lot more mature and availible by the time we run out of oil if we even need it still.

    270. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Nethead · · Score: 1

      Um, yes. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ahmed_Ressam for the story. I've even been searched at that port of entry.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    271. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Strange+Ranger · · Score: 1

      > let us assume for the moment that there is a right leaning cable news channel and a chain (singular I assume) of newspapers... how does that compare to the overwhelming number of left leaning networks (plural) and chains of papers (plural again)?

      Nowhere else in the world, or at least nowhere that anyone wants to live, would most of the "left leaning media" that you describe be considered "left leaning". The only way to make them appear "left leaning" is for you to stand extremely far to the right.

      Heck if you're all the way to The Right then even "Freedom of the Press" becomes a rebellious liberal idea.

      --

      Operator, give me the number for 911!
    272. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ignavus · · Score: 1

      Brazil doesn't fingerprint visitors (well, they were fingerprinting Americans for a while as revenge)...

      It's only revenge if you use indelible ink.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    273. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      And that candidate ended up winning the election by numbers that defied all polls leading up to the election. The people spoke as a reaction to the train bombings. What the op said it true.

    274. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ignavus · · Score: 1

      The legislature's real problem:

      When the only tool you possess is the power to legislate, every problem looks like the need for more laws.

      Corollary:

      Legislation is the legislature's substitute for action.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    275. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by dkf · · Score: 1

      Everyone I know who visits the USA these days tells me what a pain in the ass it is to travel here now.

      It depends on where you enter. JFK is truly terrible - only one immigration officer for hundreds of non-residents arriving on a flight - DTW is much better as are SFO, SEA and MEM, and I've not been through ATL, MSP or ORD for a few years and so don't remember there too well (but leaving ORD was a pain due to insufficient post-security facilities, and probably still is). BOS and IAD are rather chaotic, but not too bad. I've never entered through LAX and so can't comment on them (but it's not a good place to change planes anyway). There are other US hubs, but I've not been through those at all (not even Domestic).

      --
      "Little does he know, but there is no 'I' in 'Idiot'!"
    276. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by DaHat · · Score: 2, Insightful

      >Nowhere else in the world, or at least nowhere that anyone wants to live, would most of the "left leaning media" that you describe be considered "left leaning".

      Sadly much of Europe has skewed pretty far to the left over the years (but parts are showing promise)... so yes by comparison the bulk of our media is fairly 'centrist' by comparison... granted I suspect you'd be hard pressed to find a non state run media as compliant and supportive of given government as we have in this country today... take Charlie Gibson for example, a given unemployment rate is bad under Reagan... but good under Obama?

      >The only way to make them appear "left leaning" is for you to stand extremely far to the right.

      Sadly correct... as many on the left in this country like to remind us when a conservative or right-ish government is elected over there... their conservative is more like one of our classical liberals.

      >Heck if you're all the way to The Right then even "Freedom of the Press" becomes a rebellious liberal idea.

      You'll have to provide a citation or example better than a whole Wikipedia entry that has not a single instance of the word 'press' or even 'media' within the article itself (excluding the notes section and footer).

    277. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Apogee · · Score: 1

      Thanks to the TPA (Travel Promotion Act), there's really No Problem(TM). In addition to all the border troubles, simply charge the poor guy visiting another $10, which can then be spent on promoting tourism.

      What a brilliant idea: An entrance fee to the US... just like a theme park.

    278. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      So you do not think that fingerprints or photo's for facial recognition are effective would thwart their attempts at hiding their identities?

      Hmm.. I didn't know you could change your fingerprints. Plastic surgery can change a person's face but that's pointless and problematic is the real slim shady stood up and the fake ID's face didn't match.

    279. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Kagura · · Score: 1

      US Residents are also fingerprinted and photographed routinely upon re-entry.

      I have never been fingerprinted or photographed upon reentry to the US. I usually fly into west coast air ports.

    280. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      I was thumb or fingerprinted going into Egypt (1994), leaving Israel (1994), Austria (1994)

      Curious; I was not printed in Egypt, Israel, or Austria this year or at any time in the past. Did you require an advance visa for those countries?

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
    281. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Kagura · · Score: 1

      I think you're going for +5 funny because tractors would be machines that turn biodiesel into biodiesel ;)

    282. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by penguinchris · · Score: 1

      I grew up in Buffalo, NY and crossed the border there countless times over the years, and I always found the same thing - they are deadly serious at all times. I have (stupidly, I must say) attempted to be slightly humorous in my answers to their questions at times, since I'm so familiar with the process, and they never even bat an eye.

      However... one time I was coming back from Toronto for whatever reason, and the guy asked where I was coming from, where I was going, the usual. And then, he asked a subtle joke question in reply to whatever my answer was. I was dumbfounded for a few seconds because it was so unexpected... then I gave a little smile and he waved me through without changing the expression on his face. It was pretty bizarre.

    283. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      There are always other places to go that are as cool or cooler, and with less hassle. With the US economy in the raft it's in, with no real signs of improvement, ever (until it depresses wages enough to reboot its manufacturing base), it really is the US' loss, too.

    284. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      It is an unpleasant experience if you are lucky enough to have it all. I live in the US, my relatives are from Latin America, and whether they can get a tourist visa at all is hit-or-miss. And they are all college-educated professionals with perfectly clean records.

      That they would choose Rio as the destination - in the country that has strict reciprocality with visa requirements - sends the message out loud and clear.

      I participate in an international organization that has conferences in Asia, Europe and the Americas. It now chooses Canada regularly for its international conferences in the Americas, for the reasons described in the article.

    285. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      You have to show your passport at EU internal borders? I've only seen that at the borders to the extended EU, not the 15 old countries. You just drove along the road and at some point a sign proclaimed you're now in France or whatever.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    286. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by KDR_11k · · Score: 1

      You mean they take you out the back door, tie you to a post and beat you until you pass out, then lock you up and continue that until you die instead of passing out?

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    287. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by KDR_11k · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Yeah, with all the lockable cockpit doors and whatnot I've always been wondering how feasible it would be for a terrorist organization to get pilots hired into an airline and have them be on the same flight on attack day, engage all the anti-hijacking measures and then go fly into whatever they feel like.

      --
      Justice is the sheep getting arrested while an impartial judge declares the vote void.
    288. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jabithew · · Score: 1

      Just to clarify, do you mean the Provos? Or are we talking all the dissident Republican groups since the Troubles? The Real IRA caused quite a few deaths too...

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    289. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Going to UK, for EU citizens is also not a friendly experience.

      Last time I was going to UK for business meeting, a bus I was on that went from airport to central London was pulled over by Police. Everyone had to get out, and we were asked to sit down on chairs in big roon. Lots of police, no one is telling us anything.

      Then, they check everyone's passports, go with a dog to everyone. Really stupid small dog, not a german shepard or something I see being used by police in other countries. And yes, it loved my brand new leather jacket, which truely smells very nice.

      I was searched, interviewed by (very kind, but hey) policeman. Was asked to give address where I am staying, reveal information who I am meeting with etc. etc. My laptop was opened, and I was asked to turn it on (they didn't search the harddrive but still).

      This was one of worst border experiences I ever had. If you, in UK, are in fear of terrorism, why do you still allow so much people come from your former colonies? Why don't you close gates to people from Pakistan instead and sign Shengen treaty finally. You're in EU but still quite aside.

    290. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by jedrek · · Score: 1

      A wave of your passport? You can drive from the southern tip of Portugal to the north east end of Estonia - 4700km - without pulling out an ID or stopping at a border checkpoint.

    291. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by dave87656 · · Score: 1

      Some airlines officially allow you to carry two pieces, or one piece and a laptop

      I always travel with a laptop and a carry on bag. It hasn't been an issue yet. I usually fly Lufthansa and sometimes Swiss. perhaps other airlines are more restrictive.

    292. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by 3247 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Switherland became part of the Schengen Area on 2008-12-12, which is not exactly âoea few years agoâ. It's less than one year. However, not being a member of the European Union or the European Economic Area, Switzerland is still supposed to check for goods that have to be declared.

      The UK is a partial member of the Schengen Agreement.

      --
      Claus
    293. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by sqldr · · Score: 1

      The punishment is spending an 8 hour transatlantic flight sitting next to Boxxy.

      --
      I wrote my first program at the age of six, and I still can't work out how this website works.
    294. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by syousef · · Score: 1

      If you've crossed these off your list then you're really missing out

      Yeah. Missing out on being treated like a criminal. Do you have any idea how many amazing places there are in the world that don't lie inside U.S. or U.K. borders? Why waste your time and gamble that their systems work right and won't pick you up on some data mismatch. Fuck it. I think I'll check out an Island paradise instead. Or something closer to home and save some money.

      --
      These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
    295. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Nope, was just on tourist visa for Egypt and Austria, was on a work visa in Israel

    296. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by evanspw · · Score: 1

      I recall traveling in the US in 1994. A pocket knife of mine showed up in the X-ray of my carry-on. Sheepishly, I owned up to it, and got it out to hand over. "Oh that's alright Sir", the security person said, "you're allowed up to a six inch blade. This one is fine."

      --
      Interstitial spaces are filled with cream.
    297. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by zoney_ie · · Score: 1

      We are fairly cash-mad here in Ireland although our old banknotes only went up to IR£50 (~63.50 at changeover), but some other European countries there is a history of using larger denomination banknotes too (hence why there is a 500 note) - Germany and Austria maybe. I think Ireland has the highest amount of coins in circulation per head of population.

      It's interesting the differences between countries - in Portugal I found that people would get very annoyed with you if you paid even with small denomination banknotes if it was just a matter of a euro or two. For some strange reason small change seemed to be a precious commodity! And this is with ATMs that dispense change (e.g. ask for 50 and it provides 5,5,10,10,20 - where here in Ireland you usually just get one 50 note).

      I don't have a debit card because until recently the con-artist banks here charged you a fee on every single transaction.

      --
      -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
    298. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by freakxx · · Score: 1

      Really, I wonder if it wouldn't be better for tourists and terrorists to land in Mexico and just illegally enter the country. A ten hour hike through the desert seems less painful than trying to deal with the Border agency legally.

      Fixed that for you!

    299. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by JPDeckers · · Score: 1

      But now? Well, I've heard enough horror stories by now from friends and colleagues about entering the USA that, despite me having no criminal convictions whatsoever, I'm afraid it ain't on my "to-do" list any more.

      I've read most of the replies, and am left wondering what these horror-stories are.
      I'm Dutch, I travelled to a lot of places, and yes, the US is one of the toughest on tourists. Been there about 20 times, had my fair share of interogations & new techniques pushed upon me (including the now new all finger fingerprinting). Going into the US sucks for the visa waiver which you have to fill in online (ESTA) and then again in the airplane (euhms, systems are not aligned yet), and then undergo an interrogation by someone who's clearly not there to make friends. But hey, it's still just a few minutes on your entire trip.

      UK however is also not nice (both going in (long lines) and out (more like US security, take off shoes etc) ), had quite a few random passport-checks in Argentina by police, and my passport in now in the Chinese ambassy for a visum, with a letter with it that a give them permission to do a medical examn on me + allow 7 day quarantine in case they deem this necessary (swine flu)).

      In short, there's something going on everywhere. Yes, travelling through Europe and the Schengen countries is a breeze, no checks at all. But that's about it.

      Tip: Next time you land in the US, UK or any other country with customs waiting to check you passport, make sure you get IN FRONT of the line. Get of the plane asap, keep walking while passing all those tourist-strollers that keep glazing around. This will save you soo much more time&stress, and prevents you from standing for half an hour in the line just behind those 2 guys in front of you, speaking almost no english at all, trying to make clear to the guard they are really just tourists...

    300. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      An oblong slip of newspaper had appeared between O'Brien's fingers. For perhaps five seconds it was within the angle of Winston's vision. It was a photograph, and there was no question of its identity. It was THE photograph. It was another copy of the photograph of Jones, Aaronson, and Rutherford at the party function in New York, which he had chanced upon eleven years ago and promptly destroyed. For only an instant it was before his eyes, then it was out of sight again. But he had seen it, unquestionably he had seen it ! He made a desperate, agonizing effort to wrench the top half of his body free. It was impossible to move so much as a centimetre in any direction. For the moment he had even forgotten the dial. All he wanted was to hold the photograph in his fingers again, or at least to see it.

      " It exists ! " he cried.

      " No ", said O'Brien.

      He stepped across the room. There was a memory hole in the opposite wall. O'Brien lifted the grating. Unseen, the frail slip of paper was whirling away on the current of warm air ; it was vanishing in a flash of flame. O'Brien turned away from the wall.

      " Ashes ", he said. " Not even identifiable ashes. Dust. It does not exist. It never existed. "

      " But it did exist! It does exist! It exists in memory. I remember it. You remember it. "
      " I do not remember it ", said O'Brien.


      What indeed.

    301. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have control of both houses of Congress and the Presidency. You've have 9 months to fix the problem. You knew the date of the IOC vote. You claim you knew this would come up. And yet you did not CHANGE THE POLICY WHEN YOU HAD THE POWER TO.

      You're essentially claiming you knew it was wrong, yet your representatives, now in power, were complacent or incompetent, or didn't want to take the potential political hit. So your party chose politics over doing the right thing.

      And when it came back to bite you in the ass, you don't hold yourselves accountable, you hold the previous administration, because it fits YOUR view, YOUR purposes, and hides YOUR inabilities.

      That's pathetic.

      "What I think is astounding is the pure gall of the conservatives, blaming president Obama for not getting the Olympics when it was their crap ass policies and politics that put in place the anal probe,"

      And all liberals are like Obama and William Ayers. Moral equivalence arguments go both ways dear boy. You complain when your side gets lit up for mere associations, yet you turn around and use the same tactic against your political foes.

      I'm a conservative, and I don't blame Obama for not getting the Olympics. I do, however, see the politicking of this event, to which you are partaking. The non-conservatives sure have been going to town with the stereotypes these last 10 months. Surely, are you serious? Or do you just find this stuff suits your purpose, then bitch later when the nation doesn't "come together," "meet consensus," "cross the aisle," or curry "bipartisanship."

      btw, the anal probes at the checkpoints have little to do with losing. The facts are very simple here. Chicago lost because Chicago wasn't really a great place to host. Chicago lost because the US has won so many bids before. Chicago lost because the IOC was focused on getting South America, hell even the southern hemisphere again, to host. Chicago lost because game theory was put into practice, see bloc voting.

      You're just too stupid, like the conservative talk shows host, to see that Chicago lost because they phrackin sucked, and yet you get sucked into the political ploy because it fuels your hatred of your own country, your ineffectiveness at the ability to mold your own government despite your own party being in power, and your hatred of people different than yourself.

      "Absolving themselves from any accountability by trying to pin it on someone else. Pathetic."

      It's ourselves, asshole. We the People. That's what the Dems don't get; Reps attack Obama but recognize he represents us, we just don't like it. Dems have complete separation from governments they don't like. This is why Dems so often run to Canada. Canada loves you for it.

      And in any case, right back at you. Huge swaths of Democrats in Congress voted for these measures as well. The only difference is that you saw this headed by Republicans or because the top dog was a Republican for years.

      "We've brought this on ourselves."

      Ahh, a "We" shows up finally. Maybe you also need to account that the IOC has a fucked up voting process, instead of blaming your compatriots. Hell, North American representatives are under represented anyways. Didn't Paris, which had an outstanding setup, lost a previous Olympic bid under a similar process?

      But blame conservatives. It's all the rage these days.

    302. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you're right. Even at preclearance facilities (there's a U.S. Customs area in almost all international Canadian airports), and when one enters the preclearance area, I believe one is entering legally designated U.S. soil.
      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_border_preclearance

    303. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Its even difficult if you Are and American citizen and can prove it. You still get raked and prodded and scrutinized by the Hoards of TSA crawling the entry points like ants. I absolutely hate flying here now from within and from without...

      I have no doubts that the procedures likely played a major role and its our own governments fault...

    304. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by mdwh2 · · Score: 1

      Do you have evidence that white people have more trouble passing through US airports, than say, Asian looking people?

      Your ACLU link is irrelevant - they happily defend the rights of white people just as much, not to mention people who follow another religion, or indeed aren't religious at all. I mean what, are you seriously suggesting they shouldn't defend the rights of someone who is a follower of Islam? Or are you seriously believing the fallacy that if they defend a case of a muslim, they therefore don't defend any other people?

      I don't doubt that white people get plenty of hassle - but all the OP said was it's even worse for non-white people, and I'm looking for the evidence for your claims?

    305. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Chris+Johnson · · Score: 1

      ...would you LIKE some?
      *bing!*

    306. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by __aamnbm3774 · · Score: 1

      ahh yes, the insightful economic post from someone who took a single accounting class in high school.
      The situation is a little too complex to try and shoot it with a silver bullet, but you try anyway. Some wages may go down, but I can guarantee the majority don't. Thanks for playing though.
      (looking forward to the whiny reply 'but I'm CFO of my daddys dildo shop, I'm teh bestest number cruncher evar.')

    307. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by apoc.famine · · Score: 1

      It makes the disproportional response to the event look all the more asinine.
       
      If we spent the TRILLIONS we spent in Iraq and Afghanistan combating auto fatalities and flu deaths, the net gain in human lives would have been tremendous. I can't even begin to calculate what that would have been like.
       
      Instead, we launched a vastly disproportional response into two countries, killed a couple hundred thousand people, and laid waste to the two places.

      Oh, so that makes everything okay then.

      --
      Velociraptor = Distiraptor / Timeraptor
    308. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by pjt33 · · Score: 1

      Sorry, yes, those figures are taken from the Wiki page on the PIRA.

    309. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      I was once grilled for 45 minutes at Heathrow because they didn't believe I was in England to view Roman ruins, despite having just stepped off a plane from Italy with several other college-aged Americans and a couple of Professors of Classics of some note. Of course, that may have had more to do with the people I was hanging out with in Kerry the year before and various donations I've made to various political parties in the past, often times whilst drunk.

      Eventually they let me through, but still, it pisses me off. Train from Switzerland to Austria when I was 17, the Austrian customs people are coming through and checking passports -- I see them opening the passports of other people, until the get to me and my friend, see the 'United States of America' on the cover and don't even bother to have me hand it to them to look inside...

      But even internal travel in the US, man... I get pulled for "random searches" all the god damned time. I've pretty much given up on the idea of flying places, despite the fact my dad's a retired airline captain for US Air, his uncle was a PanAm captain for 30 years, my grandfather was a Navy pilot in WWII, and I had a good 150+hrs towards my private license when I was in high school... I'll just stick to ground-based modes of transport for now, as they haven't yet seen fit to have the state police cop a squat on the state line to make sure I'm not transporting contraband between my digs in VA Beach and my sister in North Carolina...

      yet.

    310. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      To be fair though, I think most people who cross the border into Israel aren't really planning on leaving... alive.

    311. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bsDaemon · · Score: 1

      When I go to Europe I generally have a wad of cash in my pocket, if for no other reason than that the exchange rate changes constantly and the banks don't sync their data with my home bank until its too late. I'd take out a couple hundred Euros or Pounds from an ATM to hold me through for a week or so until I was sure that the bank information had updated and my balance would be correct, as one of the times I went over by myself, I ended up over-drawing my account by a couple hundred dollars because the ATM would keep spitting out money.

      In the US, I hardly ever carry cash -- I really only need it when I go visit my parents and need to pay a $2 bridge toll.

    312. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's one bag + one personal item such as a laptop. And it's a airline/FCC rule, not a security rule, so it's not surprising the lady working security got it wrong.

    313. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      >>>FAA...many of them are able to fly for free (on a space available basis)

      This is how urban legends and false rumors spread. I worked for the FAA, and *nobody* got a free ride on planes, not even upper-level management. We had to pay for the tickets just the same as anyone else, and then get reimbursed by the government for travel expenses.

      1000 miles with speed limits of 75-80 in most central states can be done in 13 hours. I would getup early, say 5 am and arrive at my destination at 6 or 7pm. I've done that many times.

      A train would require two days, with many stops and switchovers to other trains, and therefore be inconvenient; whereas with a car you have everything in one convenient spot (the trunk or rear seat) with entertainment (radio) and a familiar environment.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    314. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      I guess I happen to live in one of those shitholes you are complaining about. Please, get a life. Get out and smell some fresh (and not so fresh due to cattle and other farm animals) air! More importantly, get out to where the only other human within 20 miles are any companions you brought with you.

      I've been to 3rd world countries and even lived in them, and you don't have a stinking clue as to what exists within this country if you think your twisted vision of the USA outside of the metro areas is anything like what you are talking about.

      + 1 . Too many Americans think the world revolves around their urban area, and ignore the people that live in-between. That's why I've done my cross-country trip twice in the last five years. It gives you a sense of perspective when you realize there's more to the world, and alternative non-urban lifestyles, other than what's inside the beltway that circles your city.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    315. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

      The problem won't be "running out of oil" but having a scarcity that drives the cost sky high. Oil will become rare like gold or silver or copper, and therefore expensive to acquire.

        This is expected to happen as soon as 2010, although with the downturn of the economy, we may not feel the effects until 2015.

      --
      "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
    316. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      after reaching the end of your comment -- "...of course reporting this or complaining about this could get me banned from flights and labelled a terrorist" -- I glanced up to see if you were posting anonymously. Almost had me fooled, Dr. Evil!!

    317. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by davidgay · · Score: 1

      No border checks in Switzerland anymore - they just joined Schengen...

    318. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by sumdumass · · Score: 1

      And as I said, there are options to alleviate the scarcity of the oil and the impact it will have. Things will get more expensive but it will not be as drastic as presented. Especially when the FT process can eliminated the needs to press oils or ferment biomass making biofuel processes more energy efficient then current methods as well as being able to use waste streams like sewage treatment or garbage disposal as feed stock.

      With the modern catalyst technology, almost any organic material can be broken to it's raw elements and re-conformed to produce oil, gas, propane, hydrogen or about any other energy elements deemed necessary. The waste generally associated with the FT process has been fixed so to say making it so much more reliable and efficient that it increased the efficiency of coal electric generation from around 40% to 45 and 50 percent. These plants are on line currently and coming on line as we talk about it.

    319. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by SynbiosVyse · · Score: 1

      There's no such thing as "worthless security procedures" in a country that is currently at war and a country that has had the most deadly terrorist attack in the history of the world. The UK has backed the US in the war against terror, and it's of no surprise that it also has STRONG (not useless) border protection. I can't believe people are complaining about the things that make us safe. It may be very well that this is very well the reason why Chicago did not get the Olympic bid, but I don't think the US is in the position right now to host the Olympic games anyhow.


      Let Brazil host them, I'm all for a new continent, and I think that's the main reason why Rio got the bid in the first place.

    320. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      You can guarantee that the real wages (in terms of actual purchasing power) won't go down in the medium term? Looks like you should have taken at least that one accounting class, instead of spending all your money at my dad's shop.

    321. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you're referring to ESTA, it's 72 hours (or at least used to be), although in practice it was usually instant.

      Also consider that the US has visa requirements for quite a few countries. Only people in visa-waiver countries get to travel "easily" (with all the extra hassles of the US mentioned), others will additionally need to apply and pay for a visa, and IIRC you have to pay even if you application is denied.

      I've been to the US quite a few times, three times just this year, and depending on the airport you arrive at, it isn't necessarily that bad...but it's still clearly the worst of any country I've been to in terms of entry procedures.

      Airport security is another matter...it's pretty bad in most places these days.

    322. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bobzaguy · · Score: 1

      "If you fly into Canada and then drive to the USAâ¦" Now tell me why do we fly into Canada to drive into the US?

    323. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bobzaguy · · Score: 1

      "Looks to me that the "war" is already won - by the terrorists." SSSSSSSHHHHH The two exs are still around, Bush & Blair, don't you know?

    324. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For international flights at least, the usual carry-on allowance is one bag in addition to a laptop/briefcase/handbag, so I very much doubt that could be against any general security policy.

      Of course if Gatwick no longer serves international flights (I haven't been through that place in ages, all my London connections are through Heathrow these days) they may have some different policies.

      Being able to slip through a security checkpoint sounds kind of dubious as well. As useless as airport security is, I've never seen anyone being able to get through checkpoints without going through the procedures.

    325. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bobzaguy · · Score: 1

      Hey don't be sad, remember the old GOP axiom: "One man's anal probe is another man's right-wing party video."

    326. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by RCL · · Score: 1

      After reading this thread I conclude that old communist propaganda might have had a point. It seems to me that visiting (at least entering) USSR in the peak of Cold War for an American was easier, than entering US for a Russian now, in peaceful times.

    327. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Kizeh · · Score: 1

      On my most recent re-entries, I was printed and photographed at the Port of Miami and Hartsfield in Atlanta. I wasn't a year ago in Washington DC, so go fig. Citizens I traveled with weren't.

      Also, the officer always asks something in the language corresponding to the nationality listed on my GC. They don't seem to have enough training to actually understand the response, so presumably as long as you don't look clueless when spoken to in what they think is your language you pass that test.

    328. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought the wiki link was too obvious to elaborate on. Those with the most money and power are associated with being on the Right. If you're far enough to the right, even speaking out against the established order is considered revolutionary. Historically the nobles did not grant freedom of the press to the proletariat, at least not without a fight. What I just don't fathom about the Right these days is how middle and lower-middle class folks can be so supportive of big corporate dominance in every aspect of our lives, from politics and the economy to the hoarding of 23% of America's wealth by 1% of the population. At what point do corporations need the same checks and balances as government? If you guys get your way we'll all be working for health care and low wages while a few execs take home billions. Oh wait... Doh!

    329. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by RockDoctor · · Score: 1

      How can you have a policy that varies from airport to airport?

      Because it's simpler than having a policy that varies from airline to airline, so that one desk will be operating a different policy to it's neighbour, and to what it was operating an hour earlier.
      Having a general policy with irregular exceptions is actually more complex than having no consistency at all. If you know that every trip is going to be an unpredictable nightmare, then you're put into the right frame of mind (dread and a desire to be somewhere else) from well in advance of departing for the airport until well after you've left your destination.
      What - you expected something else? Haven't you done your crash- and evacuation- training? Getting into a machine with a million moving parts to fly miles above the top of a fatal drop for hours on end should not be a relaxing experience.

      --
      Birds are not dinosaur descendants;birds are dinosaurs, for all useful meanings of "birds", "are" and "dinosaurs"
    330. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by DaHat · · Score: 1

      >I thought the wiki link was too obvious to elaborate on.

      Obviously not given it doesn't address the points you attempted to raise previous or here.

      >Those with the most money and power are associated with being on the Right.

      That is the common belief yes... however I haven't seen a George Soros of the right as of late, nor seen oodles of wall street bankers donating to the GOP in the amount that they do the DNC.

      >If you're far enough to the right, even speaking out against the established order is considered revolutionary.

      Same goes for any extremes... we saw that above where a person who is apparently so far to the left that he wants to have those who disagree with him be forced into their own country/ghetto. What's your point?

      >Historically the nobles did not grant freedom of the press to the proletariat, at least not without a fight.

      More so... very good trying to turn this into a class based struggle, Marx and Alinsky would be proud!

      Seriously though... you are comparing... former monarchies to... the United States and its media today? My we are grasping for straws aren't we?

      Do you recall that the express purpose of the first amendment is to guarantee the freedom of the press? And even then it was not a right 'granted' by the nobles or even the government... but a recognition by the framers that we had those rights to begin with (you know the whole endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights) and being explicit that the federal government did not have the authority to act as you seem to be suggesting.

      >What I just don't fathom about the Right these days is how middle and lower-middle class folks can be so supportive of big corporate dominance in every aspect of our lives, from politics and the economy to the hoarding of 23% of America's wealth by 1% of the population. At what point do corporations need the same checks and balances as government?

      We are not corporatists... we are for liberty... for all... and that means the freedom to succeed and the freedom to fail without undue influence from the government.

      Also would you be so kind as to name a single company (or even group) that exerts more influence on people's lives than any level (or combination of governments)?

      Remember... while the evil corporations might have a policy or product you don't like... you have the freedom to go elsewhere for it. The government though has the ability to make decisions and then force them on everyone else. Want a high-flow toilet? Sorry, they are illegal. Want a good ole cheap and non-toxic screw in light bulb? Best stock up, they will soon be illegal. How about standing in front of the white line on a bus while it is in motion? Nope, that too is illegal says the feds.

      More so... that evil 1% of the population that has 23% of America's wealth (interesting how you put the possessive on America and not say 'the wealth in America'... seeming to claim that the money actually belongs to the country as a whole but has been taken by that 1%). How exactly do you propose taking that money from them? I hear so much from the left about freedom and equality... and yet any means you use to explicitly target those people would be a violation of their freedoms .

      >If you guys get your way we'll all be working for health care and low wages while a few execs take home billions. Oh wait... Doh!

      Actually we'd be requiring people to be responsible for themselves and work get employers out of the welfare business by eliminating the tax differences between employer provided insurance and individually purchased (caused by government involvement in the first place)... as well as breaking illegal stranglehold the states have on insurance plans in general and allow people to buy plans that fit their needs from out of state.... all the while maintaining a system that rewards hard work and creativity which allows for a kind of economic mobility that really exists in no other country on earth.

    331. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "There won't be an oil shortage any time soon, but if there is a shortage, the problem will be more severe than you think, tractors are currently machines that turn diesel into food, with no oil, getting food to market won't be the problem, growing it at all will be the problem."

      Rationing would obviously favor necessary uses first, just as it did during WWII.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    332. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "Yeah, but that was before we realized that the tired, poor, huddled masses yearning to breathe free might take our jobs!"

      Let's remember that the THPM were useful and needed during the Industrial Revolution, when the bronze bitch in New York Harbor was built. There WERE plenty of jobs. That's finished now.

      We don't need massive amounts of manual laborers any more. We outsource that to China, so let the economic immigrants bang on Beijing's door instead.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    333. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Looks to me that the "war" is already won - by the terrorists.

      No, you simply do not understand the nature of the war. It was never about the terrorists, it was always a war to keep people afraid, compliant and pliable.

      Thus far, with these objectives in mind the war has been quite successful.

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    334. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      The France/Germany border is incredibly safe. Same as the Switzerland/Germany border.

      I can name a ton more in europe that are as safe as the US/Canada border.

      I agree with you, there are a ton of safe places in the world. Most of Denmark for example.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    335. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bwen · · Score: 1

      Has everyone failed to notice that the United States has the largest number of immigrants both legal and illegal coming into the country? We still are a melting pot. With most countries, vacationers don't become residents. Here in South Florida, they often don't make plans to go home. Maybe some legitimate border security would help....

    336. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Mattsson · · Score: 1

      The real question is; Why leave the checkpoint "unmanned" if you have the resources to keep it under surveillance and the resources to keep at least four police officers on standby to strike down on anyone who don't want to wait until some idiot actually takes the time to come and clear them for passage?

      If the checkpoint is unmanned, that should mean "Go ahead, you're welcome to pass."

      --
      /.Mattsson - My native language is not English, so please don't whine over linguistic errors. (That's lame anyway...)
    337. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Chrisq · · Score: 1

      I have a lot of Pakistani friends who are afraid to enter the USA since the Canadian CitizenMaher Arar was whisked off to Syria to be tortured when he tried to enter the USA. I can't say I blame them, all it needs is for their name to match someone on the list and they could be sent off to the Middle East and tortured.

    338. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by devonbowen · · Score: 1

      Switzerland's been in Schengen for about a year now. But, yes, even before that there were plenty of places where it was hard to notice where the border was.

      Devon

    339. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Kashgarinn · · Score: 1

      Yea, UK isn't much better with its security theater.

      I'll never go to the US unless someone pays me quite a lot of money to go there (unlikely).

      If it's true it's less in other european countries, I'll definitely think about stopping using flights which have UK as a mid-flight, the stupid lines there just to check everyone for everything is just ludicrous.

    340. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, throughout Schengen countries (this is around 23 in Europe), you don't need any ID to travel except for airline travel

      Except for Danish citizens. You may not need any ID, but you need to be able to prove that you are a EU citizen, or something like that. And so our government got the agreement made so that the only valid way for a Danish citizen to prove that they are an EU citizen, is their passport.

      Back to square one.

      (I don't have a passport, so legally I'm not allowed to cross the border, even with all the "free movement of people and goods", Schengen, etc).

      Still, nobody is actually checking.

    341. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't change direction in a bureaucracy like DHS overnight.

      It was created with the stroke of a pen by the previous President. The only reason I can think for the current President to keep it intact is to keep himself from being labeled "soft on terrorism" by the political fearmongers who want to see one of "their team" back in office.

      DHS was created as a kneejerk response, and it operates about as effectively as one might expect, given its provenance.

      Posted anonymously because I work for .gov and might need a job in DHS someday. :(

    342. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      I think real world terms (money) will be more explaining. If I was offered to go to USA with $50K of money _without_ any kind of special treatment and having to spend all the money there, I would reject it.

      I did a similar thing way before Sep. 11 against France. Simply rejected to travel giving the ultimate shock to consulate on phone. They wanted "background check" 3 days, I told them they should background check themselves especially what did their family elders did in Vichy period. I bet I got a nice "file" there now :)

    343. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Ilgaz · · Score: 1

      If we speak about Arab tourists, the ones rich and free enough to dare going to USA, we speak about some amazing money... Remember, Fortune 500 doesn't really include every guy especially from dictatorships.

      I speak about a modern dressed, educated person who is unlucky to come from a place with muslim majority and acts as "suspicious" since the idiot at customs have no fscking clue about "jet lag" let alone left his home town once in his bureaucrat life.

      I don't blame the customs, I blame the people actually spending their hard earned money and waiting at queue at consulates (yes!) to get into USA. This is beyond stupid and shows real lack of honor and pride if you ask me...

    344. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Rob+the+Bold · · Score: 1

      Switherland became part of the Schengen Area on 2008-12-12, which is not exactly âoea few years agoâ. It's less than one year. However, not being a member of the European Union or the European Economic Area, Switzerland is still supposed to check for goods that have to be declared.

      On the subject of my non-eventful cross-border treck, one of us screwed up, then. I'd just bought a pair of diamond earrings for my wife, and carried those across the border with me. Not that I left them in Germany or anything, no so harm no foul, right? I did declare them on return to final destination of US.

      --
      I am not a crackpot.
    345. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by ckaminski · · Score: 1

      I'm making my first West Coast trip next week. It was originally supposed to be a weekend in Yellowstone, but I decided instead to fly into Seattle and drive down to San Francisco via the Pacific Coast Highway, taking pictures and sleeping under the stars, and take an extra week of days to do it.

      That's an American vacation. :-)

    346. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The state of California takes fingerprint scans of every single citizen. So it's not exactly a cakewalk living here either. I'm rather against having my fingerprint on file considering I have never committed a crime.

    347. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1


      But now? Well, I've heard enough horror stories by now from friends and colleagues about entering the USA that, despite me having no criminal convictions whatsoever, I'm afraid it ain't on my "to-do" list any more.

      Eh, keep it on the end of your list. Our system has to collapse under its own weight in the pretty near future.

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
    348. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by rubi · · Score: 1

      It is an unpleasant experience if you are lucky enough to have it all. I live in the US, my relatives are from Latin America, and whether they can get a tourist visa at all is hit-or-miss. And they are all college-educated professionals with perfectly clean records.

      - - deleted - -

      True, I tried hard not to get on the visas theme as it would take us forever. I understand the need to "protect" the country, but the situation is like closing the fron door and windows and letting the back door wide open and with a "welcome" carpet. I have seen it called "security by absurdity". You only have to check Bruce Schneier's blog to read a number of interesting stories about airport "security".

    349. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by BoothbyTCD · · Score: 1

      Really we never took pride in being a melting pot at the time immigration was happening. WE look back with pride on our own ancestors while complaining about the hordes of dirty foreigners who are ruining the country now, and we more or less always have. I am always struck by how unchanging nativist sentiment in this country is. In the 1840s and 50s it was the No Nothing party complaining about the Germans and Irish flooding the country, then it was the Italians and other undesirable Southern Europeans and Catholics, then it was the Eastern Europeans and most especially the Jews. Xenophobia has always been a fixture of this country's political discourse, only mellowed by the passage of time and the death of racists.

      --
      snig
    350. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by BoothbyTCD · · Score: 1

      And yet, when I was a legal resident of Japan with a valid work visa and entry permit (obtained for $50 several weeks before leaving) I was fingerprinted every time I reentered. But we never hear of people railing against the injustice of Japan's policies? Dow we simply hold them to a lower standard or does nobody go there? Or is it just more fun to yell at the US?

      --
      snig
    351. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're not xenophobes.

      As a foreigner living in the US for 13 years, I can tell you that racism is ingrained in the culture.

      Natural born Americans don't even see their condescending disposition towards foreigners as racism. Same when they talk about the foreigners destroying their economy.

      The most impressive thing I have ever experienced was hearing preachers taking the time to knock on foreigners and preach American supremacy.

    352. Re:I'm sure it didn't help. by PastaLover · · Score: 1

      Two summers ago (2008) I took a train from Brussels into the UK... I had a pellet gun in my bag I won at some street game in Venice and had been carrying around for weeks. There was no problem getting in... but then when I left the UK to catch the flight back home from amsterdam (again via brussels), Belgium border security made a huge deal about it and I had to eventually just give them the gun so I wouldnt miss the train. By the way, whats the right word to describe people from Belgium? Belgians?

      I think you have it backwards. As far as I remember the Belgian police only do passport checks on the way back from London to Brussels. I had a similar experience with a colleague who got a knife (type you'd peel an apple with) through security in Brussels just fine, but got stopped on the way back by UK border security. Who proceeded to make a big stink about it, of course.

      It's Belgians, yes.

  2. No. by TheNormal · · Score: 0

    That's not the reason. They knew if they had it in Chicago it would become "Obama's Event" and Zogby has international approval for Obama at 45% and falling. Passports are nothing compared to the process of setting up an entire Olympics event.

    1. Re:No. by Jaysyn · · Score: 3, Funny

      That's just retarded. Odds are about even he won't even be president in 2016.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    2. Re:No. by TheNormal · · Score: 0

      ... Right. Because of his falling polls. That doesn't mean the man has come down to earth.

    3. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile, Brazilian President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and his left-of-center administration's popularity is still at an all-time high, sitting at a euphoric 77%!

      Those damn Brazilians don't have anything better to do than to go to wild beach parties, attend Rod Stewart concerts, and vote in public opinion polls for leftist politicians.

    4. Re:No. by easyTree · · Score: 5, Interesting

      This thread seems to nicely demonstrate the national arrogance..

      Could it possibly be that Rio won rather than the USA losing it?

      After all, it's not like you deserved it at all. Invading lots of countries to do who-knows-what isn't consistent with the spirit of international harmony spread by the Olympics.

      Feel free to mod me troll for telling it like it is :D

    5. Re:No. by pjt33 · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Speaking as a European who has experienced US border controls on connecting flights (i.e. not even properly entering the country): whatever the actual reasons for the decision, US border controls are sufficient reason not to host it there.

    6. Re:No. by lysergic.acid · · Score: 1

      I disagree with a lot of Obama's policies, but what exactly about him makes you say he's not down to earth (or at least more so than past presidents)? Do you know him personally? Did he ignore you when you waved to him at the mall?

      Blindly making character attacks on public figures is not hard to do. It does, however, make you look foolish complaining for the sake of complaining. (Do you really have any reason to believe he isn't down to earth, or is your spite towards him just an equally irrational response to all the rabid cheerleading by his masses of supporters?) Unless you get your political views from celebrity gossip rags, or such preeminent supermarket tabloids as the National Enquirer, I imagine you could do better than "OMG! Obama is sooo stuck up!" What's next, making fun of his cellulite? Aimless criticism is worse than no criticism at all.

      Besides, even if he were stuck up, what difference does it make in his capacity to be president? Just about every speech & public appearance he makes is scripted and written by White House aides or professional speech writers. National politics are run like marketing campaigns and corporate public relations these days—i.e. air-tight (which makes Bush's incredibly poor public opinion in his last years all the more impressive). With all the things going on in the world these days, I don't think that Obama showing up to a heads of state meeting sporting a pair of sweatpants with "H-O-T" written across his ass would cause an international incident.

    7. Re:No. by conureman · · Score: 1

      That reminds me of an (off-topic) anecdote, please bear with me, or skip on.
      Once in L.A. I was stopped at an intersection by a motorcycle cop, and waited an inexplicably long time, until I saw a presidential motorcade go blazing by. A month or so later, I was at the exact same intersection, one car back. (Santa Monica x Sepulveda), same thing. Since I knew what was coming, I sat on the roof of my car and waved like a madman as they zipped by. G.H.W. Bush gave me a back of the hand wave, friendly but sort of stiff, I thought. I don't think he was expecting any fans. A few years later, I was leaving a friend's house on California Street in San Francisco. (An old Black Victorian, that some of you might remember). At 25th Avenue, there was a throng of people lining the street, and a bunch of cops hanging around. It turned out that after dropping Chelsea off to start school at Stanford, the Clintons had gone to dinner at a friend's house in Sea Cliff (Feinstein?) and would be driving back along that route. I parked further down 25th, away from every one else, and sat on the cab of my pickup thinking about RPGs &c. (I kid!) After a long wait, along comes the motorcade. As I was rather high up, I could only see Hillary from the lap down (she wore a nice red suit) but Bill dropped to all fours on the floor and looked me in the eye as he waved back. Now, I didn't hold Clinton's policies in any higher regard than Bush's, but I gotta say, on a personal level, he's got my vote.

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    8. Re:No. by orzetto · · Score: 1

      This is not his second term and terms do not have to be consecutive, so chances are not exactly zero. Cleveland did that.

      --
      Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    9. Re:No. by Hognoxious · · Score: 0, Redundant

      There's a 50% chance of a constitutional amendment removing term limits?

      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
    10. Re:No. by catman · · Score: 1
      So I did the right thing, then? Earlier this year I visited family in Toronto, Ontario, and flew Icelandair via Reykjavik to avoid connecting in Boston.

      The last time I visited the US was in the late 1990s, quite pleasant to arrive in Orlando. Some day I'd like to drive Route 1 along the Florida coast - it was nice. But I'm not visiting again until the state of emergency has been lifted. And you know what I'm talking about.

    11. Re:No. by adelgado · · Score: 1

      As a Brazilian living in Rio myself, I agree with you.

      But I see matters even simplier:

      USAÂhad the Olympics 4 times already. Wouldn't be them.
      London's already in Europe and it's the next one. This vettoes Madrid.
      Rio de Janeiro is the most beutiful city on Earth. Politically, it's good, 'cause we need one in South America (and Africa, for that matter). Also, Tokyo already had Olympics there.
      Simple.

    12. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Orlando and drive to the Key's once a year. I always take Route 1.

      Even with a truck load of kids, wife, and towing a boat, it's worth it.

      If I can put up with all that once a year, you owe it to yourself to bend over for immigration just once to experience it.

      The drive, not immigration. :)

    13. Re:No. by SmlFreshwaterBuffalo · · Score: 1

      If he is re-elected in 2012, he will officially be president until January 2017. And since incumbents have much better odds of winning, there's a pretty good chance he'll be president in 2016. Whether or not that is a good thing is left as an exercise for the reader.

    14. Re:No. by IrquiM · · Score: 1

      Actually - Chicago was the first city that was removed from the list of potential candates.

      They lost, and Rio won!

      --
      This is blinging
    15. Re:No. by steelfood · · Score: 1

      I think people need to justify why the President of the F*cking United States couldn't pull the Olympics for his home city. Customs is a pretty good reason. I have my own opinion, but they can't really outdo the ridiculous situation at the border.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    16. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Could it also be possible that Chicago lost because they have a failing city government that can barely stay afloat without selling valuable assets for quick cash? Or perhaps because it's not abnormal for city employees and decisions makers from the local to the state level to routinely end up in jail for corruption (the only city I know of where the majority of Governors in the last 50 years have gone to jail). Or maybe they were just all tired of Oprah telling them they all got cars if they voted for Chicago. Plus it didn't help that the Mayor of Chicago paid for a special airing of the Simpsons episode where they go to Rio the night before the vote, okay well maybe not, but that would have been better then his bad mouthing other cities.

    17. Re:No. by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Let's pick nits why don't we?

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    18. Re:No. by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      I'm not even sure why you responded. Does "about even" sound like zero to you or something?

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    19. Re:No. by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure where you are going with that, but if he is reelected, he'll be president till January 2017. I was saying his odds are about even on being re-elected.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    20. Re:No. by SmlFreshwaterBuffalo · · Score: 1

      Just pointing out that the term would extend until the beginning of 2017 since many people, as you saw, can't seem to figure that out (for whatever reason).

      I'm aware that you were referring to his chance of being re-elected and not to the end of his hypothetical second term.

    21. Re:No. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... Bill dropped to all fours on the floor ...

      That's pretty much standard policy for him.

    22. Re:No. by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      So I did the right thing, then? Earlier this year I visited family in Toronto, Ontario, and flew Icelandair via Reykjavik to avoid connecting in Boston.

      I've been avoiding connecting flights in the US for a while now, especially since a number of people I know seem to have been picked at random ("aha, you have a media player, bend over mister !") and subsequently missed their flights.

      I suppose they have pits with stale bread and water for you to comfortably wait in for the next plane (unless they just send you back for some reason) but it's much simpler to just avoid the whole thing and go to a civilized country instead.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    23. Re:No. by Jaysyn · · Score: 1

      Ah ok, cool.

      --
      There is a war going on for your mind.
    24. Re:No. by Meneguzzi · · Score: 1

      I don't mean to insult Rio or anything, but I disagree with you about Rio being the best choice in Brazil (BTW, I am Brazilian myself). I think plenty of other cities would be a better place to host the Olympics than Rio, mainly because of the security and infrastructure. Belo Horizonte and Curitiba being the best choices both for their cities. Belo Horizonte is nicer as a city than Rio both in infrastructure and in sights (not everybody thinks beaches are the nicest views in the planet, mountains and historic cities are just as nice if you ask me). And Curitiba is by far safer and with better infrastructure (and has very nice views).
      As far as beaches go in Brazil, the Northeast (Salvador, Recife) of the country beats Rio hands down. So, from both a subjective (beauty) and an objective (security and infrastructure) point of view, Rio was a very bad choice.
      In the end, Rio won because the other countries were not acceptable to many people in the IOC. Almost everybody in Asia hates Japan, so Tokyo was out. Since the next Olympics will be in London, Madrid was out for being in Europe. And also as everybody mentioned in this post about Chicago, but missed one thing, (and I'm being objective here), there is still a very strong anti-Americanism in the world that lingers even after Obama was elected, so this pretty much eliminated the US location.
      You might argue that because Rio is in total chaos as far as security goes, the money influx from the Olympics would be welcome. But this is missing a *very* important point. Economically, Rio is probably the second largest state in the country, as attested by the budgets of their state agencies,, so it was never a matter of lack of funds for Rio to fix itself. What needs to change is the politicians (in the whole country as a matter of fact, this is an acute problem in the country nationwide, but worse in Rio, Sao Paulo and the Northeast), which will not change because of the Olympics.
      Moreover, is the world cup after Africa not going to be in Brazil? And will Rio probably not be one of the main venues? So in the end Rio did not really "win". It as a process of elimination.

      --
      www.meneguzzi.eu/felipe
  3. I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...but you ain't gettin' my fingerprints for the privilege. What am I, a criminal?
    Reform your system, and you'll see an increase in tourism, with all the good that that does your economy.

    1. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by Col.+Bloodnok · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I won't be going anywhere. I refuse to let my government have my fingerprints, in order to renew my passport.

      I'll just stay in dear old blighty.

    2. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by luder · · Score: 1

      Yeah. That and the funny toilet design with water to the top. Who the hell thought that was a good idea?!

    3. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Tourism dollars are visible dollars, so many legislative bodies chase them.

      Unfortunately, they're very miniscule dollars, so when you ignore say manufacturing concerns, to free up time to pass art grants, you never get what you lose in return. You might not notice, though, as your state theme-park-ifies, that it lacks the depth necessary to have real prosperity.

      Frankly, Chicago is better off for not having the olympics than Rio will be for having them.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    4. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by fbjon · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Nevermind tourism. I recently had to transfer via Detroit (first time in US) when going from Vancouver to Europe. I had to fill out all customs forms, and have my photo and all fingerprints taken, even before I had left Vancouver, even though I was just transiting.

      Unless something spectacular happens, the US is now on my permaban list.

      --
      True confidence comes not from realising you are as good as your peers, but that your peers are as bad as you are.
    5. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Goverment won then :(

    6. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What am I, a criminal?

      Maybe. That's why they get your fingerprints, to check against the lists. Do you really think there's no reason for the requests? It's not perfect, but at least it catches some people.

    7. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Lighten up! You don't even get into Disney world without finger prints.

    8. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by conureman · · Score: 2, Informative

      We may not be as state-of-the-art as Japan, but I just bought one with a 3" flush valve. WHOOSH!

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    9. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by jez9999 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It's easier for dogs to lap water up from them.

    10. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same for Japan.

    11. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by jabithew · · Score: 1

      Er, I just renewed my passport and didn't have to give the government any biometric data.

      As I'm also an Irish citizen, I now have two biometric passports sans biometric data.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    12. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by jabithew · · Score: 1

      I know a US/British dual citizen who flew to Pakistan via the US. For obvious reasons she didn't want to carry her US passport, but because she was interlining she had to, as US citizens have to enter and exit the country on their US passport.

      --
      All intents and purposes. Not intensive purposes.
    13. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by Cederic · · Score: 1

      I renewed my passport early to give myself a full ten years before bumping into that.

      Hopefully the system will be changed by the time it expires - although sadly it appears to be going the other way, with ever more intrusive checks in the airports.

      Even with a passport you can't now leave without informing the Government in advance, even if you own a small boat.

      New government in next year, but the Lib Dems have no hope of getting in and the Tories wont reduce the authoritarianism (although they should at least stop increasing it).

      My only hope is to move to Scotland and fight for independence.

    14. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by turgid · · Score: 1

      Even with a passport you can't now leave without informing the Government in advance, even if you own a small boat.

      Is that true? When did that happen? Is this the Peoples' Democratic Republic of England now or something?

      My only hope is to move to Scotland and fight for independence.

      If only there were decent jobs up there I'd move back, but I can't afford to.

    15. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      No offense, but tough cookies. That's law in most any country: If you have a passport issued by the country, then you enter and leave that country using that passport. Speaking as someone with triple citizenship myself, if traveling to Pakistan was more important to your friend than being an American she didn't have to get the U.S. citizenship.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    16. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by PCM2 · · Score: 1

      Oh... but there's nothing that says she couldn't have flashed her UK passport instead, once she got to Pakistan. Hopefully she brought both?

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    17. Re:I'd *love* to be a tourist in the States by Cederic · · Score: 1

      http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/4987415/All-travel-plans-to-be-tracked-by-Government.html

      (reported at the time in other publications too - google for e-borders at a guess)

  4. Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Increasing crime rates, including murder, why were we bidding Chicago in the first place? There are plenty of other US cities that are more worthy of this honor.

    1. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      US Visa process is most humiliating experience I had in my life. Am an Indian and tried to get visiting visa for a week
      from India.
      American citizen should see this process, they will not tolerate it from any other country.

      I've traveled to few other countries.

    2. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by _merlin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Rio has pretty high crime, too, you know, and slums. I doubt Chicago's worse.

    3. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Bieeanda · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Because it would be an excuse to move 'undesirables' out of the city in large numbers, make a spike in capital spending and construction, and then cause the city and its environs to implode when the Olympic venues turn out to be unrentable and the tourists vanish again?

      Hosting the Olympics might be an honour on the national level, but locally... you've got to figure out which city you can afford to disrupt over the long term.

    4. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I doubt that Chicago has more crime than Rio. I think the "Americans act like assholes to foreigners and everyone knows it" explanation has a ring of plausibility to it. I would also add that recent events probably raised some doubts about the economic viability of the USA by 2016.

    5. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah right. Have you ever been to Chicago? I have lived in different parts of Chicago for last 10 years. This city is no different than any other US city. Just because some murder made national news and changed your perception, does not mean the city does not deserve Olympics.

      What safe city are you from? LA?

    6. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      Doesn't Obama come from Chicago? So it was raised as the ideal city to host the Olympics for the same reason Cherie Blair's Liverpool was nominated for European City of Culture.

      Nominate a city based solely on its merits with today's politicians? hahahahahahaa.

    7. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Increasing crime rates? You've gotta be kidding me. There was a brutal beating that made the news, yes. But the thing is, and this is different from how things work in Rio, it made the news.

    8. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      Yes, but then Rio has Carnival as well as not being hampered by a prudish and Puritan culture.

    9. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Chicago was trying for it before Obama was elected.

      http://www.chicago2016.org/our-plan/overview.aspx

    10. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by JDevers · · Score: 1

      Chicago put it's name in the hat LONG before Obama was even running for the presidential office...possibly back when he was a state level representative.

    11. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by swillden · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hosting the Olympics might be an honour on the national level, but locally... you've got to figure out which city you can afford to disrupt over the long term.

      Not necessarily. It is possible to have a well-managed Olympics that makes the event a net short- and long-term benefit to the area.

      Salt Lake City's 2002 Winter Olympics turned a significant net profit, even after the state was reimbursed for all of the infrastructure investment (other than transportation improvements; those were needed anyway). The money left over was put into a fund which should be able to maintain all of the specialized venues for decades -- except that many of the venues have proven to be profitable on their own. The bobsled and luge tracks, for example, are operated year-round for tourists, who ride sleds (wheeled in the summer) that move at much slower but still exciting speeds. Taken as a whole, the olympic venues and museum operate at a very slight loss, which the fund should be able to maintain for a very, very long time.

      The long-term effects on Utah's tourism industry, both summer and winter, have been significant, and would have justified a fair amount of taxpayer investment even if the direct revenues hadn't been able to repay the state.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    12. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by MaskedSlacker · · Score: 4, Informative

      http://www.areaconnect.com/crime/compare.htm?c1=Chicago&s1=IL&c2=Los+Angeles&s2=CA

      Kiss my Angeleno ass. Los Angeles has lower rates of murder, robbery, assault, theft, and burglary.

      When Los Angeles, gang ridden shit hole that is, has a not just a lower crime rate, but fewer actual crimes despite its larger population, than your city, you need to shut up.

    13. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That would explain why they started their bid process, gee, back in 2008 when Obama wasn't president.

      Jackass.

    14. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by thewils · · Score: 1

      At least you probably won't get raped in Chicago - according to those stats you linked to.

      --
      Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
    15. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rio has pretty high crime, too, you know, and slums. I doubt Chicago's worse.

      Are you sure? Chicago is extremely high on the list of the most dangerous and criminal cities in the world.
      As are other USA cities.

    16. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "Hosting the Olympics might be an honour on the national level, but locally... you've got to figure out which city you can afford to disrupt over the long term."

      Detroit.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    17. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by wiredlogic · · Score: 1

      Rio is no SLC. Here is an example of one of that city's big little problems. The politicians and developers are foaming at the mouth now that they have a more legitimate reason to try and push the people out of these shanty towns. The Chinese did the same thing to some extent but the poverty and related crime are a far bigger issue with Brazil.

      --
      I am becoming gerund, destroyer of verbs.
    18. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      So far I've lived in two Olympic cities. The legacy of the Olympics is pretty clear, and positive, in Calgary. Most of the venues that were built or upgraded for them are still used, both by the public and as training centres for Canada's national athletes. The university has a big kinesiology and sports medicine program. Etc.

      Montreal had the Olympics longer ago, but they were also famously expensive games, plagued with problems. The legacy of the Olympics doesn't jump out at you. One of the buildings (the velodrome?) has been turned into a pretty nice miniature zoo though.

    19. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by drsquare · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That's the winter olympics, it doesn't involve the construction of a white elephant athletics stadium. You can re-use a ski slope, but outside of the olympics, 90,000 people aren't going to watch athletics.

    20. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rio ranked #6 in the world for most dangerous. The only U.S. city in the top 10 was Detroit (#5), which shouldn't be too surprising for anyone who's been there before.

      I'm sure Rio's ranking will temporarily go up dramatically during the Olympics due to the hoards of easy targets, I mean, tourists.

    21. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by dajalas · · Score: 1

      Rio's crime is worse unless you count Chicago's politicians. :)

    22. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by elbowboy · · Score: 1

      Not all Chicago politicians are criminals, just the ones with power.... and of those only like 60% go to jail. Although it's not all bad, they do have clean streets. Besides with no Olympics it'll give Chicago more time to work on getting their own teams to win things.

    23. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it would be an excuse to move 'undesirables' out of the city in large numbers

      You're right, of course -- prostitutes and pickpockets will flee from Chicago in all directions for the duration.

    24. Re:Chicago lost it because it didn't deserve it. by legojenn · · Score: 1

      I dunno. Detroit has two car border crossings.

      --
      I make a reasonable middle-class wage by going to work and not spamming blogs with scams.
  5. I'm not looking forward to going to the US by rundgren · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm a peaceful Norwegian with two (many years ago) convictions for possession of small amounts (1-2 joints) of marihuana. My grandmother wants to take me to visit our family in Boston next year, and I'm not looking forward to it at all because of one thing only: US border control and visa stupidity. The US is the only country in the world to care about a stupid posession misdemeanor - I could go anywhere else without issue at all..

    1. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Smidge207 · · Score: 0

      Agreed. I must say that, as a UK resident, this was the first thing that I thought of. I am planning a round the world trip next year and hesitate to include the US as the hassle is probably not worth it. Also there are all kinds of strange rules like you cannot include a stop in Cuba if your round the world ticket includes an American airline. Getting into the US is a harrowing experience. It is more than immigration's fault: Airports are treated as a war zone, and going through security to get your connection is definitely not the first and last experience you want to give a foreigner visiting the US.

      --
      Is it just my observation, or is eldavojohn an idiot?
    2. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Canada might even be worse for prior convictions (and arrests if you're from the US).

    3. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by MartinSchou · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly certain you can get a quick answer at the US embassy in Oslo just by calling them.

      The one thing you DON'T want to do on the paper work, is to omit that you have these convictions.

      And yes, it's quite stupid. Not just that the US cares, but also that it's illegal - but that's a different discussion altogether.

    4. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by garcia · · Score: 5, Interesting

      The US is the only country in the world to care about a stupid posession misdemeanor - I could go anywhere else without issue at all..

      And yet Canada won't let Americans in who have a DUI (also a misdemeanor here in MN at least and no, I've never had a DUI). I don't agree with the border policies in place in the US but I also don't think your comment is as insightful as others believe it to be either.

    5. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by badger.foo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Even without any sort of criminal record it's not a pleasant experience to enter the US, even as a Norwegian citizen entering via Canada. This May the robots routed me back form BSDCan (in Ottawa) through Washington, DC. It's possible that the fact that I did not apply for a visa (this was transit only, planning to stay on the ground roughly one hour between flights) complicated things a bit. As it turned out, in addition to the ordinary three forms (with more or less the same info in all of them) I needed to fill in a separate 'visa waiver form' (identical to at least two of the other forms in all other things than paper thickness, sheet size, color of paper and print and font) before getting to the fingerprinting, retina scanning and oral examination to check the validity of the information that I'd filled in, performed by a border guard who seemed to have been trained to appear hostile but was obviously monumentally bored by the whole process. This was after clearing the ordinary pre-boarding security theatre, mind you. And of course I would need to pick up the boarding passes for my connecting flights at the Washington, DC airport. That meant getting from one end of the airport to the other to pick up boarding passes and clearing another full act of security theatre in order to get back to where I could board the transatlantic flight. I did make my connecting fligh, running pretty much all the way except for the time spent lining up for the various security checks on the way. So yes, I can believe in a theory that US border control was a factor in deciding to place the next Olympics elsewhere.

      --
      -- That grumpy BSD guy - http://bsdly.blogspot.com/
    6. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by S.O.B. · · Score: 1

      Don't try to make Canada out to be the bad guy. Some places in the U.S. won't let in Canadians if they have a DUI conviction. I know this because it happened to a friend of mine trying to cross into New York or Michigan (I'm not sure).

      The reason is because a DUI is a violation of the Criminal of Canada (i.e. not a misdemeanor) which makes it consistently enforced at all entry points and only applies to convictions in the last 5 years. This is similar to U.S. border rules.

      And who in their right mind would pass a law making drunk driving a misdemeanor? I don't care if some idiot wants to put themselves at risk but as soon as they get behind the wheel of a car they are endangering other people. That's a criminal act in my mind.

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    7. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm a peaceful Norwegian with two (many years ago) convictions for possession of small amounts (1-2 joints) of marihuana.
      My grandmother wants to take me to visit our family in Boston next year, and I'm not looking forward to it at all because of one thing only: US border control and visa stupidity.
      The US is the only country in the world to care about a stupid posession misdemeanor - I could go anywhere else without issue at all..

      Don't sweat it. The baggage handlers can hook you up once you're in country.

    8. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You forgot the sarcasm tag surely. Otherwise I think you missed the part about conviction which implies at least that the associated consequences/punishment have been taken care of. I hope you don't use any drugs like alcohol or tobacco which are much more damaging to society in terms of cost and lives lost than a couple of joints.

    9. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The advertisement you see in Norwegian cinemas are not correct. There are lots of exceptions...
      See this site: http://travel.state.gov/visa/frvi/ineligibilities/ineligibilities_1364.html
      Note section 2 A which regards to drugcrimes. Section 2A ii has exceptions.

      I quote the two exeptions for drug convictions here:

      "
      (I) the crime was committed when the alien was under 18 years of age, and the crime was committed (and the alien released from any confinement to a prison or correctional institution imposed for the crime) more than 5 years before the date of application for a visa or other documentation and the date of application for admission to the United States, or

      (II) the maximum penalty possible for the crime of which the alien was convicted (or which the alien admits having committed or of which the acts that the alien admits having committed constituted the essential elements) did not exceed imprisonment for one year and, if the alien was convicted of such crime, the alien was not sentenced to a term of imprisonment in excess of 6 months (regardless of the extent to which the sentence was ultimately executed).
      "

      Note especially The length of maximum penalty and the length of imprisonment.

      When that is said, I have a spotless record and after the treatment my family received at the border last time we visited I decided it isn't worth it. DisneyWorld isn't good enough to give up your fingerprints for, twice! (Once at the border, once at the gates to DW.)

    10. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's the ultimate hypocrisy, the US is the greatest consumer of drugs in the world. They export junkies like crazy.

    11. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by ztransform · · Score: 0, Troll

      I'm a peaceful Norwegian with two (many years ago) convictions for possession of small amounts (1-2 joints) of marihuana.

      Unless you have a pharmacy and/or medical degree you're an idiot. And if you go around sticking your fingers into power points with a medical and/or electrical engineering degree you're equally as stupid.

    12. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by orzetto · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Heisann, en av dine nye landsmenn her.

      I heard from a guy who was in a similar situation at a julebord a few years ago. He (a researcher at NTNU) had to go to a conference, and when entering the US he was asked whether he had previous convictions. He had, for "civil disobedience" (he did not specify, but I suppose it was bad enough to worry about). Realising that, had he answered "yes", he would have been denied admission and would have missed the conference, he managed to contact the Norwegian embassy or a consulate, and asked whether he really had to mention that. The embassy told him (not sure how explicitly) that he could say he had not, with the understanding that had the US border authorities checked with the embassy they would have backed him.

      So, congratulations US border authorities: you are being so much of a pain in the ass that even the institutions of satellite countries tell their citizens to lie to you. I suppose this will help catching whomever you are looking for.

      --
      Victims of 9/11: <3000. Traffic in the US: >30,000/y
    13. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'm fairly certain you can get a quick answer at the US embassy in Oslo just by calling them.

      Nice idea, but no.

      There is no circumstance in which a US embassy can tell you for sure that you will be allowed into the USA.

      The guy at the border can always turn you away. Even if you've done nothing wrong. Even if you have a valid visa. Even if you're the fucking Pope. If the guy at the border doesn't want to let you in, you don't come in.

    14. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Worked with some nice people from India - they told how they paid a lot of money for the visas, flew over and then got turned away for no reason... it was all just some kind of money-grab from the US.

      Yes, posting anonymously simply because I fly to the US every so often (VWP, but still)

    15. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It's not even "pleasant" to re-enter the United States, from Canada, as a U.S. Citizen!

      It certainly doesn't involve the BS that non-citizens have to go through...but they do check your car, your bags, throw away any fruit you may have (for no particular reason), and they're generally surly and ever so slightly menacing. Oh, and I'm white, was born in New England, and do not have any sort of "funny accent." Now they even require a passport.

      Much better than a non-citizen's experience, I'm sure, but still nothing close to "pleasant."

    16. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by elefantstn · · Score: 1

      Uh, what about your stupid country that gave you a possession misdemeanor? They apparently cared enough.

      --
      If it ain't broke, you need more software.
    17. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I got grilled for an hour going into Canada. Going camping and sightseeing in Ontario was a foreign concept to the woman on the Canadian side of the crossing. Driving back, I showed my drivers license, answered "yes" to "looks like you were camping" and drove on south.

    18. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Vesvvi · · Score: 1

      A DUI doesn't necessarily put you into Canada's "Inadmissible Classes" (their legal term) permanently. If 5 or more years have passed, you can apply for an "Approval of Rehabilitation" that will permanently void the DUI issue.

      I know someone that ran into this (unexpectedly, I recall) when he traveled to Canada recently. It delayed him for about a day to have the paperwork processed, which involved getting US police to fax appropriate documentation to the Canadians. In the end he was allowed in.

    19. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      born in New England, and do not have any sort of "funny accent."

      I hate to break it to you but that statement is contradictory.

      Granted it's a common funny accent.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    20. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Well, since we've moved it down from 0.15 to 0.08 percent, we've picked up quite a few people who aren't actually drunk.

    21. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by ianturton · · Score: 1

      Not to mention you'll pay $5 a minute to phone a US embassy. And don't think about visiting with out paying the $250 fee and getting an appointment (at $5 a minute).

    22. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1

      I'm a peaceful Norwegian with two (many years ago) convictions for possession of small amounts (1-2 joints) of marihuana. My grandmother wants to take me to visit our family in Boston next year, and I'm not looking forward to it at all because of one thing only: US border control and visa stupidity.

      The ironic part is that possession of that small an amount of marijuana isn't a criminal offense in Boston due to a law passed last year.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    23. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1

      I hate to break it to you but that statement is contradictory.

      Contrary to popular belief, not everyone that is born New England is from Southy.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    24. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by S.O.B. · · Score: 1

      Where are you that less than 0.15 is not impaired driving? 0.08 is drunk enough that you can't drive, 0.15 is drunk enough that you can't walk.

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    25. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't try to make Canada out to be the bad guy. Some places in the U.S. won't let in Canadians if they have a DUI conviction. I know this because it happened to a friend of mine trying to cross into New York or Michigan (I'm not sure).

      Further than that. The US won't let in some Canadians because of their business dealings with Cuba. Yes, that's right. There are Canadians who are forbidden from entering the US at all because they have the gall to have customers in Cuba for their privately run Canadian business.

    26. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by eggnoglatte · · Score: 1

      Well, a DUI puts innocent bystanders at risk. Smoking a joint? Not so much.

    27. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      I think that if you carried a breathalyzer with you one weekend, you'd be surprised how little 0.08 is. Two hotel-bar drinks would do it for a lot of people. If you go back and look at the data, there's a very slow upward trend in risk of wreck with increasing BAC until about 0.15, at which it turns significantly upward. That was the standard adopted in the late 70s, when DUI first really began to be enforced.

    28. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by IrquiM · · Score: 1

      Remember; what happens at julebord, stays at julebord!

      --
      This is blinging
    29. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by HornWumpus · · Score: 1

      But you all talk funny.

      --
      John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
    30. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by juletre · · Score: 1

      yay, more norwegians! With at least 3 of us/europeans here you could force /. to use metric right?

      --
      "he, who has quotes in his signature, is a douche" - unknown.
    31. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by S.O.B. · · Score: 1

      Actually I wouldn't be surprised how little it takes to get to 0.08 as I do have a breathalyzer. It's not a question of how many drinks it takes to get to 0.08 it's a question of are you impaired at 0.08 and the answer is YES. I'd be interested if you could provide a link to anything that shows what you claim.

      And just because 0.15 was the standard adopted in the 70's doesn't mean that it was right. All you have to do is look at the clothing then and it's clear we were drunk and nothing we said could be trusted anyway. :D

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    32. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by neurovish · · Score: 1

      He can also take all your stuff just because he wants to.

    33. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A big 'me too', here, hence the Anonymous posting. As I'm as big an optimist as George W. Bush *cough*, I had hoped that a 'regime change' would have turned things for the better. Now that not even a black president is willing to step to the plate and get rid of this tool of oppression for colored people (the 'war on drugs') in the US, I guess there's no hope.

      Oh well. I guess I'll automatically become jaded some day and not worry about it anymore ;p.

    34. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US is the only country in the world to care about a stupid possession misdemeanor - I could go anywhere else without issue at all..

      Really?

      Been to Saudi? How about Israel?

      We're not the only ass-holes in the world, friend!

    35. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by demonlapin · · Score: 1

      Well, you're impaired at 0.07, too; my point was that at 0.09 you're picking up a lot of people who are - yes - not at peak form, but aren't really drunk. I can't find that graph online; wish I could.

      As for the 70s, I think that Jonathan Livingston Seagull alone was proof that everyone was high as a kite.

    36. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by S.O.B. · · Score: 1

      I agree that being impaired at 0.08 is somewhat arbitrary since different people react differently to alcohol. I've seen people stumbling around after one drink and other people who can still pass a sobriety test after 5 or 6 drinks. Unfortunately the law requires a more precise definition and at 0.08 most people are impaired so that's the number that we have.

      --
      Some of what I say is fact, some is conjecture, the rest I'm just blowing out my ass...you guess.
    37. Re:I'm not looking forward to going to the US by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      The US is the only country in the world to care about a stupid posession misdemeanor - I could go anywhere else without issue at all..

      C'mon, we're puritans over here. What, you don't think we have a president who sold coke on the street, do you?

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  6. UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I thought that was the whole point.

    What's that? They're for stopping TERRORISM, you say? Naaaaah, can't be.

    (I once went one a round-the-world holiday. At Fiji's passport control, they gave us garlands, and serenaded us with guitars; at US passport control they growled at us.)

    1. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by cptdondo · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I carry both a US and a Czech passport. I can travel anywhere in the former communist nations without a second look. Heck, this last time I didn't even get a stamp. We went through Amsterdam and it took a few seconds and I got a smile from a pretty cute immigration lady.

      But on coming back to the States, I'm treated like a criminal - where have you been, what did you do, what are you bringing back, did you do this or that, what's in that bag....

      I hate it.

      And the irony isn't lost on me - we (the US) pride ourselves on our freedoms, but we have instituted what is probably the most draconian entry system in the free world. And the former communist nations, which boast no claims of freedom, allow me to travel unhindered, with a wave and a smile.

      Maybe this will be a wakeup call to the US that we've gone completely off the deep end here.

    2. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by ColdWetDog · · Score: 1, Funny

      (I once went one a round-the-world holiday. At Fiji's passport control, they gave us garlands, and serenaded us with guitars; at US passport control they growled at us.)

      Believe me, it's much better that way. Imagine if the US passport staff had tried to serenade you with guitars. The only thing that I can think to match that in sheer horror is having a Vogon recite poetry to me.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    3. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by An+dochasac · · Score: 1
      (I once went one a round-the-world holiday. At Fiji's passport control, they gave us garlands, and serenaded us with guitars; at US passport control they growled at us.)

      At Virgin Gorda my border card was not accepted because it wasn't done with a blue or black pen (sorry, dark purple ink looks black to me and no they wouldn't lend us a pen, so we were stuck for a while for the bizarre reason that one of their border agents has color hypersensitivity)

      At the Republic of Korea, they divided us into male/female queues, emptying every purse of the females but letting most of the men through with huge backpacks.

      In the U.K. they plan to take DNA samples and test for mitochondrial bloodlines

      In Japan and Spain, they plan on paying foreign visitors to go home.

      In Ireland, I was refused a type of visa because my academic record wasn't in the form of a parchment diploma (would velum do?)

      My point? Most national borders are frayed and reform is unlikely because those in a position to see the problem don't have a vote. And those who can vote are told, "We're just keeping you safe from the bad guy out there, all we need is more money and more power over your^H^H^H^Htheir rights."

    4. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by Petrushka · · Score: 1

      (I once went one a round-the-world holiday. At Fiji's passport control, they gave us garlands, and serenaded us with guitars; at US passport control they growled at us.)

      ... and even though Fiji is ruled by a military dictatorship now, it's still a more friendly place to visit.

    5. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by steelfood · · Score: 1

      Maybe Chertoff had trouble figuring out what Bush was trying to say and just say, ah fuck it, let's make it hard for everybody to enter.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    6. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by Dare+nMc · · Score: 1

      I suspect your example has identical results in most countries. for whatever reason any relation to Amsterdam is a automatic fisting in many countries.
      My own experience was in France where they looked at me and the cover of my US passport was enough, but traveling in the same train was a gut from Amsterdam he and bags was searched a couple time, and after providing all required documents was still escorted away.
      I don't argue with the article though, pre 01 our meetings were in Chicago because Canada was a pain, now my managers take the trips out of North America instead of the opposite. So it is not only Tourism it is likely hurting US business as well (closed our offices in Chicago, used to be the defacto international meeting headquarters.)

    7. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by codegen · · Score: 1

      Maybe this will be a wakeup call to the US that we've gone completely off the deep end here.

      If past experience is any indication, I doubt that it will.

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
    8. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by cptdondo · · Score: 1

      Except that Amsterdam wasn't my final destination, and I traveled in Europe on my Czech passport and returned to the US on my US passport. No way for them to know that I've been in Amsterdam. I get the same treatment when I come back from Asia.

      It's the usual harassment to demonstrate how tough the US on terror.

    9. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by HeadlessNotAHorseman · · Score: 1

      (I once went one a round-the-world holiday. At Fiji's passport control, they gave us garlands, and serenaded us with guitars; at US passport control they growled at us.)

      Fijians are all nice and smiley to white people, but try being of Indian origin there. My wife is a Fiji-born Indian, and I am white. When she travels back alone the Fijian border security go through her belongings with a fine-toothed comb, and generally make things very difficult. When she went there with me they barely even glanced at her bags or my bags, just smiled and let us through.

      --
      I like my coffee the way I like my women - roasted and ground up into little tiny pieces.
    10. Re:UI Border controls aimed at stopping tourism by captainClassLoader · · Score: 1

      As a U.S. citizen on recent international travel, I had few problems passing borders, outside of the fact that my backpack was searched and put through the bomb sniffer test by security people in both countries. But, given I had this in there, I was expecting some delay. It turned out to be much less of a problem than I thought it would be, and the Immigration folks in Boston were actually surprisingly cordial.

      --
      "The plural of anecdote is not data" -- Bruce Schneier
  7. I'm sorry, is that surprising how? by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've read it years ago that the USA is losing billions per year in tourism after the 9/11 border restrictions.

    The Olympics became a disgustingly commercial event for the past few decades and corporations are going to put pressure towards a location where prospective visitors aren't put off by over the top security measures...

    The next time someone asks what's the harm in the security theatre, point them towards the loss of tourism. I have to say I'm one of those people who deeply resent the invasive fingerprint taking entrance to the USA. It's a shame that stupid border procedures prevent me from visiting an otherwise beautiful country...

    --
    It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
    Be yourself no matter what they say
    1. Re:I'm sorry, is that surprising how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      same point with tokyo losing too... who wants to be finger printed to get in the country.

    2. Re:I'm sorry, is that surprising how? by arbiter1 · · Score: 1

      I've read it years ago that the USA is losing billions per year in tourism after the 9/11 border restrictions.

      that and the hosting city of the games loses billions paying for the advertisement, police, etc. and when they end they are in the hole a few billion that has to come from somewhere.

    3. Re:I'm sorry, is that surprising how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It was the same 30+years ago and never changed - one week I visited New York (briefly for a conference) then Moscow - New York was the most unpleasant of the two by a long long way, I even had a smile from the young Russian border guard - subsequent US visits were seldom much better - the only exception was flying into a mid west airport - transiting via Miami was totally unpleasant - the US never wanted tourists then, still less now every mom is scared that any tourist will blow up their local shopping mall

    4. Re:I'm sorry, is that surprising how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      it's just going to the movies with all those other pirates and thieves. they obviously don't want my money anymore!

    5. Re:I'm sorry, is that surprising how? by Swampash · · Score: 1

      I wonder how many paying jobs the Olympics would have created in America.

      #fail

    6. Re:I'm sorry, is that surprising how? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I have to say I'm one of those people who deeply resent the invasive fingerprint taking entrance to the USA. It's a shame that stupid border procedures prevent me from visiting an otherwise beautiful country..

      This is a bit tin-foily, but maybe your reaction was induced as part of a grand scheme of better (controlling | wearing down into submission) the resident population.

    7. Re:I'm sorry, is that surprising how? by weber · · Score: 1

      [...] I have to say I'm one of those people who deeply resent the invasive fingerprint taking entrance to the USA. It's a shame that stupid border procedures prevent me from visiting an otherwise beautiful country...

      Here are some alternative identification methods. I definately prefer the right-most one, since it wouldn't allow for my iris to be used for flashing commercials at me, like in Minority Report, and at the same time it would allow me to accurately convey my opinion about the Border Control.

  8. Border Control only? by AndGodSed · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well it could also be because a Rio olympics would be really awesome. I don't think Chicago could compete on atmosphere with Rio.

    1. Re:Border Control only? by mc+moss · · Score: 5, Insightful

      And the fact that South America never held the Olympics before.

    2. Re:Border Control only? by adamkennedy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Indeed, not to mention the rise of Brazil in the world in general (much like China before it) and the chance to finally have one in South America now there's a country competent enough to make it work. Plus the better weather, plus it's cheaper to go to, plus you don't need crazy-priced "Platinum (US Only)" grade medical and lawsuit travel insurance, plus how awesome a Brazillian opening and closing ceremony will be, plus America has had it relatively recently, and on and on.

    3. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yeah they're really friendly toward tourists in Rio.

    4. Re:Border Control only? by ThePhilips · · Score: 4, Funny

      how awesome a Brazillian opening and closing ceremony will be,

      Rest of the world would never know about it - because it would be rated 18+/21+ and would never be aired.

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    5. Re:Border Control only? by AndGodSed · · Score: 1

      I thought as much, but couldn't remember for sure.

    6. Re:Border Control only? by NoYob · · Score: 4, Informative
      Unlike China, Brazil actually has a thriving world class aeronautical industry . I see in the business press how the Boeing and Airbus needs to watch out for the Chinese and I think , "Chinese?! The Brazilians are well on their way."

      Although Brazil has quite a few social problems, they're well on their way to getting their shit to together and I'm thinking in the not too distant future, they'll be a very large power house in the World Economy. I may start taking Portuguese!

      --
      It's NOT me! It's the meds! I'm on 1000mg of Fukitol.
    7. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The USA isn't the rest of the world.

      The USA and some of the religious theocracies in the middle east would ban it.
      Everyone else would enjoy watching.

    8. Re:Border Control only? by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      The Establishment in Brazil is not generally very supporting of nudity, and there are laws prohibiting it which are generally only [effectively] relaxed on special occasions (through selective enforcement.) Even then, they are not simply ignored. The line moves! Yes, I have discussed this issue with actual Brazilians. I've thought about moving there but it seems a little chaotic for my tastes. There's even less middle class than we have here in the USA, although it's only a matter of time (I believe) before that's shifted the other direction. It might not even be that long.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
    9. Re:Border Control only? by the_humeister · · Score: 2, Informative

      I just heard this on NPR this morning. You know what else the Brazilians are pledging? $14 Billion! What was Chicago going to pledge? $5 Billion to this event.

    10. Re:Border Control only? by ThePhilips · · Score: 1

      Having your purse stolen during festival or rectal colonoscopy in U.S. airport. What would you pick?

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    11. Re:Border Control only? by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      Well it could also be because a Rio olympics would be really awesome. I don't think Chicago could compete on atmosphere with Rio.

      Plus the gander would get a little taste of the goose sauce too - Brazil is one of the few nations to 'retaliate' and start fingerprinting Americans (and only Americans) who enter the country:

      http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/06/1073268024215.html

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    12. Re:Border Control only? by Entropius · · Score: 1

      They're also doing well in the sciences. I've met some Brazilian physicists and they're all very good in their fields.

    13. Re:Border Control only? by Rich0 · · Score: 1

      This of course begs the question of why people should be forced to pay for the Olympics. There is no reason it couldn't be funded purely through ticket sales, television rights, and, if necessary, participation fees.

      Perhaps it would be OK if it were put up to a local referendum, and then any money that is pledged would be obtained from a tax on local businesses that would benefit from the tourism. If the Brazilians want to pay more money to host a sporting event, more power to them.

    14. Re:Border Control only? by pete6677 · · Score: 1

      All of this money goes straight to the IOC and other cronies. Expenses are paid by the host city.

      Goldman Sachs may be thought of as greedy, but they're amateurs compared to the Olympic profiteers.

    15. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I see in the business press how the Boeing and Airbus needs to watch out for the Chinese and I think , "Chinese?! The Brazilians are well on their way."

      Embraer isn't really competing with Boeing and Airbus. They're concentrating on the smaller airplanes for short-range, low number of passengers trips. Boeing and Airbus are creating the monstrosities that hold 400+ people.

      They each have their place, and they don't compete at all. You need the smaller airplanes to fly from cities to large airport hubs where a large airplane would be a waste of money. However, the smaller airplanes are a waste of money when flying from one large hub to another.

    16. Re:Border Control only? by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 0, Troll

      And the fact that South America never held the Olympics before.

      You're forgetting the Georgia olympics.

    17. Re:Border Control only? by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      Wow, because I totally never got my pockets picked in my home city. Like, it absolutely never happens.

    18. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right On!
      I hope they still do that.

    19. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Does "rest of the world" mean just the USA, to you?

    20. Re:Border Control only? by IrquiM · · Score: 1

      For you guys: HBO

      Rest of the world: National TV

      --
      This is blinging
    21. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And the fact that South America never held the Olympics before.

      Fuck the goddamned olympics anyway.

      Those bastards own the rights to the name. So we can have the high school olympics, the cowboyolympics, the dog and cat olympics. The name is damned near free to anyone to use with permission, but the gay olympics??? -- no fucking way. A lawsuit put a screeching end to that attempt.

      Until these homophobes back down on that, they can fucking well have their goddamned games in hell. I don't want any bunch of bigots making millions of dollars in my country.

      And, as we all know, the gay olympics really are with us -- if all the gay athletes dropped out, you could hold the olympics in a large mall parking lot.

    22. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rest of the world != The US. Here in Sweden we get to watch 18+/21+ content on television.

    23. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You are insane if you think that Brazil 'has it together' in any way shape or form. It is one of the most racially divided countries in the Americas and considers free access to cocaine in rural areas to be a suitable replacement for social programs.

    24. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With the weird fixation Americans have with the "ASS" why can't they shove the purse in their buts? WIN/W^H^H^H^GOAT.CX

    25. Re:Border Control only? by cdrnet · · Score: 2, Informative

      Don't worry, it's only Americans who have such weird issues with nudity. No problem airing it in the rest of the world...

    26. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, if you by "rest of the world" mean the US. In the actual "rest of the world" we can handle nudity just fine.

    27. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Two girls one ceremony ?

    28. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Nah, here in Europe we would watch it in prime time and with our children beside us. Nipples are only deadly in the USA.

    29. Re:Border Control only? by drsparkly · · Score: 1

      When will Antarctica get their turn? *brrr*

    30. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well,

      maybe in the US of A, and maybe in some islamistic minded corners of the world, but eg. the reaction on "Tittigate" (Janet Jackson - Justin Timberlake) was just: What a stupid people some american legislators and "Moral Authorities" are!

      I think the rest of the world will enjoy some beautiful bodies and a lot of real good show!

      CU

    31. Re:Border Control only? by nametaken · · Score: 1

      And the plea of an aging IOC member?

      And our public transit is dogshit?

      And we're known worldwide for serious corruption?

      And that various Olympic games would be in conflict with city gun laws?

      And our violent crime rates are ridiculously high?

      And our weather sucks?

      It's unfortunate for us Chicagoland residents, but the list honestly goes on and on. If I were them I'd have voted for Rio too.

    32. Re:Border Control only? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      Unlike China, Brazil actually has a thriving world class aeronautical industry . I see in the business press how the Boeing and Airbus needs to watch out for the Chinese and I think , "Chinese?! The Brazilians are well on their way."

      Embraer's largest plane (E190) competes with Airbus's (A320) and Boeing's smallest planes (B737). The latest generation of 737 (737-800) is fairly safe having a longer range then most airliners in the narrow body class and Airbus (EADS) and Boeing are concentrating on the wide body mid range (A330, A350, B767, B787) and long range (A340, A380, B747, B777).

      EADS and Boeing aren't concerned with Embraer, Embraer is competing with the companies like Bombardier (Canadian).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    33. Re:Border Control only? by Macgrrl · · Score: 1

      Rest of the world would never know about it - because it would be rated 18+/21+ and would never be aired.

      Like anything else of value, it will be on pay-per-view.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
    34. Re:Border Control only? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Rest of the world would never know about it - because it would be rated 18+/21+ and would never be aired.

      In the US, maybe. In Europe, the broadcasters will have to ADD some gratuituous nudity to pass the regulations.

  9. Personal Example by inicom · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I can give you a personal example of this - my father is a 76-year old western european citizen, and has been to the US easily a hundred times and was a US resident for over a decade. And as a merchant, he's spent easily many hundred of thousands on goods in the US over the past 40 years. Last Christmas, he came over to see us, and at the local International Airport he was pulled aside, patted down, his baggage and items gone over in detail, and interrogated for 20 minutes. Why? No reason given. As a result, he doesn't want to come to the US at all any more, so we have to go visit in Europe or rendezvous in another 3rd country. Yea, I know, we get to go to Europe more often, but it's a lot more expensive & difficult to coordinate schedules and take the family than to have one person travel here.

    I spent a lot of last year overseas on projects - and I heard over and over again from people that no longer think it's worth it to come to the US for shows/conferences/travel because of the travel restrictions and attitude toward non-US citizens by customs and immigration.

    --
    -a.e.mossberg
    1. Re:Personal Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That could happen anywhere. I was once travelling alone to visit a friend in Trondheim, Norway from Denmark. I was forced into a small claustrophic interrogation chamber and strip butt naked for no reason at all :( On top of that the airways lost my baggage irreversibly,

    2. Re:Personal Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      That's not necessarily a unique situation due to him being a "foreigner", though. American citizens are subjected to exactly that kind of treatment (and then some) on a random basis even on domestic travel.

    3. Re:Personal Example by gte275e · · Score: 0, Troll

      No reason at all? Did he have a beard?

    4. Re:Personal Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

      he doesn't want to come to the US at all any more, so we have to go visit in Europe or rendezvous in another 3rd country.

      Rendezvous in a third country, you say? Hmmm, sounds like grandpa has something to hide. What kind of merchant is he? Do you engage in "training" in this other country? I think the Department of Homeland Security would be interested in this story. Please sit quietly at your computer, a black helicopter and van has been dispatched to your location.

    5. Re:Personal Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sorry to hear that. Even worse, from what I see, the attitude towards US citizens even, sadly, is not that much better.

    6. Re:Personal Example by BradMajors · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It is not a non-citizen vs. citizen thing. I am a US citizen and I have been questioned for over an hour, my address book copied, my carry on papers have been copied, and my checked baggage gets opened and searched every time I fly.

    7. Re:Personal Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm back in the US for a course, a US Citizen traveling on a diplomatic passport. Even *I* hate the drill. Let's be clear: the fault on this isn't with Border Patrol, or State, or even TSA -- it's Congress. They've made sure that all the fear-mongers are satiated and that their 'constituents' (mostly security contractors) never have to fear that foreigners might show up in their town. They've done a pretty good job of keeping AmCits from traveling here unnecessarily, too, so they got that going for 'em. A few years ago I was lugging a diplomatic pouch through Dulles, and the TSA guy demanded to x-ray it. I explained to him that it was a dip pouch and he said "You people don't get special treatment here" I said "Yes, I've noticed that you regularly violate both treaties and US Code. Diplomats from other countries tell me they've started avoiding US assignments." He said "Good".

    8. Re:Personal Example by Derosian · · Score: 2, Insightful

      My father is actually a US citizen but he went out to Iraq working for KBR as a contractor, then later on switched to a better paying company that hires people out to other locations, now he nearly refuses to come back to the states, because he says the security and the people are such a pain. The good side is, he flies the family out to other countries now so we can visit him.

      I think the US needs to see the bigger picture more, and the individual event less. How many lives have we lost to terrorism in how many years of history?

    9. Re:Personal Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      My perspective, coming from South America, is that now the only people that wants to go to the US is 3rd world country population. That's due to several advantages not in their country. I hear lots of European people that don't want to go, and they have the means. While us, South Americans still lack some shows and electronic devices are real expensive. So, many people come for a quick trip, perhaps a concert, buying some goods (TV's, Laptops perhaps) and leave. The main drawback I see is that these families, contrary to wealthy European ones, have to struggle more to come, and therefore won't spend as much as they could.

      So, I still see people that use "tourism" as an excuse to buy things that are still cheaper in the US. If that price margin gets smaller, many people will stop traveling. Let the artists (U2 for example these days) go out on tours more often to those countries, and another big chunk of people will stop traveling too.

      As the Americans, if people don't have reasons to travel abroad because they think they have what they need, well, they won't do it at all.

    10. Re:Personal Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I am a university professor. I have invited a number of colleagues to visit or spend sabbatical leaves in the US. Increasingly, the reaction is "thanks, but it's just not worth coming to the US any more. Let's rendez-vous in Canada instead." And so, increasingly, that's what happens.

    11. Re:Personal Example by vu2lid · · Score: 1

      The attitude of the (US) airport security personnel also depends on the locality I guess (I am assuming that most of them are recruited locally).

      For example in a tiny airport like Providence (PVD) one will often find unbelievably arrogant security personnel. Security personnel in larger (attached to larger cities) airports - for example like Detroit (DTW) - are often more polite and reasonable.

      I am referring to US domestic air travel.

    12. Re:Personal Example by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      "Last Christmas, he came over to see us, and at the local International Airport he was pulled aside, patted down, his baggage and items gone over in detail, and interrogated for 20 minutes."

      Hey, pretty good treatment! On one of my post-911 trips to the US I was "randomly" selected for a pat down and baggage check five times before actually boarding the plane. I have yet to travel to, in or from the US without being patted down every time through security, though they've eased up on the manual luggage rummaging a bit.

      And I'm white, Canadian and have no criminal record.

    13. Re:Personal Example by Rorschach1 · · Score: 1

      I'm a clean cut white guy, born in the US, a business owner with no criminal record and a (now expired) security clearance, and I still get treated like a criminal by US customs, more often than not. I guess you can consider that a victory for equal rights - they treat everyone like crap, regardless. I've been treated worse by customs in Los Angeles than anywhere else in the world. From China to Bosnia, no other country has ever hassled me. Had some confusion with Thai customs when they misread a Chinese receipt, but at least they were polite.

      I did discover a little trick on my last return from Asia, though. After passing through most of the customs crap, I had an agent approach me and start their 'casual' secondary questioning. Turns out the key to ending that quickly is to immediately launch into excessive, tedious detail about all of the trade shows you visited, vendors you met with, and so on.

      That only goes so far with the guy at the desk who's got a list of questions he needs answered, but a little extra detail does seem to shift them from 'interrogate' mode to 'let's just hurry up and get rid of this guy.' Sure, they might not need to be declared, but since he asked I'll tell him about the toy helicopter I got for my son in Shenzhen, and the Lego knock-off set I got for my daughter, and the cute cat figurine I got for my girlfriend during the stopover in Narita.

    14. Re:Personal Example by bored · · Score: 1

      I'm going to second the dozens of comments about everything being treated like ass. I'm a US citizen as well, and of the last half dozen entries maybe 2 where what I would call smooth. I've done everything from sit in the first mystery room (you know the one where people in line mysteriously get taken to, and then just as mysteriously released, or disappear into other rooms never to be seen again!), to being stuck in customs sweeps where they go over every passenger's belonging with a fine tooth comb. Or most common, having the joy of standing in the immigration line for more than a few hours.

      I've missed enough flights due to simply trying to reenter, that I now try to leave 6 hours on my itineraries to get back in. I would rather sit around an airport for 5 hours, than get unexpectedly stuck in some city overnight.

      BTW: If you haven't had the joy of the first mystery room, then you are really missing an experience. I couldn't actually believe how people are treated there. Lets just say, after my fairly mild experience I believe all the stories posted on the internet.

    15. Re:Personal Example by Fred_A · · Score: 1

      A few years ago I was lugging a diplomatic pouch through Dulles, and the TSA guy demanded to x-ray it. I explained to him that it was a dip pouch and he said "You people don't get special treatment here" I said "Yes, I've noticed that you regularly violate both treaties and US Code. Diplomats from other countries tell me they've started avoiding US assignments." He said "Good".

      Just... Wow. Those guys are really far gone nowadays. They've started their very own little virtual ring dictatorship around the US.

      --

      May contain traces of nut.
      Made from the freshest electrons.
    16. Re:Personal Example by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I spent a lot of last year overseas on projects - and I heard over and over again from people that no longer think it's worth it to come to the US for shows/conferences/travel because of the travel restrictions and attitude toward non-US citizens by customs and immigration.

      I was born in the U.S., making me a U.S. citizen, but I've lived in Europe most of my life. In the end of this month, I'm going to LISA'09 in Baltimore, but if I didn't have the U.S. passport I'd probably consider other options, mainly because of how the post-9/11 immigration process.

      How are the immigration procedures in the immigration checkpoints for U.S. citizens?

  10. more likely reason: by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 2, Insightful

    More likely, part of the reason Chi. lost the Olymipic bid had something to do with an honor's student getting hit on the side of the head with a railroad tie (as captured and shown on CNN and youtube.

    There are people out of control in Chicago right now and I have to say I can't blame the IOC for not wanting to go there. Along with the traffic issues and overwhelming government corruption there are too many problems for Chicago to have an Olympics in the near future.

    1. Re:more likely reason: by tmk · · Score: 1

      If this was the issue, how could one of the crime capitals of the world get the Olympics? Rio is not known for its secure environment.

    2. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if you think crime in Chicago is bad, then don't ever go to Rio. 3/4 of the city is a drug lord controlled slum. Chi-town didn't lose the games because of crime.

    3. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      There are people out of control in Chicago right now and I have to say I can't blame the IOC for not wanting to go there.

      As compared to Rio, where there are over 8000 murders per year? Think a bit.

      Along with the traffic issues and overwhelming government corruption

      Ok, that's true. The IOC is so corrupt they don't want any competition from the locals.

    4. Re:more likely reason: by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      Rio isn't much better in terms of crime.

    5. Re:more likely reason: by wickerprints · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Who the hell modded you up?

      Rio de Janeiro is one of the most violent cities in the world. You think one sensationalist news story compares to what goes on in the favelas of Rio? What's worse is that the proximity of poor areas to rich ones means you're not safe anywhere. People regularly get mugged and kidnapped, tourists especially.

      Rio's murder rate: 37.7 per 100,000 (2006)
      Chicago's murder rate: 15.7 per 100,000 (2005)

    6. Re:more likely reason: by Foolicious · · Score: 2, Funny

      There are people out of control in Chicago right now

      Like its mayor, Richard Daley.

      --
      Please don't use "umm" or "err" or "erm".
    7. Re:more likely reason: by ildon · · Score: 1

      You should watch this movie.

    8. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, because Brazil doesn't have ANY crime whatsoever.

    9. Re:more likely reason: by Haffner · · Score: 2, Informative

      As someone who lives blocks from where the new Olympic Village would be held, I can assure you that it really isnt a safe place (right now). Too bad we didnt win the bid, as it would have really helped to clean up the area. Washington Park, the intended site, IIRC had multiple shootings over the summer. The Olympics would be hosted in a pretty bad part of town - Some of the worst neighborhoods in the city are literally right down the street.

      --
      "Going to war without the French is like going deer hunting without your accordion." ~General Norman Schwarzkopf
    10. Re:more likely reason: by couchslug · · Score: 1, Informative

      Chicago is famously corrupt, and since I have no interest in visiting it as an American (having seen enough of urban blight and the people who live in it) I can see why the Olympics are being hosted elsewhere. Rio is exotic, Chicago is not. Rio can clear whatever area is needed for the Olympics, while US law exists to obstruct. Labor costs will be lower in Rio. End of story.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    11. Re:more likely reason: by r0yrul3z · · Score: 1

      You should seriously consider posting some sources when you are trying to get a point across.

    12. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Actually 15.7 is still pretty sad.

      London and Madrid had rates below 2 murders per 100,000 in 2006.

    13. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Detroit's murder rate: 47.3 per 100,000 (2006)

    14. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, and it's a good thing it didn't go to Detroit (46 per 100000 (2007)), Baltimore (45 per 100000 (2007)), or St. Louis (40 per 100000 (2007)).

      Look in your own backyard first.

    15. Re:more likely reason: by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Yikes. Both of those are awfully high.

    16. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Holy shit, here in Norway the murder rate is 0.7 per 100 000!

      Based on your statement both places are to dangerous for the olympics.

    17. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Detroit's murder rate: 46 per 100,000 (2007).
      Baltimore - 45.
      St Louis - 40.
      Yep - those foreign cities sure are violent.
      Oh yes - Madrid, Tokyo & London - around 2.

    18. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      don't know if it's true but the radio was saying Rio cops killed the same number of people per day that die in Chicago to both violence and the cops.

    19. Re:more likely reason: by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Rio has a murder rate a bit more than that of Detriot, but with enough money the problem areas can be cordoned off or simply destroyed by demolition.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    20. Re:more likely reason: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I thought you were going to end on a dramatic note like

      Rio's murder rate: 37.7 per 100,000 (2006)
      Chicago's murder rate: 15.7 per 1,000,000 (2005)

      instead, the two numbers are basically the same! I wouldn't be surprised if they literally WERE the same in eitehr 2006 or 2005, as you quote disparate years, and who knows how much it fluctuates naturally. Just sayin'

  11. I don't blame them by Aurisor · · Score: 2, Insightful

    The amount of man-handling and smug stares I have to endure from thick-necked, multi-chinned police academy rejects is bad enough when flying domestically. That's no way to welcome the largest tourist event in the world.

    1. Re:I don't blame them by Ronald+Dumsfeld · · Score: 1

      The amount of man-handling and smug stares I have to endure from thick-necked, multi-chinned police academy rejects is bad enough when flying domestically. That's no way to welcome the largest tourist event in the world.

      Yes, but they never thought of this. They just wanted to welcome the largest tourists in the world.

      I think most of them are already in America, and looking for their next cheeseburger.

      --
      Where's the Kaboom?
      There's supposed to be an Earth-shattering Kaboom.
  12. They may be lucky! by gilgongo · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I live in London, where just about anyone you ask who lives here will tell you they don't want the games, never wanted the games, and are angry that money to fund the building of venues and facilities is being taken from National Lottery funds and (possibly) direct taxation.

    Mileage varies considerably in the short and long-term economic and social effects of hosting an Olympics. London doesn't need it, and Chicago may well not have done either.

    --
    "And the meaning of words; when they cease to function; when will it start worrying you?"
    1. Re:They may be lucky! by zmollusc · · Score: 4, Funny

      The London Olympics have epic potential for showcasing the UK. The cycling events should all be on the pot-holed, speed-bumped, litter-filled streets and have to comply with all road laws, the weight lifters would all be subject to health and safety legislation, as would the hammer and javelin throwers. Runners would struggle down the uneven, excrement-smeared pavements, dodging around the lamp-posts, bollards and fencing etc.

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    2. Re:They may be lucky! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      So you're a snaggled tooth limey yourself then?

    3. Re:They may be lucky! by CrackedButter · · Score: 1

      So true, don't know why you got modded down.

    4. Re:They may be lucky! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Have to disagree with the above post, I live in London and I'm very much looking forward to it.
      You mustn't get whipped a-long by the overly cynical press we have in this country. I tend to think that even if the games are a complete success, the press will want to create a air of disappointment around them.

    5. Re:They may be lucky! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the weight lifters would all be subject to health and safety legislation, as would the hammer and javelin throwers.

      Well, I certainly hope they are. Why wouldn't they be?

    6. Re:They may be lucky! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No one in Chicago really gave a shit except for Daley and his cronies. This wasn't even a news item when I went in to work yesterday.

    7. Re:They may be lucky! by Latinhypercube · · Score: 0

      Don't forget being chased through the isle of Dogs by Knife wielding chavs.

    8. Re:They may be lucky! by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>the weight lifters would all be subject to health and safety legislation, as would the hammer and javelin throwers

      I thought the UK banned javelins? Last I heard, the Olympians would have to throw spoons down the field.

    9. Re:They may be lucky! by Angostura · · Score: 1

      I live in London, where most of my friends will tell you they are really looking forward to the games, wanted the games, and are happy enough that money to fund the building of venues and facilities is being taken from National Lottery funds and (possibly) direct taxation.

      Hope that helps.

    10. Re:They may be lucky! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmm, speak for yourself. I, for one, am really looking forward to the London Olympics. Then again some people will find a reason to moan about anything!

    11. Re:They may be lucky! by jez9999 · · Score: 1

      It doesn't help that the IOC's selection process for which sports should be included is woefully disrespectful of a sport's appropriateness for testing various physical and mental skills, and has everything to do with commercial profitability, resulting in squash being ruled out, whilst golf, table tennis, and fencing get to be included. I've lost pretty much all respect for the Olympics having realized the shittiness of this selection procedure.

    12. Re:They may be lucky! by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Runners would struggle down the uneven, excrement-smeared pavements, dodging around the lamp-posts, bollards and fencing etc.

      That would classify as extreme hurdling.

    13. Re:They may be lucky! by T+Murphy · · Score: 1

      (I live in the Chicago suburbs) It's not that I don't want the games or economic reasons. I don't want them for political reasons. Maybe it's the same in Madrid, Tokyo and Rio, but Chicago does a good job of defining how machine politics work. I don't want Mayor Daley to have $Billions in contracts to dole out to friends and political connections. Not to mention he'll get credit for it all which will ensure he remains mayor for life. He's done some good things with his power, but in the end his machine is far too corrupt and I'd hate the power he'd gain far more than I would like having the games right at home.

    14. Re:They may be lucky! by zmollusc · · Score: 1

      Biodegradable wooden spoons from sustainable resources.

      --
      They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
    15. Re:They may be lucky! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a Chicago resident, I can tell you that I feel very lucky.

  13. Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Rogerborg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    And get precleared through US immigration while still within a civilised country? No joking: if the Security Theatre misidentifies me as a notorious enemy of Freedemocracy, I'd rather prove my innocence to just about anyone except US "Homeland Security".

    --
    If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    1. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by gclarkey · · Score: 1

      And get precleared through US immigration while still within a civilised country? No joking: if the Security Theatre misidentifies me as a notorious enemy of Freedemocracy, I'd rather prove my innocence to just about anyone except US "Homeland Security".

      I live in Ireland and travel to the US regularly with work. The US Immigration guys in Shannon and Dublin are still complete dicks, although they are admittedly less of a pain in the ass than the immigration in Newark, but those are the only three US immigration I've been through. To be fair though, if you want a tough stance on the people you want to let into your country, complete dicks are just the kind of people to do that job well.

    2. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Rogerborg · · Score: 1

      I'd take issue with the actual effectiveness of complete dicks at keeping serious undesirables out, but the important difference is that they're complete dicks trying to fuck you under Irish and then ultimately European law, rather than US.

      --
      If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
    3. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Because it is US Immigration that mans these "preclearance points" - can be even more rigorous than flying into US directly.

    4. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by jcenters · · Score: 3, Funny

      Or even easier: Fly to Mexico and jump the border. I find it interesting that legitimate visitors have such a hard time getting into the country when our southern border is Swiss cheese.

      --

      vi ~/.emacs

    5. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The US Immigration staff at Dublin Airport are, in my experience, every bit as obnoxious and humourless as their domestic counterparts.

    6. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If you get "pre-cleared" in Canada, who do you think is preclearing you? It is US Customs and Border Control officer. The same ex-military, nasty unwelcoming bunch that you would have to face coming in from anywhere else.

    7. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dublin airport?

      "are you, or have you ever been, a terrorist or enemy of free democracy?"

      "yup"

      "ah, well, erm you won't be blowing up any of those American places now will you, so through you go then."

    8. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by gclarkey · · Score: 1

      I suppose I agree, and at least you would get refused entry before you actually fly, rather than getting there and being told to "do one"...

    9. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by imsabbel · · Score: 1

      Haha.
      Reminds me of one time i went to US from Canada (on a trip from europe) and managed to not get a i94 in that process.
      Happy funtime explaining why you dont have one in your passport when leaving the country...

      --
      HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
    10. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a U.S. citizen, I'm still annoyed by the name of the Department of Homeland Security. It's the word "Homeland" that rankles. I think it institutionalizes an "us-against-them" view of the world, which is rather unwholesome. It also seems evident that the people running that agency do not share my concern.

    11. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by shutdown+-p+now · · Score: 1

      Or even easier: Fly to Mexico and jump the border. I find it interesting that legitimate visitors have such a hard time getting into the country when our southern border is Swiss cheese.

      Do you think your north border is any better?

    12. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      You still get inspected by US border guards. On the upside, if they decide you're a terrorist you just have to make it down the hallway rather than to the nearest border.

    13. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by conureman · · Score: 1

      Back in the early eighties, just for laughs, my friend Patrick Laffey and I snuck back from Tijuana through the brush, on foot. We were the only U.S. citizens out there, but we weren't alone.

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    14. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by zoney_ie · · Score: 1

      Yeah, flying to the US is a pain and the US immigration is still unpleasant, but it really helps psychologically to be in an airport I'm super-familiar with, filled up with a nice Irish breakfast from relaxing after check-in looking out over Shannon estuary from the restaurant, and knowing that whatever they throw at me, I'm still just in a little building built on ordinary Irish bogland near home. Going through security in Shannon airport at least is something even the security guys just seem to go through the rigmarole of just like the passengers (actually Dublin is much the same but it's nevertheless a horrendous ordeal just because of the sheer queues of people at times). People here in Ireland aren't that exercised about procedure and stuff!

      Note that you still have to deal with the same people and handle the same "interrogation" at pre-clearance, but it is something one can much more easily cope with when you know that if they stopped you in your tracks, you could just leave the airport and go down to the pub or back home to bed. Haven't been there since they integrated Agriculture and Customs checks at pre-clearance (these generally didn't involve anything much on arrival in the US though - just the "no I haven't been on a farm" lark).

      It was a bit surreal all the US military wandering around in Shannon in uniform though, although any imposing effect was entirely cancelled by their fawning over Irish tourist trap trinkets in the duty-free gift shop.

      --
      -- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
    15. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ireland a civilised country? You're talking about a country where the average house price is/was half a million euros for a house smaller than those in the worst slums of the US. Not to mention that Ireland will also take your picture and fingerprint you as well. I'm really sick of this country. Worst infrastructure and amenities in the western world and the most expensive country to live in with ridiculously low salaries.

    16. Re:Why not fly into Canada or Ireland first by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      precleared through US immigration while still within a civilised country

      Why would I want to visit, if you don't consider my original country a civilized country?

  14. I'm glad by racerx509 · · Score: 1

    Frankly, I'm glad to see them reject our bid and I'm even happier to see them state why. Everyone knows the border restrictions are stupidly strict in some ways, and too lax in others. What makes this even better is that President Obama himself did the presentation, so it will come as a slap in the face to him. This will hopefully get him moving on rolling back some of the more bothersome portions of provisions of us air travel border restrictions

    --
    13 year old white supremacists are shitty web designers.
    1. Re:I'm glad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Frankly, I'm glad to see them reject our bid and I'm even happier to see them state why.

      Hey, numbnuts, did you read the article? Even read the summary? Of course not.

      They didn't state why. Some people are GUESSING at the reason why.

      Personally, I suspect the main reason is that the games have never been to south america, and since Rio will be hosting the soccer world cup many years before the olympics, they will have quite a bit of experience by the time the olympics arrive.

      What makes this even better is that President Obama himself did the presentation, so it will come as a slap in the face to him. This will hopefully get him moving on rolling back some of the more bothersome portions of provisions of us air travel border restrictions

      Actually, the restrictions are set by Congress, not the Obamessiah. And there is quite a difference between air travel restrictions & border restrictions.

      At the US border, everyone (except Canadians) get photographed & fingerprinted, even if you're from a friendly country (like the UK) that doesn't need a visa. Many of us find that very insulting - fingerprinting is what you do to criminals.

  15. Easily the most unfriendly airports in the world by Ovspec · · Score: 2, Informative

    Travelling through the US (spending a night there) is one of the worst things that can happen to you. I now avoid it at all costs, even if the other alternative is alot more expensive, hell its even worse that going through Venezuela. You don't need to make people jump through hundreds unnecessary hoops, treat them like some kind parasite/criminal you don't want anywhere near your country and employ the stupidest, most incompetent, pettiest little assholes to handle them in order to protect your country from the big bad terrorism. If a terrorist wants in, its not going to be hard, airports that treat people like scum are just further isolating your country from the rest of the world.

  16. Re:Easily the most unfriendly airports in the worl by MickyTheIdiot · · Score: 4, Informative

    Just so you know, people at American airports don't treat *Americans* very well either.

  17. "The most ridiculous interview..." by Guppy · · Score: 5, Informative

    "The most ridiculous interview I heard with my own ears:
      Interviewer: "What did you have this morning as breakfast?"
      Applicant: "Bread." I: "Nothing else?"
      Applicant: "No."
      Interviewer: "According to American law, we cannot grant you a visa."
      Applicant: "....".

    I was sitting beside the person when he was rejected. You know, it is funny to reject someone according American law just because he only had bread in the morning."

    From http://home.wangjianshuo.com/archives/20060519_getting_us_visa_in_china.htm

    1. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I am a greencard holder, and this is how it went at the Newark airport on my return after a long break I took to visit my family in India:

      The Lady in Uniform: How long were you there?
      me: About 3 months.
      TLIU: Why 3 months? That's too long.
      me: Because I had not visited my family for a while and I needed a break.
      TLIU:What were you doing there?
      me: Being with family, visiting friends, seeing places.
      TLIU: But 3 month is a long time for that.
      me: Er..

      It went on for 2 more minutes like this. I have no idea what she was trying to do there. I mean, which law I might have breaking for taking three months off work?

    2. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by easyTree · · Score: 5, Funny

      I mean, which law I might have breaking for taking three months off work?

      Guilty of having more holidays than her?

    3. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by z_gringo · · Score: 4, Funny

      Sorry. The correct answer was Bacon. Remember that for next time. Bacon.

      --
      -- -- Warning. Do not stare directly at the sun.
    4. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe they scanned his stomach and knew he was lying.

    5. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Very clever... weeds the Jewish, Muslim AND Vegetarians out.

    6. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No, the correct answer is "guys like you." I mean, who the hell wants to come to the US anyways. I have been trying to get out of here.

    7. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Ihmhi · · Score: 3, Funny

      I live in Newark, so I'd understand how you'd catch some shit. I know it smells bad, but the gas mask was probably a bad idea.

    8. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by MagusSlurpy · · Score: 1

      Maybe they scanned his stomach and knew he was lying.

      They don't scan, silly. They probe!

      --
      My sister opened a computer store in Hawaii. She sells C shells by the seashore.
    9. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Anynomous+Coward · · Score: 1

      Bacon. And steak. A quarter pounder steak. Gotta clog these arteries early in the morning before they start passing blood.

      --
      I'm not a coward by any name.
    10. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      The last time I went to the US, my mother was driving me to the Greyhound station to avoid me the hassle of dragging three months of luggage in the metro, and her main advice "when you get in, they don't care that as a Canadian citizen you have a visitor visa waiver, especially since they'll hear that you're a foreigner, you lie and tell them you're only staying the month, you'll thank me when you write back from your boyfriend's"

    11. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by superyanthrax · · Score: 1

      Green card holders can have their green card revoked if it is determined that they have an intent to establish a permanent residence in another country, no matter how long they have been out of the USA, I have a feeling they are trying to have a "gotcha" so they can kick you out.

    12. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Based on reading the quote, there's nothing that links American law with consumption of only bread. That's a huge leap of logic to connect the two together.

    13. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Idiomatick · · Score: 1

      Lol my GF is in school in the states and she came to visit me in Canada. She got held up for 20minutes because they didn't believe people can maintain long distance relationships. The rest of the ppl on the bus weren't pleased.

    14. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by PCM2 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I am a U.S. Citizen who travels on a U.S. passport. The last time I came back from an overseas trip, I showed the security guy my passport and was subjected to the following interview:

      Interviewer: Where will you be going once you land?
      Me: Uh. Home?
      Interviewer: And what will you do once you're in the U.S.?
      Me: ...

      I had been hopping between airports for a long time that day and was tired and eager to get home, so you can imagine how ridiculous this situation seemed. Part of me wanted to say, "Oh, you know, the usual... smoke some weed, hang out with my buddies at the mosque, maybe get on welfare..." I mean, technically I could have said "rob banks" and as a U.S. citizen I would still have every right to return to my own country! (And I mean that literally...the Right to return to my country.)

      But you can fill in my real answer yourself; I'm sure you get the idea. Expedience was necessary here, as I had a connecting flight to catch. But it still galled me that I had to talk to some droid as if I were interviewing for a job at McDonald's just to return home after a trip.

      --
      Breakfast served all day!
    15. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by neurovish · · Score: 1

      "The most ridiculous interview I heard with my own ears: Interviewer: "What did you have this morning as breakfast?" Applicant: "Bread." I: "Nothing else?" Applicant: "No." Interviewer: "According to American law, we cannot grant you a visa." Applicant: "....". I was sitting beside the person when he was rejected. You know, it is funny to reject someone according American law just because he only had bread in the morning."

      From http://home.wangjianshuo.com/archives/20060519_getting_us_visa_in_china.htm

      The correct answer is of course "ham, sausage, a side of bacon, and a bloody mary to wash it all down"

    16. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by grotgrot · · Score: 2, Interesting

      When I came through SFO last time their computers read my British passport and Green Card and then decided that meant I was American which resulted in ever increasing numbers of supervisors being called over. At some point one of them started arguing with me as I was born in an African country but was only there for one month after my birth. He was insisting I must have a passport from there as well. No amount of pointing out that the US is one of the few countries with a policy of being born there means automatic citizenship appeased him. (They eventually worked out the computer system was being stupid.)

      BTW the time limit for outside visits with a Green Card is 6 months. You can go for up to a year if you fill out lots of paper work in advance.

    17. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by gbjbaanb · · Score: 1

      I've had bacon in America.

      The correct answer is 'delicious pork products brought to us by the Krusty corporation".

    18. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      Applicant should hire a lawyer and/or contact the Congressman or Senator of the petitioner if it's a family-based visa. Likely the interviewer thought the applicant was lying (and I'd bet dollars to doughnuts this was in a Stokes interview and the applicant's sponsor had said something different about what he/she had had for breakfast) but that's still no reason to deny a visa.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    19. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by zuperduperman · · Score: 2, Interesting

      This kind of thing was one of the factors that made me decide not to apply for a green card when it was offered. Once I looked into it I realized it was an untenable way to live my life - settling in a country but living forever knowing that a breach of any of a whole raft of obscure and ambiguous constraints and restrictions might see me kicked out of the country despite having maybe a house, family, job, kids or all kinds of other commitments. In fact, the way I understood it at the time, they could basically terminate your greencard for *any* reason - just because they felt like it. No one should live with that threat hanging over their head. Of course, one can (and probably should) apply for citizenship eventually, but that might be 10 years down the track.

    20. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by nametaken · · Score: 1

      Feigning Canadian as an entrance strategy? I'm not sure that's legal.

    21. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I know you were feeling tired, but the "correct" answer would have gone like this:
      Interviewer: Where will you be going once you land?
      Me: Uh. Home?
      Interviewer: And what will you do once you're in the U.S.?
      Me: Whatever I feel like I wanna do. Gosh!

      the last bit being, of course, in your very best imitation.

    22. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by bobzaguy · · Score: 1

      Obviously not more, just longer. "Why 3 months? That's too long."

    23. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by easyTree · · Score: 1

      If one's been conditioned to think that five or six weeks per year of free time is 'normal' then sure..

      Me, I like free time :D

    24. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They call it "vacation" in the US. Holiday refers specifically to days like Christmas, Thanksgiving, Veterans Day, Independence Day, etc.

    25. Re:"The most ridiculous interview..." by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

      Interviewer: And what will you do once you're in the U.S.?

      Sorry, the correct answer was, "Octo-stacker".

      --
      My God, it's Full of Source!
      OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  18. I protest by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Some people enjoy cavity searches when they're on their way to Disneyland.

  19. Re:Easily the most unfriendly airports in the worl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Hi,
    I try quite hard to avoid US airports too, including transitting throigh both Mexico and Canada, but when I do I find the staff quite pleasant, by and large. They are generally decent folk operating a pretty poor system. Most Americans, in my experience, are substantially more polite than most Europeans, and this seems ot carry over to your Border protection people.

  20. Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by RealityProphet · · Score: 2, Interesting

    You know, as much as I hate how Obama continually sets himself and America up for trampling on by all members of the international community, Rio deserves this, and so does Chicago for that matter.

    The Olympics belong to the emerging economies, not the first world. Western nations whine so much about the possibility of hosting the Olympics, why on earth should they choose any western nation? London has cried from the get go of how much it'll cost, how other large scale projects have failed miserably, even how much traffic it would bring and how much it would, oh gasp, inconvenience the local populace. F em. Half of Chicagoans didn't even *want* the Olympics hosted there. WTF? Why have it there then? What a welcome!

    Contrast the western media's handling of the London bid, the Chicago bid with that of the Beijing games and their exuberance. It was the most spectacular games in history, and they were positively giddy to be hosting it. Contrast Chicago's reception of their own bid with Rio's. You get the feeling that all of Brazil wants to host it, so let them! While I don't think it'll be as big as the Beijing olympics, it will be far more spectacular, optimistic, and inviting than anything any of the other condenders would have been able to muster.

    1. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by Zarf · · Score: 1

      Well said. I was going to post the same thing. When I heard the argument from the Brazilians I knew it was going to them. They have one of the 10 largest economies in the world and have never hosted. Your argument makes a lot of sense. Getting to host the Olympics should be a badge of honor saying you've arrived. I sincerely hope we get to see the Olympics hosted on every continent.

      --
      [signature]
    2. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by Darkn3ss · · Score: 1

      Living in the Milwaukee area, I am very glad that the Olympics are NOT going to Chicago. Chicago is a land of garbage and destruction, and doesn't deserve the Olympics. Obama just wanted it there because he lived there once. I will be glad to never see the Olympics in America again. The Olympics just beg for terrorist attacks, and I would prefer to keep those in other nations.

    3. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by hamburger+lady · · Score: 2, Informative

      Obama just wanted it there because he lived there once

      "lived there once"? what the hell does that mean? outside of 4 years at harvard he lived in chicago from 1985 until he became president.

      --

      ---
      Is this the MPAA? Is this the RIAA? Is this the DMCA? I thought it was the USA!
    4. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Exactly. Lived there. I wouldn't have said lived there once, but I'm not a dumbass. Now he lives in a house he doesn't belong in, and nobody wants him in.

    5. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Don't US Senators live in Washington?

    6. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by CitizenJohnJohn · · Score: 1

      "I sincerely hope we get to see the Olympics hosted on every continent."

      Antarctica might be tricky.

    7. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by 4D6963 · · Score: 1

      why on earth should they choose any western nation?

      I didn't know Brazil wasn't in the west. From the western nation of Ireland it looks like Brazil is westerner. The point? Don't say western if what you mean has nothing to do with the west.

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    8. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by Zarf · · Score: 1

      That would be a fantastic year 3000 wouldn't it?

      --
      [signature]
    9. Re:Good for Rio (good for Chicago) by Culture20 · · Score: 1

      The Olympics belong to the emerging economies, not the first world.

      That is why you fail. The Olympics has, since its ancient roots and its modern inception, been centered around "first world" nations.

  21. that's gotta be the last reason they lost... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    A history of city government corruption that goes back so far I don't remember a time when it didn't exist, neither can my parents...

    A weak police force that's powerless to control the gangs and violence that occurs on a daily basis...

    A solid history of mob corrupted city services...

    Pollution â" better bring your bottled water since BP is allowed to dumps millions of gallons of solvents into Lake Michigan which is the main source of fresh water...

    Don't even get me started about the construction that would need to happen to host the Olympics there â" they can't build anything anywhere near budget or on deadline. Millennium Park, the gigantic park that was to be built for the big Millennium celebration, was tens of millions of dollars over-budget and completed years late, not to mention the poor quality of construction all-around (a moderate downpour will result in days of "raining" inside all levels of Millennium parking garage).

    No one seems to pay attention to the fact that they are laying off record numbers of city employees at all levels due to budget deficits, do they somehow think things would magically correct themselves and they would have the funds needed to host an event that size?

    They'd have to move the Olympics to Milwaukee at the last minute just so they could happen.

    Two words: Kennedy & O'Hare

    The only real loser in all this is the mob. They were rubbing their mitts up until yesterday.

    In fact I can't even think of one good reason to hold the Olympics in Chicago. I can't believe they are actually surprised they lost.

    1. Re:that's gotta be the last reason they lost... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They'd have to move the Olympics to Milwaukee at the last minute just so they could happen.

      Nothing wrong with that: but then again, I am from Wisconsin.

  22. Mod this up by gerddie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Then again, when I'm already in Canada, why would I want to go to the US ;)

    1. Re:Mod this up by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      It's warmer.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    2. Re:Mod this up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well...Right now it's 76 degrees F without a cloud in the sky. But, then again, I live in Southern California. In Toronto it is 57 and cloudy. Vancouver is 43 and cloudy. Winnipeg is 45 and cloudy. Montreal is 55 and cloudy. You're probably right, though. There are no reasons I can think of why the US is worth all the hassle to visit. I'm thinking about going swimming in my pool this afternoon when warms up a little bit.

    3. Re:Mod this up by Nethead · · Score: 1

      Indian casinos. I see dozens of buses from Canada every day, mostly filled with older Asians. And don't forget the outlet stores!
      Oddly though, my wife and I took our honeymoon in Victoria.

      --
      -- I have a private email server in my basement.
    4. Re:Mod this up by royallthefourth · · Score: 4, Funny

      So that you can get access to the best healthcare system in the world. Duh.

    5. Re:Mod this up by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Cheap gas :)

    6. Re:Mod this up by m.ducharme · · Score: 1

      Not in Chicago.

      --
      Rule of Slashdot #0: You and people like you are not representative of the larger population. - A.C.
    7. Re:Mod this up by AceofSpades19 · · Score: 2, Funny

      First you need to sacrifice your first born child and your right hand before you can even get within 50 feet of a hospital

    8. Re:Mod this up by jeffstar · · Score: 1

      hawaii.

  23. Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

    Anyone ever try to enter Brazil? They aren't the easiest either...

    1. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by JamesP · · Score: 5, Informative

      No, they just make you go through the exact same thing a Brazilian citizen goes while going to your contry.

      If you're from a Schengen country, come on in. If you're from the US, you need a visa, you need to have your fingerprints taken, etc, etc

      Reciprocity's a bitch, isn't it.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    2. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by cutecub · · Score: 1

      Agreed. In 2004, Brazil turned around and started subjecting US visitors to the same treatment the US was meting out to Brazilian travelers.

      As they say on the school playground: "The United States Started it."

      The 2016 Olympics should be interesting for American travelers.

      -S

    3. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 3, Interesting

      They could really do us a solid if they were to make a big todo about the reciprocity. Most americans have no clue how bad it is because they don't have to suffer through it. If the brazilians would take the time to explain exactly why each american gets a symbolic anal cavity search, it would go a long way towards getting the problem fixed back here.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    4. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pretty much this.

      I am Brazilian. I remember laughing when that law appeared a few years ago.

      I don't think it useful, mind you, but it is hilarious.

    5. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by JamesP · · Score: 1

      And still, even with the reciprocity, it's easier for an American to go to Brazil.

      For example, no need for a transit visa. No TSA (and I really, REALLY am glad for this)

      Of course, a foreign visitor to Brazil will probably be extorted by customs (not border control), robbed while leaving the airport or at least getting to pay twice or thrice the price of the cab so it kind of evens out in the end :(

      yep, I'm Brazilian living in BR

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    6. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reciprocity just means that there's more data to flow back to the other country's three letter agencies. You know that US "intelligence" isn't allowed to spy on American citizens. Well, foreign immigration can, and then they share their findings with their friends at other countries' TLAs. Do not applaud privacy invasions, not even those that you think are instated to "get back" at another country('s people).

    7. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Reciprocity's a bitch, isn't it.

      Except that it's directed at ordinary travelers who have nothing to do with US border policy, so it's just more fucking bullshit you are cheering on like a total asswipe scumbag sack of filth.

    8. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A few years ago the USA lost thousands of people in an act of terrorism that shocked the world and brought the world together in once single act, the response to this created more terrorists, a reaction to that created more again. We all know the USA is acting and reacting to terrorism but instead of being the nation we all respect and require but they are being played by a clever enemy. The USA has the correct government, give them time and do not underwrite them and they will be a great nation once again, until that happens it's real friends should help and advise even if they dislike the advice they receive from the people they trust.

    9. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by cptdondo · · Score: 1

      Heck, just have the Brazilians call the US Border Patrol every time a US Citizen gets on the plane to go home.. Have them give a description and a vague state statement that the person may be carrying drugs.

      Why have the Brazilians do the dirty work?

    10. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And you know what? The Brazilians just throw the fingerprints away after taking them. They do this just because they are the superpower-in-waiting and hence can have an "eye-for-eye" policy...

      I once was queuing up with an American entering Sao Paulo, and he loudly complained how expensive the Visa was. He was totally stumped when I explained him about reciprocity, and that the Visa costs exactly the same as an US Visa will cost for a Brazilian.

      You get what you ask for. We Europeans continue to roam free on the beaches of Rio ;)

      Otherwise I agree - as a person who has to pass thru US almost monthly, often just for a connecting flight, the procedure is slow and ridiculously complicated. Like what's the point of doing BOTH the pre-visit web stuff AND the green "were you a Nazi in 1945?" stuff? Umm... and what's the average age of any remaining 1945 Nazis nowadays? 90 years?

      I always get the same baffled questions about why somebody from Europe is living in Brazil and now wants to enter US.

      Only my strong level of self-preservation stops me from saying like the guy going to Vancouver: "I don't".

    11. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ahh, so the policies implemented by the president i voted against are used as grounds to make my life hell when visiting your country? do you honestly believe that's fair. if so you do not understand that word.

      there is something to be said for equal protection under the law.

    12. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by steelfood · · Score: 1

      That would certainly throw the Olympics.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    13. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by JamesP · · Score: 1

      ahh, so the policies implemented by the president i voted against are used as grounds to make my life hell when visiting your country? do you honestly believe that's fair.

      Of course it's not fair! Tough.

      As it's not fair for a Brazilian (or any citzen of a non visa-waiver country) to have to travel a long distance (in Brazil think 2h flight in some places) and pay lots of money (It's one thing for an american to pay $150, in Brazil think it feels like paying $400)

      For the Canadian visa I sent the paperwork to an agent in my city, waited 2 weeks and that's it.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
    14. Re:Brazil's passport system is no picnic either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Except that it's directed at ordinary travelers who have nothing to do with US border policy, so it's just more fucking bullshit you are cheering on like a total asswipe scumbag sack of filth.

      Exactly like the US border policy.

      a total asswipe scumbag sack of filth

      Indeed you are. Thank you for proving it.

  24. Passport Control? by ErikZ · · Score: 1, Troll

    What sane person would choose "Chicago" over "Rio de Janiero"? Passport control? Are you kidding me? Chicago is known for being wet, cold, windy, and expensive.

    Maybe this will be the wakeup call for Chicago, that their culture of bribery is actually costing them business. But I doubt it.

    --
    Democrats or Republicans. They are both taking us to the same place and they are not afraid of us anymore.
    1. Re:Passport Control? by Anne+Onymous · · Score: 2, Informative

      Chicago is known for being wet, cold, windy, and expensive.

      Actually, Chicago in the summer is know for being miserably, even deadly, hot.

    2. Re:Passport Control? by footNipple · · Score: 2, Insightful

      What sane person would choose "Chicago" over "Rio de Janiero"? Passport control? Are you kidding me? Chicago is known for being wet, cold, windy, and expensive.

      You're must not be from Chicago. Because if you were, you'd know that there's nothing better than a summer day downtown and along the lake front.

      Maybe this will be the wakeup call for Chicago, that their culture of bribery is actually costing them business. But I doubt it.

      What is causing the absence and flight of business in Chicago is high taxes, unions and democrat governance in general of which bribery and graft are a prominent feature.

    3. Re:Passport Control? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you so Naive to think that Chicago has bribery and Rio does not?

    4. Re:Passport Control? by Nf1nk · · Score: 1

      I am sorry I went Chicago for business twice this year once in April and once in June. In April I froze my ass off (but no snow). In June it was sweltering.

      I found that the restaurant scene on the outskirts of town was dismal.

      Oh yes and Chicago is still my least favorite airport on earth.

      --
      I used to have a cool sig, back when I cared
    5. Re:Passport Control? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >Maybe this will be the wakeup call for Chicago, that their culture of bribery is actually costing them business.

      The IOC simply didn't offer ENOUGH of a bribe for Chicago to be selected.

      Or did I get that backwards?

    6. Re:Passport Control? by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "You're must not be from Chicago. Because if you were, you'd know that there's nothing better than a summer day downtown and along the lake front."

      Too bad summer is fleeting. :)

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  25. Thank you, border patrol by Waffle+Iron · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm grateful for the men and women who patrol our borders. If this report is true, their hard work has kept us safe from another potential disaster: Having to endure 7 years of unrelenting hype, having to witness multiple late and overbudget Stalinesque construction projects, all capped off by an orgy of hypocritical corporate-sponsored "amateur" contests and overblown nationalism. Good job!

    1. Re:Thank you, border patrol by FudRucker · · Score: 1

      even though your comment was modded "Funny" i find it more Insightful.

      --
      Politics is Treachery, Religion is Brainwashing
    2. Re:Thank you, border patrol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Mod this one up. Finally the TSA did something right

    3. Re:Thank you, border patrol by Draek · · Score: 1

      Other than the orgy of corporate-sponsored "amateur" contests, that sounds like just a normal day for the US government.

      --
      No problem is insoluble in all conceivable circumstances.
    4. Re:Thank you, border patrol by squarooticus · · Score: 1

      Not sure why this was modded "funny": it should have been modded "insightful".

      --
      [ home ]
    5. Re:Thank you, border patrol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm grateful for the men and women who patrol our borders. If this report is true, their hard work has kept us safe from another potential disaster: ....

      Yeah, I know you mean the disaster of having the olympics here, but put the "kept us safe" shit back up your asshole where you found it.

      "Ohhh, we haven't had an attack by foreigners for the past eight years."

      So fucking what -- we didn't have one for thirty years before these DHS clowns started arriving by the busload. There is no way to prove anything about their effectiveness. Unless you believe that my anti-elephant spray works. Well ... you don't see any elephants around, do you?

      People are simply unwilling to admit that, for the perpetrators, the ROI on the 9/11 attacks -- the damage to the US and world economies, the crushing of civil rights, the savage gathering of power by governments, the waste of resources that should be going to the weakest among us -- is the absolute largest ROI in the entire history of civilization.

  26. As an American, I can honestly say by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...I'm glad Rio got it. Not just because it's about time a South American country got a chance (though shouldn't the Summer Olympics be held in January down there?), but because I would expect an Olympics held in Chicago would create a black hole sucking in money from all over the country, at a time we can ill afford to increase our deficit.

    And no, I don't consider sports stadiums an "investment." There are plenty of economic analyses that show that any return on investment on projects like this -- a return which is iffy, I might add -- is far less than what could be created by using the same resources repairing existing infrastructure.

  27. Quick Answer by ChinggisK · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    No, Chicago lost the bid because Chicago is a horrible, horrible place.

    1. Re:Quick Answer by the_humeister · · Score: 1

      They lost because the Brazilian government was willing to put up $14 Billion to host the event vs. $5 Billion for Chicago. Heard it on NPR this morning.

    2. Re:Quick Answer by TerranFury · · Score: 1

      Have you been there? It's a pretty cool city actually.

    3. Re:Quick Answer by ChinggisK · · Score: 1

      Yes, I've been there. I didn't like it. Philly/DC/NYC are all much nicer/more interesting in my opinion.

    4. Re:Quick Answer by TerranFury · · Score: 1

      Yeah, DC's pretty good, and of course there's no city like New York! Not sure I'd agree about Philly, but fair 'nuff.

      It's also possible that season has something to do with it. I lived in Chicago for a summer, and it's during those months that I hear the place comes the most alive. It might be dismal in the winter, who knows.

  28. Re:Easily the most unfriendly airports in the worl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bearded people especially, even if they have a short Abe Lincoln style beard like mine.

  29. Puhleez... by Ritz_Just_Ritz · · Score: 1, Flamebait

    You think the US immigration process is more of a hassle than China's? Hell, they made it MORE difficult to get a tourist visa after getting the Olympic nod.

    I think the immigration process had little to do with the decision.

    1. Re:Puhleez... by jonbryce · · Score: 2, Informative

      As a matter of fact, yes I do.

      I struggle think of countries where I would expect a worse welcome than the USA. Maybe Zimbabwe as Mugabee blames the British for all the problems it is facing at the moment.

    2. Re:Puhleez... by markov_chain · · Score: 3, Informative

      I had far less trouble getting a tourist visa for China than US. And their border control was far less invasive. The only unusual step was getting checked via remote IR thermometer, due to the swine flu epidemic.

      --
      Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    3. Re:Puhleez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      chinas procedure is not worse ... you are most likely a US guy who doesn't go through border pain when entering ... so you have no comparison.

    4. Re:Puhleez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree. Sounds like sour grapes from a bunch of folks who whine about the US, but are bitter because they can't gain entry.

    5. Re:Puhleez... by Jah-Wren+Ryel · · Score: 1

      chinas procedure is not worse ... you are most likely a US guy who doesn't go through border pain when entering ... so you have no comparison.

      I agree. A close friend of mine travels a lot for business - asia, europe and within the USA. She was bitching about how terrible passport control was in europe - some sort of long line she had to go through the last time she was in Spain. But she had absolutely no idea what non-citizens go through on entry to the US because, as a citizen, she's never had to suffer it herself. She flat out refused to believe me when I told her how fuckt it is, had to dig up articles on fox and cnn before she would accept it.

      --
      When information is power, privacy is freedom.
    6. Re:Puhleez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree, but Obama's administration has had a history of blaming previous administrations (It Bush's fault). This sounds like another spin on that to me.

    7. Re:Puhleez... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whoever modded this flamebait has obviously never been to China. Try it some time. Also, if you don't "look Chinese" you can expect to be stopped on the street by cops and asked to show your passport and/or residence permit on a regular basis for no reason at all. Makes you feel all warm and fuzzy inside.

    8. Re:Puhleez... by nikwax · · Score: 1

      Bollocks.
      I lived/worked for three years in China, traveled extensively, am European, and was never stopped and asked for a passport at any time. Not only that I was wandering in and out of semi-secure environments (Telephone Exchanges) at all hours of the day. In fact China was one of the safest places I have ever lived, and I've lived in quite a few places. I've had more trouble from the police in the UK and Canada.

    9. Re:Puhleez... by Ixitar · · Score: 1

      I was lucky enough to get my one year multiple business visa to China in January 2008. I had friends in Hong Kong who never had any difficulties getting a visa to China for years. They ended up running into road blocks from March 2008 until after the Olympics.

      That problem aside. I never had a problem with Immigration and Customs in China.

  30. Is it Ironic or not ? by atlmatt36 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Really, is it all that ironic that the IOC would consider our immigration and the recent crime statistics as reasons to not come here over RIO ? For me at least, I can see their point on a few issues :

    1) The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate when measured against citizen head count to incarcerated or otherwise restricted status citizenry (Parole/Probation) of ANY country in the world.

    2) A convicted U.S. felon can still travel internationally to other countries, yet the U.S. refuses to consider allowing another country's citizens to arrive here for what constitutes a misdemeanor or less, regardless of time passed

    3) Getting back into the country as a citzen or "worse" GC or other status holder is worse than painful if singled out for secondary. I am non-white and get profiled every time I come back, despite having served and having no "reasons" to be flagged other than my last name which is clearly non-american originated.

    4) While requiring a VISA or fingerprinting itself is not counter-intuitive to travel, the manner and inconsistency is. Having said that, for being touted as "the land of the free" and "a shining beacon of democracy" is ironic itself when our policies at the border (or even non-border with the TSA and Border Agents) clearly indicate that we are profiling even inside our borders. How do you explain roving road blocks for "immigration" checks just because you happen to be on a road within 100 miles of a border....

    5) To host in Chicago, we'd be doing the same things we did in Atlanta. We'd be buying the homeless once again a 1-way ticket to nowhere (or anywhere but "here"), we'd be tearing down projects and displacing people/families to make way for the Olympic Village, and you can be damn sure that the average "Chicagoan" (sp?) would not be able to even get into the venues, much less afford the cost of the tickets being hosted in their own city. This happened in Atlanta where I live in 1996....

    6) We just had the summit in Pittsburgh that was shameful in the way it's citizenry were treated as well as most of the peaceful demonstrators. Beatings, the use of a sound cannon and extensive use of tear gas, etc had me thinking initially this was some other country where liberty and democracy/freedom of speech was supressed.... Turns out I was right, but had the wrong country in mind, which was depressing and downright scary

    The list could go on with examples, but it would be unfair to clutter the Slashdot database with further examples that are easily googled.
    I do love my country and the people in it for the most part, but I'd be lying if I said I believed 95% of the hype that our Tourism Board spews out to attract visitors. I think the loss of tourism and downturn in visitors since we enacted the failed Patriot Act speaks volumes, the rest of the tidbits I shared just add further fuel to the reasons why those who would like to see us (the U.S.) just stay the hell away.
    Suffice it to say in my opinion that on the one hand we have U.S. which has clearly become a very dim shadow of itself and the other hand we're trying to portray ourselves, or at least that's my impression as a U.S. Citizen.....

    1. Re:Is it Ironic or not ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Really, is it all that ironic that the IOC would consider our immigration and the recent crime statistics as reasons to not come here over RIO ?

      Perhaps you're not familiar with the 8000 murders/year in Rio.

      1) The U.S. has the highest incarceration rate when measured against citizen head count to incarcerated or otherwise restricted status citizenry (Parole/Probation) of ANY country in the world.

      So? Either the USA has more criminals per capita, or the police catch them more easily.

      The incarceration rate isn't a relevant number. Look at the crime rate, the reoffend rate, the clearing rate (how often the perp is found & convicted), and the false conviction rate.

      2) A convicted U.S. felon can still travel internationally to other countries,

      An American has the right to enter & leave the USA. Similarly, Germans can enter & leave Germany. Canadians can enter & leave Canada.

      The convicted US felon can leave, but they still have to find another country willing to let them in, and many countries won't accept visitors with a criminal record.

      yet the U.S. refuses to consider allowing another country's citizens to arrive here for what constitutes a misdemeanor or less, regardless of time passed

      Absolutely false. There is in fact an application for foreigners convicted of crimes to enter the USA. Some of them are approved.

      6) We just had the summit in Pittsburgh that was shameful in the way it's citizenry were treated as well as most of the peaceful demonstrators. Beatings, the use of a sound cannon and extensive use of tear gas, etc had me thinking initially this was some other country where liberty and democracy/freedom of speech was supressed.... Turns out I was right, but had the wrong country in mind, which was depressing and downright scary

      You're right - unlike the Italians, who kill protestors at summits.

    2. Re:Is it Ironic or not ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      not all felons can still travel internationally. in fact, many, despite having served their sentences, can not even marry a foreigner. meaning you can't leave and they can't come to you. this equates to the government choosing who you can and can not love and who can and can not love you, regardless of the fact they've served their punishment and repaid their debts.

    3. Re:Is it Ironic or not ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Guess what? The terrorists won, after all. In our fear, we have destroyed our ideals, our liberties and our country.

    4. Re:Is it Ironic or not ? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      3) .... my last name which is clearly non-american originated.

      You mean your name is not of European origin, right? Otherwise, american originated last names would be like Big Bhite Eage, or similar in Choctaw.

      4) ... VISA or fingerprinting ...

      As a holder of US visa, VISA and fingerprinting are not mutually exclusive. You get your fingerprints taken during Visa application.

    5. Re:Is it Ironic or not ? by pngmangi42 · · Score: 1

      Your "profiling" story is crap. I have flown all over the world with my family (living in Papua New Guinea and the U.S.), and we have been stopped at virtually every U.S. airport we have been through for "random" checks. There are eight kids in my family, and we are all white. What sort of "profiling" category would that fit into?

      --
      I tried to walk into Target, but I missed. --Mitch Hedburg
    6. Re:Is it Ironic or not ? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      1. This statistic is meaningless. I think most people in the world would agree there's more crime per capita in Brazil than the US. In fact, last I heard Brazil had the highest "murder by firearm" rate in the world. The difference between the two countries is the US is better at finding suspects and imprisoning the accused
      2. What countries disallow convicted felons to travel internationally? India maybe...any other countries?
      3. Cry me a river, man. I'm 6'4, blond hair, blue eyes, and get "randomly" chosen for secondary screening more than half the time I fly internationally. Hell, last time I came back from Canada they searched my car
      4. You really need to live in a border state to understand why there are checks 100 miles away from the border...
      5. Sounds like you're basically saying the standard of living in Chicago would go up. What's the problem here?

      Personally I think it's great that Rio gets to host the Olympics, but this has nothing to do with the US sucking per-se. This happened for the following reasons:
      1. A South American country has never hosted the Olympics
      2. Atlanta, Salt Lake City, etc were all recent Olympics held in the states. It'd be unfair to the rest of the world to hold another one here again

      As someone whose actually visited South America, my only concern with hosting the Olympics in Rio is crime. That city isn't safe for tourists by a long shot.

  31. Re:We're America by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you'd finished your post with "for now".

    You might have god modded insightful :)

  32. Real reason by fluor2 · · Score: 1

    I could come up with some reasons:

    - It was just not americas turn. The Olympics is trying to spread it around the globe.
    - And, your olympic commitee has been in dispute with The Olympics because of percentage of earnings.
    - Quite frankly, the presentation and sending Obama created a unpleasant pressure.
    - The US is not making efforts considering drugs/doping, and have make minimal progress in the last ten years.

    The US must step down from its virtual high horse and ask itself what they do wrong. The US Passport control is not among where you should change.

    1. Re:Real reason by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Leaders from all three front runners went to Copenhagen:

      http://www.boston.com/news/world/europe/articles/2009/09/24/copenhagen_readies_for_olympic_vote_world_leaders/

    2. Re:Real reason by horza · · Score: 1

      The US must step down from its virtual high horse and ask itself what they do wrong. The US Passport control is not among where you should change.

      True if you want the first virtual Olympics, where nobody is expected to go but instead watch on TV or via streaming.

      Phillip.

    3. Re:Real reason by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

      - The US is not making efforts considering drugs/doping, and have make minimal progress in the last ten years.

      That is SO TRUE. Where are the steroids that don't shrink your dick and cause heart problems, I ASK YOU?

      Oh, is that not what you meant?

      The US must step down from its virtual high horse and ask itself what they do wrong. The US Passport control is not among where you should change.

      Uh, yes, yes it is.

      --
      "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  33. You actually fell for that ... amazing by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The IOC is about money..

    If you don't get that then you do not understand what the IOC is all about and what the Olympics has become. Its all about the greed. Low labor rates, compliant legal systems and municipalities, government subsidizing, etc are the cornerstones of the IOC, its a balance between the ability of rich countries to subsidize the build out and poor countries able to do it for cheap, either way as long as it meets the IOCs guiding principles of greed you make the list. Chicago didn't make the grade because it is uninteresting as a destination. The original story is a red herring which you all fell for.

    1. Re:You actually fell for that ... amazing by funwithBSD · · Score: 1

      Yeah, this was the first rigged election that the Daly machine ever lost.

      --
      Never answer an anonymous letter. - Yogi Berra
  34. Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by antifoidulus · · Score: 3, Insightful

    As a visitor entering Japan, you are subject to being fingerprinted and having your picture taken at border control as well as a bunch of harassing questions such as, "Where are you staying and who are you staying with?"(I always make up a fake address). I don't know how much different it is compared to the US, but if they rejected Chicago because of these restrictions, they probably rejected Tokyo for a lot of the same reasons.

    1. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Jeeeb · · Score: 2, Informative

      When I entered into Japan it was really extremely easy. I showed my visa and was then asked if I spoke Japanese. I said yes and was directed in Japanese to place my hands on the finger print scanner and look into the camera. The entire immigration process took about a minute and before I was cleared to go through. The only question I was asked is if I spoke Japanese. Which I presume had to do with working out whether to direct me in English or Japanese.

      Of course as an anti-terror policy it is somewhat silly. The only terrorist attacks I know of in Japan have been committed by Japanese. About the only outside group that might consider a terror attack on Japan is North Korea and being a tall white guy, I don't exactly look North Korean... But I guess applying it fairly beats racial profiling.

      On the other hand, crime by Chinese residents is a big and growing problem in Japan. So I can understand them wanting to clamp down on immigration procedures and so on. It's just a matter of executing it in a fair, professional and efficient way which from what I've seen they're doing.

    2. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Sycraft-fu · · Score: 4, Insightful

      No, of course not! It is only evil when the US does it! Other countries are perfectly justified in doing it, the US is the only bad guy.

      I'm quite sure the border control was a very small issue especially since such a thing could be laxened specifically for the Olympics (China did) and likely would be since the president was keen on having them.

      No my guess is the most important consideration was that South America has never had an Olympic games. That gives them a leg up on getting them, presuming they are ready to host them. The Olympics is, after all, an INTERNATIONAL competition. Seems only fair that it should get hosted everywhere in the world then, no region that is capable of hosting it (it does take a certain amount of infrastructure) should be excluded. The US has gotten the Olympics more than any other country I'm aware of, so it seems reasonable to give others a chance.

      There's also the matter of location. Chicago seems like a pretty shitty place to host the summer Olympics just climate wise. Not really one of the top summer destination spots in my book. Rio is a MUCH nicer location. Let's face it, the Olympics being a big tourist event, that sort of thing matters.

      While the issue of border control may have been discussed, I doubt it was any serious consideration. Like I said, you've got the president pushing for it. If they go and say "Well ok, we'll give it to Chicago, but you have to do away with the fingerprinting and such for the people coming to see it," the president will say "No problem."

      This is just people trying to twist things to push their agenda of getting rid of the new border controls. Now don't get me wrong, the new border controls are BS and should be done away with. However, trying to make up bullshit reasons makes you no better than the people who made up bullshit reasons to justify them int he first place.

    3. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Manip · · Score: 1

      If that is ALL the Japanese boarder security agents do then I need to visit Japan more. You get all that stuff entering the US too and more....

    4. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You have to be kidding me. I got back from Japan yesterday, and because I am not from one of the Western European countries or the US, I had to get a visa to visit Japan from their Chicago office. You know how this process went? I walk into their Chicago office, submit my application and pick up the visa the next day. That's it. You know what the visa fees were? $USD 8 (yes, eight dollars). You know how much pain the US visa process makes you go through? Well, the fees are USD 131 and you have to negotiate the visa application process at https://www.vfs-usa.co.in/Home.aspx
      For UK visa, the fees are about the same. And you have to do a fingerprinting and biometrics session *before* you even submit your visa application (by mail). They also give you no website URL so you can check the status of your application. The visa process for both the US and UK sucks. I'm glad Chicago didn't make it.

    5. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

        it took me less than 1 min in japan
      to put my finger, take a picture, and pass.

        and then asking where u are staying is completly different that staying in line for an hour, treated like shit in USA, and answer more detailed questions like do you have sexual relationship with the person you visited with, how much do i get paid etc - and then 2 years later when coming back they read back my answer when they asked me again if i visited her when i was in the area - Fascist States of America

    6. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least in Tokyo you get good food!

    7. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My son has traveled to Japan recently (last Feb.) and has traveled extensively in the USofA. He says the difference is shocking. He now avoids travel to the US and looks forward to his next trip to Japan.

    8. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by thewils · · Score: 2, Informative

      I visited Japan during the initial H1N1 scare and even then it was a fairly pleasant experience. I was concerned about missing our connecting flight from Tokyo to Osaka but we were processed and had our luggage within 20 minutes of disembarking and checked in 10 minutes later. We even managed to get a plastic bottle of water air-side. It was taken from us, put through a sniffer machine and very politely handed back.

      I wasn't looking forward to the new passport/fingerprint restrictions, but they were all done in a typically low-key Japanese way and I didn't have a problem with any of it.

      --
      Once I was a four stone apology. Now I am two separate gorillas.
    9. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This is not unique to Japan and is quite common in other places. No country is going to want people who don't have a place to stay or no money. However giving false information such a fake address is often a crime.

    10. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      2008 was at Beijing and 2014 is in Russia. Tokyo had no chance.

      But honestly - while Japan is a G7 country, it has lost its leadership in most areas and economy is down. So even if Japan strip searched everyone who visited, it would not be as much news as US's war on terrorism and the resulting TSA messup is.

    11. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by codegen · · Score: 1

      Do they fingerprint you when you enter Japan?

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
    12. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by dimension6 · · Score: 3, Informative

      Really? I've been living in Japan for two years now (I'm a US citizen), and I absolutely dread going back to the States. Arriving in the US feels like a madhouse by comparison. As a Japanese multiple-exit visa holder (most long-term residents have this), I have a separate line at immigration that usually has no line. There is the fingerprinting and photo (which was a point of contention with the American Chamber of Commerce, I remember), but I've never been asked any background questions on any of my 10+ entries into the country. The entire process takes no more than 5 minutes as opposed to the hour-plus ordeal that I face at any US international entry point. You don't have to remove your shoes, and at least for domestic flights, it's no problem to bring a bottle of liquid (tea, etc.) right through security).

    13. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by HonIsCool · · Score: 2, Informative

      Yeah, same experience here. I visited Japan first time before the new fingerprint checks were put in, and it was supremely simple procedure to enter. The customs staff were very polite (of course) and friendly, and just waved me through. I was actually worried because I had brought a big perfume bottle which I realized on the plane to be over the allowed duty-free size, but no problem! I don't consider having to give an address of residence for the stay to be harrassment either. This is given on a disembarkment card and not in a interrogation by officials by the way. I do hate the new fingerprinting checks, no doubt about that, but the procedure itself is very smoothly implemented and going through takes about no time.

      --
      "Give me six lines of C++ code written by the most competent programmer, and I will find enough in there to hang him."
    14. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by svirre · · Score: 1

      In my experience the US immigration officials are a lot more impolite than the japanese ones. In addition (And IMO more significantly) in the US you usually have to stand about 30 minutes in line to get questioned. US immigration got to be the slowest ever.

    15. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Consider the cultures. The Japanese will bow 10 times before *asking* you to put each finger on the scanner, while a US officer will be *ordering* you around. Because of this minor difference, the whole experience is dramatically different.

    16. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It is obvious you don't have a clue about the depth of animosity US immigration creates. As a "white boy" who travels regularly through US immigration my experience is they are arrogant, often ignorant of their own rules, and often nasty with it

    17. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by codegen · · Score: 1

      While the issue of border control may have been discussed, I doubt it was any serious consideration. Like I said, you've got the president pushing for it. If they go and say "Well ok, we'll give it to Chicago, but you have to do away with the fingerprinting and such for the people coming to see it," the president will say "No problem."

      Bwaaaaahhaaaaaahaaaaahaaahaaahaaahaahaahaa

      --
      Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
    18. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Japan has a lot of the same formalities, but they are reasonably friendly about them. In the US, I find you get orders barked at you from the time you step off the plane until you make it through to the public area, and the stories about dual citizens getting shipped off to Syria for "questioning" while in transit on flights home to Canada go far beyond what Japan's immigration would do to you.

    19. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by AK+Marc · · Score: 1



      I've never been asked any background questions on any of my 10+ entries into the country. The entire process takes no more than 5 minutes as opposed to the hour-plus ordeal that I face at any US international entry point.

      I don't specifically remember my last entry to the US. It was a while ago, and I've never had that much trouble. But it's nothing compared to my last international trip. I landed in Auckland last month. I went to the general line, handed over the USA passports for my family. He asked "how are you today?" and "oh, permanent resident?" I was through in under 30 seconds. And this was my wife and son's first trip to NZ and we were all getting permanent residency. We did a lot of paperwork to get to that point (a lot, if you've never gotten permanent residency in a foreign country, it took an application packet that was 3 lbs of paper by the time we were done and about a year of time gathering paperwork and waiting for responses to submissions). We were expecting something more, when he handed it back, I was all ready to ask "what next." But that little stamp is all we need to live here the rest of our lives. And it took under 30 seconds for 3 people.

    20. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by freakxx · · Score: 1

      As a visitor entering Japan, you are subject to being fingerprinted and having your picture taken at border control as well as a bunch of harassing questions such as, "Where are you staying and who are you staying with?"(I always make up a fake address). I don't know how much different it is compared to the US, but if they rejected Chicago because of these restrictions, they probably rejected Tokyo for a lot of the same reasons.

      I live in Japan from last 5 years and I disagree with you. They do ask some questions but the way they ask is so polite and humane that you would be "willing" to give them more information that they are asking for. They also have concerns about their security. This not like some rude US officer is harassing you. Most probably, you will encounter a cute Japanese lady there giving you an unforgettable smile you might ever have encountered. The attitude of the officers as well as the local people are very very polite and honest.

    21. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Um, are you INSANE?

      Chicago has a worse climate than Brazil?! FFS, it's a hot climate! I'd have to say your book is pretty shitty.
      There is nothing worse in this world than a hot climate! It's not simply a matter of opinion, you really need your head examined. I'm so f***ing sick of people asserting that tropical climates are some sort of paradise.
      Tropical/hot climates are hell on earth! If it's freezing outside, you can actually do something about it and wear warmer clothes. If it's sweltering, you can do nothing except die of heatstroke. It's f***ing common sense!

      And South America has never had the Olympics because none of its countries are developed enough to be tourist destinations. All of the governments in SA are openly corrupt (as opposed to 1st world governments which *pretend* not to be corrupt) but then again you'd be hard pressed to find a worse government than that of China so apparently a ridiculously oppressive regime doesn't matter to the IOC. Rio has a much higher rate of crime than the US and they tend to target tourists. These reasons alone are plenty of reason why holding an international event or any single person EVER visiting Rio would be absurdly stupid. And for the record, I don't live in the US and I really don't care where the olypics go as I consider it a pointless waste of money and resources. It's just simply absurd that Rio could get selected over any city in a first world country.

    22. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by mjwx · · Score: 1

      As a visitor entering Japan, you are subject to being fingerprinted and having your picture taken at border control as well as a bunch of harassing questions such as, "Where are you staying and who are you staying with?"(I always make up a fake address). I don't know how much different it is compared to the US, but if they rejected Chicago because of these restrictions, they probably rejected Tokyo for a lot of the same reasons.

      Being asked where you are staying is a standard question, I just respond with the city I will be spending the majoirty of my time in (Phuket, Kuala Lumpur and so on). Almost every nation I've been to has had a passenger arrival card and all the information customs needs is on that card. Here is a somewhat aged example of the Australian passenger arrival card, the laws regarding the amount of alcohol that one person can carry in has changed to 2250ml but that's pretty much it. Each passenger must fill out the card (parents must fill one out for their children) and this is handed to the customs offical with your passport, more often then not my entry into a nation is silent, everything they need is on the card.

      As for your rights and responsibilities with Australian Customs please refer to Section 195 of the Australian Customs Act of 1901. You are legally obliged to answer any questions as stipulated in Section 195 but that's about it. There are legal repercussions for Australian Customs offices who violate the Customs Act or bring the Customs service into ill repute (it is part of the AFP (Australian Federal Police) so the same laws that govern the AFP apply to Customs).

      --
      Calling someone a "hater" only means you can not rationally rebut their argument.
    23. Re:Did Tokyo lose because of this as well? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You really think that? I think they might politely instruct the ICE officers not to be as fuckwad cartman respect my authorite as usual, but I seriously doubt they would make actual temporary adjustments to immigration law.

  35. been interrogated and fingerprinted at US border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can't help but feel pleased to see the Olympics go to Rio, not Chicago. Hooray for the free world.

    I am not an American citizen. At the US border a couple years ago I was subject to a search (ok) and a politically motivated interrogation over 6 hours (not ok) asking me who I knew, etc. They asked me about anything and everything. Was I running drugs? Was I a terrorist who spent time in Pakistan? They seized my laptop and sent it to forensics. Anything and everything was on the table, if only they could pin something on me. You probably don't know what it is like to have every word you speak carry so much weight. What if I misspoke? What if something I thought was perfectly legal turned out to be illegal, and I admitted to it? What if I forgot to delete a questionable picture from my laptop, or brought herbal pills restricted in the USA but not my home country? They tested everything. Finally, after hours of mind games, threats, and good-cop-bad-cop routines, I was fingerprinted, photographed, and refused entry. I had no criminal convictions, no connections to violent or drug organizations, and did not originate in a country known for trouble. My "crime" was to speak and write on unpopular matters. My biometric information is now contained in some databases somewhere. Probably the "servers in the sky." Two weeks later my laptop was returned. I threw it away. The whole experience was terrifying. That to me is America. A terrifying police state where what you say will be used against you at every opportunity. I stopped speaking out.

  36. The Sad Thing... by IonOtter · · Score: 3, Insightful

    ...is that the Republicans-and probably more than a few Democrats-are going to blame Obama and his administration for something THEY ruined.

    --
    [End Of Line]
    1. Re:The Sad Thing... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 1
      Whyever would you think this?

      Off the top of my head, I can't think of any Repubs who really wanted the Olympics in Chicago, and the only Dems I can think of who did want it there were Obama and Daley and the Chicago Machine.

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
    2. Re:The Sad Thing... by mdmkolbe · · Score: 1

      The reason to blame Obama isn't that he caused it, but that he hasn't fixed it. If he doesn't fix it soon, then all his talk of "change" will have just been a bunch of hot air.

    3. Re:The Sad Thing... by ShakaUVM · · Score: 1

      >>...is that the Republicans-and probably more than a few Democrats-are going to blame Obama and his administration for something THEY ruined.

      It warms my heart to know that Bush still can be blamed for every single thing that goes wrong in the entire world.

    4. Re:The Sad Thing... by Tarantura · · Score: 1

      ...is that the Republicans-and probably more than a few Democrats-are going to blame Obama and his administration for something THEY ruined.

      The media quickly started spinning the apparent 'failure' of Obama et al. Newsweek blog headline: "Losing the Olympics Bid Is Good for Obama" http://blog.newsweek.com/blogs/thegaggle/archive/2009/10/02/losing-the-olympics-bid-is-good-for-obama.aspx I saw that one coming a long way off. Watching certain Chicago TV newscasters react in utter disbelief - as if it was a fait accompli Chicago won - was also amusing. Chicago weather typically suxs, anyway (although I do love the city).

  37. Image? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I "love" how everything that needs fixing these days is supposed to be fixed by fixing "the image". Don't address the problem, market. There are more than a few people who really don't buy the marketing BS anymore and the younger ones seem to be catching on quicker.

    Reminds me of Qantas. Firing a whole bunch of workers then allocating $20 million on an advertising campaign to tell us that they are still wonderful even though services were being hobbled. Personally I would have preferred they keep the services and not have to spend on the marketing but they probably act like the public service. The $20 was in someone elses budget so it couldn't be used for keeping workers. Pet hate, you can probably tell.

    As for the US I certainly wont submit to being treated as a criminal just to visit a country so have made it clear that the US is one place we will never visit. Fortunatly there are quite a few other places to go.

  38. Actually... by denzacar · · Score: 4, Insightful

    From all those cities listed in the report linked above, only Athens seems to have failed to properly exploit the effect of hosting the Olympic Games.
    All other cites (Barcelona, Atlanta, Sidney, Beijing) reported nothing but growth.

    London doesn't need it, and Chicago may well not have done either.

    Nonsense.
    A global metropolis that can say "I'll pass" to billions invested in the infrastructure, millions of visitors and billions of pounds/dollars/euros spent by everyone?
    No such place on this planet.
    The effect on the crime and pollution alone (clean streets) is worth the trouble for the average Tom, Dick and Harry.
    Those must be some crazy conservative xenophobes you talked to.
    Not wanting money during a global economic crisis. Mad as bicycles that lot.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:Actually... by zippthorne · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You can clean your streets without having the banner of five rings looming over them. Do you think that the olympic committee comes in and does the work?

      You can invest money in infrastructure without an international committee overseeing the work, too. Where do you think those "billions invested" come from? It's not the organization that runs the olympics.

      Instead of adding those billions to the "benefits", you should subtract them. And when figuring the boost, you have to recall six years of spending with no payoff until the end. What would that spending have gone towards if it hadn't been directed at grown men playing children's games? Growth, I'll bet.

      There is no economic reason for any city to host any sporting event. Let the event organizers pay for and reap the profits if it's so great.

      That said, Chicago didn't lose. Rio won the decision. They weren't voting against chicago. Are we really so vain that we probably think the choice was about US?

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    2. Re:Actually... by adamkennedy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Speaking as a long-time "Sidney" resident, I gotta say we were all a bit annoyed by the whole damned thing too, the fact they ripped up half the CBD, the endless news stories, the drama bombs, the wasted money, the roads that were all going to be closed, and all the general getting ready crap. People were wearing "Fuck The Olympics" shirts openly in the streets.

      And then the games started.

      And it was a fucking awesome enormous city wide party that lasted for 2-3 weeks, all the horrible concrete repeatedly torn up footpaths had been replaced with highly skatable and cable-friendly slate all through the centre city, there were no building sites anywhere, the pubs and bars were all full, and it just generally kicked ass.

      While I don't by any means underestimate the ability of Londoners to put a negative light on something, I have this suspicion that it's the same for every city that hosts it. A sort of preparation and drama filled pregnancy, filled with hormonal outbursts and morning sickness.

      Wait till the games actually start, it will be a different place.

    3. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sydney

    4. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All other cites (Barcelona, Atlanta, Sidney, Beijing) reported nothing but growth.

      What exactly can be attributed to the Olympics for growth in those cities? Also what else could the billions have been spent on? Also what normal growth happens without any investment?

      The effect on the crime and pollution alone (clean streets) is worth the trouble for the average Tom, Dick and Harry.

      Cittation needed.

    5. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All other cites (Barcelona, Atlanta, Sidney, Beijing) reported nothing but growth.

      Similar to how the politicians that handout hundreds of millions of dollars for sports stadiums claim that it brings in net income for the city. In the end, it's a purely narcissistic boondoggle -- done largely so the politicians can hang out with famous people, and hand out construction contracts to their friends -- that they try to push numbers around to justify. Hosting the Olympics is a great way to give the shaft to the people who actually live in the city, taking their tax money and disrupting their lives for long periods of time and giving them little of value in return.

    6. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It might not be listed in the report but Montreal just finished paying off their 1976 Olympic Games in 2005.

    7. Re:Actually... by ais523 · · Score: 1

      I'm British too; it's mostly the media who gets upset about the Olympic Games being here (I have no idea why; they may be trying to attack the Mayor of London indirectly via it). And when enough of the media are upset about something, it's common for many of the men on the street to get upset about it, even without knowing why. (Things like the stupid logo that cost a lot to create don't help either; the logo is really garish, and one of the promotional videos featuring it had to be banned because it was triggering epilepsy in people.)

      --
      (1)DOCOMEFROM!2~.2'~#1WHILE:1<-"'?.1$.2'~'"':1/.1$.2'~#0"$#65535'"$"'"'&.1$.2'~'#0$#65535'"$#0'~#32767$#1"
    8. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      JFC. The games last for a few weeks, then Londoners are left with stuff we didn't need that won't pay for itself. Hotdog vendors and hotels admittedly could have a good summer. We'll have decaying concrete white elephants for years, taxpayers are footing the bill, and it's destroying an established city-centre park.

      Next you'll be telling us our property prices will somehow magically increase in the long-term because some visitors may need to crash in London in the short term (as various newspapers and politicians did do in order to make the bid popular). Oh wait, you believe that? Then, on to business. I've got some investment property in South Africa you'll love. 2010 and all that.

    9. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those must be some crazy conservative xenophobes you talked to.

      I pretty sure that craziness is an equal opportunity disease that afflicts conservatives, and liberal left wing nuts alike. In the Vancouver most of the opposition to the winter olympics came from the left wing.

      The olympics needed a new highway to Whistler? People complained that environmentally sensitive areas would have to be buldozed for the wider roads.

      Billions spend on improving rapid rail transit? Again the left wing complained and said think what would happen if that money was spent on education or health.

      New bridge being built? Again....people said that money should have been spent on social programs, not making it easier for cars to get around.

    10. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually you should check the source. This is a silly lobbyist document.

      Why would a corporate relocation service be doing any research (and it reads more like selective meta-analysis than research) on the topic except out of economic interest for themselves?

      Whichever argument this document makes I'd believe the opposite.

    11. Re:Actually... by Kozz · · Score: 1

      Mad as bicycles that lot.

      Hey, I make my living working at a bicycle company, you insensitive clod!

      (OK, you Brits have some funny expressions, and this one I'd never heard before. In fact, your comment is only one of six matches on Google for the quoted phrase "mad as bicycles".)

      --
      I only post comments when someone on the internet is wrong.
    12. Re:Actually... by denzacar · · Score: 1

      You can clean your streets without having the banner of five rings looming over them. Do you think that the olympic committee comes in and does the work?

      Of course not. The regular city ordinances do that - only with extra pressure and support from other links in the chain.
      That is, new brooms for the city sweepers, new truncheons for the cops and full support in using both.

      You can invest money in infrastructure without an international committee overseeing the work, too. Where do you think those "billions invested" come from? It's not the organization that runs the olympics.

      Again... Government support.
      It is far easier to get a favorable credit and tax rate when the government of the entire land is your backer.
      And big projects like Olympics mean big money which call for big investors to get involved looking for big profit. Things that would take a decade are done in a year.

      Instead of adding those billions to the "benefits", you should subtract them. And when figuring the boost, you have to recall six years of spending with no payoff until the end. What would that spending have gone towards if it hadn't been directed at grown men playing children's games? Growth, I'll bet.

      Actually... it would just not get invested.
      Instead, a very small fraction of that money would be spent here and there and most of it to maintain the status quo.

      And you are being silly with those six years.
      It is not as if all that will be built will be torn down come closing ceremony.
      These things are built to last decades, if not even centuries. Plan their use accordingly.

      There is no economic reason for any city to host any sporting event. Let the event organizers pay for and reap the profits if it's so great.

      Along that line of thought, there is no economic reason for any city to build roads either. Let drivers build the roads if they like to drive around so much.

      That said, Chicago didn't lose. Rio won the decision. They weren't voting against chicago. Are we really so vain that we probably think the choice was about US?

      Quite true that.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    13. Re:Actually... by bXTr · · Score: 1

      What would that spending have gone towards if it hadn't been directed at grown men playing children's games?

      Grown women play them, too, you sexist pig.

      --
      It's a very dark ride.
    14. Re:Actually... by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      You can clean your streets without having the banner of five rings looming over them. Do you think that the olympic committee comes in and does the work?

      Sure, all these things are *theoretically* possible. But the key is motivation. How well do you clean your house as compared to when you have guests coming over?

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    15. Re:Actually... by drsquare · · Score: 1

      Not wanting money during a global economic crisis. Mad as bicycles that lot.

      The Olympics doesn't bring in money, it costs money. The city spends billions on white elephant venues with no future use, then the IOC comes in and scoops up all the profits. Then you pay the debt off for decades, with your 90k capacity stadium filled with 500 people for an athletics meet.

      Billions 'invested' in infrastructure is just money taken from much more needworthy causes.

      That's not even mentioning the people turfed out of house and home to make room for the facilities, their allotments buried under concrete.

    16. Re:Actually... by uncle+slacky · · Score: 1

      My favourite such expression is "hatstand", as in, "he's completely hatstand". Also "Dagenham", as it's two stops past Barking...

      Rob

      --
      Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it.
    17. Re:Actually... by zippthorne · · Score: 1

      Money not spent by a government is either not taxed or not borrowed. Either way, it benefits the people who it isn't taken from. By not being taken from them.

      --
      Can you be Even More Awesome?!
    18. Re:Actually... by gripen40k · · Score: 1

      The Montreal olympics were a horrible mess of a disaster: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1976_Summer_Olympics#Legacy
      The debt for the stadium was finally paid off in 2006, 30 years later!

      --
      Har?
    19. Re:Actually... by ignavus · · Score: 1

      And it has been so wonderful in Sydney since then. Our transport system is overloaded. Our hospitals underfunded. Our schools in need of repair and maintenance. Our state government practically bankrupt.

      Perhaps all that money that went into making the wonderful Olympics came at the cost of investing in everything else that was needed over the last 10 years?

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    20. Re:Actually... by Rhesusmonkey · · Score: 1

      Actually... it's not clear that it would be profitable at all http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Do_cities_lose_money_hosting_the_Olympics You could also check out Democracy Now, they talked about it a little. As for more substantial citations, well that's for you to research - as I am a very lazy devil's advocate.

      --
      You need more psychedelic art in your life. rhesusmonkey.deviantart.com
    21. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the downside is that while everything works during the olympics afterwards sydney fell apart due to years worth of maintenance funds going to developments that never get backed up
      the roads were relaid to look nice but the traffic destroyed them ( due to the rush they took shortcuts in construction ) and they have yet to be fixed NINE years later

    22. Re:Actually... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You Aussies *really* know how to do it right! In parallel with the games preparations, there was a tv program "The Games" starring John Clarke and Bryan Dawe that was a truly superb send up of the games. Congrats on a tremendous games but, even more, congrats on the TV program!

    23. Re:Actually... by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

      From all those cities listed in the report linked above, only Athens seems to have failed to properly exploit the effect of hosting the Olympic Games.

      Athens was a big failure. Two problems that stand out in my memory are the clustefuck that was their transportation network and the audiences. The transportation was so bad that even some of the athletes missed their events. With Microsoft putting in a 'data center' in Chicago and whining about needing a too-big-to-fail handout, it's no wonder that the Olympic Committee had to steer away from Chicago.

      --
      Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
    24. Re:Actually... by will_die · · Score: 1

      NPR had an interview with some researcher who looked into the long term business benefits of hosting the Olympics; he even admitted that the building and local usage will take decades to recoop.
      The basic conclusion was the benefit was an increase of about 30% of external business and that was seen for all cities that got nominated; actually winning gave no additional boost. That number was decreased for cities/countries that had previously held the Olympics, if it was a world known city and other factors. The thinking of the researchers was that being nominated indicates to the business world that you are ready to interact with the world and have the infrastructure to handle that business.

    25. Re:Actually... by mollusc · · Score: 1

      ....aaaand then we've been stone-flat broke ever since. Although that could always just be the fault of NSW Labor.

  39. Probably not by moosesocks · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Unless something's changed in the past two years, this probably didn't have a huge effect, given that the next two games following Vancouver are going to be held in London and Moscow respectively. Neither the UK nor Russia have a reputation of being particularly welcoming to travelers.

    Although not as bad as the US, border security in the UK is by far the most invasive in the EU, opting to screen people arriving from within other parts of the EU. Back when I used to hold a multiple-entry visa to the UK, it was treated as a point of suspicion every time I crossed the border (despite the fact that I had to provide the consulate with every shred of information about my private life in order to get the visa). This policy is completely and entirely illogical -- odds are that the border agencies knew more about me than they do about their own citizens.

    On the other hand, Russia takes the cake for bizarre and restrictive immigration procedures. The US state department's page describes these in detail, as there are far too many peculiarities and specifics to list here.

    If this was an issue, I seriously doubt that the UK or Russia would have been selected by the IOC. As it stands, Chicago didn't lose by that many votes, and the IOC's voting rules and distribution of membership are hardly fair. An IRV system is definitely needed to prevent the sort of gamesmanship that likely caused Chicago to lose, and somehow made Tokyo lose votes in the second round.

    That all said, Rio will be a fantastic host for the games. This will be the first time ever that the Olympics have been held on the South American continent, which is a pretty cool milestone all in itself. I'm fairly confident that the US will be first in line for 2018.

    --
    -- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
    1. Re:Probably not by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      "On the other hand, Russia takes the cake for bizarre and restrictive immigration procedures."

      Russian visa procedures are fairly common. It was about equally easy for me to host a guest from the EU and visit EU country. About the only unusual requirement is restriction on visiting some cities (a legacy of the USSR), but generally you won't encounter problems with it.

      Also, Russia softens visa requirements for special occasions.

      PS: I'm Russian, currently living in Ukraine.

    2. Re:Probably not by dunkelfalke · · Score: 1

      Dude, get your facts straight. The games of 2014 will be held in Sochi, not Moscow. Sochi is 1200 km away from Moscow, at the Black Sea.

      --
      "It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
    3. Re:Probably not by karuna · · Score: 1
      It is easy to get a Russian visa but I have paid bribes to Russian borders guards and police upon leaving on several occasions. Usually it was because Russia requires registration for all visiting foreigners and unless you stayed in a hotel (I usually stayed with friends) it was simply impossible to get the registration as the paperwork required was simply insurmountable. In two cases I had to pay a fine to police because I hadn't registered in Moscow where I only changed the trains and had stayed merely for a few hours. The bribes requested were really low, usually no more than $20. In a way it was actually cheaper to pay the bribe than to get an official registration. On the other hand even the terrorists without proper IDs could bribe the airport officials and blow up two airplanes.

      I hear that the things have been improved now but I am sure that Russian border is still in a mess. Recently a Latvian participant to Eurovision was detained for several hours at the Russian border because the border guards were too stupid to figure out that his visa in his old (expired) passport and a new passport is a valid combination for travel. Or maybe they were just waiting for the bribe...

      In comparison entering and leaving the USA has always been quite eventless. Just fill the form, scan the fingers and look in the camera and that's it. More bureaucratic but not a big deal compared to airport security lines, long flights with transfers and jet lag sensation.

    4. Re:Probably not by Cyberax · · Score: 1

      "n two cases I had to pay a fine to police because I hadn't registered in Moscow where I only changed the trains and had stayed merely for a few hours."

      Actually, you were ripped off :) There's no requirement to register unless you're staying permanently. Also, police officers on streets don't even have the right to check the registration.

      It's a common scam used by police, though :(

    5. Re:Probably not by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Russia takes the cake for bizarre and restrictive immigration procedures

      Sorry, but in Russia, unlike in US, a visa grants you a right to enter. (There is 0.01%, where visa has been revoked.) Otherwise, entering Russia, is no less prohibitive, than entering any other European country. The visa application process is quite bureaucratically heavy though, but usually taken care by the tour company transparently to the tourist.

    6. Re:Probably not by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      Recently a Latvian participant to Eurovision was detained for several hours at the Russian border because the border guards were too stupid to figure out that his visa in his old (expired) passport and a new passport is a valid combination for travel.

      Ha! That would have happened in US also. The embassy in my country told me to reapply, because my passport with 10 year visa is to expire. An expired passport, is an invalid document, therefore the guy was lucky they let him through.

      In comparison entering and leaving the USA has always been quite eventless.

      Having been in both US and Russia many times, I can safely say that entering Russia was less of a fuss, than entering US. Entering US, you get a feel like you are entering a night club with face control and the border guard can just not let you pass at his own discretion(based on how many of your kind are already inside?).
      Yet entering Russia, you can safely know, that you are holding a valid visa, and they WILL in any case let you in, because that is Russian law.

    7. Re:Probably not by drsquare · · Score: 1

      I'm fairly confident that the US will be first in line for 2018.

      Why? The US bids are pretty boring and underfunded compared to other efforts. The Atlanta and LA games were cheap and nasty compared to Beijing or Australia.

    8. Re:Probably not by dacaffinator · · Score: 1

      Having travelled to both the UK and the US, my border experiences at the UK were much worse. That said I was living in the UK on a working holiday visa (and travelling a lot) and only one of my US trips was post September 11.

  40. yes, probably by jipn4 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've organized some international events, and US border control policies and visa requirements are a big argument against holding them in the US.

    Border control in Europe is very simple in my experience; people check whether your passport is on a list, and if it's not, they just wave you through. No fingerprinting, photographs, long lines, tricky questions, pre-registration, or interrogation booths. And despite that, Europe seems to have been doing no worse on terrorism or illegal immigration than the US.

    1. Re:yes, probably by JAlexoi · · Score: 1

      The main reason is quite simple. The internal law enforcement in Europe is tighter than in US. There is very little need on harassing people at the gate. Need be, one country's police can chase you down into another country and get assistance from the local police force.

    2. Re:yes, probably by steelfood · · Score: 1

      This isn't true. The major cities in Europe have a lot of pickpockets and undesirables looking for tourists to prey off. Major cities in the US tend to be safer in that regard. If you stick to the touristy areas, you'll usually be fine. If you wander off the beaten path, you might get shot, but that's largely your fault for going somewhere everybody else with better sense isn't.

      That having been said, I don't feel the small increase in safety is worth my liberties. The reason why people are so willing to give up their liberties for safety (perceived or otherwise) is because they're generally intellectually lazy.

      --
      "If a nation expects to be ignorant and free in a state of civilization, it expects what never was and never will be."
    3. Re:yes, probably by jipn4 · · Score: 1

      I don't think that's true. There's probably less police on the street in day-to-day life. What is different is immigration enforcement: employers can--and do--check that you have the right to work.

    4. Re:yes, probably by jipn4 · · Score: 1

      Your implied argument makes no sense. What do "pickpockets and undesirables" have to do with "terrorism and illegal immigration"? And what do immigration controls at airports have to do with illegal immigrants? Are you saying that Europe has a large numbers of illegal immigrants flying in on airplanes from the US and then go out on the street pickpocketing and being undesirable? Or what?

  41. Who would want to go to Chicago when this happens? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Chicago Violence:

  42. Bad for Permanent Residents too by evilned · · Score: 4, Interesting

    My wife has permanent residency here in the US and I am a citizen . We used to be able to go through border control together and she was treated quite well. Now, she has to be fingerprinted (the fact that her fingerprints are already on file with immigration, has been through the interview process for permanent residency seem to make no difference).

    I have permanent residency in her country, Singapore, as well. When we enter or exit Singapore, its quick and easy. Even before I had PR status, it was easier to get in and out of the country as a tourist than it was to get in and out of the US as a citizen. Land of the Free, my ass.

    --

    "My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

    1. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by MeNeXT · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The US has lost the title of land of the free unfortunately its citizens have not yet realized it.

      --
      DRM? No thanks, I'll just get it somewhere else...
    2. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by FatherDale · · Score: 1

      I love Singapore's airport, and how they do airport security. Airport architects and security personnel should be required to go there and see how it SHOULD be done.

    3. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by Arimus · · Score: 1

      Did it ever really have a cast iron claim to that title?

      Repression has always existed, just the target changes (albeit now American has done away with selective discrimination repesses all equally so that's a kind of progress).

      --
      --- Users are like bacteria -> Each one causing a thousand tiny crises until the host finally gives up and dies.
    4. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by DoofusOfDeath · · Score: 1

      The US has lost the title of land of the free unfortunately its citizens have not yet realized it.

      Many of us have. We're just impotent to do anything about it, and tired of our impotent rage, we try to tune it out and get on with life.

    5. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by grotgrot · · Score: 1

      Not to mention that the immigration desks at Singapore airport never have queues, don't have specific lines for locals/residents vs foreigners and are usually handing out candy!

    6. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Wrong. US citizens can travel freely within the US. US citizens can travel freely to other countries (getting a passport in the US is much easier than many other nations). It's just a little more difficult to get back into the US for citizens now. Sorry but "land of the free" doesn't apply to non-US citizens.

      The reason you don't have problems with Singapore passport control is because everyone and their brother isn't trying to immigrate (legally or not) to Singapore. Did your wife show DHS her GC or just her Singapore passport? The passport on its own would be a reason they'd fingerprint her.

    7. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by evilned · · Score: 1

      Singapore's airport is one of the best I have ever flown through, but the new Hong Kong airport beats it hands down. Both are infinitely better than any airport I have used in the US.

      --

      "My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

    8. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by evilned · · Score: 1

      Actually, they group lines into Citizen/PR and everyone else. Still they have an excellent setup.

      --

      "My head hurts, My feet stink, and I dont love Jesus." -Jimmy Buffett

    9. Re:Bad for Permanent Residents too by grotgrot · · Score: 1

      Are you sure? I was just there last month. I am talking about the many immigration desks that are on the same floor as all the shops in T2 and T3 (and just a few metres away from the shops). Maybe you are thinking of customs?

  43. Yeah, the Travel Promotion Act.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "To lure visitors back, U.S. Travel has been pushing the Travel Promotion Act, which recently was passed in the Senate and is awaiting action in the House, to create a campaign to strengthen the image of the United States abroad"

    Yeah, right. The fine print is that the promotion activities shall be paid by substantial fees to be collected from visitors which currently do not need a visa to travel to the US (ESTA notwithstanding).

    Here in Europe that is generally considered completely counterproductive, braindead and reeking of the "forced money exchange for travellers" schemes which were enforced by former Eastern block countries during the cold war.

  44. Re:Easily the most unfriendly airports in the worl by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Indeed, the USA has led the world in making air travel a misery. I am always astonished how citizens of the "land of the free" tolerate it.

    I have entered both USA and Brazil a number of times in the last few years. In Brazil I am welcomed by smiling officials of normal intelligence and body mass. In USA, a fat moron will threaten me. Consequently, I avoid USA in favour of Brazil.

  45. Border patrol employees are dickheads by thetoadwarrior · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I'm sure there's a requirement that only only douche bags can work within border control in the US. They do treat everyone, American or foreigner like a piece of shit. It's because if it wasn't for their cushy little job as a government bully, they'd probably be a toilet clear for Wal-Mart.

    Being an American who has opted to live outside of the US seems to be some sort of crime in their eyes. At least I can take comfort in the fact my life means something unlike theirs.

    1. Re:Border patrol employees are dickheads by FatherDale · · Score: 1

      Mmm. Not buying it. I suspect it's the kind of job where your usual 'customers grind you down, no matter how sunny your disposition when you started there.....

    2. Re:Border patrol employees are dickheads by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I checked out the requirements for TSA awhile back: in my city, you can START OFF at $80,000/year. You are supposed to have one year's experience in security or some shit, but I doubt anyone does.At $80,000/year, they can hire ME and I will be a dick to everyone: and I suspect thats the problem.

    3. Re:Border patrol employees are dickheads by nikwax · · Score: 1

      > Mmm. Not buying it. I suspect it's the kind of job where your usual 'customers grind you down, no matter how sunny your disposition when you started there.....

      So how come the rest of the world manages to have relatively courteous, civilized immigration officials? Or is it just impossible for you to admit that the US has a problem here?

    4. Re:Border patrol employees are dickheads by FatherDale · · Score: 1

      I haven't met any of those courteous, civilized immigration officials. Not even in New Zealand, the most civilized country I ever visited.

    5. Re:Border patrol employees are dickheads by bearclaw46 · · Score: 1

      Hey, consider yourself lucky that you're living out of this Communist State. It's a joke anymore. People with any kind of power, i.e. TSA, esp if it's Govt (local, State or Feds) have become the rudest folks to deal with. I wish I could get out of this country but it's practically impossible financially for me.

  46. Violence not the answer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Seriously? Last year, there were 500 murders in Chicago compared to over 2000 murders in Rio. Oh, and I'm sure that Rio is much less corrupt than Chicago also. Sheesh.

  47. Wiki on tourism in N-A by aepervius · · Score: 1

    I am not sure if this can be translated directly to tourist number but I found this char on wiki on tourism : internationala rrival
    It seems people just accept the security theater, and ignore it while enojoying their 5 days in Vegas. As anecdtotial story, my sister only remember her holiday, not the problem of the security while coming or going.

    --
    C. Sagan : A demon haunted world:
    http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0345409469/
    visit randi.org
  48. US Customs Isn't Kind To US Citizens, Either by damn_registrars · · Score: 5, Informative

    They are concerned about what US Customs would do to foreigners, they should look at what they do to citizens. I was born and raised in the states, and still live in a state near a border. I recently crossed back into the states (by car) after 5 days in a neighboring country. I pulled up to customs and had to turn off my car and hand my keys to a leather-gloved customs officer so he could search my trunk, while I stayed in my car. I was not allowed to see what he was doing; he could have easily taken items from my trunk or placed items in my trunk without my knowing it. Eventually they cleared me but offered no explanation for what they were doing.

    I have had similar experiences in the past as well, I once had to pull from the customs booth to the "additional screening" building (single car garage with doors on both ends) where I had to empty my trunk for a customs agent.

    So I can't say I'm surprised if the security theater here was a deciding factor against having another Olympics here. Certainly our procedures have changed a fair bit since 1996.

    --
    Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    1. Re:US Customs Isn't Kind To US Citizens, Either by Entropius · · Score: 1

      Is this by any coincidence in Arizona? The Border Patrol guys around here are pretty nuts.

    2. Re:US Customs Isn't Kind To US Citizens, Either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I recently crossed back into the states (by car) after 5 days in a neighboring country. I pulled up to customs and had to turn off my car and hand my keys to a leather-gloved customs officer so he could search my trunk, while I stayed in my car. I was not allowed to see what he was doing; he could have easily taken items from my trunk or placed items in my trunk without my knowing it. Eventually they cleared me but offered no explanation for what they were doing.

      They were searching for contraband. That is part of the role of US Customs.

      I have had similar experiences in the past as well, I once had to pull from the customs booth to the "additional screening" building (single car garage with doors on both ends) where I had to empty my trunk for a customs agent.

      They were searching for contraband. That is part of the role of US Customs.

      Being an American means that YOU can easily enter the USA. Your luggage and vehicle are subject to search (in case you didn't know, some smugglers are American).

    3. Re:US Customs Isn't Kind To US Citizens, Either by richmaine · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Amen. I'm a US citizen (by birth, and I've lived here all 59 years of my life). The border folk of my own country give me far more hassle than I've ever had with any other country. I don't even fit any particularly common "bad guy profile" (independent of any questions about the use of such profiles). I'm quite the nerdy, white middle-class American image. They don't pick on me in particular; its just that the way they are to most people is so much worse than the border folk of most other countries.

      This summer I had my first trip to Russia. The cruise ship folk warned us about how painful the border folk were. This appeared to be mostly a push to buy the cruise ship tour excursion so that they could help you smooth it. I didn't do that; did have my own Visa. Went through the Russian officials more quickly and easily then the US ones when I returned home.

      As far as so-called security goes, if someone in my family mysteriously disappeared, never to be heard from again, agents of my own government would be a lot higher on my list of likely culprits than foreign terrorists. I don't really run around every day worried about either possibility (and I don't even brink my tin foil hat with me when I travel), but I sure know which one is higher on my concern list.

    4. Re:US Customs Isn't Kind To US Citizens, Either by damn_registrars · · Score: 1

      They were searching for contraband. That is part of the role of US Customs.

      If they were searching for contraband then why didn't the agent have a dog with him? He didn't even open my suitcase (I would have heard the zipper), he just poked around in the trunk a little bit and closed it back up.

      Which was pretty much the same thing that happened to me before, I had to unload the trunk, then the agent decided they had seen enough (without opening any containers) and let me through.

      What is more irritating about it though is how thoroughly inconsistent it is. For the past 4 years I have cross the border three times per year (at various crossing points). The crossing point I just came through this time I came through about two months ago as well and had a very different (faster) experience with no search. Obviously they don't have enough agents to thoroughly search every vehicle, and nobody would be willing to pay for that anyways.

      Part of me wonders if they may have actually had some advance information to suspect my car was clean and so they selected me "randomly" for search just so that they could quickly increment their search total for the day. One of my grandfathers experienced a similar thing when his company implemented "random" drug tests; they knew he was cleaner than a whistle so every time the tests came around they asked him to pee in a cup so that they would have more clean tests in their records.

      --
      Damn_registrars has no butt-hole. Damn_registrars has no use for a butt-hole.
    5. Re:US Customs Isn't Kind To US Citizens, Either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they were searching for contraband then why didn't the agent have a dog with him?

      Dogs are expensive, and need a handler. And you don't need a dog to find most contraband. Dogs make it easier to find drugs & explosives.

      He didn't even open my suitcase (I would have heard the zipper), he just poked around in the trunk a little bit and closed it back up.

      So? Many smugglers have their contraband right out in the open.

      Which was pretty much the same thing that happened to me before, I had to unload the trunk, then the agent decided they had seen enough (without opening any containers) and let me through.

      Part of customs officers training is to observe how people react. Most smugglers would be sweating bullets at that point.

      Once Customs asked me, "Do you have any marijuana in the vehicle?". I truthfully said, "No." Later, my girlfriend asked does anyone actually answer yes? Some people do say yes, but Customs is looking at how you react when you answer no. Many people don't lie very well.

      What is more irritating about it though is how thoroughly inconsistent it is.

      That is called RANDOM searching. You appear to be a low-risk individual - you aren't a convicted smuggler, and haven't been caught before with undeclared goods, so most of the time they wave you through. But you still have RANDOM searches to make sure.

      It's part of good security, since organized smugglers will hire innocent-looking people with no record to carry goods across the border.

      Part of me wonders if they may have actually had some advance information to suspect my car was clean

      It tends to be the other way round - they get tipped off to suspect you're carrying something.

      and so they selected me "randomly" for search just so that they could quickly increment their search total for the day.

      Reagan said, "Trust, but verify". It's part of good security, since you never know if you'll be searched or not, which tends to discourage smuggling.

      One of my grandfathers experienced a similar thing when his company implemented "random" drug tests; they knew he was cleaner than a whistle so every time the tests came around they asked him to pee in a cup so that they would have more clean tests in their records.

      And how did they know he was clean? You don't know until you check. If you believe in random drug testing, then you need a random survey of everyone. And you would be surprised how many senior citizens use illegal drugs - the hippies are getting old.

    6. Re:US Customs Isn't Kind To US Citizens, Either by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Dogs are expensive, and need a handler. And you don't need a dog to find most contraband. Dogs make it easier to find drugs & explosives.

      Cars are sitting around for several minutes idly waiting to get up to customs. Many crossing points regularly walk dogs down the aisles between cars to pre-screen. One handler and one dog can check a lot of cars in very little time.

      And being as customs controls the time elapsed per car, they can easily slow down the agents in the booths to give the dogs a little more time if they want.

      Part of customs officers training is to observe how people react. Most smugglers would be sweating bullets at that point.

      So what part of customs training includes x-ray vision so that they can see through the trunk and see how the driver is reacting while they are behind the car?

      It's part of good security, since organized smugglers will hire innocent-looking people with no record to carry goods across the border.

      And how many smugglers do you know? Do you honestly believe that a large portion of smuggling goes through customs checkpoints? Are you forgetting how much of the borders are not patrolled at all?

      And how did they know he was clean? You don't know until you check.

      Consider the probability of OP's grandfather being in a union - it likely is fair or better if OP is an adult, considering how high union membership used to be in the states. As much as reaganites like to claim otherwise, union members do actually know each other quite well and have a good sense of who is up to what. It would be trivial for management to ask someone else ahead of time "who do you know to be clean" and then make sure to include them in the "random" sample.

  49. Funny by copponex · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A DUI is something that carries the stigma of the high probability of the offender killing themselves or someone else. Having a joint is literally not a crime to anyone, and yet which one gets American nuts in a twist?

    The disconnect in moral reasoning is getting ridiculous.

    1. Re:Funny by frieza79 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Having a joint is literally not a crime to anyone, and yet which one gets American nuts in a twist?

      Do you know what the word literally means?

    2. Re:Funny by copponex · · Score: 1

      Crime requires an injured party. Who am I injuring when I'm carrying weed in my pocket? I mean, besides the hurt feelings of some person who believes they can tell me what I can or cannot do with my own person...

    3. Re:Funny by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "The disconnect in moral reasoning is getting ridiculous."

      US drug policy is driven by Christian fanaticism. Chemical pleasure competes with Gawd, hence the insane punitive attitude. Foreigners need not bother visiting the US. It is a culture-free zone.

      If you want wide open spaces, go to Canada instead. There is no reason to want to visit US cities (BTW I'm an American who grew up around NYC.) They are large, that is all. European cities are much more interesting.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    4. Re:Funny by conureman · · Score: 1

      Do you know what the word crime means?
      Violating a retarded statute (or not), getting convicted (of a "felony" even) and going to gaol does not make one a criminal. A crime victim, maybe, but that's the price of living in "The Land OF The Free".

      --
      The cost of that cleanup, of course, will be borne by taxpayers, not industry.
    5. Re:Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Won't someone think of the children? Being put in the microwave, while stoners change the turkey.

    6. Re:Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Funny, I thought crime was defined by law, not you.

    7. Re:Funny by lawpoop · · Score: 1

      Maybe he means it in an abstract legal-philosophical sense, as in "nobody has been hurt; therefore, no crime has been committed."

      --
      Computers are useless. They can only give you answers.
      -- Pablo Picasso
    8. Re:Funny by TheSpoom · · Score: 1

      Interesting thing: If, in an immigration medical, you either say you have ever smoked marijuana in the past, or it's determined that you have by testing, your visa will be instantly denied and you will be banned from entry to the United States for at least three years.

      Doesn't matter how long ago you smoked or whether it's legal in your country (and in fact, testing is done on every immigration medical in some countries, such as Jamaica). It could have been twenty years ago and only once. Doesn't matter. Banned for three years.

      Yes, this does mean that President Obama, if immigrating now, would incur a three year ban.

      --
      It's better to vote for what you want and not get it than to vote for what you don't want and get it.
      - E. Debs
    9. Re:Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A DUI is something that carries the stigma of the high probability of the offender killing themselves or someone else. Having a joint is literally not a crime to anyone, and yet which one gets American nuts in a twist?

      Ever been out at a bar or pub after work and had two or three beers during pleasant conversation and then hopped in to your car to head home without a second thought?

      Being as I am social and open to a good glass of beer and conversation from time to time, I am guilty of this horrible transgression (acting of "high probability of killing myself or someone else.") Really? Is it so? Does three pints of beer over an hour or so constitute complete intoxication for someone of relative tolerance and normal body mass index?
      The hard numbers used by MADD and the modern temperance movement would suggest that operating a vehicle under those conditions is a recipe for death and destruction. I suggest bullshit. I drive around regularly and see people texting on phones, putting on makeup while driving and talking on the phone, people reading books while driving, etc.

      DUI arrests are so prevalent because they result in a large revenues and are easily proved in court.

      This horrible "stigma" applies to many people who have been guilty of debatable transgressions and aggressive legislation. In most states in the US a BAC of .08 is legally drunk, fine. It's an acceptable number. My problem is when .08 and falling becomes a cash grab for the local government. I'm not talking about crashes or destruction of property, but traffic stops results of "incorrect lane changing" or whatever else the office deems necessary reasoning for stopping you.

      I'm not defending the guy that drank a gallon of scotch and drives like he is on the racing circuit, I'm just saying I'm tired of all these broad generalizations made by people who for whatever reason think anyone who drinks alcohol from time to time is wrong, but continue to smoke pot or enjoy whatever vice they may have while looking down from their nonexistent mountaintop.

    10. Re:Funny by Zirnike · · Score: 1
      "Having a joint is literally not a crime to anyone, and yet which one gets American politicians' nuts in a twist?"

      Fixed that for ya.

      --
      I'm not shy, I'm stalking my prey
    11. Re:Funny by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1
      Ever been out at a bar or pub...then hopped in to your car?

      No, I would take the train/bus/taxi home. And that is one of the reasons why the USA (and New Zealand which had a similar attitude) has terrible statistics for deaths on the road. It's like you have a twin towers moment every month, and nobody cares.

      When I visit home I hate getting into the car with my parents if they have been drinking, but on occasion I feel I have no choice (there probably is no taxi in that (rural) area anyway).

    12. Re:Funny by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      A DUI is something that carries the stigma of the high probability of the offender killing themselves or someone else. Having a joint is literally not a crime to anyone, and yet which one gets American nuts in a twist?

      Both, actually, which just goes to show how little you actually know about us. It's a fairly recent phenomenon on both counts: back in the sixties and seventies, when I grew up, if you were high and got pulled over, it really wasn't that big a deal. The cops would ask you how far you were from home, and if it wasn't too far they'd follow you there to make sure you got home ok. Nowadays, doesn't matter what your drug of choice is (pot, alcohol, whatever) you get a DUI (if you're not outright arrested.)

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    13. Re:Funny by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Who am I injuring when I'm carrying weed in my pocket?

      Jesus.

  50. Not to mention by markov_chain · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At the Olympics which did happen to be hosted in USA, in Atlanta, after all the nasty border control security the one terrorist act that actually occured was performed by a domestic terrorist.

    --
    Tsunami -- You can't bring a good wave down!
    1. Re:Not to mention by couchslug · · Score: 1

      "after all the nasty border control security the one terrorist act that actually occured was performed by a domestic terrorist."

      Not to mention that the cops hounded an innocent man, while the perp went on to commit more attacks!

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
  51. I hate your guards, I hate your border by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I didn't do anything. Leave me alone, don't steal my goddamn laptop. Don't harass me. Don't treat me the way you do.

    1. Re:I hate your guards, I hate your border by couchslug · · Score: 1

      Just stop crossing the border. Choose a country, live there. It really is that simple.

      --
      "This post is an artistic work of fiction and falsehood. Only a fool would take anything posted here as fact."
    2. Re:I hate your guards, I hate your border by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      Living up to your handle, I see.

  52. Unlike... by midifarm · · Score: 1

    the porous borders of Pakistan, who'll let anyone through with or without a passport.

    1. Re:Unlike... by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 1

      Except the border with India.

      --

      Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

    2. Re:Unlike... by midifarm · · Score: 1

      Right... damn Kashmir the only good thing that area of the world has brought to life is a killer Led Zeppelin tune.

    3. Re:Unlike... by _Shad0w_ · · Score: 1

      And Cashmere wool. I like soft comfy wool, rather than hard scratchy wool.

      --

      Yeah, I had a sig once; I got bored of it.

    4. Re:Unlike... by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

      You mean like the border between Mexico and the United States ?

  53. fingerprinting is criminal by anticharisma · · Score: 1

    fingerprinting is the thing that needs to be ceased. its so offensive its over the top.

    --
    http://www.anticharisma.com/
  54. Even US citizens are frustrated.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Even American citizens are frustrated by this. I cruise a couple of times a year and the port officials always seem to glare at you when you present your US passport. I can only imagine what it must be like for non-citizens coming in at the airports.

    Bin Laden scored a great victory just by locking down freedom of movement in the US. I love traveling to other countries and almost always feel welcome. I wish the same were true here in the US.

    1. Re:Even US citizens are frustrated.. by Colonel+Korn · · Score: 1

      Even American citizens are frustrated by this. I cruise a couple of times a year and the port officials always seem to glare at you when you present your US passport. I can only imagine what it must be like for non-citizens coming in at the airports.

      Bin Laden scored a great victory just by locking down freedom of movement in the US. I love traveling to other countries and almost always feel welcome. I wish the same were true here in the US.

      Bin Laden was the prompt, the the guy who declared war against freedom in the US was George W Bush. Sadly, while Obama railed against that as a candidate, he's not doing a lot to distinguish himself from Bush on that front now.

      --
      "I zero-index my hamsters" - Willtor (147206)
    2. Re:Even US citizens are frustrated.. by Richard_J_N · · Score: 1

      As a UK citizen, who used to come to the US on holiday twice a year (Florida in the summer; Colorado for the skiing), we've transferred our vacations to other places (usually Italy in summer; Canada for skiing). The main reasons are Guantanamo, and the fingerprinting process. In the last 8 years, our family has cost the US economy $100k+ as a result. When will it stop?

    3. Re:Even US citizens are frustrated.. by gatkinso · · Score: 1

      I never seem to have trouble getting back into the country. I just wait in line, gt my stamp, and continue on my way.

      --
      I am very small, utmostly microscopic.
    4. Re:Even US citizens are frustrated.. by retchdog · · Score: 1

      Florida in the summer... Italy in summer.

      Speaking as a Floridian: at least you can take some of that $100K and use it for psychotherapy. ;-)

      --
      "They were pure niggers." – Noam Chomsky
  55. Still being checked as american citizen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    For all the countries I have visited the US has the most unfriendliest immigration service of all even AFTER becoming an american citizen. I am still being questioned for the most ridiculous questions. Hey you do not need to ask me where I work, I am an american citizen, this is my country as much as yours including that I am paying your salary INS! Check my passport, ask me where I have been, confirm its me and let me thru. An illegal alien gets treated better crossing the southern border.

  56. It's one of the biggest factors for sure by hansoloaf · · Score: 1
    The other factors are in my opinion are:
    • SLC bribery scandal. Couple that with Chicago's reputation for corruption.
    • Chicago's presentation did not inspire the IOC as others did, despite Obama's apperance
    • It's simply South America's time and this is the biggest reason. Just a matter of time.
    1. Re:It's one of the biggest factors for sure by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The other factors are in my opinion are:

      • SLC bribery scandal. Couple that with Chicago's reputation for corruption.
      • Chicago's presentation did not inspire the IOC as others did, despite Obama's apperance
      • It's simply South America's time and this is the biggest reason. Just a matter of time.
      • And the women are hotter.

      TFTFY.

  57. I've had this experience in heathrow by way2trivial · · Score: 2, Interesting

    requiring a visa to change planes-and that was pre 9/11

    JFK-london-BUD

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
    1. Re:I've had this experience in heathrow by raju1kabir · · Score: 1

      requiring a visa to change planes-and that was pre 9/11
      JFK-london-BUD

      With an American passport? No. You only required a UK entry stamp. I doubt they'd even have been willing to give you a visa in that circumstance.

      I do not think you understand the hoops that passengers transiting in the US must go through. If they are not from a visa-waiver country (of which there are only a couple dozen), then weeks before the trip, they have to go to the US embassy in their country, pay an application fee which could be $100 or more, submit to a humiliating interview in front of all the other people who are also applying, and then hope it will be granted.

      It's a monumental bother and it's why there aren't many transit flights through the US these days. Central American and Caribbean nations have picked up that business.

      --
      "Patriotism is your conviction that this country is superior to all other countries because you were born in it." -- GBS
  58. I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Once on a flight from Australia to Canada, my plane stopped to refuel at Hawaii airport.

    When we were about an hour out approaching Hawaii, the flight attendants came around with US immigration cards for us to fill out. I was completely baffled and started to get seriously worried that I was on the wrong flight or some shit. I said to the attendant "But, we're going to Vancouver, right?". She replied "Yes, I'm sorry, everyone has to fill out a US immigration card". She seemed kinda puzzled by the whole thing too.

    Not entirely put at ease, I started filling out the form, which was probably the most poorly laid-out and silliest form I've ever encountered in my life. Am I affiliated with the Nazi party? WTF is the matter with these people? I felt like I was being interrogated like a criminal suspect. Do I intend to commit acts of terrorism against the United States? Well right up until I was forced to fill out that form, I would have categorically said "no", but afterwards I have to admit my inclinations were changing in that regard.

    My favourite question was "Why do you wish to enter the United States". I wrote down the only reasonable answer under the circumstances: "I don't".

    So we all got off the plane, milled around Hawaii airport in swelteringly humid conditions for TWO HOURS, were forced to remove our shoes and finally, when it was my turn to meet the immigration official and hand in my stupid form, she looked at my answers, scowled at me and said "What does this mean, 'I don't'?".

    I'm totally fucking serious. That's what she said.

    I replied "It means just what it says. I don't wish to enter the United States."

    She said, I shit you not, "Well why are you here then?".

    Wow. Just ... wow. Here is a person whose job it is to enforce immigration policy and she doesn't even know that they force transit passengers who are not bound for the US to go through immigration? I feel an intense fury at the level of stupidity on display, but I clench my teeth and force myself to stay calm. After all, I don't want to get on the wrong side of this person/vegetable and get a finger stuck up my ass for my trouble.

    After thinking for a moment about how I can explain the situation to a person of such ... limited mental faculty, I say "I'm going to Vancouver. My plane is refuelling here and apparently that means we have to go through US immigration?"

    She levelling her blank stare at me for a few seconds, then shuffled some papers around while I stood there wondering what the hell kind of Twilight Zone bullshit I'd just wandered into. Then she stamped my passport, stapled the stupid form to it, muttered something at me and let me through. I had successfully visited the United States! Absent any consent or intention to do so! After all, it's not like travellers actually know which countries they want to go to. Better decide these things for them.

    I then got back on my plane, sat in the exact same seat I had occupied two hours earlier, and we made our way to Vancouver.

    When we arrived at Vancouver airport, a nice man in a suit asked me if I was a Canadian resident. I said "no" and with a polite "this way please sir" he directed me to the non-residents line. After waiting in the queue for about 5 minutes, the guy at the desk said "Oh you're from Australia. What brings you to Canada?" I said "Just here on holiday.". He asked "Gonna do any skiing while you're here?". I said "Maybe." He said "Cool.", stamped my passport and in I went.

    Let's look at the contrast here. Canada treated me like a welcome visitor and the process was efficient and friendly. The US forced me to enter their country against my will whilst demanding that I explain why I was entering their country, and expected me to be grateful for the whole experience.

    So in conclusion, I refuse to visit the US as long as this idiotic attitude prevails, and I think the IOC has made an eminently sensible choice regarding the 2016 Olympic Games.

    1. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Informative

      This government efficiency is why we aren't exactly thrilled with the idea of government health care...

    2. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by node159 · · Score: 1

      That ... is ... awesome! Good on you!

      It is one of my pet peeves that as a transit passenger (on intentional soil) I am forced to jump though the hosting countries whims. I don't want to visit your country, the only reason I am here is because the plane can't fly direct!

      --
      GPLv2: I want my rights, I want my phone call! DRM: What use is a phone call, if you are unable to speak?
    3. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Kagato · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You're forced to enter the US because that's the way your airline set it up. The reason you had to get off and clear immigration is because an airline has to have a special agreement with the country in question to do that. The airport also has to be set up to allow for people connect to connect that way. HNL is a fairly small airport. It's not set up to have people connect that way because it's 99.9% of the flights HNL is the final destination. So, you might have a point about gruff gov't employees, but you having to get off the plane and then clear immigration is entirely the fault of the airline you traveled on.

    4. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      As much as I dislike the border procedure I just go with the program when I actually want to enter the US.

      However, I never understood why I have to clear US immigration and customs if I am just transiting the US. This is plain stupid and silly and comes at a great cost in time and money to me and the American tax payer. Why oh why do I have to leave the secure area and stand in line once again to be subjected to the xenophobic comments of a TSA slug who doesn't know how to read a foreign passport? I fly via Asia or Canada just to avoid that BS.

      Oh get this, now they want a $10 fee (in addition to the fee you are already paying with your ticket) and they want to use this to promote tourism! Does it get any more stupid than that?

      Compare that to continental Europe. Arrive from your transatlantic flight and go to your gate. Done. You'll pick up your bags at your destination.

    5. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      Canadians generally like Aussies :) You're sort of like us (Commonwealth country, similar roots and all).

      My advice to you is to pay a little extra and get a direct flight next time.

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
    6. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by nojayuk · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I flew from the UK to Montreal recently. My local airport has no direct flights to Canada but there is a daily flight to Newark and I could have easily bought a through ticket to Montreal, changing planes in Newark. But... that would mean jumping through all the Immigration hoops in the US, including registering on a US government website at least a week in advance to pre-clear my arrival. It was entirely possible that on my arrival at Newark I could be refused entry to the United States and repatriated back to the UK on a whim even if I had spent hours filling in all the details on the required forms.

      Instead I found another flight to Montreal via Schiphol in the Netherlands. On arrival in Schiphol I stayed airside and passed through security only when embarking on the second leg of my flight. I did not have to pass through Immigration or Customs.

      The last time I was in the US was 2004. I don't see myself going back again any time soon although I really enjoy my visits to America and would like to go again. It's the getting there that hurts.

    7. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by 4D6963 · · Score: 3, Funny

      Regarding the immigration form, one thing that was must puzzling wasn't what they asked, but how they asked it. They had 5 boxes to tick (hint: don't tick any), and under one box they were asking both if you worked for the Third Reich between 1933 and 1945 or if you were looking for work in the USA. In the same fucking question!!

      --
      You just got troll'd!
    8. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was in a direct flight. He had to land in the US through no fault of his own (the plane needed fuel).

      This all raises a question, with the new 'register before you arrive' thingy that the US inflicts upon us aliens now, what would happen in this instance?

      You are on a direct flight from Australia to Canada, no intention of visiting the LOTFAP, so you didn't jump through the US pre-travel hoops before you leave... NOW you find that you are transiting through the US, without pre-approval... what are the border goons going to do to a plane load of people in the same situation?

    9. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Once on a flight from Australia to Canada, my plane stopped to refuel at Hawaii airport.

      I've been on that Air Canada flight (Vancouver-Sydney) a couple times, and you are mistaken about a few things. Maybe Air Canada didn't explain it very well when you bought the ticket, or you didn't pay attention.

      Some airports have an international transit area. Honolulu does not. When your flight lands at HNL, you didn't refuel and take off again. Everyone got off the plane. Then you waited a couple hours, and you got on the plane again.

      Since there is no transit area at HNL, when you get off the plane, you enter the USA (which means you have to go through customs), then you leave.

      A better question is what happens if US customs rejects you? Do you send you on the first flight out? (which is what you wanted to do)

      Not entirely put at ease, I started filling out the form, which was probably the most poorly laid-out and silliest form I've ever encountered in my life. Am I affiliated with the Nazi party? WTF is the matter with these people? I felt like I was being interrogated like a criminal suspect. Do I intend to commit acts of terrorism against the United States? Well right up until I was forced to fill out that form, I would have categorically said "no", but afterwards I have to admit my inclinations were changing in that regard.

      My favourite question was "Why do you wish to enter the United States". I wrote down the only reasonable answer under the circumstances: "I don't".

      Having visited the USA many times, I have often filled out those little blue cards. I have never seen those questions on the form. Was this many years ago?

      I replied "It means just what it says. I don't wish to enter the United States."

      She said, I shit you not, "Well why are you here then?".

      Wow. Just ... wow. Here is a person whose job it is to enforce immigration policy and she doesn't even know that they force transit passengers who are not bound for the US to go through immigration?

      There are many, many flights from all over the world that arrive at HNL, at all hours of the day. Customs doesn't know that you planned to transit the USA - they have to look up your flight record to see that.

      I had successfully visited the United States! Absent any consent or intention to do so! After all, it's not like travellers actually know which countries they want to go to. Better decide these things for them.

      Travelers usually pay attention to the flights they book, what countries does the flight land in, is there a transit area, and what are the visa requirements (if any).

    10. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hi there,

      you are lucky that you weren't locked up into a room during transit.
      That's what happened to me and my family.

      We got locked up in a room with chairs, bathrooms and vending machines which only accept dollars.

      None of us had any dollars, no way of getting our hands on dollars.

      Those were my only 2 hours on American soil and I'd also like to go make trip to the US,
      but asking for fingerprints is asking too much.

      Way too much choice out there in the world when it comes to interesting destinations.

    11. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by martin-boundary · · Score: 2, Funny

      Well, in this case the correct answer to the question "why do you wish to enter the US" is "so that the plane doesn't crash", but sometimes telling the truth is... counterproductive.

    12. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 0, Troll

      I, for one, am glad you showed such a shitty attitude towards frontline government employees. Don't want to enter America! That's a good one! PS Chicago didn't get the Olympics because they didn't bribe the IOC enough, had nothing to do with immigration policy. But thanks for venting on a totally unrelated subject!

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    13. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by ignavus · · Score: 1

      This happened to me too at San Francisco airport. Don't tell me SF airport is "a fairly small airport". Whose fault is it that the airport is not set up for transit passengers? Not mine. I simply wanted to get from the UK back to Australia - I would have been perfectly happy to fly via Canada or Mexico - you know, sane countries.

      --
      I am anarch of all I survey.
    14. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Funny

      Yeah, Australia it's just a warmer Canada, without the cranky neighbour ;D.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    15. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He was in a direct flight. He had to land in the US through no fault of his own (the plane needed fuel).

      You're making it sound like an unscheduled stop to refuel due to some unforeseen problem.

      It's an Air Canada flight from Sydney to Honolulu, everyone gets off, you spend a couple hours on the ground, you get on again, then the plane takes off for Vancouver.

      If the flight landed, loaded up on gas, and took off again without unloading/loading passengers, that would be different.

      The reason Air Canada does that (2 flight segments) is because Hawaii is a very popular travel destination. Many people on that flight are only going to/from Hawaii without going all the way across the pacific. It also is much easier on the crew - otherwise you have to travel with more spare crew because pilots are only allowed to work so many hours, and it's a looooong flight.

      This all raises a question, with the new 'register before you arrive' thingy that the US inflicts upon us aliens now, what would happen in this instance?

      The computers are aware of this, and the airline won't let you get on the plane in the first place.

      And incidentally, Australia does the same thing - as a Canadian (Americans are subject to the same rules), I had to pay & pre-register for an Australian electronic travel authority when I flew Vancouver-Honolulu-Sydney. Air Canada warned me that if I didn't, they wouldn't let me on the plane.

    16. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Kagato · · Score: 1

      Again, it's your airline. In order to accommodate that the airport would have to spend millions to build a special secure terminal facility to do that type transit. Fact is, maybe one or two flights a day might need that facility, almost all of them Australian.

      Asian airlines don't stop in the US when going to other North American Countries. They just go directly to the destination. Same thing with European airlines.

      Even then, it's a short term problem. As soon as the 787 ships Quantas will be able the trip with out the stop or if they bought the existing 777-200LR they could be flying directly to Canada already.

      SFO isn't going to pay for the facilities and the Aussie airlines are going to pay for it either.

    17. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1
      Some airports have an international transit area. Honolulu does not.

      It used to in the 1970s, when DC10s couldn't make it all the way to los angeles.

      Don't worry, when QANTAS gets a few more A380s perhaps you can have a direct flight in comfort. Of course you still run the risk of there being a natural disaster in Vancouver and the flight being diverted (IIRC this happens on the east coast and one person was jailed on an outstanding arrest warrant cos it landed on US soil).

    18. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1
      without the cranky neighbour

      Hey, don't forget Indonesia, where they want to introduce the death penalty (by stoning) for adultery. That makes the USA seem laid-back by comparison!

    19. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      On my last visit to Canada, I got grilled in Toronto. Much worse than anywhere else. The guy was semi-polite about it, but it was still worse than what I got in any other nation, including the US.

      Why am I here?
      How long will I be staying?
      Where will I be staying?
      What do I do for a living?
      How much money do I make?
      Where am I going next?
      etc, etc

      Funny thing was I went thru Montreal the year before, stayed for longer and got no hassle at all.

      American stupidity has been known to spread. Unfortunately, the Canadians have gotten some of it. While the US certainly isn't admission friendly even to its citizens (got a gruff inspector at Washington-Dulles yesterday), Canada is far from being a bastion on friendliness.

    20. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      To make a long story short - YMMV and Canada border patrol sucks just as bad, eh.

      Five years ago I tried to enter Canada under the North American Free Trade Agreement. Their border patrol held me up for nine freaking hours because the uneducated moron processing my NAFTA Visa didn't believe a "Bachelors of Computer Science" degree in the US qualified me for a "Software Engineer I" role in Canada. After eight hours I inquired about filing a formal complaint, and the agent handling my case suddenly decided to offer me a better visa that didn't have to be renewed every year:( The thing is I had a Canadian colleague working in the US on the same project, same title, who came in under NAFTA. She said it took DHS something like half an hour to process her.

    21. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Meanwhile, if you avoid the USA and set your trip up so that you pass through Singapore instead, you can, as a transit passenger, take a bus tour around the island without having to pass through immigration. That is assuming you have enough time to spare between flights of course. I haven't done the tour myself, I assume there is some check to make sure you don't stay behind, but it shows what can be done by people who care about their visitors.

    22. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by rtb61 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Australia is an island, no neighbours ;).

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    23. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      With an attitude like that I'm surprised the Canadian official didn't give you hell too. You're a visitor, act like it.

      With an attitude like that I'm not at all surprised that you lost the games.

    24. Re:I, for one, boycott the US by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1
      Australia is an island

      The people living in Hobart might disagree :-)

  59. So, your sister was drugged.. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ..during her security check?

  60. Re:Easily the most unfriendly airports in the worl by Potor · · Score: 1
    As mucxh as I hate the system - and God do I hate the system - I must agree with your assessment.

    The Brits are the worst.

    But the French are the best. They practically wave you through if they don't suspect you of anything. And the Europeans know this. I was once told by a Belgian immigration official to enter and exit Europe through Paris CDG if I was concerned with overstaying my Schegen visa, because, in essence, there was no way they would check.

  61. bush was right by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it seems america is winning the war on tourism

  62. Rigorous, that's nonsense. by MM-tng · · Score: 1

    Is ridiculous. You have to fill in a list where you have to mark all things with the obvious answer if you want to get in. This of course regardless of anything on there is true or not. Have you ever used drugs? Who is ever going to answer yes to that on a form. It's just for the feeling of safety. I refuse to take part in that kind of moral pressure to lie.

    1. Re:Rigorous, that's nonsense. by Ihlosi · · Score: 1
      Is ridiculous. You have to fill in a list where you have to mark all things with the obvious answer if you want to get in. This of course regardless of anything on there is true or not. Have you ever used drugs? Who is ever going to answer yes to that on a form. It's just for the feeling of safety. I refuse to take part in that kind of moral pressure to lie.

      You don't understand the purpose of the list. The list just gives them another charge to tack on to the list if you're caught committing a crime in the US.

  63. What a joke. by MaWeiTao · · Score: 1

    This must be some kind of joke. Having traveled to a varied of countries and having had friends and family visit from foreign countries coming into the US is no more difficult than it is going anywhere else. In fact, in some cases it's more of a pain going through immigrations in other countries although even then it's not the end of the world.

    There is a problem I've found travelers encounter coming into the US, and that's good old shitty American service; immigration officers, for example who are complete assholes. They tend to be in bad moods for no apparent reason and they have little patience for people who can't speak English clearly. Obviously, not every immigration officer is like this. It's just a preview of what a foreigner is in for once they go out to shop. This is more of a cultural problem related to poor work ethic, among other things, than it is anything with immigration services.

    However, I think the most important reason for Brazil being chosen is the fact that there hasn't yet been an Olympics in South America. Certainly Rio de Janeiro wasn't the best choice. I'm sure corruption will be rampant and it's going to be a logistical nightmare getting the games set up down there. Certainly, any of the other options were superior, with Japan likely being the best choice. And the fact is that until the US is no longer a superpower Europeans are going to continue disliking us.

    1. Re:What a joke. by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

      I agree the US was unlikely to get the Olympics. With the previous Olympics being in London, Chicago was way down the list. Go from one predominantly white, English-speaking country to another?

      The Olympic committee has shown interest in taking the Olympics to a broader range of cities as of late, Chicago just wasn't in the cards.

      I also thing it's interesting people have forgotten so quickly the bribery scandals in regard to Olympics selection just a decade ago. Even if there is no out and out bribery, with a prize as valuable as the Olympics in the hands of a relatively small number of people, there will be massive levels of plying, cajoling and favor-currying. The impact of this on the selection process has to be at least as large as that of the border policies of the countries involved.

      --
      http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
  64. Nail on the Head by The+Wooden+Badger · · Score: 1

    Being a nation on the rise in the world's eyes is a much bigger factor. The passport thing might have played a small role, but I think that this is a lot more about Brazil than America. I don't have any opinion poll numbers available, but I would be willing to bet that Brazil has a higher percentage of the population in favor of the Olympics being in their back yard. Add to that the fact that there has never been a South American host city for the Olympics, paired with the Salt Lake, Atlanta, Los Angeles, and Lake Placid games in the recent past, and we have the emotional story that always plays so well with these types of votes. There are a bunch of other factors that would come into play (weather, facilities, mass transit, hotels, non-Olympic tourist destinations, etc.) that would come into play in this decision. Passports wouldn't rank very high on that list IMHO.

    --
    Heroscape, it's like legos combined with anachronistic wargames.
  65. It's bad even if you're a citizen... by Entropius · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I'm a US citizen who recently went to China for a scientific conference. China has a reputation, no doubt well deserved, as a police state. But in terms of ridiculous airport security and immigration control, it's nowhere *near* as bad as the Americans. The Chinese are bureaucratic as all hell with their regs, but they're at least friendly about it.

    When I got my passport checked back in the US, the fellow looks at my passport, notices the Chinese visa, and says "Welcome home" in this smug tone, as if to say "Aren't you glad you're back in the Land O' Freedom?"

  66. Not going there by __aavevi421 · · Score: 1

    I wont travel to the US specifically due to their 'border' control. I'm ex-forces and still get treated as a suspected terrorist, even though I spent 5 years trying to defend my country AGAINST terrorists.

  67. TSA by gramlin · · Score: 1

    Flying into Newark a couple of weeks ago and I have to say; TSA is a major joke. My solution. 15 megatons. That would do the trick. American idiots.

    Btw... go metric, bastards.

  68. Convicted? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It helps if you clarify that under Norwegian law you were only "convicted" of this offense implicitly by paying a FINE!

    Unless you contested the claim and chose to have your day in court?! Small amounts of drugs for personal use only result in fines in Norway.

  69. It's comcast falt for trying to buy nbc and make i by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's comcast fault for trying to buy nbc and make it cable only so no NBC, USA, Syfy, CNBC, MSNBC cable TV, Bravo, qubo, Telemundo, The Weather Channel, Hulu and Olympics on direct tv, dish, and many other cables system where comcast has there own. But they will say then can have them for a very high rate. Just like VS.

  70. toughen up by YesIAmAScript · · Score: 1

    This is very standard for border checkpoints. We used to travel back and forth to Canada in the 70s and this would happen from time to time in both directions. It's just like some guy searching your luggage when getting off an airplane, which happens everywhere from time to time too.

    It there to deter smuggling.

    As to things changing since 1996, perhaps you didn't notice the US has had the Olympics since then? Since 9/11 even.

    --
    http://lkml.org/lkml/2005/8/20/95
  71. I've never had a problem by a+whoabot · · Score: 1

    I'm not a US citizen. When I want to drive from Southern Ontario to Northwestern Ontario or vice versa I go through Michigan every time. I also many times go to the Lutsen ski area in Minnesota. Only one time had I a "problem". I was driving from London, Ontario having just picked up a car one relative inherited from another recently deceased distant sort-of relative (sort-of because of divorce). The car was still registered to the dearly departed. When I went across the Ambassador bridge they directed me to another stopping point. I got out there and they asked whose car it was. I explained it to them. They asked for proof that it was not stolen. I told them I didn't have any. They then let me go. It took about 3 minutes to cross the border that time. Every other time took about 15 seconds, not counting waiting in traffic. And I've travelled through with trailers and the vehicle packed with random boxes and furniture. I've moved apartments by going through the States. They never bothered to check any of the stuff.

    About a year ago my brother and his girlfriend took the border bus (not sure what it is called) from Windsor to Detroit. She forgot all her ID. She had no passport, no driver's license, no ID of any kind. They got angry but let them both in anyway!

    I have to wonder whether the IOC questioned the border policies of China before they gave them the green light for Beijing games.

    1. Re:I've never had a problem by ceoyoyo · · Score: 1

      Canadians are still special where the US border is concerned, particularly if you're driving. It's not quite so pleasant flying, and it's not pleasant at all, flying or driving, if you're not Canadian.

    2. Re:I've never had a problem by aoeuid · · Score: 1

      The problem is that out-of-the-blue it could all change for you. They are keeping a record now of when you enter and leave (photos of your license plate or when they scan your passport going back into Canada), and they can see that you have a history of doing that. But if you ever try and do something unusual or make a small mistake, you could have a seriously different experience. Don't think it is always so easy for Canadians. It isn't. Even if you've never had a problem, your day could come. It can be as easy as mistaking what neighbourhood of Detroit you're going shopping in. Make a minor, innocent mistake to the front-line officer, and get yourself sent to secondary, then you might learn the hard way what everyone else is talking about.

  72. the security theater has no impact on ... security by obarthelemy · · Score: 1

    It's almost funny how the pain in the ass measures dreamed up by politicos have no impact on security. A while back, there actually was an "I am a terrorist" check box on the little cards you have to fill in when you enter the US. Come on...

    Do the guys who create those idiocies actually have to go through them, or is there a handy "i'm a politico" cut-through card ?

    --
    The Cloud - because you don't care if your apps and data are up in the air.
  73. My personal experiences aren't that bad by mlgm · · Score: 1

    I'm not really a frequent visitor to the U.S., but I've been there a couple of times as a tourist and I can say, my personal experiences aren't that bad. The unfriendliest welcome was when I was entering by car from Canada about 20 years ago but even that wasn't so bad, just a little annoying. The last times I entered through Houston and Washington D.C. and the custom officers were friendly as have been most Americans we met (if not all).

    About the Olympics, Chicago would probably be a great city for Olympics, but I wouldn't believe custom procedures to be a major factor in the decision. I rather believe it's about the first games in South America.

  74. To all the non-Americans reading this thread: by Entropius · · Score: 0, Troll

    The USA really is a nice place. Our natural bits are wonderful and our people (in many places) are quite friendly to foreigners. Sadly we probably don't speak your language, unless it's English or Spanish, and you'll have to figure out what "miles" are if you want to use our roads.

    We're sorry about our government's temper tantrum for the last eight years. Sadly in a large chunk of our country religious fanaticism passes for local color, and a segment of our political system has gotten pretty good at manipulating that to get votes. We're trying to fix that now but our government has trouble doing anything quickly or efficiently, partly because they're still scared of the fanatics. Hopefully soon we'll get the country fixed back up and in a state to receive visitors -- check back in a few years.

    1. Re:To all the non-Americans reading this thread: by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We're sorry about our government's temper tantrum for the last eight years.

      *You* as an individual are, perhaps. You clearly don't- and can't- speak for your country's electorate as a whole which democratically elected the regime you implicitly criticise in 2000, and (more significantly) re-elected them in 2004.

      The fact you (the electorate) re-elected someone different this time around IMHO doesn't reflect as big a change in attitude as those outside the US- and those in the "liberal" coastal cities seem to think.

      I appreciate that your post was vaguely tongue-in-cheek, but the religious fanatics and conservatism of Buttfuck, Kansas are as much a part of America as the more tolerant views of the big coastal cities, and you can't whitewash your country by implicitly denying that.

  75. Maybe the Mexicans will save us? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    As unhappy as I am about the current immigration laws in America (my fluent-in-English, college-educated Japanese friend cannot live here, but an untrained Kenyan can because of their impoverished status, for instance), I anticipate that it will get better. Hispanic folk now outnumber blacks in America, and their population continues to explode. I can only hope that as their children grow up, they will have huge voting power, and surely they are pro-immigration.

    1. Re:Maybe the Mexicans will save us? by TerranFury · · Score: 1

      surely they are pro-immigration.

      Hmm.... I'm not so sure about that. Obviously it's dangerous to generalize or stereotype, but this is not the impression I've gotten from the Latinos I've known. And perhaps more persuasively, those majority-Caucasian Americans who are now anti-immigration are themselves probably second- to fourth- generation children of immigrants themselves. So it seems that once you get here and secure the good life for yourself, you just look out for what you perceive to be your own interests regardless of where your family came from.

  76. As an American by beej · · Score: 1

    I have to admit that getting through US Customs takes longer and is more stressful for me than any European country I've been to. Undoubtedly part of that is that we've all heard how nightmarish it can be... and just being afraid of that is enough to make the experience decidedly unpleasant, let alone when it actual gets bad.

    We need to fix this, seriously. I want as much tourism cash in this country as possible.

    1. Re:As an American by Nimey · · Score: 1

      TBH, I thought Scottish customs were about as bad as American. I'm American and visited Glasgow in '06 for my honeymoon, and I compare that against the border crossing at Niagara, NY/Ontario.

      Maybe it was that particular Scottish border agent (nearly everyone else in Scotland was *wonderfully* friendly), maybe it's because I'm American, maybe 'cause I didn't have a particular place I'd be staying the whole two weeks, I don't know.

      --
      Hail Eris, full of mischief...

      E pluribus sanguinem
    2. Re:As an American by beej · · Score: 1

      I haven't been to Scotland, in my defense. :) And I'm sure there must be places that are much much worse for customs than the US... I'm not even convinced that our reputation is entirely deserved.

      But a reputation, it is, deserved or not.

  77. Fingerprints aren't that bad by MasaMuneCyrus · · Score: 1

    Conspiracy theories aside, fingerprinting isn't all that bad, IMO. Japan now does it and the process is quick and painless. Besides, there's literally nothing to do with the fingerprints other than waste megabytes in some database of useless fingerprints that will never matter they are of people who don't live in the US. That said, Japanese customs agents are incomparably, perhaps infinitely nicer than US customs agents could ever even dream of on a nice day.

    What you should be more worried about than fingerprints, that even I'm worried about as an America ncitizen, is the tearing apart your luggage because you've been randomly chosen as part of their non-terrorist-looking quota (to prevent racial profiling charges) and the confiscating (read: stealing) of your laptop, potentially exposing all of its confidential information.

  78. I've never had problems w customs or visas by witch-doktor · · Score: 1

    I've studied and now work in the United States. I travel on an Indian passport. I've applied for visas three times and never had a problem and was always treated with courtesy. At customs I've never been treated disrespectfully, though once the person was surly. I would be too, if everyone and his brother was trying to get in and I had to sit there stamping 800 passports (About three international flights at the same time, in Dulles VA). Customs at DC airports is overworked, at Boston and Washington are friendly.

    I've had to travel to Europe twice. Once to Germany and once to Denmark. The embassy staff were respectful and responsive, but it required peculiar paperwork, notably proof of health insurance during traveling including repatriation. Customs at Germany was friendly, at Denmark was surly. This year I'm going to Germany and again have to collect paperwork for the visa.

    I've never really had problems anywhere, so I'm puzzled by the vitriol poured on the US border. I'm sure there is a wide range of personalities but in my experience I don't find that other countries in Europe are any better or worse.

  79. Good publicity for once. by zmollusc · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hooray! At last the strict border controls have a positive outcome, saving millions of taxpayer dollars and billions of man-hours of inconvenience from the craptacular olympics.

    --
    They whose government reduces their essential liberties for temporary security, receive neither liberty nor security.
  80. Last I heard... by DaveV1.0 · · Score: 1

    It had to do with money and the fact that there has never been an Olympics held in South America.

    --
    There is no "-1 offended" or "-1 you don't agree with me" mod options for a reason.
  81. Pain in the ass procedure by Gonoff · · Score: 1

    That will be the full BCS then?

    --
    I'll see your Constitution and raise you a Queen.
  82. Re:NO BRAINER! SUPER FAIL! by blincoln · · Score: 1

    What were those people even thinking! Have you seen Chicago? No thanks, Amerikkka.

    Chicago is actually pretty cool, other than literally everyone there driving like a meth-addict maniac with a deathwish, and their bizarre Adam Smith-inspired freeways.

    Rio is probably nicer overall, though. I haven't been there myself yet.

    --
    "...always new atoms but always doing the same dance, remembering what the dance was yesterday." -Richard Feynman
  83. Better keep out the scum, Olympics or not! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Terrorism or not, if it was easy to enter the USA, the scum of the earth would use the chance to immigrate illegally to the supposed land of the rich. Mexican drug bandits, every american knows about them, but there are many other hazards!

    Canada already has the big plague of murderous and cleptomaniac eastern european gipsy. They are brown-skinned tribal people originating fron northern India thousands of years ago, literally descended (and degenerated) from the ancient arianian warrior race, but they now more like neanderthals due to excessive in-breeding amongst them. They are imported to Canada by liberal jewish troublemakers who ask for political asylum for them, claiming abuse in the Czech Republic and Hungary. Abuse is real, it is actually coming from the police, because they are legally required to relentlessly search and catch thieves, rapists and homicidors, who the gipsy are. They refuse to leave poor gipsy criminals alone.

    If you want Amtrak crashes make sure it is easy to enter USA and the gipsy will come. They have a habit of stealing everything made of copper or brass and sell it for scrap metal: railway crossing electric signal cables feature prominently in their wishlist. They waste the money on game slot machines and drinks afterwards. Gipsy kids rob people in the streets with razor, gangs composed of 8 year olds are not afraid to attack a teenager twice the size, for shoes, handy or bicycle.

    They fornicate when 12-13 year old and by 14 they have the first kid usually. An average gipsy woman has 6 kids from 4 different fathers before reaching 35 years of age (the last child is often fathered by the first-born son, yeah, total in-breading). Brother-sister sex (often rape) and pregnancy is common among the gipsy.

    Genetically and physically handicapped infants are common among the gipsy, because they get social security support for invalids in Europe, so they alcoholize, inhale solvents while pregnant and beat the foetus in the head with a rubber-head hummer while in the womb to make him/her a retard. Deformed kids are also profitable for street begging, which is the favoured occupation of romanian gipsies.

    There are over 10 million gipsies in eastern and central europe, all ready to invade your shores as soon as USA opens the door. Is it really worth winning the right for another Olympiad if it means letting shiploads of orcs land at Ellis Island? (Czech call the gipsy orcs because of their primitivity and love of violance, as well as obvious lack of bodily cleanliness. Most central european people would gladly exchange the gipsy population for black african people on an 1:1 basis or 1:5 for chinese immigrants. The chinese are diligent people and only commit crimes among each other, while gipsies are lazy and specifically target the european whites for crime.)

    The canadian have already woken up, they re-instated visa requirement against the Czech Republic last month. A big diplomatic trouble, but necessary to protect civilization in Canada.

    I think hmong man-eaters are enough trouble already for the USA, so keep your borders tight!

    1. Re:Better keep out the scum, Olympics or not! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a complete crock of xenophobic bullshit.

  84. The problem is bigger than passport control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A majority of the world does not like the U.S.A. We certainly don't have a majority on that council that decides where the Olympics will be held... Americans need to get over themselves. At least those people in Chicago who were instantly enraged by this decision...We've fucked up a lot here in America, and are not liked by many other EU nations.

    1. Re:The problem is bigger than passport control by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Truer words have rarely been spoken.

  85. Re:the security theater has no impact on ... secur by arthurpaliden · · Score: 1

    Security Theater:

    Paper bag that may contain a bomb left on a chair, shut down and evacuate the airport and call bomb squad.

    Bottle of liquid that may be explosive, put in bin with all the other 'explosive liquids' at the security station where all the people are.

  86. my recent experience... by Odinlake · · Score: 1

    ...at NY, was not that bad. The wait was really long and the inspecor quite nosy... Err, come to think of it the experience was not that good either. But they were at least polite and even friendly (in a well rehearsed way), which was not what I had learned I should expect.

    On the other hand I've had aquintances exposed to all sorts of visa stupidities that would've belonged better in the dark ages. No I think I'll stay away from the US insofar as I can.

  87. Probably not the hardest decision by smchris · · Score: 1

    Either:

    1. Send people behind the fascist curtain to the "windy city on the lake" known for the quality of its hot dogs and pizza and the resultant doughiness of the citizenry's bodies and a working-class, hard-scrabble mindset that created Al Capone and the whole snake pit of Neoconservative _real_ gangsters spawned by the "Chicago School" who have done such delightful things to the current world economy, or

    2. Send people to a country that is an up-and-comer, welcomes tourists, knows how to show them a good time, and has world class ocean beaches, weather, and beautiful people of legendary reputation.

    The second world corruption and violence are probably a wash in both cases at the level of the tourist experience. Downtown Chicago has always seemed very well policed but Rio presumably has experience dealing with their level of problems as well.

    I thought Madrid had a chance but South America has had some good years lately and throwing them a bone at this time makes a lot of sense.

  88. Lack of experience by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    No. The US lost its bid because the world community would NEVER pass up the chance to poke the President of the US in the eye that way. It wouldn't matter who was President, the result would have been the same. Other Presidents have just had the sense not to put us in the same position.

    This just shows how out of touch with world politics our current President is, that he would give them that opportunity. Duh.

  89. Compare Beijing and Vancouver.... by canadian_in_beijing · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Lived in Beijing for 5 years then the Olympics came around and the Chinese government decided to switch around the visa regulations. Myself and lots of expats on a T/F visa had no choice but to leave the country during the Olympics (many never went back). Had a friend that was in the Olympics for rowing and his grandparents were denied a visa to come watch him in Beijing!.

    Now living in Costa Rica and wanted to take my girlfriend to NY and Vancouver. US was relatively easy to get her a visa. Canada was not... they required original bank statements, property titles, etc... so she didn't get a visa. Ridiculous! I'm Canadian and ashamed of our visa policy.

    Both these countries got the Olympics with very bad visa policies... Maybe US visa policy is brought up to cover the other problems such as the US shrinking international reputation...

    1. Re:Compare Beijing and Vancouver.... by gordguide · · Score: 1

      Just curious ... is your girlfriend a Costa Rican citizen, and did she have a Passport?

      I say this because a good friend married a Costa Rican. He had to apply to the Costa Rican government, with assurances that she indeed was invited to Canada, before they would issue her a passport. He asked me to help and we wrote all the letters, etc on my computer; I know exactly what they said and to whom they had to be addressed.

      It's the same for most Caribbean and Central American citizens ... they don't issue passports as a right of citizenship like someone from the US, Canada, or Europe is used to. You have to prove you have a bona fide reason, and what amounts to an invitation from a citizen from that country, to get a Passport.

      Getting that visa would be mixed up in all this stuff; it's likely that the red tape you encountered is driven more from San Jose than Ottawa. Your problem may be summed up simply as not allowing enough time ... generally speaking citizens of Central America or the Caribbean will allow a year for the paperwork to clear, with most of that time dealing with the local officials. Any less and you probably are not going.

    2. Re:Compare Beijing and Vancouver.... by canadian_in_beijing · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the info... She is from Argentina with a passport and has traveled extensively including to the US. It was not a problem for her to get a visa to the US... just Canada

    3. Re:Compare Beijing and Vancouver.... by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      Does she have any convictions (impaired driving for example) that considered indictable offences in Canada? Are you sure? Canada does not generally deny visas without a good reason. If you are certain that she does not then perhaps she should try applying for a ministers permit to visit. Remember that Canada has the highest level of immigration of any country on earth. About the only thing that would stop her is a previous conviction or a suspected false refugee status claim.

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
    4. Re:Compare Beijing and Vancouver.... by canadian_in_beijing · · Score: 1
      None of the above. She got a visa to the US a few weeks ago. Canada will not give her one.

      She is a university student in Argentina (not exactly a third world country) and the Canadian government requires sufficient proof that she will be returning to Argentina (understandable).

      Proof = original bank statements, letter from employer, property titles, etc. Or I could sponsor her, which I tried to do... but then they started asking me show original bank statements, property titles, etc. Think this is a huge invasion of a persons privacy asking for so much detailed info.

      If a person from Canada or the US had to supply this amount of info just for a tourist visa nobody would travel.

      Sure Canada has high immigration (full time residents)... but probably not tourist numbers due to the complexities and invasion of peoples privacy.

    5. Re:Compare Beijing and Vancouver.... by gordguide · · Score: 1

      Generally when rules like this are tightened, it's because Canada has placed citizens of a given country on a list due to large numbers of refugee claimants from that country (refugee claims are made while the visitor is in Canada ... all applications for residency have to be made from your native country). Because of the way Canada's laws work, all refugee claimants can stay in Canada while the process works it's way through; generally it's a few years of residency in Canada before a final decision is made with no further avenues of appeal.

      Recently, citizens of Mexico were added to the list. It only happens when there is a spike in claimants from a given country's citizens. After a while, if things settle down, your native country is taken off the list.

      I took a moment to check out the most recent regulations. Currently there are four countries added to the list due to a spike in claimants from previously "normal" levels.
      Chile
      Argentina
      Hungary
      The Czech Republic

      There's your answer.

      The Czech Republic

  90. Crossing borders elsewhere can be far easier. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I've just returned from a week travelling in Europe based in Luxembourg.
    I travelled into France, Belgium, Holland & Germany without even having to stop at the borders. Twice I had crossed the border and not realised it.
    On the final day we decied to see if we could visit all 5 countries on 1 tank of fuel (150miles) on the bike.
    There you go, 5 countries in 5 hours and you don't have to show your passport.

    Here is an example of the opposite.

    I visited the US (while working for a US Company) and got stopped at gunpoint because I was riding a British Registered Motorcycle. The Cop wanted to know where my 'state' tag was. Apparently there was some local law that made it an offence not to show one. A $250.00 fine later and I was released. I had my fingerprints & mugshot taken. I'm now a criminal in that state.
    Guess why I won't be visiting the US ever again. I'm not an Alien. I don't come from some other planet but US Immigration & Customs seem to think that anyone from outside the US is a citizen of Plant Zog.

    1. Re:Crossing borders elsewhere can be far easier. by agnosticnixie · · Score: 1

      Hell, in Europe, whole armies can cross borders accidentally and apparently almost nobody will notice

    2. Re:Crossing borders elsewhere can be far easier. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I've just returned from a week travelling in Europe based in Luxembourg.
      I travelled into France, Belgium, Holland & Germany without even having to stop at the borders. Twice I had crossed the border and not realised it.

      Yes, because all those countries signed the Schengen treaty. If you arrive at one of those countries from a non-Schengen country, you have to go through regular customs & border control.

      I visited the US (while working for a US Company) and got stopped at gunpoint because I was riding a British Registered Motorcycle.

      It is extremely unusual to see a vehicle in the USA that isn't registered in the USA, Canada, or Mexico. These 3 countries have legal agreements to recognize each other's vehicle registration.

      Does the UK have such an agreement with the USA? I don't know. Will your British insurance cover you in the USA? I know my insurance policy will NOT cover my car if I drove it outside of the USA, Canada, or Mexico. Driving without insurance is a serious offence in many states.

      Further, if you brought your motorcycle with you from the UK, I will bet it was a lengthy visit (you probably didn't bring a motorcycle with you for a 1-week trip). In many states you are required to register your vehicle locally & get a local driver's license if you're staying longer than 30 days.

      The Cop wanted to know where my 'state' tag was. Apparently there was some local law that made it an offence not to show one.

      I think you misunderstood your offence, was it driving an unregistered vehicle?

      Incidentally, Canadian & Mexican vehicles are legally allowed to travel in the USA, and Canada doesn't have "states" (I don't know about Mexico).

      A $250.00 fine later and I was released. I had my fingerprints & mugshot taken. I'm now a criminal in that state.

      Most traffic offences aren't categorized as crimes. But if you're a criminal in one state, all the states will categorize you that way.

  91. Whats really going through the IOC's mind by voss · · Score: 1

    Hmmm....

    Chicago hot no beaches, good pizza, but weve already done olympics in the US in 1980, 1992, 1996, 2002 plus now they have
    screwed up passport control.

    Madrid- Its pretty but in the summer its hot as heck...plus Europe already got the games 2004,2006, and 2012

    Rio- Never gotten the games before and south america is culturally vibrant....holy crap did you see the hot brazillian girls in those string bikinis!

  92. Well duhh by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get your laptop stolen, your credit details stolen, yelled at, forced to sign away your rights, extremely rudely treated and ass croncked and you won't much want to visit the land of assholes again. Not to mention the millions of people on no fly black lists and hundreds of millions with names similar to them. And not to mention that you are made to pay for this treatment and it's costs as the traveler in the new US "visa" system.

    Bush and Bolton turned the system into one that is run by a bunch of sadistic, rude and sexist assholes. The land of fascist pigs is what USA is today. Never go there.

  93. Then there's this jewel by bradley13 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    "International travel to the U.S. declined by 10 percent in the first quarter of 2009 according to the U.S. Department of Commerce. To lure visitors back, U.S. Travel has been pushing the Travel Promotion Act, which recently was passed in the Senate and is awaiting action in the House, to create a campaign to strengthen the image of the United States abroad."

    The US has just announced a $10 fee that any visitor to the US must pay to enter the country. This is to be used to fund an internation publicity campaign. Putting two-and-two together, I assume this is the campaign that the fee is going to.

    Draw footgun, fire!

    --
    Enjoy life! This is not a dress rehearsal.
    1. Re:Then there's this jewel by masonc · · Score: 1

      I have never understood how a country can expect to charge visitors for their marketing. Wouldn't you expect the people who benefit, i.e., the hospitality industry, the taxi drivers, the amusement parks, to pay the costs of marketing. Why the tourists? How does raising the cost to the customer increase the amount of business? As if the ignorant stupid immigration requirements weren't enough to keep visitors away, now they want to make it financially less desirable? Stupid.

      --
      CM www.cometenergysystems.com Blog: http://caribbeanrenewable.blogspot.com/
  94. So what you're saying is by MattGWU · · Score: 1

    We're not going to have the Olympics in the U.S. again, ever.

    --
    "These people look deep within my soul and assign me a number based on the order in which I joined" --Homer re:
  95. No Loss.... by rec9140 · · Score: 1

    As far as the olympic bid goes..... no loss.

    Only those cities/sites which have EXISTING infrastructure to handle the oplympics should even bid. ie: Lake Placid NY. If it requires the building of one building, your disqualified. Why?

    Look at all the places that build olympic venues and that don't use them for much of any thing else years, decades later.

    Even better, pick two places and have the olympics in those two places, and quit wasting $/£/ etc. to build these facilities in new places, and use it for something else.

    I vote that the winter games be held in Munich and summer in Sydney

    As for the border control, did it have an effect, probably if the committee was comprised mostly of non US citizens.

    As for the effectiveness of such controls... well the harder you squeeze the..... (you can look up the rest) its just like everything else being down at airports for "security" NOT the SOLUTION!

    --
    1311393600 - Back to Black
    1. Re:No Loss.... by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      "NOT the SOLUTION!"

      So please tell what is.

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
  96. It is worth it by J_Omega · · Score: 1

    disclaimer: I'm in and from the States.

    It sounds like you would like to do a lot of things here in the U.S. Each of those activities could take days, if not weeks. I would guess that the hassle you might receive entering (a few hours delay? LESS than the flight over) would be worth it for the experiences available to you once here. The cities, the diversity of people, the scenery (Niagra / Grand Canyon / etc.,) are all really amazing and quite accessible.

    Yes, border crossing into the U.S., especially by air, can be "harrowing" sometimes - but the experiences can be very rewarding. Reconsider putting a trip over-the-pond back onto your to-do list.

    1. Re:It is worth it by AlamedaStone · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Yes, border crossing into the U.S., especially by air, can be "harrowing" sometimes - but the experiences can be very rewarding. Reconsider putting a trip over-the-pond back onto your to-do list.

      It really comes down to how much public humiliation is worth a few days as a tourist. Some people don't seem to mind it, but personally I don't even fly inside the US anymore.

      If I wanted to pay to be insulted, demeaned, and harassed I'd want it done by a professional - preferably in full leather.

      --
      "All these years believing you're the signified monkey, only to find out you're just a big hunk of nobody cares."
    2. Re:It is worth it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I wanted to pay to be insulted, demeaned, and harassed I'd want it done by a professional - preferably in full leather.

      ...and with the guarantee of a 'happy ending'

    3. Re:It is worth it by Macgrrl · · Score: 2, Informative

      If I wanted to pay to be insulted, demeaned, and harassed I'd want it done by a professional - preferably in full leather.

      If you're in Australia, I can get you a number on that. Though most of the Dommes I know prefer Latex.

      --
      Sara
      Designer, Gamer, Macgrrl in an XP World
  97. Maybe but.... by ibm1130 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its entirely possible border issues were a consideration but I would hope that the committee also pondered Chicago's well deserved reputation as the most corrupt large municipal entity (New Orleans is most corrupt of any size) in the US.

  98. Grounded for life. by westlake · · Score: 1

    I won't be going anywhere. I refuse to let my government have my fingerprints, in order to renew my passport.

    Now tell me how many other government agencies or private employers and services have access to your fingerprints.

    How you explain to your boss why you a) can't travel abroad or b) have been denied clearance to enter certain facilities?

    1. Re:Grounded for life. by newcastlejon · · Score: 1

      Now tell me how many other government agencies or private employers and services have access to your fingerprints.

      Unless they took prints when I was born, none whatsoever.

      --
      If God forks the Universe every time you roll a die, he'd better have a damned good memory.
    2. Re:Grounded for life. by dskoll · · Score: 1

      Now tell me how many other government agencies or private employers and services have access to your fingerprints.

      Zero.

  99. Yep... by Newer+Guy · · Score: 1

    and as long as the USA believes that everyone coming into the country is a terrorist (and treats them like one) things will never change. Another nightmare from the Dick and Bush show!

  100. Ben said it best... by CFBMoo1 · · Score: 1

    "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

    There goes the liberty to make money off the events here in the US because we couldn't sell ourselves over our paranoia. I wonder how long the safety will last as our debt keeps going up and up and up?

    --
    ~~ Behold the flying cow with a rail gun! ~~
  101. Re:NO BRAINER! SUPER FAIL! by commodore64_love · · Score: 1

    I expected Chicago to lose. After all the U.S. has been picked rather often lately - Los Angeles, Atlanta, and Salt Lake. We've hogged the Olympics enough. The REAL surprise is that Chicago was voted-off before Madrid, since Madrid was in violation of the unwritten rule - no olympics on the same continent twice in a row. I expected Madrid to be removed first. So Chicago must have really really fraked up.

    --
    "I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it." - historian Evelyn Beatrice Hall
  102. Let's All Play the Blame Game by rochberg · · Score: 1

    I'm confused. Yesterday, I was told it was Obama's failure. Now you're telling me it's the fault of the post-9/11 policies of G.W. Bush. So it's Bush's fault. But 9/11 happened because Clinton didn't do enough to take out Bin Laden in the '90s. So it's Clinton's fault! Wait, wasn't Bin Laden originally pissed because of the US presence in Saudi Arabia during Gulf War I? So it's G.H.W. Bush's fault! Hold on... Didn't Bin Laden and the Mujahedeen get their training from the US in the '80s to fight the Soviets in Afghanistan? So it's Reagan's fault! Eh, to hell with it. Will somebody just tell me who to blame?

    1. Re:Let's All Play the Blame Game by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      The terrorists are to blame. Nobody else. Of course, who the terrorists are depends on your perspective in the world doesn't it?

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
  103. 2nd hand smoke causes cancer by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 3, Informative

    There, didn't think about that did you? Care about your enviroment, shoot crack.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

  104. Who reported it? by SmallFurryCreature · · Score: 1

    There have been reports which say that places like Atlanta are still paying for the olympics.

    Remember that there is a HUGE lobby behind the olympic games and it makes a lot of people look very good, INCLUDING the press. Nothing they love more then being wined and dined at a special event where everyone just has to report from.

    The actual economy of the olympics is in far greater doubt when you start talking to people who only have to deal with such simple things as paying for it.

    Simplest effect: All hotels filled with tourists? Great or not? Not. Reason? Business people can't find a place to stay. Next year, the tourists are gone and so are the business people.

    --

    MMO Quests are like orgasms:

    You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.

    1. Re:Who reported it? by denzacar · · Score: 1

      Simplest effect: All hotels filled with tourists? Great or not? Not. Reason? Business people can't find a place to stay. Next year, the tourists are gone and so are the business people.

      Really? All businessmen stop coming to the town hosting the Olympics - FOREVER?! And so do tourists?!

      HOLY SHIT!
      Quick! Someone inform the Brazilians before it's too late.

      --
      Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    2. Re:Who reported it? by droptone · · Score: 1

      There have been reports which say that places like Atlanta are still paying for the olympics.

      I was under the impression that Atlanta was one of the success stories of economic growth resulting from hosting an Olympics. This story indicates that there were net economic benefits from hosting the Olympics, but you are generally right, the economic benefits from hosting the Olympics are questionable in general. As others have mentioned, Montreal only recently finished paying off the Olympic stadium they constructed for the 1976 games. The Birds Nest stadium that the Chinese were so proud of is scheduled to host 1 event in 2009, but using Beijing as an example is dubious since it seemed clear from the beginning that the Chinese intended to host a hugely wasteful Olympics for ego purposes.

      --
      Every post I make begins with the assumption P=~P.
  105. from a Anonymous COWARD :) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Have a few friggin bombs blownup in your backyard. I could care less if any of you want to see the beautiful USA

  106. Short answer by slashdotmsiriv · · Score: 1

    Of course it has been a factor.

    As a non-US citizen I have experienced the frustration of long border controls in US and Canada
    too many times, and from now on I will try my best to minimize them.

    The Olympics is a celebration of peace and freedom. Please oh please no more overpoliced olympics!

    So not really a short answer :)

    Rio was the best for 3 reasons:

    a) Infrastructure and preparation. Recall that they have two main events to organize within 2 years.
    If the World cup is successful, no doubt they will organize an equally successful Olympics.
    Even if it fails, they will have enough time to fix all the problems, which they will
    have learned first hand, thus it is more likely they will absorb the lessons of failure.

    b) Not a main target for terrorists etc. Face it, the US is a prime target and policing
    events on the mainland is a nightmare. Also some countries are less likely
    to be attacked simply because they have not pissed off as many people
    as the US. So was Greece in 2004, and so will be Brazil in 2016.

    c) Latin America. The Olympics should go there at some point ... and where
    better than the magical city of Rio, in one of the most vibrant economies in the world?

  107. Brazil Visa nearly impossible from LA Consulate! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    According to LA Times (http://travel.latimes.com/daily-deal-blog/index.php/bound-for-brazil-bew-5390/) it is nearly impossible to get a Visa from LA Consulate now! Big hassle and fees from other Brazil consulates which have their own rules and procedure for USA passport holders! Look for big windfall for Brazil consulates in Visa fees for 2016!

  108. Err by copponex · · Score: 1

    If cigarettes were illegal, you may have had a point. But they are legal. So I don't know what your point was.

  109. Wrong! by NaCh0 · · Score: 0, Troll

    Hop the southern border. When you get here you will never need to show documentation to get full government service. 20 million mexicans did it, so can you!

  110. no kidding. by Nekomusume · · Score: 1

    I refuse to even drive accross the border from Canada, and that crossing is relatively nightmare free. But going through their airport (in)security? Not a freaking chance. Those people have no conception of risk assessment, are totally isane and don't even know their own damned laws and policies. Not to mention the last thing I want is some high school dropout who can barely use their cellphone poking around in my laptop and accidentally deleting stuff in a vain search for files conveniently labeled "child porn.mpg" or "terrorist plot plans.doc".

    Seriously folks - why the hell do you put up with this shit?

    1. Re:no kidding. by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      Because 1000s of us (including 24 Canadians) were killed on 9/11. It may seem irrational to those outside the US, but to those of us inside we NEVER want that to happen again. Even if it means it's a royal PITA for people to visit here.

      Being a Canadian long before I became an American, and having experienced many humiliating questions/hassles at the US border, I totally empathize with how you feel. But I can also totally understand how painful it was/is for people to lose their loved ones and fellow citizens to terrorists. I so wish it didn't have to be so that we have to make our borders such an unwelcoming experience, but I'm afraid there simply may not be any other way to prevent smugglers, criminals, terrorists, and those in general who seek to harm us from ruining it for everybody else.

      Until such as time that there is a mass change of attitude in this country away from the "we are the world" mentality to one of "we are only part of the world", the US will continue to be colossal target for all kinds of fanatics and lunatics.

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
    2. Re:no kidding. by Moldiver · · Score: 1

      And sadly as it is: deserved. The US had such a thing coming a log time due to it's behaviour around the world.

      Besides the number of deaths at 9/11 is a joke as reason for all what happened afterwards. Hell even in small germany we have more deaths from car-accidents per year.

  111. US starts... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    US starts their new Freedom Olympics in 3.. 2.. 1..

  112. Not just the olympics... by codegen · · Score: 4, Informative

    It is not just the olympics. International scientific conferences are tending to shy away from the US as well. I'm involved in the organization of three computer science conferences that traditionally alternate between North America and Europe. The North American Slots are ending up in Canada because it is to much of a hassle for the European participants to enter the US. I was at one conference in the US several years ago, and several of us were in the security lineup to leave the country, and one of my colleagues remarked to me, that "it just isn't worth the hassle anymore". Throw in the drama that happens if you happen to take a picture in public (omg a picture of a library or a hotel), and you have to wonder why anyone would visit the USA.

    --
    Atlas stands on the earth and carries the celestial sphere on his shoulders.
    1. Re:Not just the olympics... by cgomezr · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I go to 3-4 computer science conferences a year. Last year, I went to one in the US. At the customs, I got singled out for no reason and taken into a room with other 50-60 people. I had to wait for a long time while a bully guard was saying that we were not American citizens so they had the right to search our luggage and retain us for as long as necessary (no one had asked him anything, he was just saying it out of sheer pleasure, it seems). They interrogated me and didn't want to tell me why I was taken there. They wouldn't let us use our mobile phones. I spent like 3 hours there until they let me go, fortunately I was able to catch my connecting flight (to a different US city) in the last minute (since I had been told that if I missed it due to the interrogation no one would pay anything, since it was "for security".

      After the experience, I decided not to go to the US anymore unless it is strictly necessary. This year I have not submitted papers to any conference taking place in the US, and I don't plan to do so in the future, unless I have a coauthor willing to go. Sorry guys, it's not that I don't like your country, in fact everyone was really nice to me once I was *inside* the US. But being treated like a piece of sh*t at the customs without even being given a reason is not a nice experience. Perhaps if you haven't gone through it you may think that it's just a minor nuisance, but it really gets to your nerves being there, waiting, unable to do anything, surrounded by heavily armed guards as if you were a criminal, receiving no explanation whatsoever for your situation, and getting nervous as the time for your next flight is approaching and they don't let you go. Even if the country is nice, it's just not worth it.

      So yes, I'm sure these kinds of border controls harm tourism. I don't want to go to the US while the situation is like that, and I'm aware of more people of the same opinion.

      PS: I have been to like 20 or 30 countries, including poor and rich countries, and I haven't been treated so badly in any other place, only in the US customs.

    2. Re:Not just the olympics... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Last year, I went to one in the US. At the customs, I got singled out for no reason and taken into a room with other 50-60 people. I had to wait for a long time while a bully guard was saying that we were not American citizens so they had the right to search our luggage

      Actually, Customs has the right to search everybody's luggage, American AND non-American.

      and retain us for as long as necessary (no one had asked him anything, he was just saying it out of sheer pleasure, it seems).

      They certainly have the power to do that, as does every other customs office around the world.

      PS: I have been to like 20 or 30 countries, including poor and rich countries, and I haven't been treated so badly in any other place, only in the US customs.

      Then you haven't traveled much - you should see how the Italians treat the Albanians. I was once taking the ferry, and the Italians wouldn't even let the Albanians in the building. They set up a desk outside for the Albanians, while the rest of us went through the regular building for customs/passport control.

  113. No by nurb432 · · Score: 1

    Chicago lost because they offered a less attractive *package* then the others. They couldn't compete at several levels, which is good as the midwest really doesn't have the cash to spend on this with the economy the way it is.

    --
    ---- Booth was a patriot ----
  114. They're not America anymore. Hello, Panama canal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Leif Ericson and Christopher Columbus landed on Turtle Island, but then were promptly displaced to their pestilent America. Speaking of countries that had nothing to do with the original landing parties, We conquistadors officially chopped them off the America train when the former America-centrals assisted in carving the Panama canal: ending further discussion of there ever being their assertion to have political autonomy interdependent to the military enclaves us Americans opened in their former front-yards. We have a southern America, and it's Texas and Arizona; haven't you ever heard of the 48 united States of America? Nope, Mexico and Canada aren't in America either. They tried to help re-create the North American union, but failed and were smacked-down when everyone heard about Bernanke escourting 800 million Silver & Gold Ameros through the Denver Mint to the Chinese Bank of Reconstruction to exchange their failing U$ 2.2 trillion funny money. The former America-southerns never had enough economic or intellectual merit to attempt a Souther American union as did conspire between the former America-centrals in Mexico and Canada.

  115. Re:NO BRAINER! SUPER FAIL! by easyTree · · Score: 0, Troll

    since Madrid was in violation of the unwritten rule

    How about the one that's only whispered? "No acts of war within memory of having received the Olympic 'OK'" ?

  116. They love their buraucracy by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I remember arriving in the USA back in 1996 for the first time in my life on a tourist visa. The welcome at the airport in San Francisco was new to me. I guess they try their best to be as stone faced as they can. It felt like I was on the wrong side of some fence. But I went in without any problem. It felt like I was crossing into a zone where I had lost my rights. It felt strange. But then, I'm french.

  117. Open the borders!!! by Baldrson · · Score: 1

    Clearly, the loss of this Olympic bid means that there is no point in maintaining control over national territory.

    OPEN THE BORDERS NOW!!

    Signed,

    El Cucaracha

    1. Re:Open the borders!!! by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      If means having secure borders and no Olympics I'll gladly take that thanks.

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
  118. The Capitol of the World Must Improve by tjstork · · Score: 1

    If the USA wants to act like it is a different sort of multinational nation that is a kind of capital of the world, then it cannot arbitrarily bar people of that world from travelling to and from it.

    --
    This is my sig.
  119. Thought I was the only one to think this way... by Damnshock · · Score: 1

    As I can see by the comments made here, I realize I'm not alone in thinking that the border control in the USA is outrageous and insulting. It happens that I recently visited the States (in fact, Chicago) and I was pretty close to not want to get into the country and flight back to Barcelona (Spain) just because of the way they were treating me and the way I was feeling: am I a thief, a terrorist?

    I've been to the States three times, and every single one of them I've had to get to to Homeland Security and explain the reason of my trip. Once was because I was staying too long! I was visiting a friend and staying at her house for 7weeks which, apparently was not right :S

    The last time, my mum had a lighter in the suitcase. They told us she couldn't keep it. Why? Because it was rechargeable... wtf?? Am I not allowed to get 100ml into bottles on the plain? Why not a lighter?

    I don't even wanna talk about the fact that they have the *right* to break through your baggage even if that means they have to break it! ARGGG it happened this to me on this very trip! And I could not protest!

    Well, I think I made my point...

    It'll probably take a long time to me to get back to the states, there are plenty of places to get where I'll be treated properly ( note: I'm not talking about the american citiziens themselves, who happen to be very welcoming and friendly).

    Damnshock

  120. Bush made more freedom to more people by tjstork · · Score: 1

    I can't see how liberals say that Bush was against freedom when they first argued away the enumerated powers doctrine of the constitution, then, argued away half of the bill of rights, then argued in favor of increased regulation in all regards, and confiscatory taxation, and suddenly, wow, Bush is the bad guy. Even now, the liberal agenda is going to be enslave much of the country to pay for health insurance for those who are not competent enough to get it for themselves, will effectively place taxes on the fundamental right of building a fire, will disarm a law abiding populace ... but they are the party of freedom?

    Seriously, Bush was an asshole for doing the travel restrictions, but Dems ran in 2006 on implementing ALL of the TSA recommendations and that included a national ID card for everyone. Bottom line is, anyone looking to Dems to increase their freedom is a total retard. The most practical way to get more freedom is to gut the federal government.

    --
    This is my sig.
  121. Trade by zogger · · Score: 3, Interesting

    At this time Canada relies on trade with the US, but if they were smarter, and thought more long range, they wouldn't need to at all. They could be completely independent on energy and (most) manufactured goods and agriculture, then they would have the luxury of charging heavy premium prices for any exports, because they really wouldn't need exports then, nor much in the way of imports. Plus they could ignore all that border crossing nonsense for the most part. It is potentially the richest nation on earth per capita if you take their low population and compare it to land mass and available natural resources, including the largest amount of freshwater. They just need to diversify even more then they are now and stop selling off all their resources at sub wholesale rates for short term profits like some third world poverty stricken developing nation. They could go high end and develop the best quality this or that manufactured thing, and not even try to compete at the low range. If they don't watch it, they will become just a colony to be exploited by the US and China for all that wealth. They are half way there now as it is.

    1. Re:Trade by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yup. We basically need to tell the US to go stuff themselves.

      As it is, we sell our crude to the US to be processed and then buy it back because we don't have any refineries of our own. We should be like Venezuela with gas costing 20 cents a litre. But instead we pay MORE than what Joe American does when you do the conversion from litres to gallons.

    2. Re:Trade by Francis · · Score: 1

      I'm not sure where you're getting your information from. Canada generally has a very moderate and long-range economic policy, especially compared to the US. Canada "relies" on the US in the same way any two trading nations rely on each other. In fact, you could argue that the US relies on Canada more than the converse.

      The US and Canada are both each other's number one trading partner. I've never understood why not many people in the US seem to realize this. The trade balance between the two countries has long been that Canada exports more goods to the south than the opposite. In this way, you could argue that the US depends on Canada to sustain itself than the converse. For some reason, I rarely hear journalists in the US mention this, but Canada is even America's #1 supplier of oil. More than Mexico, more than Iraq, more than Saudi Arabia.

      As far as Canada's economic policy, it's always been very moderate and stable. While the American economy is more prone to boom and bust cycles, Canada is a bit more stable. When it booms, it's not as big in Canada, and when it busts, it's less harsh. This is just intelligent economic policy - the government and the central banks should always seek to grow the economy in a robust and stable way.

      --

      --
      #include <malloc.h>
      free(your.mind);
  122. London and regeneration. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Olympic games in London will take place mostly in East London, an area famous for its gangsters and low lifes of all kinds.

    The idea is that by hosting the games in that area they will be an incentive to regenerate it, creating new jobs and businesses and replacing ugly industrial areas with liveable areas and sporting facilities.

    This has worked, with varied degrees of success in other venues, for example the are around the Olympic Stadium in Barcelona is now a tourist attraction, before the Olympics it was a very ugly neighbourhood that you wanted to avoid by all means.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  123. Yep, but later cities learnt the lesson. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 1

    It is all great and dandy that you quote Montreal (as all the Olympic gemse haters do) conveniently forgetting to mention that most cities have benefitted enormously since then.

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
  124. Oh, really? What did you expect? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am from Germany and I didn't give Chicago the smallest glimpse of a chance.

    cb

    1. Re:Oh, really? What did you expect? by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      I'm from California and neither did I (in fact I predicted Rio would win). Too many people in this country are complete dupes of the popular media. Even after the defeat Yahoo news, for example, was STILL calling Chicago a "front runner" when it was obvious to all that it was nowhere near that.

      That said, I have seen MANY gracious things written about Rio's success written by average Americans. Not all of us are complete fools and poor losers -- those attributes are usually defined in the popular media.

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
  125. Sidney-Sydney by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Sorry 'bout that. Silly spell checker.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  126. Yes, SO much safer by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    ...and who the hell modded you up? Are you really arguing Chicago is "twice" as safe as Rio? Yay Chicago, only three times the national average.

    Homicide rates, 2006, per 100,000 people:

    Singapore: 0.39
    Japan: 0.44
    Norway: 0.71
    Netherlands: 0.78
    Germany: 0.88
    Italy: 1.06
    UK: 1.37
    Australia: 1.42
    Canada: 1.80
    China: 2.36
    United States: 5.7

  127. I almost have to wonder... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...if Chicago was sent packing first as a clear message. The committee probably doesn't want every nation sending notables to try and sell their city of choice. Did Oprah and Obama do more damage than good for Chicago?

  128. Don't forget previous Olympics in USA. by jotaeleemeese · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The Olympic games in Atlanta are generally cited as some of the worst in all history.

    The over commercialism, failure of public transport (including athletes and officials being delayed for their competitions) and plain going around IOC's commercial interests left the IOC very hurt (and Samaranch, the IOC's President at the time, was in Copenhagen to remind everybody of that when promoting Nadrid's bid).

    As for Salt Lake City winter Olympics, there was a corruption scandal, that led to a wide reform in the IOC.

    Add to that the asinine US immigration policies, a very capable bid from Rio de Janeiro (including Brazil's President spending lots of time promoting Brazil's bid) and the result is not so surprising.

    What baffles me is how meretricious so many people in the US are in regards to President Obama trying to help with Chicago's bid, all the other countries sent their heads of government (and in the case of Spain, also the head of state) to help with the bid, 4 years ago Tony Blair, former UK's Prime Minister, was widely credited with having helped with London's bid. That so many US people are blaming President Obama for Chicago's failure just show how pathological politics have become in the US....

    --
    IANAL but write like a drunk one.
    1. Re:Don't forget previous Olympics in USA. by travisb828 · · Score: 1

      You forget the terrorist attack during the 1996 games. The guy that committed the attack did this because he believed that the games were to promote global socialism. Does this sound familiar? Whenever we get a Democrat in the White House this kind of crazy comes out of the woodwork. Personally, I wouldn't want to have company over when I have my crazy spread all over the living room.

      Also, corporate sponsorship is part of Atlanta culture. This is probably due to the fact that many large corporations are headquartered in Atlanta, and employ a large portion of the population. It was one of the things that stood out when I moved to Atlanta 3 years ago, to work at a the headquarters of a large corporation.

      Even with all that, I tend to believe that Rio's win has to do more with the fact that the US has hosted 8 games. More games then anyone else, and the 2016 Olympics will be the first time the Olympics are hosted in South America.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Olympic_host_cities#Total_Olympic_games_by_country

      I am happy for Rio, and I hope for a successful 2016 Olympics.

       

    2. Re:Don't forget previous Olympics in USA. by fluffy99 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Per the interview with the Chicago mayor I heard on NPR this morning, it was two main reasons. Rio put a $14 billion of government back funding on the table and Chicago only presented $5 billion of mostly private funding (some of which was questionable). Plus the IOC really wanted to host the games in a non-major country or area such as South America or Africa. Personally I found it odd that the White House had a task force assigned to try to get the games to Chicago, which was actually a turn-off to the IOC. Chicago was never a serious contender as they started lobbying so late and really didn't have any actual plans to make it happen well, just as Atlanta was ill prepared..

  129. cheers to Rio by rainbowgoblin · · Score: 1

    A few days ago on a midwestUS hillbilly radio station I heard someone proclaim that Rio was in Argentina. It's a demonstrable fact that most Americans know practically nothing about South America. (or anyplace else for that matter, but this continent seems to be represented by a higher than usual level of ignorance) This was pointedly brought up to me by someone I met in Juiz de Fora a few months ago. Apparently he was impressed I even knew the capital of his country. Here's to hoping that if nothing else, the 2016 Olympics will teach a few American kids that Rio de Janeiro is in fact a city in Brazil.

    1. Re:cheers to Rio by nojayuk · · Score: 1

      The capital of Brazil is Brazilia, a purpose-built capital city somewhat like Washington DC. Rio is just a large Brazilian city, not even the biggest by most methods of measurement (population, incorporated land area etc.)

  130. Re:They're not America anymore. Hello, Panama cana by Smurf · · Score: 1

    Wow, what an amazing display of hogwash.

    But just in case someone reads this and thinks there is some substance to it, the first half sentence already has an egregious mistake, as does the subject.

    1) Columbus never set foot on what is now the continental USA, he only visited the Antilles, and parts of Central and South America.

    2) The name America comes from the latinization of the name of Amerigo Vespucci (i.e., Americus Vespucius), an Italian cartographer who first mapped the East coast of South America. He never set foot in Noth America. Thus, the earliest known map that contains the name "America" (by Martin Waldseemuller, 1507) places that label right in the middle (actually towards the south) of South America. How the present-day country ended up with that name is actually amazing.

  131. Maybe it's got more to do by sa1lnr · · Score: 1

    with the fact that you have already hosted them twice in the last twenty five years?

    1. Re:Maybe it's got more to do by MLease · · Score: 1

      I think that's a very good point. While I was mildly disappointed Chicago didn't make it from a personal perspective (I was born there, though we moved to the other side of Illinois when I was very young), I understood that only one city was going to make it, the IOC wants to move the Olympics around to different parts of the world, and they had never been held in South America before. I thought Rio was a very reasonable choice, and I'm happy for them. It wasn't really a matter of the IOC disliking Chicago so much as it was a matter of their liking Rio.

      I don't think the IOC was trying to send any messages, or spite Obama or the US. I think they just made a decision the best way they knew how, and they happened to choose Rio rather than Chicago. You can't win 'em all. :)

      -Mike

      --
      I'm sorry; I don't know what I was thinking!
  132. we are at WAR! by gooeee · · Score: 1

    does any one remember what the Olympics is about, we have no business being in the running, we are at war, and the city that was picked is a war zone, children are killing children.

    1. Re:we are at WAR! by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      Russia got the 2014 Olympics and its been at war on terror and separatism longer than the US has been at war. The United Kingdom got the 2012 Olympics and its been at war just as long as the US and yea there is crime there too.

      In the state Rio is in, there are three times more police killings of civilians a year than in the entire United States.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rio_de_Janeiro#Social_conditions

      In 2006, 2,273 people were murdered in the city giving it a murder rate of 37.7 cases for every 100,000 people.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicago#Crime

      Chicago, along with other major US cities, experienced a significant reduction in violent crime rates through the 1990s, eventually recording 448 homicides in 2004, the lowest total since 1965 (15.65 per 100,000.) Chicago's homicide tally remained steady throughout 2005, 2006, and 2007 with 449, 452, and 435 respectively.

      And I'd bet you crime statistics are better reported in Chicago than Rio.

  133. Re:Actually... You really don't get it do you? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Billions of our money invested in infrastructure that will only be needed for the games and then be of little or no benefit thereafter. The cost of which won't even be covered by the tourism spend, those little bits of the spend that do make it to the local economy after Nike, McEvil and Coke have evicted all the local retailers and food outlets because they are the sponsors and have paid for their right to feck all the local businesses.

    Yeah, just what we need in the middle of an economic problem, tell you what, why don't we just throw our tax money in the Thames and let it wash out to sea?

    But you are right about the pollution, the diesel generators that GE ship round the world to power the Olympics to ensure that they don't rely on the local grid will be great for our air pollution, it will make up for years of us reducing it with our congestion charge!

  134. Canadian Border Patrol by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I'm a Canadian and due to work, I travel frequently between US and Canada.
    I don't really have any problem traveling through the border; BUT I was once traveling with my brother (Same mother / father / last name)
    The Canadian Border Patrol actually asked me a really tough question:

    CBP: "Who's this traveling with you?"
    Me: "My brother"
    CBP: "How do you know him?" .... (speechless)

    I actually didn't know how to answer this question. Do I know my brother through my mother? But then, they may ask me, how do I know my mother?

    1. Re:Canadian Border Patrol by Jerry+Rivers · · Score: 1

      That must have been a trick question. I can't imagine any agent asking you that for any other reason.

      --
      The pursuit of absolute tolerance leads to the most rigorous and ludicrous intolerance. - REX MURPHY
  135. Foreigners have NO rights in the US by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Has someone mentioned that foreigners have NO rights in the US? Even if you are lucky and they let you in, that doesn't mean you have gained any rights whatsoever. This means foreigners have no habeas corpus, there is no telling your embassy, no call, no nothing. As a foreigner they can detain you and you've disappeared without anyone knowing what happened.

    That could also have been in the minds of the COI.

  136. As a Chicagoan, I sadly admit Rio's bi was better by gjt · · Score: 1

    I was so excited for the prospect of having the Olympics in Chicago. One of the venues was literally just going to be across the street from my condo. But if you look at the bid details on Rio's site (http://www.rio2016.org.br/en/) and Chicago's site (http://www.chicago2016.org/). Rio's was more complete - and more honest about what they need to do.

    Most notably to me, Chicago failed to address transit improvements. Transit plans have been critical in recent past Olympic bids. Venues are far apart. There needs to be a fast and efficient way to get from venue to venue. Rio promised a new high speed train linking all of the venues. You could go from beach volleyball to basketball in 30 minutes or less on a modern, efficient train.

    In Chicago, there's no proposal for improving the decrepit state of Chicago's train systems. In fact, they actually had the nerve to claim that the atrocious Amtrak service is actually an asset (http://www.chicago2016.org/our-city/transportation/rail.aspx).

    Chicago transit is horrible. Some of the train lines are over 100 years old. It's not good enough for the Olympics.

    As it is, traffic grinds to a standstill on surface roads and train platforms crowd to dangerous levels when smaller events like the 4th of July or the Taste of Chicago food festival occur. The Olympics would dwarf anything that Chicago has ever seen. It would be a traffic (and security) nightmare. And they largely ignored it and ignored suggestions from people like myself who tried to make that and other suggestions.

  137. I am not welcome - i am treated like a criminal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am German resident and i have visited the US pre 9/11 multiple times for Business and for Vacation. I have not been to the US since the entry required giving Fingerprints. I have even refused to go in my Job and i'll never ever go to the US as long as i am treated as a criminial. Europe, Australia
    and Africa are also nice targets to go on Vacation.

    I am not welcome - so i'll not visit the US ...

  138. Same thing in Tokyo by Kagato · · Score: 1

    You have to get finger printed in Tokyo as well. I think the difference is the TSA gives people from areas of interest the third degree.

  139. The entry fee didn't help either by formfeed · · Score: 1
    Hmm, if tourists don't come anymore because of the way they are treated at the border, they all should pay a $10 fee, and the money could be used to promote more tourism.

    Sounds logical? That's at least what the Senate thinks: Travel-Promotion-Act

    The US is already seen as responsible for new machine readable passports and biometric features in the passport. Tourists are questioned, fingerprinted, and photographed at the border, and airlines have to transmit personal passenger data.

    The fee doesn't add much to the cost of a US visit, but on top of all the other things: Being treated that way, and paying a fee for it? There are other places to go.

    That's the climate in Europe right now. The EU is considering an entry fee for Americans. This fee hasn't been big news in the US and Obama might not even have been briefed on what he walked into in Copenhagen.. but the only other country I can remember charging an entry fee was Eastern Germany.

  140. OK, Fine. by FatdogHaiku · · Score: 1

    We'll just have our own olympics, but with blackjack, and hookers.
    On second though, forget about the blackjack and the olympic parts...

    --
    You have the right to remain sentient. If you give up the right to remain sentient, you will be elected to public office
  141. Profiling by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We need to institute stricter racial profiling. I'm sorry that it isn't politically correct but forms of profiling are currently tolerated and embraced by the insurance industry so why not extend profiling to the realm of airport security and customs where it makes most sense. Males are inconvienenced with higher car insurance rates and the unhealthy are forced to pay higher rates for health coverage, so why not ask certain risky demographics to spend a little extra time with the customs agent.

    Mr Pakistani IOC member, please take one for the team and resist your selfish bitching; the rest of us don't need to wait in line so long.

    1. Re:Profiling by Lemmy+Caution · · Score: 1

      First, it's not just profiling that's an issue. It's the entire visa process. If you haven't seen it, you have know idea.

      Second, profiling on (seeming) ethnic appearance breaks everything for thousands of reasons. False negatives, false positives, simple unfairness.

      Last, the rest of the world seems to have no trouble letting the Pakistani IOC member come into their countries without making him feel like a pariah. Maybe it's US border policy that should "take one for the team."

  142. Correct assumption. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It came as a first thought: how would they manage handling thousands athetes from any world's country through the airport border at KORD for example? Treating friends and foes as criminals, taking fingerprints, growling arrogant questions, seizing electronic devices, breaking private life and intimacy in laptop's files and folders, saving life and records of anyone, innocent or not, in their federal databases, all that after hours queuing and filling forms.

    And then: a faulty answer, or sneezing and looking left during the questioning, or maybe a couple unpaid car parking fines back at home and you're lucky if you're sent back on the first plane. All this in the positive and friendly spirit of the Olympics?

    No. I'll rather risk Rio.

  143. It is my informed opinion that you are an asshat. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    America was the progressive style of the countries that have always been North of the equator, not the pillaged tribes that the explorers surveyed for the pope and his/it's conquistadors.

    Turtle Island is the geographic plane for which the northern tribes were domiciled in their tents and huts, not the sodomite voodoo ethnicities central and south of the equator where plantations were revealed to raise product cheaper for the import to the provinces back around Spain, Iberia, and further Hermania.

    It was never the cause of the pope and the colonial powers to raise freeholds for the politic south of the equators to civily produce an international presence: they are no different than factories, and now--a bunch of sloths in the streets of their former captors and masters, continuing on in their superstitions and barbarism of non-productive behaviour if it weren't for the presence of United States corporations outsourcing to them for cheaper labor and subvert the politic of America.

    And I got news for you: America may have been 1492, while the United States may have been 1754 and then re-associated to incorporation in 1776, but the Several states among Turtle Island before America in inherint in the exploration of the Knights Templar to landmark against Turle Island for America to carve it's entrance and later the Illuminati bifurcative 48 united States of America from the Continental United States.

    You haven't a clue where you stand, because you have read the books given you by certified government education, while ignoring the non-catalogued books in the Library of Congress over near the city of Washington in Columbia -- you know, the 10-mile quartered area after masonic affections, after Spainish assent of the commonwealths Virgin**/Mary****, where the Admiralty of the re-organization and incorporation to non-plural United States exists and roosts.

  144. Rio won. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Could it possibly be that Rio won rather than the USA losing it?

    I can't help but think along the lines of... if I were an IOC member and had to choose between watching beautiful Brazilian women wearing thong bikinis on the beach, or getting robbed and beaten up or shot in the face in downtown Chicago, the vote would be a no-brainer.

    1. Re:Rio won. by easyTree · · Score: 1

      if I were an IOC member and had to choose between watching beautiful Brazilian women wearing thong bikinis on the beach, or getting robbed and beaten up or shot in the face in downtown Chicago, the vote would be a no-brainer.

      Chicago?

  145. Rio de Janeiro by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Janiero? WTF!

  146. Part of the problem is .... by taniwha · · Score: 1

    that there aren't enough of them - whoever's in charge of the dept just isn't putting enough resources into guys in booths. The other problem is that the US runs all transit passengers though there too, wasting the immigration people's time - visit a real airport, say Hong Kong, arrive on your way somewhere else there's no paper work no guys stamping passports, just go through the transit security point upstairs to your departure gate. Not so in the US - you have to spend 2 hours going through immigration even though you're just there while your plane refuels - sometimes it leaves without you. Everywhere else in the world has sealed departure gates that are a sort of diplomatic no-man's land and a procedure for leaving the country - you present your passport as you go, they log you out of the country and you get it stamped, in the US they depend on the airlines getting it right - no wonder people can come to the country and disappear - some of them actually left (this is actually a somewhat common problem - people come BACK to the US to visit and are denied because they 'overstayed' the first time - while they left on time but have no way to prove it because there's no such thing as a US exit stamp in your passport)

  147. China worse? You know not of what you speak... by LynnwoodRooster · · Score: 3, Informative
    I am a natural born US citizen who lives half-time in Shanghai, China. I travel every month one way (one month US, one month China). As a US citizen - with a multiple-entry, one year Chinese visa (for which I write a letter inviting myself to go to China), I have considerably LESS issues entering China as opposed to the US. My visa takes approximately 1 week to get, including delivery to and from the processing center. And on entering China immigration is quick, efficient, simple; I wish I could say the same about the US.

    .
    Coming into China at 5:45 AM or 11 PM, I have never had to wait for immigration officers to get to their stations; officers are ready any time passengers are arriving. Contrast that to the last time I entered the US - September 14th, 2009 at LAX on NWA flight 002. The entire plane - a full 747-400 with 403 passengers - had to wait for 40 minutes until 9 AM, when immigration officers finally started their shift. And we then queued into line while the officers strolled out one at a time, took 5-10 minutes to get their station ready, then started processing.

    China worse than US? Not by a mile. The US simply sucks in terms of immigration, even for US citizens. But as a US citizen, I've come to expect nothing less of any Federal employee or department; we citizens exist to serve and support them, not the other way around!

    --
    Browsing at +1 - no ACs, I ignore their posts. So refreshing!
  148. My recent experience by TheSync · · Score: 1

    As a US citizen, going into the Netherlands this year was very enjoyable. Entering the UK was OK, although clearly a lot of people from Pakistan and Africa were being forced to sit around and wait for something (perhaps visas, I wasn't about to ask).

    Entering the US has sucked every time. Either 1) you get yelled at or 2) things are totally unorganized, huge lines form, and no one is there to organize them.

    I am just embarrassed every time I come back to the US by our customs operations.

  149. Unanticipated positive effect by dskoll · · Score: 1

    So, Chicago was spared an expensive boondoggle. It won't have to shovel its homeless off the street just before the Olympics. It won't have to deal with corrupt IOC officials or drug-addled athletes.

  150. Fine by me by JonnyO · · Score: 1

    Speaking as a life-long Chicagoan I don't really care what the reason was. I'm just glad the games won't be held here. The benefits of holding the games are questionable at best. What is certain is that it would be the biggest source of graft and corruption for friends of Mayor Daley and the Chicago Democratic Machine since the opening of O'Hare. The city hasn't completed a single public works project on time and on budget in decades, and this would surely be a financial disaster that would run into the billions. And it would be up to folks like me to bankroll it, since, unlike the other candidate cities, Chicago did not have federal assistance or sponsorship. If you think the IOC cares one whit about passport control or swamping the locals with debt then I have a bridge to sell you...

  151. Simple: no one takes 3 months off of work. by maillemaker · · Score: 2, Informative

    >I mean, which law I might have breaking for taking three months off work?

    In the United States, the concept of taking three months off of work is inconceivable. The idea of taking a full two weeks off is borderline lunacy. The idea of taking a whole week off is borderline fantasy.

    --
    A work that expires before its copyright never enters the public domain and thus enjoys eternal copyright protection.
  152. Not just the security theater. by Steve+Baker · · Score: 1

    It could also be the outright theft too. My in-laws are Chinease and not once have they managed to visit without something going missing in their (security) checked luggage. You can bet the government paid thieves at O'hare International would be living large in the event of an Olympics there. The IOC made a good call in my opinion.

  153. More like because the US pitch wasn't good. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

    Its interesting that all this blame is being put on the US, our culture, warmongering, Passport control, Obama, Bush, whatever, but the more I read about it, the more it sounds like the US bid failed because the USOC just failed and the tone of the Administration's pitch was wrong.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/04/sports/04usoc.html

    In the lead up to the vote, there were killings in Chicago, fights over the Olympics, corruption over the Olympic bid, and just flat out Chicago style politics. Besides, Chicago in August, not where I want to be. New York and Chicago are poor choices for US Olympic pitches. LA, the Bay Area, Seattle or Denver would be better choices for Olympics in the US. LA showed how to make a profit from the Olympics, Seattle would show that mix of new and old industry and in a great place to live, Denver would show the frontier spirit that made the US and the glory of a modern sprawl ;).

    1. Re:More like because the US pitch wasn't good. by Dunbal · · Score: 1

      In the lead up to the vote, there were killings in Chicago

            You obviously aren't aware that Rio de Janeiro is one of the most violent, gang-ridden cities in the world and I'm sure any Olympic committee member knows this. I doubt that a few murders in the week of the decision formed a significant part of that decision.

      --
      Seven puppies were harmed during the making of this post.
    2. Re:More like because the US pitch wasn't good. by Wyatt+Earp · · Score: 1

      I know Rio is, I post about it up in the thread. The difference is, does the violence in Rio make the "big news"? Nope it does not, but on CNN its up on the main page.

      Go to news.bbc and search - chicago then rio and see on the first page of searches which seems more violent, Chicago has dog fighting, Rio has nothing about the constant killings.

      The murder rate in Rio is over double that of Chicago right now.

  154. And you wonder why we don't want public healthcare by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And you wonder why we don't want public healthcare?

    They have embezzled money from the Social Security funds and Medicare to the point that they are broken Ponzi schemes.
    Made flying within & without the US a massive hassle
    "Sealed" and "confidential" court documents are suddenly opened when one is a nuance to a favored candidate.

    And yet somehow Europeans are confused when we disagree with the idea that they should take over healthcare and have total control of our medical records.

  155. coming from the nanny state by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    i find this comment not only most confusing but also ineloquent and otherwise desering of scorn (did i get to the limit yet on the fil ter?)

  156. we used to want to be better by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    than japan and brazil. now we just settle

  157. Difference by jawahar · · Score: 1

    USA and UK are checking whether you are a patriot in their border checks. This is not the case in Japan. And I believe Patriotism is Oxymoron in Globalization.

  158. 834 posts before mine by kubitus · · Score: 1
    I havent read them all, but the tenor seems to be critizising the US border procedures.

    I fully agree

    I have been to the US several times since 1980.

    Alas I wanted to do some sightseeing when time and money allows, as many of the fellow posters here.

    But until these rigorous Orwellian schemes are dismissed - it is a strict vote with the feet: aint going there again.

    So it is less a slap for Obama, but a slap in the face for Homeland Security!

  159. The real reason is Mexico by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The real reason the U.S. lost the Olympics is our mistreatment of Mexico and Mexicans. The 9/11 thing can't be blamed since all Western nations are under threat. With the U.S. the real problem is the millions of "illegal aliens" from Mexico and the promise of the Obama admin. to give them amnesty, which a hardcore minority of white supremacists will do anything to stop, like they already did with the Bush admin., with sanctimonious big brains pontificating about overcrowding as a cover story. Right now they try to drown out debate by shouting "illegal" every time they can, as if that settles it. Amnesty of course means they will be made legal, which they don't want. The whole situation causes foreigners to look at the U.S. as a white supremacist hellhole on the verge of violence that doesn't want any foreign visitors who aren't white.

    It's too bad that we try to sort Mexicans living into the U.S. into legals and illegals when there are so many, plus the fact that they're not "aliens" from overseas, but our next-door neighbors like in Canada. The U.S.-Mexico border is the result of 160 years of de facto apartheid of brown-skinned people foisted back in 1848 when half its territory was taken by force for the whites-only homeland, leaving Mexico permanently crippled and doomed to dependence, and now that white supremacy is kaput the legacy remains, stinking the U.S. up, witness the Olympics snub.

    The answer all along has been to end the apartheid by having Congress officially invite the entire Mexican people to join the U.S. as 10+ new states sans the corrupt Mexican federal govt., allowing it to finally be developed and emerge from the Third World. The U.S. will gain 760K sq. mi. of new territory and a more defensible seabound border, but must accept the Mexican peoples' existence along with a bilingual nation. To me it's a no-brainer, and should be started immediately. I've thought it all out and call it the Megamerge Dissolution Solution, take time to read it and help me entice the Obama admin. into working for it so we can finally end the age-old problem and become a model for the world.

    To read it, click http://go.to/megamerge

  160. Re:China worse? You know not of what you speak... by steeroy · · Score: 1

    I applied for a Chinese visa for my British passport in Bangkok and got it the same afternoon. On arrival their was no more security than you'd get for a domestic flight, and I wasn't asked a single question during the whole process. Go China.

  161. Get a perspective, actually get out a bit by algoa456 · · Score: 1

    What bogus nonsense. I travel to the US frequently from Europe and even from India - the passport checks while rigorous are no more than an inconvenience. The twaddle written here implies they take you into a room and interrogate you like in the movies. Passport control into Brazil, at least via Miami, is also pretty strict. But again it is a minor convenience rather than some major effort. Perhaps the toughest border crossing is arriving in the UK from outside the EU. Then they really scrutinize you. I would expect nothing less from countries in the modern world given the terrorist threat. Chicago lost the Olympic bid - the efforts of the Dark Doofus notwithstanding because America has had the games several times. Spain and Japan have also hosted the games. South America has not, and anyway Rio is one of the most beautiful cities in the world which is an added bonus. Everyone has anecdotal stories about how bad US border guards are,but I have as many stories about other places I have traveled to: Singapore, Russia, China and countries in Africa. Of course, once you are in the EU moving from one state to another is easy, but try flying into the EU - say Spain - from some unusual country like Yemen. They detained me for 4 hours while they checked my background which is Canadian - and finally I have even been detained by Canadian border guard for several hours after flying in from India via Frankfort.

  162. very simple reason why Rio won .... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    olympics have been held: 30 times in europe, 5 times in asia, 2 times in oceania, 15 times in north america 8 of those in the US. It has never been in south america .......

  163. Yes by zogger · · Score: 1

    That's what I said, they are exporting raw materials to the US and china at chump change prices and neglecting future generations and even the current ones. It's a bad trend I saw many years ago and the trend is increasing, they have the ability to reverse that now.

    They have gone out of their way to make themselves a colony for the US and now China for exploitation. They do it a lot, example, lobbying furiously at the wto for softwoods exports, when they could be using that wood more internally, or at least working it into higher end products, even beyond finished lumber. Develop that stack better, don't just ship off raw wood so much. A for instance: Harsh climate in the winter, they could be the world's leader in developing superinsulated thick walled and roofed homes, like four feet thick. They have simply gigantic, tremendous energy potential, they could be the world's leader in developing cold climate mass scale year round farming with vastly improved greenhouse design with geothermal and windpowered and hydroelectric and fission adjunctive heating and lighting. Oil, they could be sitting on their reserves for a longer time and using them to develop internally, not exporting raw crude by the tanker full. They are so wealthy in natural resources they have the theoretical ability to sit on these raw resources more, and basically use them internally for a longer period, for further value added wealth creation, which has a profound and dramatic wealth multiplier effect when it is taken several logical steps forward. They do it *some* now, and have success, so I suggest they do it *a lot more* and expand the success in that direction as the TOP emphasis.

    Raw resources are indeed a saleable item, and if you have enough you can still be well off, witness the gulf states who make hardly anything much, just sell raw oil, then using that to build luxury cities, which will eventually collapse once that oil runs out because that's all they do. They've been stupid, generationally short sighted, and lazy. Oh well, we'll just pump oil now for whatever we can get and look, we are making billions! Yes, that's true, eventually though it will not be true, then they got *bupkis*. Anyone can see that, it is *by far* the easiest of futurist trends to see.

    Now think besides oil, all the minerals and metals, the biologicals, the weater, the wind, all the possible resources...USE them, don't just dig them up and export them, USE those things more. Work that stuff VERTICALLY as far as possible, then kick it another notch higher, and again.

    The *combination* of raw resources into manufactured goods and in advanced services is where it is at for valued added wealth creation.

    Look at Japan where despite them having to import everything,like 98% "everything*, they still manage to create vast amounts of wealth by being masters in this combination of raw resources. Imagine this Japanese model of value added and compounded wealth creation IF they *also* had internally the vast raw resources that Canada has, and didn't need to import as much raw materials and energy. That could be Canada, if they CHOSE to be.

    Canada has way more of a policy that reflects early centuries thinking where stopping at the *first* level of wealth creation seems to be one of the primary driving economic trends today. They have HUGE potential, they DO manufacture a lot of items, some are very good, what I am saying is they should expand on THAT and head for the high end ultimate *quality* markets, starting internally, (you want to be richer, right?) and not bother with the low end cheapest possible razor thing margins markets that other nations clearly have an advantage in, and will, because of vastly cheaper monkey labor, more monkey labor in the terms of numbers of hands, and a workforce willing to live in hovels and be near serfs. No sense even trying to compete there, so don't bother. You don't want that, you want better quality of life and a higher wealth to capita rati

    1. Re:Yes by h4rm0ny · · Score: 1

      Oh well, we'll just pump oil now for whatever we can get and look, we are making billions! Yes, that's true, eventually though it will not be true, then they got *bupkis*. Anyone can see that, it is *by far* the easiest of futurist trends to see.

      You made a great post, but I'm going to single out the above snippet because either you or I are wrong about this. I'm not saying that the spending of wealth in osme of the Arab countries hasn't been profligate. It certainly is by my standards. But it's wrong to imply that there's no re-investment going on. In fact, a lot of that money is coming back to the West in exchange for bargain sales of irreplacable things such as part-ownership of the NASDAQ and the London Stock Exchange: Link. There are plenty of other significant examples of investment, but those are the most dramatic ones, I think. And it's not entirely wrong for greater cities to be built in those countries. People should live in nice places, yes? A lot of future business will be of a non-manufacturing kind - financial work or intellectual property for example. Very little of London's revenue is from manufacturing I should imagine. The key question is whether the cities are maintainable long-term due to natural resource issues. Water may be one of the most strategic issues in the future, but if these countries invest in nuclear power, then they may be okay. Of greatest concern is whether some of the money is invested into Education. After all, purchases of things like the LSE do little to benefit the mass of people in Qatar, for example.

      --

      Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
  164. Sorry guys.... by AmonTheMetalhead · · Score: 1

    But with your policies i'm not stepping one foot in your country, random searches, the fact you can search my laptop or even confiscate it on a whim, not to mention the fingerprinting.... screw that, i'll stick to the rest of the world with a more friendy face.

  165. Wait... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    In Soviet Zippthornia you tax the government?
    Being that, the less government taxes you, the more money you have - which is again not taxed.
    So you and other untaxed citizens soon own all of the money in the country, means of production and resources.

    Two more questions.

    1. Where is that lovely communist utopia?
    2. Karl Marx, is that you?

     
    Governments will always tax its citizens. If not in form of money, then in the form of "voluntary service".
    As we do not yet posses the means to see the future - there will always be a calculated overhead in those taxes.
    As costs are really unpredictable it is usually spent, but when we do get to see it we call that a sufficit.
    Government will always take as much money it can from its citizens. That money will be spent.

    Money (not)spent on projects such as Olympic games would not be left to the citizens.
    Instead of Olympics (or other cultural and infrastructural advances and projects), it would be spent on things like Acapulco seminars for government officials and nuclear submarines.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  166. Sorry old chap... by denzacar · · Score: 1

    Not a Brit, but a Bosnian here.
    Born, raised and all the other stuff that goes after that.
    During which time I've had me my share of British TV programmes though, particularly the ones of humorous nature.

    Which is where I have picked up that particular expression - as uttered by Hugh Laurie in the final episode of Blackadder Goes Forth, commenting on Rowan Atkinson's comparison of imperialistic and expansionist tendencies of British and German leaders during the World War I.

    As an unexpected side effect of all that cultural indoctrination, whenever I start "thinking in British" the little voice in my head that does the thinking for me invariably turns either into John Cleese's, Rowan Atkinson's or Hugh Laurie's voice - with expected consequences.
    Sadly, what little there was of Doctor Who on local television was aired during the period of my youth when I was still unable to distinguish English from say.. Greek, so Tom Baker never did made it into that small but influential group of British voices in my head.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  167. pa .. leazze by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh, and it is so damn easy for an American to enter Pakistan?
    When in the United States Officials of other countries ought to get the same treatment that American's get there. Oh, wait a minute, that would be immoral. Because in many parts of Pakistan they hunt down and kill American's.

    The reason that Chicago lost is because they are a morally currupt political dictatorship of the worst sort.

  168. Interviewing for the games by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    - I want to host the Olympic Games.
    - OK. Why?
    - I would love people from all places in the world to come and bring a lot of money there.
    - How do you feel about foreigners coming to your country?
    - I'm terrified by them, TV says the world out there is full of evil terrorists and dirty immigrants who are going to destroy this country if we let them do so. We should put all of them in quarantine before entering our borders. Pesky aliens!
    - OK, sir. Don't call us, we will call you. Next!

  169. Re:They're not America anymore. Hello, Panama cana by pommiekiwifruit · · Score: 1

    Or the TV series QI (and Dr Basil Cottle) might claim it comes from "Richard Amerike" who owned the ship "Matthew" that landed in North America in 1497 (John Cabot's voyage).

  170. Lethal fruit by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have been to the US once, in 2003 - so after the Twin towers. On waiting for our luggage at Chicargo a sniffer dog took interst in one of my travelling companions. The security officer with it asked her if she had fruit. She said that she had eaten an apple on the flight. A form was presented that compelled her through a special security channel, which as we were one party we all went through. No explanation was given but they intended to fingertip search all through our luggage, irrespective of the time we had available to meet our connecting flight to Denver. Made a lasting impression that - more interested in contraband fruit than bombs - which would have at least had my support. I also remember an unsettling request made on flight to fill in the ( whatever it was ) form needed to get through passport control carefully " as you will encounter problems if even a small mistake is made ".
     

  171. Cheques in 2009? by mjbkinx · · Score: 1

    I'm 33, I remember my parents paying with cheques when I was a little kid. I received one from an aunt when I was 18, specifically so that I could have the experience of caching a paper cheque at least once in my life. I haven't seen one since, but I hear you can still technically use them as a method of payment.

  172. US no longer gets my tourist dollars by QuestionsNotAnswers · · Score: 1

    I have not been to the US since the introduction of its id/facist-checkpoint/visa requirements. In the past I have skied there for months, always enjoyed it there, and it is an easy stopover for me. US travel no more for me!

    I have also travelled to Rio - and it is the only place I have ever been mugged - but I would still go back. Hopefully they can clean up the pestulent beaches where the sea is loaded with desease...

    --
    Happy moony
  173. It's outright harassment, that's what it is by clsc · · Score: 1

    >> "the sometimes rigorous entry process for foreigners, which they see as a deterrent to tourism"

    Rigorous? Is that the word you choose?.. wtf's up with you? It's bloody harassment and outright disrespect for human rights, that 's what it is!

  174. who decided? by SgtChaireBourne · · Score: 1

    You'll have to explain to us who the "crazy fuckers" are. Because I seem to remember it was a group of mostly Saudi's who happened to be fundamentalists (notice how I separate the two?!) that decided it would be a good idea to hijack our airplanes and ram them into our buildings.

    You don't know that. You know that a group of mostly Saudis did ram three planes into three buildings. You don't know who decided that it would be a good idea. The investigation was cancelled partway into the initial phase.

    Speculating on who decided is simply blowing hot air. For all you know, it could have been a false flag op or planned by Xe (formerly Backwater). All 2-bazillion pages of the Patriot Act were all ready to go and just waiting for an emergency, so there are more suspects than just some Saudis.

    --
    Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
  175. the business of business by zogger · · Score: 1

    The financial "business" of London was even further in the hole than the US wallstreet boys and needed an almost entire 100% level GDP new poof created cash injection to keep from going bankrupt. because it is unsustainable, or it wouldn't have needed this fast inflationary stealth tax injection. Here's a graph/link from the BBC yesterday about it. Someone has to do the real work in the world,you can't eat or drive or live inside electrons, and when it is increasingly not your own nation doing the real work of wealth creation, you have to resort to emergency accounting tricks, which merely delay the inevitable full collapse. The UK killed off manufacturing faster than the US, shipping it off for chump change for the fast buck, and that's why they got nailed even harder. It's directly proprtional how this happens.

    That old model is unsustainable, completely proven last year and this year, it just doesn't work, but that business model and those gents is what we have right now "by law" in many western nations. They *should* have been allowed to fail and collapse so we can get this sorted out better. Hate to flog that old tired mule, but there's no free lunch, you must have domestic manufacturing. That's the number #1 method of having value added wealth creation. You can't create wealth with the printing press or just changing server entries. You can keep the people faked out domestically for a little longer doing that, but not the whole world, you have to actually do real work to create real wealth. Who is sitting on surplus and who isn't? Who are the big debtors and the big creditors now? Look how much this has changed over the last thirty years. The manufacturing world, primarily china, is the big creditor, followed by japan, the other big manufacturer. The oil rich states have that too, surplus, but they are mining "fossil wealth" (I do hereby claim this new financial term), and it will get exhausted eventually. They've been blowing it for three generations now on massive luxuries purchases, busywork mc government jobs, and buying foreign made goods and importing foreign serf laborers to do construction and menial tasks. That can't go on forever, only as long as they can pump out fossil wealth.

    So them investing in just more proven failed business models is not a smooth move either, those oil rich states doing that are just grasping at straws now, because they are stuck with poof created money, a cultural mindset of anyone but them does the real work, and need something to do with their fossil mined and now accumulated cash, and are furthering their own domestic collapse when their oil runs out, because they have never bothered to even try and do manufacturing or anything else with their fossil wealth. Some of them are investing in farmland in Africa, like China is also doing with surplus poof created money, because at least a few sixty watt bulbs there in those nations realized they will have to eat all the time, that *might* work longer range until such a time the locals decide once again that they don't like being the exploited colony, and they want to own it back. mau mau version two will happen, with many foreigners becoming lunch and so on....

    Some are investing in solar power, etc., and the saudis and I think one of the emirates are making noises this week about wanting their own nukes now,but none of it is a substitute for manufacturing and agriculture, which are the two main ways to actually create *value added compounded wealth*, and that act as economic force multipliers inside an economy. Yes, you need energy production for that, but it is only the first step, you need to keep climbing that ladder to develop the vertical stack.

    Wealth is grown, mined, harvested, extracted and then if needs be manufactured from the combination of the above. Everything else is wealth rearranging, wealth governance, wealth entertaining, yada yada, basically just wealth dilution. Some wealth dilution and rearrangement

  176. Where? by pestie · · Score: 1

    Where? Do any of these exist along the relatively-populated Quebec/New England border, or only in the middle of nowhere (Montana, North Dakota, etc.)?

  177. Can we start with you? by pestie · · Score: 1

    Little Mexico's, little China's, little Vietnam's, little Japan's.

    If we're going to require people in this country use proper English, can we start with you? As Dave Barry once said, "An apostrophe does not mean, 'Look out! Here comes an S!'" Hell, that's not even a complete sentence.

  178. That's impossible! by pestie · · Score: 1

    No, see, it's impossible that Rio won, and the US sure as hell didn't lose! See, here in the US, we know that:

    1) We're #1 at everything
    2) We never lose

    Ergo, Rio must have cheated.

    1. Re:That's impossible! by easyTree · · Score: 1

      :D

      No, Ergo, Rio only got it because the US didn't want it.

  179. Re:They're not America anymore. Hello, Panama cana by Smurf · · Score: 1

    Yes, I know about the theory of Richard Amerike as the origin of the name America, but to be frank with you it seems as historical revisionism by people who refuse to accept a non-Anglo-centric view (much like the AC that I replied to and the one that also replied to my post, pretty sure they are the same).

    I think the Wikipedia entry on Amerik summarizes that theory in a fairly complete way. (Of course, being Wikipedia we must tae it with a grain of salt, but still). You will notice that Amerik's involvement is fairly minor, and unlikely to justify the naming of a continent after him.

    In particular look at the second-to-last paragraph of that section, which explains why Waldseemuller would have used the name "America" in his map, according to the Amerik theory.

    It basically says that the name of Amerik may have appeared in Cabot's maps (something impossible to prove since the maps don't exist any more), and Amerigo Vespucci may have seen those maps and thus used that name in his documents. Documents in which, by the way, his name would appear as Americus Vespuccius since at the time official documents, at least for the Spanish and Portugese crowns, were always written in Latin (and thus Cristoforo Colombo appeared as Christophorus Columbus -- ever wondered why the country is called Colombia and not Columbia?). America is the feminine for of Americus? Oh, just a coincidence, then.

    Furthermore, Waldseemuller, (who used Vespucci's documents to produce his famous map and featured him prominently with a portrait at the top, labeling him Americi Vespvciii), may have thought mistakenly that Vespucci used the word America due to his own name, since Vespucci said nothing on the contrary.

    All this in a theory concocted in 1908. Quite frankly there are too many mays in a theory that tries to explain how the name of a minor character got on the main piece of solid evidence (Waldseemuller's map), furthermore on the least related side of the map (South vs North America). By Occam's Razor I'm far more inclined to believe the simple theory: he placed the name America there because Americus/Americi was apparently the first cartographer that discovered (or at least confirmed) that the new lands were indeed a separate continent and not part of Asia as some thought. He placed the name down there because, well, those are the lands Vespucci charted, and he used the feminine form because all the known "continents" had feminine names in Latin.

  180. Re:It is my informed opinion that you are an assha by Smurf · · Score: 1

    Let me guess: you are the same delusional soul to whom I replied originally. At least you have similarly twisted ideas full of misconceptions and expressed in the same bizarre language, full of grammatical inconsistencies. As the original message, yours makes very little sense. And most of what makes any sense at all is, well.... wrong.

    Given the absurdity of the messages and the way they are written I suspect that you suffer from a mild mental impairment, so trying to reason with you is most certainly futile. So I just wanted to comment on one thing you said:

    You haven't a clue where you stand, because you have read the books given you by certified government education, while ignoring the non-catalogued books in the Library of Congress [...]

    Sooooo..... you based your "knowledge" on "facts" that are supposedly registered in some obscure books that are "hidden" in the Library of Congress in order to perpetuate some obscure political agenda. Any similarity to several Hollywood movies is pure coincidence... (Dude! You are living in a movie script! Awesome!)

    But the books are not catalogued! That means that you have not read them either, so you know all this from hearsay, and thus the credibility is... quite low...

    (I know, I know, you know all that because you are The Master Librarian of The Library of Congress, yada yada yada... Sure, whatever makes you happy.)

  181. No, with my wife by way2trivial · · Score: 1

    who has a eastern european passport
    we had to go to NYC and visit the embassy in advance of the flight-I think pay 32$
    and get a visa in her passport-- just to change planes...

    check the list
    http://www.ukvisas.gov.uk/en/doineedvisa/visadatvnationals
    "Direct Airside Transit Visa (DATV) nationals
    In addition to needing a visa to enter the United Kingdom, nationals of the following countries also need a visa to transit through the UK, known as Direct Airside Transit Visa (DATV). See our Transit (INF 20) guidance for more information."

    her country has since fallen off the list...

    --
    every day http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Random
  182. Re:We're America by Savior_on_a_Stick · · Score: 1

    I'm an American - Insight would be wasted on you scum!