Us To Fingerprint & Photograph All Visa Travellers

Quote:

---

Originally posted by james_bond_rulez+3 January 2004 - 04:05--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (james_bond_rulez &#064; 3 January 2004 - 04:05)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4@2 January 2004 - 22:17
<!--QuoteBegin-james_bond_rulez

---

Quote:

---

@3 January 2004 - 03:07
well i dont think i&#39;ll be fingerprinted and dna tested when i enter the US (which i rarely do anyway)

since Canadian citizens can enter the US without a visa right? :lol:

---

JBR-

Let&#39;s assume, just for a moment, you submit to fingerprinting or DNA testing at the border.

What ill do you imagine would then befall you?

Serious question.

---

wow protection personal information is something u can&#39;t understand?

i dont know about u US folks but i&#39;d like the US gov to keep its nose out of my biological information such as my fingerprints and dns molecules

u guys dont mind having ur genitle exposed and being examined, I DO&#33;&#33;&#33;[/b][/quote]
Are you a risk?

Then I suppose you&#39;d want to keep your fingerprints private.

You don&#39;t want to come here anyway, but if you did, we&#39;d be onto you-and unless you&#39;re going to bomb something, no harm, no foul, yes?

But if your intentions were otherwise?

Also-

I assume instead of "dns molecules", you meant INS molecules? :lol:

Only Michael Jackson and Bill Clinton are subject to the, um...genitle search. ;)


BTW-bigdawgfoxx-

That last was a very concise post. ;)

wow so much flame so lil love

sometimes i wonder why i hang around here

i post one opinion and everybody flames me

great forum this is

the actual solution to all these arguments is very simple :D

@ All Americans

"next time dont put it off or complain. VOTE" :angry:

then the world will see a real POTUS in the white house.


thankyou and goodnight from a country that has had to put up with terrorism for a lot longer than the last few years. and still lets anyone in &#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;

what i don&#39;t understand is why they think that fingerprints and photos will stop the suicidal terrorist...after all surely they don&#39;t know the identity of every terrorist and new recruits will be used....once they have blown themselves up how is the fingerprint record going to help?
When i moved here i was photographed and fingerprinted beyond belief but i accepted it even though it didn&#39;t exactly make me feel welcome. i accepted it because my wife is American and we decided to live here. However i can see tourism fading fast as more and more honest law abiding people from around the world are put through the humiliation of being treated like a criminal the moment they step off the plane, and that is the whole point of the objections. Fingerprinting and photographing is viewed as something that only happens to criminals and it&#39;s not just humiliating it&#39;s kind of insulting to many
yes we do live in troubled times and yes security is important but is this really necessary? and does anyone think it will endear us to the rest of the world

finally somebody who understands....

Quote:

---

Originally posted by vidcc@4 January 2004 - 06:46
what i don&#39;t understand is why they think that fingerprints and photos will stop the suicidal terrorist...after all surely they don&#39;t know the identity of every terrorist and new recruits will be used....once they have blown themselves up how is the fingerprint record going to help?
When i moved here i was photographed and fingerprinted beyond belief but i accepted it even though it didn&#39;t exactly make me feel welcome. i accepted it because my wife is American and we decided to live here. However i can see tourism fading fast as more and more honest law abiding people from around the world are put through the humiliation of being treated like a criminal the moment they step off the plane, and that is the whole point of the objections. Fingerprinting and photographing is viewed as something that only happens to criminals and it&#39;s not just humiliating it&#39;s kind of insulting to many
yes we do live in troubled times and yes security is important but is this really necessary? and does anyone think it will endear us to the rest of the world

---

Uh yeah...but you forget that the reason the WTC got flattened was because of attitudes like yours that were ubiquitous in our security.

After 9-11 I, as a Verizon telephone technician, still don&#39;t like having to go through more security measures by any given customer to do work FOR THEM. It is an inconvenience. It was much easier when I just showed my work badge and got the main telephone room key and went to do my work.....

..but there are levels of free. It seems that when people are used to going anywhere without anyone asking questions it feels very "relaxed". In fact it is also unregulated.

Realize that everyone does not have the good intentions for the US like you do. :lol: ;) <_<

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Busyman+4 January 2004 - 06:16--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Busyman @ 4 January 2004 - 06:16)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-vidcc@4 January 2004 - 06:46
what i don&#39;t understand is why they think that fingerprints and photos will stop the suicidal terrorist...after all surely they don&#39;t know the identity of every terrorist and&nbsp; new recruits will be used....once they have blown themselves up how is the fingerprint record going to help?
When i moved here i was photographed and fingerprinted beyond belief but i accepted it even though it didn&#39;t exactly make me feel welcome. i accepted it because my wife is American and we decided to live here. However i can see tourism fading fast as more and more honest law abiding people from around the world are put through the humiliation of being treated like a criminal the moment they step off the plane, and that is the whole point of the objections. Fingerprinting and photographing is viewed as something that only happens to criminals and it&#39;s not just humiliating it&#39;s kind of insulting to many
yes we do live in troubled times and yes security is important but is this really necessary? and does anyone think it will endear us to the rest of the world

---

Uh yeah...but you forget that the reason the WTC got flattened was because of attitudes like yours that were ubiquitous in our security.

After 9-11 I, as a Verizon telephone technician, still don&#39;t like having to go through more security measures by any given customer to do work FOR THEM. It is an inconvenience. It was much easier when I just showed my work badge and got the main telephone room key and went to do my work.....

..but there are levels of free. It seems that when people are used to going anywhere without anyone asking questions it feels very "relaxed". In fact it is also unregulated.

Realize that everyone does not have the good intentions for the US like you do. :lol: ;) <_< [/b][/quote]
so please explain just how it will stop 9/11 hapening again...as i said we don&#39;t know the identity of every terrorist and and never will and new recruits with no record would be used.
there was debate in congress about ending the visa waiver program but it was decided that it would not be to America&#39;s financial benefit to do so. is this not a loophole in security ?
i just feel that this particular action would cause more alienation than benefit.
if you work in a sensitive area then security should be tight after all that&#39;s where a terrorist could gain information....a very real threat
if the government decreed that all US citizens be fingerprinted and photographed after Mcveigh did his deed (internal terrorism) would you see it as just?

if it does or doesn&#39;t help security i am just putting a point of view and am not attacking your view, and i do realise that not everyone has my good intentions..i just don&#39;t see how this will help

Only American citizens have the rights of freedom our people have.

The rest are here as visitors and we would like to know who you are. To make things simple, we could just close our doors period. You are not needed here for any reason. 9/11 would never have happened at all.

By letting the foreigners in, all we do is expose ourselves to risk without any possible benefit.

Perhaps had we known more about those we were training to fly, maybe they would never have been given access to their lessons.

Didn&#39;t one fellow tell his teacher that he did not care how to land, only take off?

Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US. Not as an invasion of privacy, but to preserve the integrity of that field.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes@4 January 2004 - 07:59
...Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US...

---

Which is slightly different than the British family of four taking their kids to see Disneyland for the first time.

:ninja:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MagicNakor+4 January 2004 - 10:09--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (MagicNakor &#064; 4 January 2004 - 10:09)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@4 January 2004 - 07:59
...Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US...

---

Which is slightly different than the British family of four taking their kids to see Disneyland for the first time.

:ninja:[/b][/quote]


British citizens are part of the Visa Waver Program:

Andorra (MRP) Iceland Norway
Australia Ireland Portugal
Austria Italy San Marino
Belgium (MRP) Japan Singapore
Brunei (MRP) Liechtenstein (MRP) Slovenia (MRP)
Denmark Luxembourg Spain
Finland Monaco Sweden
France the Netherlands Switzerland
Germany New Zealand United Kingdom


No need to worry, little Paddington and Chelsea will be ok.

Canadians are not part of this program but Citizens of Canada generally do not require a visa.

Though some do routinely request to be strip searched ;)

I am a bit concerned that Scotland is part of this and I am writing my Senator about this issue. I think the Scottish should require a photo, fingerprints, and a police-artist sketch of what they are wearing under their kilts.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes@4 January 2004 - 06:59
Only American citizens have the rights of freedom our people have.

The rest are here as visitors and we would like to know who you are.&nbsp; To make things simple, we could just close our doors period. You are not needed here for any reason. 9/11 would never have happened at all.

By letting the foreigners in, all we do is expose ourselves to risk without any possible benefit.

Perhaps had we known more about those we were training to fly, maybe they would never have been given access to their lessons.

Didn&#39;t one fellow tell his teacher that he did not care how to land, only take off?

Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US.&nbsp; Not as an invasion of privacy, but to preserve the integrity of that field.

---

i still don&#39;t see how having the fingerprints of the 9/11 hijackers would have stopped it happening. perhaps it had more to do with the security for internal flights at the time ..we would just have known how many callouses they had.
the one saying he had no interest in take off or landing should have raised alarms but again his fingerprints would have helped none unless they had intelligence on him in the first place...as i said they will use unknown new recruits.

as for non Americans not bringing any benefits..well it was estimated in congress that America would lose (i read this in some newspaper) &#036;28 billion generated by tourism from countries on the visa waiver program should they decide to end it (people put off if they need visas).......technology.........blah blah..etc.etc.

as pointed out there is a difference between a family of british tourists going to see mickey mouse and a vocational license...however i must point out that british tourists won&#39;t be fingerprinted as they are in the visa waiver program.
regardless of all the debate it&#39;s going to happen. i just hope it serves its purpose and doesn&#39;t alienate the USA from the rest of the world at a time when it needs friends.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes+4 January 2004 - 16:54--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (hobbes @ 4 January 2004 - 16:54)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MagicNakor@4 January 2004 - 10:09
<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes

---

Quote:

---

@4 January 2004 - 07:59
...Photos and fingerprints are used for routine granting of professional licenses here in the US...

---

Which is slightly different than the British family of four taking their kids to see Disneyland for the first time.

:ninja:

---

British citizens are part of the Visa Waver Program:

Andorra (MRP) Iceland Norway
Australia Ireland Portugal
Austria Italy San Marino
Belgium (MRP) Japan Singapore
Brunei (MRP) Liechtenstein (MRP) Slovenia (MRP)
Denmark Luxembourg Spain
Finland Monaco Sweden
France the Netherlands Switzerland
Germany New Zealand United Kingdom


No need to worry, little Paddington and Chelsea will be ok.

Canadians are not part of this program but Citizens of Canada generally do not require a visa.

Though some do routinely request to be strip searched ;)

I am a bit concerned that Scotland is part of this and I am writing my Senator about this issue. I think the Scottish should require a photo, fingerprints, and a police-artist sketch of what they are wearing under their kilts. [/b][/quote]
ok you posted the british citizen s on the visa waiver before me...but in my defence i have 3 kids all competing to see who can drive me insane first so it takes me longer to type :lol: :lol: :lol:

It really is quite simple, if you do not wish to follow the rules of Any country, simply do not go there.

That way your precious photograph and fingerprints are safe. There will be no invasion of your civil liberties and the concomitant return to the worst excesses of Nazism.

I believe the new UK passport is to contain a fingerpring (tho&#39; I am not sure) so it&#39;s not really a problem here. If you want a passport you have to give the intensely private details of photograph and possibly fingerprints anyway.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@4 January 2004 - 18:26

I believe the new UK passport is to contain a fingerpring (tho&#39; I am not sure) so it&#39;s not really a problem here. If you want a passport you have to give the intensely private details of photograph and possibly fingerprints anyway.

---

i&#39;m not sure if the new passport will have the fingerprint either , however i think that as a british subject you will have to have one of the new machine readable passports to be able to enter the USA..not sure of the date for this. your old style passport even if still valid won&#39;t be allowed, and i have no doubt that the cost will be bourne by the passport holder..as was planned for the national ID scheme.

ALL U.K passports will be Biometric by 2006-7 then as older ones are renewed/run out - like the u.k driving licence which has photo on it.

oh and as for closing the door on visitors, will that keep your government officials from going on selling trips to dictators in Iraq/libya/afghanistan.

do not misunderstand me, hell i have just come back from the u.s and love going back (NOT DISNEY) but until a "fair and balanced view" is in the white house, please excuse us

any policy/law changes MAY be needed but,

would you have listened to Stalin lecture on freedom at the u.n.??????

even if he was 100% right

Now think how many people would have raised a complaint if Clinton was still there?

almost none for my money.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by Nexus UK@4 January 2004 - 05:32
the actual solution to all these arguments is very simple :D

@ All Americans

"next time dont put it off or complain. VOTE" :angry:

---

:rolleyes: The elections were rigged and all the politicians who have any chance of getting into office are fucking crooks.

Lets apply a little logic.

The 9/11 terrorists didnt use false ID&#39;s. Even if they had been fingerprinted and had their DNA taken it wouldnt have changed a thing.

These measures wont guarantee your safety, they will however guarantee an illusion of safety. Surprisingly, this seems to be more than adequate for many people.

I suppose it could have changed something if the United States had a huge database of 6,340,613,474 fingerprints and possible political and religious associations.

But it doesn&#39;t.

:ninja:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leftism@6 January 2004 - 22:31
Lets apply a little logic.

The 9/11 terrorists didnt use false ID&#39;s. Even if they had been fingerprinted and had their DNA taken it wouldnt have changed a thing.

These measures wont guarantee your safety, they will however guarantee an illusion of safety. Surprisingly, this seems to be more than adequate for many people.

---

Your post does have, as you say, "little logic".

In case you missed it, we are living in the "post-9-11" world, where an effort is afoot to plug some of the holes previously extant in our incredibly leaky boat.

Is it your position that, since you deem steps currently being implemented are inadequate, or illogical, we should do nothing?

You strike me as a bright individual-you must, therefore, have a brilliant idea or two-let&#39;s hear them.

:)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 00:00
I suppose it could have changed something if the United States had a huge database of 6,340,613,474 fingerprints and possible political and religious associations.

But it doesn&#39;t.

:ninja:

---

Geez, MN-

Do we really need all 6,340,613,474 of them?

Can&#39;t we even leave you off the list?

:)

Obviously not - I&#39;ve had my trunk lining ripped apart by an overzealous marine. No explanation as to why, either. And, of course, no compensation for getting it fixed, when (oddly enough) the bare wood and metal was shown.

Contrary to what seems to be the popular rhetoric, the world did not change on September 11th, 2002. The United States is, frankly, overreacting. Quite a few other countries have had, and continue to have, acts of terrorism. The only thing that was brand-spanking-new was the use of fully-fueled airplanes flown into buildings and blowing said buildings up.

Of course, an irritated elephant is far more dangerous than a terrier, which is why, to an extent, certain governments are more willing to placate it.

:ninja:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 02:13
Of course, an irritated elephant is far more dangerous than a terrier, which is why, to an extent, certain governments are more willing to placate it.

:ninja:

---

True enough.

But, as you say, other countries have suffered and continue to suffer acts of terrorism, despite their best efforts to forestall them.

The Elephant is arrogant enough to attempt to shoot for zero-tolerance of terrorist acts.

I suppose we&#39;ll be keel-hauled for being intolerant. ;)

However, forcing other governments to adopt your procedures and restrictions (when they aren&#39;t even implemented in the United States) is completely ridiculous.

Force them into your own government practices first. Lead by example. And for Pete&#39;s sake stop blaming Canada for everything. :frusty:

:ninja:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 02:38
However, forcing other governments to adopt your procedures and restrictions (when they aren&#39;t even implemented in the United States) is completely ridiculous.

Force them into your own government practices first. Lead by example. And for Pete&#39;s sake stop blaming Canada for everything. :frusty:

:ninja:

---

What?

Now you want us to stop blaming you?

No way....you&#39;re just too handy. :D


I will reiterate my sentiment:

I love Canada, and everyone in it-always have, and always will.

Except Jean Chretien.

I like France and it&#39;s citizens, too.

Except Jacques Chirac.

All clear now? :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Your post does have, as you say, "little logic".[/b]

---

:sleeping:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>In case you missed it, we are living in the "post-9-11" world, where an effort is afoot to plug some of the holes previously extant in our incredibly leaky boat.[/b]

---

This isnt going to plug any holes. You honestly think known international terrorists are going to board a plane, allow themselves to be identified and get caught by this system? If you believe that you must think the terrorists are as stupid as yourself which, unfortunately for the US, they aren&#39;t.

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@

Is it your position that, since you deem steps currently being implemented are inadequate, or illogical, we should do nothing?
[/quote]

No. Is it your position that implementing completely useless &#39;steps&#39; is a good strategy?

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4

You strike me as a bright individual-you must, therefore, have a brilliant idea or two-let&#39;s hear them.[/quote]

Sure.

I suggest you do something. Preferably an expensive and inconvenient something. Don&#39;t worry about whether it&#39;ll work or not. Thats irrelevant.

The important thing is that when the job is done you can stand back and loudly proclaim "WE DID SOMETHING&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;"

Then you can live in a fantasy world of illusional safety.. then when you get attacked again you can stand back and say...

"I DONT UNDERSTAND.. IT HAPPENED AGAIN&#33;&#33; BUT THIS TIME WE DID SOMETHING&#33;&#33;"

I&#39;m not sure about the next steps after that, its a little hazy, but I&#39;m fairly certain they will involve doing &#39;something&#39;.

And the harm done is what?

As I have said, whatever your country deems necessary I will gladly comply. If it is a bit too much, I simply won&#39;t visit.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes
And the harm done is what?

---

Apart from wasting money, manpower, time and inconveniencing thousands of people to achieve nothing more than a false sense of security its not going to be drastically harmful.

I just think that security measures should be judged primarily on their effectiveness.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leftism+7 January 2004 - 03:55--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism @ 7 January 2004 - 03:55)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Your post does have, as you say, "little logic".[/b]

---

:sleeping:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4
In case you missed it, we are living in the "post-9-11" world, where an effort is afoot to plug some of the holes previously extant in our incredibly leaky boat.

---

This isnt going to plug any holes. You honestly think known international terrorists are going to board a plane, allow themselves to be identified and get caught by this system? If you believe that you must think the terrorists are as stupid as yourself which, unfortunately for the US, they aren&#39;t.

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4@

Is it your position that, since you deem steps currently being implemented are inadequate, or illogical, we should do nothing?

---

No. Is it your position that implementing completely useless &#39;steps&#39; is a good strategy?

<!--QuoteBegin-j2k4

You strike me as a bright individual-you must, therefore, have a brilliant idea or two-let&#39;s hear them.[/quote]

Sure.

I suggest you do something. Preferably an expensive and inconvenient something. Don&#39;t worry about whether it&#39;ll work or not. Thats irrelevant.

The important thing is that when the job is done you can stand back and loudly proclaim "WE DID SOMETHING&#33;&#33;&#33;&#33;"

Then you can live in a fantasy world of illusional safety.. then when you get attacked again you can stand back and say...

"I DONT UNDERSTAND.. IT HAPPENED AGAIN&#33;&#33; BUT THIS TIME WE DID SOMETHING&#33;&#33;"

I&#39;m not sure about the next steps after that, its a little hazy, but I&#39;m fairly certain they will involve doing &#39;something&#39;. [/b][/quote]
Spoken like a true terrorist.

Or simple provocateur.

I can&#39;t decide which. :huh:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leftism+7 January 2004 - 09:44--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 7 January 2004 - 09:44)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
And the harm done is what?

---

Apart from wasting money, manpower, time and inconveniencing thousands of people to achieve nothing more than a false sense of security its not going to be drastically harmful.

I just think that security measures should be judged primarily on their effectiveness. [/b][/quote]
Critcism is for the uninspired.

What do you offer?

BTW, in planning a trip or relocation to another country, the additional effort of a photograph and fingerprinting is a pittance.

Certainly this a far cry from the holocaust decried by the Brazilian judge, no? A "xenophobic policy, worthy of the worst horrors commited by the Nazi&#39;s"

So you may find the policy ineffective, but that has no bearing on the original post. And how do you deal with my response that I am willing to comply with whatever policy a host country employs. After all, if I visit them, I should play by their rules.

Jean Chretien ceased to be Prime Minister in December. Paul Martin&#39;s the "new" guy now. And, unfortunately for us, he&#39;s more American-friendly.

We&#39;re used to being the United States&#39; scapegoat. But four major blame-sessions in a year is a little much.

:ninja:

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leftism@7 January 2004 - 03:55
If you believe that you must think the terrorists are as stupid as yourself which, unfortunately for the US, they aren&#39;t.

---

I do believe I&#39;m being attacked. :)

Ouch.

(Hope thats the correct response&#33;)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 04:56
Jean Chretien ceased to be Prime Minister in December. Paul Martin&#39;s the "new" guy now. And, unfortunately for us, he&#39;s more American-friendly.

We&#39;re used to being the United States&#39; scapegoat. But four major blame-sessions in a year is a little much.

:ninja:

---

I&#39;ll see what I can do. :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>Spoken like a true terrorist.[/b]

---

"True terrorists" think the US ought to have effective security? Strange concept...

Quote:

---

Originally posted by j2k4+--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (j2k4)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>I do believe I&#39;m being attacked[/b]

---

You mean counter-attacked. We&#39;ll have no martyrs here thank you very much :)

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes
Critcism is for the uninspired.

What do you offer?

---

Ahh that old chestnut :) . Any criticism given must always be accompanied by an alternative solution. Do you apply that standard to yourself at all times? Of course not. Its a desperate point to make.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes
BTW, in planning a trip or relocation to another country, the additional effort of a photograph and fingerprinting is a pittance

---

In your opinion perhaps but many people say they feel like criminals in that situation. They may be right or wrong to feel that way but it is a common perception.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by hobbes
Certainly this a far cry from the holocaust decried by the Brazilian judge, no? A "xenophobic policy, worthy of the worst horrors commited by the Nazi&#39;s

---

Agreed, that comment is utter BS.

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes@
So you may find the policy ineffective, but that has no bearing on the original post.[/quote]

The original post was "I find this ridiculous and totally agree with Brazils Move". I took that to mean discuss what you think of this plan and whether Brazil is doing the right thing. Tacking an OT sign on the effectiveness of such a strategy seems to be an odd decision. Surely the effectiveness of the scheme is THE main issue here?

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
And how do you deal with my response that I am willing to comply with whatever policy a host country employs. After all, if I visit them, I should play by their rules. [/quote]

Of course but everyone has their limits. I take it there are certain things you would not accept and which would persuade you not to visit the country in question? Well thats whats going to happen in the US too.

And while you may think that "By letting the foreigners in, all we do is expose ourselves to risk without any possible benefit." you seem to be ignoring the millions of &#036;&#036;&#39;s the US makes from tourism.

Its give and take. You lose a few tourists maybe a few jobs but you gain some security. If you are going to go to all this trouble then at least make sure you really get the security you&#39;ve been promised not an expensive PR exercise so the politicians can say they did "something" when the inevitable happens.

Imo i&#39;d just like to say to the US

http://www.bbc.co.uk/scotland/tv/chewinthe...unds/toofar.wav


That said if i was planning on spending all that money & time to go to america it probably wouldn&#39;t put me off, just piss me off.

What If You&#39;re Allergic To Ink?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by stupidguy@7 January 2004 - 11:40
What If You&#39;re Allergic To Ink?

---

:lol: :lol: :lol:
but they have fingerprinting machines that are more like photocopiers now..no ink involved..providing the airport pays up the money for the machine

Quote:

---

Originally posted by leftism+7 January 2004 - 11:38--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (leftism &#064; 7 January 2004 - 11:38)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

<!--QuoteBegin-hobbes
Critcism is for the uninspired.

What do you offer?

---

Ahh that old chestnut :) . Any criticism given must always be accompanied by an alternative solution. Do you apply that standard to yourself at all times? Of course not. Its a desperate point to make.

Since the comment bears nothing on my ultimate conclusion, how is it "desperate", tactics boy?

Any earnest discussion begins with addressing the issue (Homeland security- necessary or not?) It then progresses to your opinion on how it is being implemented including the factors which formed that opinion (experience, research, etc) and an alternative solution, if possible. Sometimes you cannot offer an alternative, this is fair, but you should make this admission. Why would any honest person not follow this simple etiquette, always?

"I understand that the US has concerns about homeland security. I think that fingerprinting will be an ineffective screening tool for x,y,z, and may, in fact, drive a wedge in international relationships by placing the criminal stigmata of fingerprinting on upstanding foreign citizens.

It is a complex situation, to be sure, and I see no easy solution. At least the US attempted to start simply and they didn&#39;t expel all foreign nationals living in the US on Visas. These people are not tourists, and they don&#39;t come from the 27 countries that have Visa exemptions, they are resource leeches, who want to learn a skill and take it back home. We clearly don&#39;t need them or their money. They pose nothing but a security risk.


If you are going to go to all this trouble then at least make sure you really get the security you&#39;ve been promised not an expensive PR exercise so the politicians can say they did "something" when the inevitable happens.

That is your bottom line, you suspect that this is a political ploy, a ruse. You may be correct, but you don&#39;t think that people are going to go to some happy place over this policy. Do you think Americans will all say, "well that terrorism issue is sorted, we got fingerprints now"? Or will people just look at this policy as a tiny piece in a very big puzzle. That&#39;s how I view it. If Tom Ridge thinks that he can point back at this as the pinnacle of anti-terrorism and seek absolution of all guilt if terrorists strike again, he is seriously deluded.

[/b][/quote]

here is something to consider....Richard reed, the attempted shoe bomber on the flight from Paris to the USA held a British passport and therefore did not require a visa and thus would not have been fingerprinted, however it wouldn&#39;t be of financial benefit to the USA to end the visa waiver program.
there is the point that he had a criminal record and wouldn&#39;t have qualified for visa free travel but the point is that a terrorist could come from any one of the 27 (i think) countries in the visa waiver program.
a person is not a threat purely by his nationality, it is a believed fact that there is an Al quada group active in the USA...American citizens &#33;&#33;&#33;
the granting of visa waiver isn&#39;t just because a country is considered a threat, it&#39;s also based on the countries economic situation to stop entry of financial migrants..Argentina was withdrawn from the scheme when it&#39;s economy collasped (correct me if i am wrong...i know someone will :lol: )

Quote:

---

Originally posted by vidcc@7 January 2004 - 19:23
here is something to consider....Richard reed, the attempted shoe bomber on the flight from Paris to the USA held a British passport and therefore did not require a visa and thus would not have been fingerprinted, however it wouldn&#39;t be of financial benefit to the USA to end the visa waiver program.
there is the point that he had a criminal record and wouldn&#39;t have qualified for visa free travel but the point is that a terrorist could come from any one of the 27 (i think) countries in the visa waiver program.
a person is not a threat purely by his nationality, it is a believed fact that there is an Al quada group active in the USA...American citizens &#33;&#33;&#33;
the granting of visa waiver isn&#39;t just because a country is considered a threat, it&#39;s also based on the countries economic situation to stop entry of financial migrants..Argentina was withdrawn from the scheme when it&#39;s economy collasped (correct me if i am wrong...i know someone will :lol: )

---

So what&#33;&#33;&#33;

Timothy Mcveigh was a white American citizen and committed the worst act of terrorism at the time (in the US).
What&#39;s the relation to the original point?

The 9-11 terrorists were not from Britain.

if u come in to the u.s.a the only right u have is to do wtf the gov says ........
Now many peeps that know me now i have a lot of complaints bout the us gov.
but this is not one of them........ since i would have no problem being finger printed and pic taken .... what&#39;s the harm in that? As a citizen of the u.s.a i back this fully, and whatever else it takes to keep ppl from killing thousands of ppl for no reason........
i also think ppl need to get a grip ..... i say if u come in to the USA u obey the law or stay the fuck home ......& also if u dont like the law Stay The Fuck Home.... &
to compare this to the nazi&#39;s shows how stupid and lil minded you are&#33; And my suggestion would be to anyone that says this law is like the nazis to really get sum help cause u need it ........ or get a life&#33;

that&#39;s my two cents&#33;