Printable View
I do believe I'm being attacked. :)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't.
Ouch.
(Hope thats the correct response!)
I'll see what I can do. :)Quote:
Originally posted by MagicNakor@7 January 2004 - 04:56
Jean Chretien ceased to be Prime Minister in December. Paul Martin's the "new" guy now. And, unfortunately for us, he's more American-friendly.
We're used to being the United States' scapegoat. But four major blame-sessions in a year is a little much.
:ninja:
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'm being attacked[/b]
You mean counter-attacked. We'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.
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
BTW, in planning a trip or relocation to another country, the additional effort of a photograph and fingerprinting is a pittance
Agreed, that comment is utter BS.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's
<!--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 $$'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've been promised not an expensive PR exercise so the politicians can say they did "something" when the inevitable happens.
Imo i'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't put me off, just piss me off.
What If You're Allergic To Ink?
:lol: :lol: :lol:Quote:
Originally posted by stupidguy@7 January 2004 - 11:40
What If You're Allergic To Ink?
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 @ 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't expel all foreign nationals living in the US on Visas. These people are not tourists, and they don'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'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'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'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'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'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'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 !!!
the granting of visa waiver isn't just because a country is considered a threat, it's also based on the countries economic situation to stop entry of financial migrants..Argentina was withdrawn from the scheme when it's economy collasped (correct me if i am wrong...i know someone will :lol: )
So what!!!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'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'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 !!!
the granting of visa waiver isn't just because a country is considered a threat, it's also based on the countries economic situation to stop entry of financial migrants..Argentina was withdrawn from the scheme when it's economy collasped (correct me if i am wrong...i know someone will :lol: )
Timothy Mcveigh was a white American citizen and committed the worst act of terrorism at the time (in the US).
What'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'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's shows how stupid and lil minded you are! 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!
that's my two cents!