US Expands Fingerprint and Mugshot Program for Visitors 1073
prakslash writes "The US State Department has expanded its anti-terrorist fingerprinting program to include visitors from close US allies such as the UK, Australia, France, Germany and Japan. Everytime a visitor enters or leaves the US, they will have to get their mugshot and fingerprints taken - something that used to be mainly limited to your local police precinct. More news can be found here and here. In addition to the huge costs involved, one has to wonder if this will affect tourism to this country." Hmmm, a huge database of digital mugshots and digital fingerprints, which will be kept forever - hope we have enough RAM to search through it quickly and constantly.
what do you want? (Score:5, Insightful)
Just some questions...
Re:what do you want? (Score:3, Insightful)
Freedom of speech (Score:5, Informative)
Hey, I thought you guys had freedom of speech? If so, why is it that virtually no USA based media is reporting that an FBI insider, Sibel Edmonds [google.co.uk], has said that the Bush administration knew about the 911 attacks before they happened. Apparently your government has used a law to stop this story in the press. [independent.co.uk]
Freedom of speech indeed!
Re:Freedom of speech (Score:5, Informative)
She effectively did. She said that they had information that there were planned attacks with aeroplanes against skyscrapers in the short term before September 11.
She was brought in AFTER 9/11 to clear a backlog of untranslated documents
True. Two days after.
But these were UNTRANSLATED DOCUMENTS, so nobody knew what information they contained.
But that's not what she is saying. She is saying that she saw documentation that showed that they knew, prior to 9/11, that there might be such an attack. And she said that in her testomony she was quite clear about which documents she was referring to, and it would be easy to confirm what she was saying.
I think the CIA/NSA/FBI frowns on translators revealing information
Yep, I can understand that. However, if what she is saying is true, this is a huge news story and definately "in the public interest".
She has testified before the commission investigating intelligence failures before 9/11, in private. But that wasn't good enough for her, so she went to the UK media.
Yes, I expect because she thought there would be a cover-up. Remember, this information could be embarassing to both the Rublicans and the Demoncrats. Both parties might want it covered up.
I think if what she says is true then she did the right thing going public about it. However, no doubt she is now going to get smeared, because that's what happens when someone speaks out, at least in the USA and UK.
Re:what do you want? (Score:4, Insightful)
I don't know if you joke or not, but I am SERIOUSLY entertaining the idea of my first gun purchase lately. I used to think those psychos in Montana were out of their minds. I still think they were, but more and more, I fear that they weren't/aren't.
This sort of thing occurs in steps - gradually. However, eventually, a lot of people may well wake up one morning and say "Holy shit! It's 1984!"
I, for one, am not willing to let that happen.
And, still.... I do not post A/C....
Re:what do you want? (Score:5, Insightful)
Rule Number Two: There are no exceptions to Rule Number One.
You may think you are armoured up like Rambo but you are still as good as dead.
Re:That isn't necessarily decisive (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:what do you want? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:what do you want? (Score:5, Interesting)
What's scarier? That s/he posted that, or that I take him/her seriously?
I used to be highly anti-gun...
Re:what do you want? (Score:4, Funny)
Don't worry, the rest of the world has already moderated GWB -6billion "Scary".
Re:what do you want? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:what do you want? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:what do you want? (Score:5, Insightful)
What use is freedom when you're dead from a terrorist attack?
Better to die on my feet than live on my knees. The terrorists can kiss my ass (except for Cheney - eww).
I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
- If somebody is going to commit something illegal, he'll probably enter the country illegally. Probably through the porous mexican border or the huge coastline that the US has.
- Secondly, this is downright disrespectful. Detractors will argue that it's for the safety of the US. Well, I really don't see how it'll help. Once the dude is in the country, and has committed the offence, this sort of system is absolutely worthless. Effort should be put into preventing these sort of tragedies. Efforts like putting more effort into the Israel Palestine crisis, managing Iraq more effectively, stop being so patriachal and showing more respect to the citizens of the world.
I for one, will be taking my tourist dollars elsewhere. Where the authorities respect me. Where I'm not treated like a criminal and people realise that not everybody is out to get them.Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Interesting)
it's not the same. a better comparison IMHO would be gun conrols and getting a visa which is a permit to get into the country. Which is a good thing. So I think instead of making everyone feel like criminals by doing this, they should focus on a better way to check backgrounds, etc. when giving out visas. Also it would be a good thing to have very secure visas as to not have someone have their own fake visa.
I dont know if I'm making much sense.. alcohol is not letting me think...
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
However, let's also think about this: name 1 person who has committed a terrorist act in this country who entered it illegally (not who was here illegally, but who enter here illegally.)
For the record, I'm opposed to this as I don't think it'll solve much since most islamic terrorists are dead after they commit their act.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:4, Funny)
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
Actually, most (all?) of the September 11 hijackers entered the USA legally. The problem was that no-one stopped them.
But I'm not sure how taking their photograph or fingerprints on entry would have done anything to stop it.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
Now they will take advantage of other weaknesses, like the ones the parent post mentions (mexican border, etc).
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:4, Interesting)
Depends on how you define "legally." IIRC their applications were horribly out of order and if the people in charge of reviewing the applications did their jobs they wouldn't have gotten into the country. It's like saying that driving at 90 MPH is legal because you didn't get pulled over/tire spiked/whatever.
All in all, it's just another example of Congress passing new laws when what we really need is better enforcement of existing ones.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Funny)
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:4, Insightful)
The real problem is that most had legal paperwork while entering the country, but then did not leave when that paperwork said they had to. What we really need to do is actually enforce the visa laws, which means when a foriegn student skips too many classes, we find them and throw them outta here. Yeah, it's a bit mean to the student who is harmlessly goofing off... but we can't stand allowing the ones who aren't so harmless being allowed to go untracked.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's pretend we live in a dreamy world where face recognition is correct 90% of the time. Every year, there are about 200,000 airline passengers entering the united states. Suppose 200 of them are known terrorists (probably far too high). That leaves 199,800 innocent passengers.
In this scenario, the system will flag 19,980 innocent passengers as potential terrorists. It will flag 180 terrorists as potential terrorists. So the alarm will be wrong 99.1% of the time. When the system flags someone as a terrorist, the authorities will assume it is yet another false alarm and ignore it. So what good did face recognition do?
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:3, Insightful)
Suposedly 9/11 terrorist entered legally USA. Perhaps it will be more effective to remove the people that ignored the warnings [cnn.com]...
stop being so patriachal and showing more respect to the citizens of the world.
That would be apreciated
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
If you don't have your papers, then you're obviously a terrorist and it's into the slammer with you. That's how it'll work, you see the grounds for that being put into place today; make people afraid, strip away their rights one by one, catalouge and condition them like sheep. Once you've got them controlled enough and you've got absolute control of the media, begin the cleansing of ideals, er, winning of hearts and minds. If you're a blank on their system, you're not a citizen. If you aren't registered and you're on american soil, then you're a terrorist, and subject to the same treatment as the current round of people are getting at guantanimo, or not if they just decide it's too expensive to export you or make you an american citizen and shoot you.
Of course, people will forget their papers all the time. There'll be "mistakes", because as we all know, you can't keep that many people in jail. Or people who burn their papers will be thrown into jail. So, of course, they're going to mandate RFID or some kind of mark that can't be taken off. And after everyone has RFID tags, then all the banks and commerce are going to switch over to that system since it's easier and more secure that way.
Getcha mark of the beast ere', $10!
Call me a troll if you must, but that's where it's going. The only reason it hasn't already happened is because this pesky internet thing is here and they can't stop it and moreso, more and more people are moving onto the internet and getting their info from alternative sources. Last year fox lost half of it's watchers, and CNN lost a good 25%. The internet takes that control away and helps to put people in power that should be in power.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:4, Interesting)
You're probably right. I sure hope you are. One night FOX was speculating whether or not there should be "some kind of control" against "liberal" sites like moveon.org, etc. Obviously they're getting nervous. The gov't is trying to pass some new anti-pirate law, linking P2P with kiddy porn in order to whip up the troops. (old story, I know, but some house sub-committe(sp) just "passed" some new copyright resolution) My point is that they are already worried about the net.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:4, Insightful)
Security has been "tightened" at airports. Fingerprinting is already in place, on-line systems and the works. And yet, the Immigration officer will turn to you and ask: "For how long did you stay in the US the last time you've been here?". Damn?!? If they don't know this, how do you expect them to catch terrorists?
Also, remember that the terrorists from 9/11 were lawful resident aliens. They would not be caught in the anti-terrorist net.
Moreover, it's a fallacy to think that all terrorists are from abroad. Just remember the unsolved Anthrax cases.
I have a suggestion (Score:3, Funny)
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Interesting)
The U.S. is THE biggest arms dealer in the world. They have absolutely NO interest in resolving the Mideast thing, or any other conflict for that matter.
The Mexican border is probably pretty tight compared to the Canadian border, but there's not too many Canadians crossing over looking for the "good life". So, it's not going to get the press coverage.
Man, I would love to see a concerted effort by everyone to avoid doing any business with the Americans until they come down off their high horse and start treat others with some respect. Judging from the American farmer strike a long time ago, entertainment boycotts, etc., it's not bloody likely.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
Please don't lump all Americans into one basket, I'd call that racist, but it's not an issue of race but of country.
Remember - half of the US voters voted for Gore. Actually, more than half. Off topic - Best bumper sticker I saw after the 2000 election - "Re-elect Gore in 2004!" (And no, I didn't and won't vote for Bush).
Anyway, seriously, we are not all the same. We're really not this brainwashed mass that you make us out to be. Yeah, Fox News totally bites and some US TV programs aim for the lowest common intellectual denominator. Yeah, there's crappy stuff about any country's culture.
But extrapolating some things to the general populace is just as ridiculous and dangerous as claiming all Jews are cheap or all Arabs are terrorists.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:4, Interesting)
Obviously in the 3rd paragraph that should read "250+ million individuals."
And now, before anybody goes off on me about the individual faults of US policy (internal or external), I'd like to again state that I know things are only getting worse. It needs to change, but that is the way every country goes. The politicos grab power and impose law to keep their power. The people have to get that power back (or just stop giving it away). And even those methods don't last forever.
No great civilization in history has lasted forever. I doubt the US will be magic #1 in this regard. But this country certainly has a solid enough foundation (Constitution, Bill of Rights, etc..) that it can at least remain free for many more generations, if we as a citizenry choose to stand up for ourselves.
Anyhow, thats it for my addendum/rant/what-have-you.
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:I wouldn't visit the United States (Score:5, Insightful)
I was just talking to a friend about going to Orlando in June. After this nonsense, it looks like Europe is going to get the tourist money.
Any one want to bet what happens the 1st time the US finger prints an Aussie whos on the jet fighter selection comitteee? I'm betting that will sway the decision about the Euro-fighter. The decision has already been made about buying Boeing jets by two of the local airlines and they declined.
Tourism in the US is just starting to recover in the US (www.bea.gov) but international tourism is flat and its the 4th largest "import" of money into the US. The US Gov't is spending $50 mil [doc.gov] tring to get more tourist. Germany, Japan, UK, Canada and Mexico account for about 3/4 of all visitors in to the US. France used to be major contributor but they seem to be going elsewhere.
Big Brother is watching... (Score:5, Funny)
Maybe they could offer the tourists a copy of the photo in a lovely decorated cardboard frame as a memento of their trip.
April 1? (Score:3, Funny)
Ex Post Facto (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, a silly example but how far from the truth is it? I just don't think these measures do much at all to prevent acts of terror.
Happy Trails!
Erick
This really sucks (Score:5, Insightful)
My girlfriend is Japanese. She went back to Japan recently for her brother's wedding, and upon her return she had to go through this procedure. She has a green card. It saddens and sickens me what this country does in the name of preventing terrorism.
Re:This really sucks (Score:5, Interesting)
Upon arriving at LAX on his last trip, he was taken aside and asked how he became a US citizen. What right he had to be one etc. It seems I was born here you idiots isn't enough when you've been to NZ, which we all know is the hot bed of south pacific terrorism.
Re:This really sucks (Score:5, Insightful)
The only reason I'm getting away with it is that my father is British, and my mom's American, which means I *inherit* both. But, as the post above mentioned, I only show the US passport to the US customs folks. (and vice versa for the UK/EU customs folks.) While I suspect they'd handle it fine, it's never a good idea to tax their brains.
Let's hope its reciprocated.... (Score:5, Interesting)
Futile (Score:5, Insightful)
You'd be surprised... (Score:5, Interesting)
The Canada/US border is vast, but people *are* watching. Chances are, it has been determined that you're harmless.
USA Ignores Canada Yet Again (Score:5, Funny)
I am slighted, shocked and appalled that Canada was not included in this list.
Goddam Americans.
That tears it. (Score:5, Insightful)
The first question I have is: just what does the US think this will achieve? And the second question: how does it think this will achieve it?
Is it to stop terrorists entering the country? Sorry. No such luck. If Individual A joins a terrorist group, but keeps his head low, he won't be on any of the lists. If he's careful, there'll be no way to say that he is a terrorist, even though he is. Would this system have caught the Unabomber, for example?
Or criminals? Same story.
All this system will do is catch those who have been stupid enough to be caught before... if that. It's a dubious step, of dubious usefulness; the potentials for abuse of this information are sufficient that I, for one, will not be visiting the US in the future (unless they drop this requirement). The UK? Maybe. Africa? Possibly. Maybe even Jamaica (via Britain, rather than the US, as I'd have to get a transit visa to go through the US...)
I would suggest that the US can kiss a reasonable proportion of their current tourist dollars goodbye.
Business dollars (Score:5, Insightful)
Until recently the US was the undisputed center of the international economy. Recently the EU has risen as a potential threat, and in other fields so has China.
Despite all claims of telecommunications and ecommerce, big business deals are still made in personal meetings, and have more to do with social processes than with economics.
Given these measures, where do you think the business will go?
If you had to choose between making a deal with someone who deals with you as an equal, or someone who treats you like a terrorist, which one would you choose?
Many a good business proposal has gone down because of more trivial reasons: bad personal chemistry, bad food in a business dinner, personal dislike for a national stereotype, etc.
In Latin America, for example, people have been typically happy to do business with Americans:
The stereotype says that Americans like to do business, have money, and keep things straightforward. The US was normally seen as a nation that welcomes you and treats you like a king as long as you bring money to pay for it.
The whole US was for most middle-class businessmen of the region like a mix of Disneyland and a Giant Shopping Mall is for a teenage girl. A business meeting in Atlanta, New York or Florida is a half-vacation.
In short, they're happy and receptive to a pitch while the other team has 'home advantage'.
More recently, it's easy to find people feeling personally insulted by new measures post 9/11. Now this can make them feel like criminals.
People will start to simply refuse to go to the US, for business or pleasure: "if they want to do business, let them come here". And the stereotype will be different as well: Americans are paranoid, make things difficult, think of everyone else as criminals and terrorists.
It wouldn't take much for a friendly European or Asian competitor to take the business. It's not like they have to dazzle them with a better offer, they just have to make them feel better about the deal.
I can see it now... (Score:4, Funny)
Customs official: Ah. Welcome to the United States, terrorist--I mean, guest. Yeah. Guest.
Tourist: Why, hello there! This is my first time visiting America, and I must say that--
Customs official: Please be quiet. I need to take your photograph then get your fingerprints. This is essential. It is a matter of national security. You must comply or you'll be on the next plane back to whatever country you came from.
Tourist: What? My photograph? My fingerprints? I'm not a terrorist! I'm just a tourist! I'm just here to take in the sights and see what it's like in yank-land!
Customs official: I'm sorry, you're going to have to comply if you want entry into the United States of America. We are not going to use this information we've gathered about you for any nefarious purpose, anyway.
Tourist: You're not? Then why are you collecting it?
Customs official: That's classified.
Tourist: It is? Well, classified be damned! What do you need this information for? I demand my rants! I'm not from some rogue, anti-American nation! I'll have you know I'm a French citizen!
Customs official:
Tourist: What? You have something against France?
Customs official: Calm down. Here. I have something for you to eat. They're freedom--I mean, French, fries. Yeah. French fries. Have one. They're really delicious.
Tourist: Why, thank you...hm, they taste kind of...
Customs official: Look, okay, why don't you just let me get your mugshot. I mean, photograph. Yeah. Because the word "mugshot" has negative connotations. And that's obviously not what I'm doing. I'm not doing anything negative.
Tourist: Um, okay...
Customs official: Nothing at all. Of the kind. This data I'm collecting probably--I mean, this data won't be used against you in any way, shape or form. It's just to protect civil liberties.
Tourist: Okay.
Customs official: It's for your privacy.
Tourist: It's for my privacy? You're collecting information about me for my privacy?
Customs official: Yes. These aren't the droids you're looking for.
Tourist: These aren't the droids I'm looking for?
Customs official: No, they aren't. Come here, let me take your photograph and fingerprint you, you dear Frenchman.
Tourist: I will comply. I have no mind of my own--my own. I will--have my photograph taken.
Customs official (thinks): The drugging worked like a charm, I'll be damned. I'm sure it'll work out perfectly next week when we put these fries into the national food supply and drug them all. Then we'll have control. Ahahahaha!
A Fingerprint's Rights (Score:3, Insightful)
If a freakin fingerprint is all you have to worry about entering this country, you're still doing pretty damn good.
Re: A Fingerprint's Rights (Score:5, Insightful)
The 9/11 problem was that the CIA wasn't sharing the information it had with other government agencies.
Re: A Fingerprint's Rights (Score:3, Informative)
Fingerprinting is an infrastructure already in place world wide throughout a number of professions, making it an easily shared medium across agencies (hello?) Plus the technology has been tweaked over the last few years to provide a high degree of success in software matching.
I never said it was the end all be all of security, but it is another layer that will undoubtably help in the long run.
Re: A Fingerprint's Rights (Score:3, Insightful)
Afterall if a freakin fingerprint is all you have to worry about to live in your country, you're still doing pretty damn good, right?
Re: A Fingerprint's Rights (Score:5, Insightful)
Being a frog in the world's largest pot, you might not think so. But from outside your country, where we do not have a history of routine fingerprinting of people who are not even suspects in a crime, this is a major deal. If my wife wasn't American, there would be no way I would be going to the US at all now. As it is I'm not happy that she insists I accompany her on visits.
Most people don't realise the value of privacy until they have suffered some consequence of its violation. Your time for this will come.
Re: A Fingerprint's Rights (Score:5, Insightful)
So, you have two countries; one of them does a bit of paperwork and takes your temperature with an infrared camera. The other one fingerprints you, takes a mugshot, and puts it all into a big database. Remind me, which one is the totalitarian dictatorship again?
In all honesty, the US remains a lot more free than China, but the situation at the border sure doesn't help my perception.
Re: A Fingerprint's Rights (Score:5, Informative)
If our government didn't make mistakes and only did this stuff to terrorists maybe you could rationalize it. Fact is they are making mistakes and hurting innocent people.
Hundreds, if not thousands, of people have been wrongfully held since 9/11.
An Egyptian student was staying at a hotel near ground zero on 9/11. A security guard at the hotel framed him, because he was Arab, and accused him of having a radio that could monitor airline frequencies that was found in the hotel. The FBI managed to coerce a confession out of him by threatening to turn his brother over to Egyptian authorties, just like the Syrian case. He admitted it was his radio to protect his family which led to him being a suspected part of the plot. After the confession hit the news the private pilot that actually owned the radio came forward. The FBI's threats were so good they made him confess to something he didn't do.
http://www.cnn.com/2002/LAW/12/13/wtc.pilot.rad
Your missing a basic point. As soon as they started doing it there is nothing stopping them from continuing to do it and doing it more and worse. You really don't want to visit a country, where you can be arrested and held without charges and denied access to your embassy. It is the most basic travelers right. Unfortunately
Jose Padilla, a U.S. citizen, has been held without access to a lawyer, his family or any judicial review for a couple years now. He may be guilty of associating with terrorists. If he's guilty of something try him and prove it. Holding him forever without proving anything is simply not what a country based on law does.
http://www.counterpunch.org/whitney01032004.htm
Capt. James Yee, an Islamic Chaplain at Guantanami, was in a military brig in isolation for more than 2 months facing a death penalty charge for espionage. The military destroyed his life and his marriage. Last week they back handedly admitted he wasn't guilty of anything but they aren't going to apologize for destroying his life. During the course of the trial the military's lawyers inadvertently divulged classified documents to the defense team. The military in fact was guilty of what they were accusing Yee of doing. None of the docs he had in his possession were, rightly or wrongly, marked as classified.
http://www.refuseandresist.org/detentions/art.p
Several British citizens held at Guantanamo were likewise just released. Only thing they were guilty of was being in Afghanistan when the war started so they got a couple years in relatively brutal solitary confinement and a series of beatings.
Use the standard model Mcfly! (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Use the standard model Mcfly! (Score:4, Insightful)
Ask your self this. Would having the pictures and fingerprints of the 9/11 terrorist have stopped them?
Sorry, trick question - the US government did have that information and 9/11 still occured. Quite a few of the 9/11 terrorists used their real identities and despite some of them being on watch-lists, still succeeded.
So tell me again how this extremely expensive initiative is going to make you safer?
Hint: Gathering info about the bad guys isn't the problem - the US has reams of info on terrorist and doesn't need the picture and fingerprints of every person entering the country. The problem is sorting through, connecting and properly and correctly analyzing the data they already have. Wouldn't this money be better and more effectively spent in this area, without insulting and marginalizing the rest of the world?
Think it's not a bother? Ask the US airline pilots who have to get photographed and fingerprinted in Brazil if it's just part of the routine. Or maybe flipping the bird and getting fined is part of the routine...
As a Canadian who works in the U.S. (Score:5, Interesting)
However, I do question the efficiency of the plan. I was fingerprinted and had my photo taken for a quickpass to get over the border called Nexus. It certainly seems like taking extra precautions against people who obey the law, cross the border lawfully every day, and pay taxes in your country is a strange focus for your limited resources.
But then again, it seems to me that attacking a country completely unrelated to the terrorist threat is a strange way to focus your resources.
Overall, this should be the decision of the people of the U.S.. It will certainly hassle visitors to your country, and make it seem unwelcoming even to the friendliest of tourists. It will also not stop the people determined to enter your country to harm you. However, it may make it a bit more difficult. Too bad it only takes one whacko with a suitcase nuke.
Personally, I think a lot of this stuff since 9/11 has been a knee jerk reaction. It's understandable, but it's completely illogical, if your goal is to prevent terrorism. You can't beat terrorism. By definition, it is the tool of the people who've already been beaten. It's a force you can't fight if you want to keep your principles.
I'm sad for you guys. Good luck though! I hope you figure yourself a way out of it.
One less tourist. (Score:3, Insightful)
Disgraceful
Say goodbye to your science conferences... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Say goodbye to your science conferences... (Score:5, Insightful)
It will (Score:3, Insightful)
Write to your favourite US airline! (Score:5, Insightful)
I will definitely stop going to or through the US and start using a non-US airline. I think I'll write to AA to let them know. Maybe if enough people do that...
Does this mean... (Score:5, Funny)
Your identification papers, Fraulein! (Score:5, Insightful)
With computer databases, your image and your fingerprints *are* identification papers, and now you are being forced to hand them over at checkpoints.
Seriously, it was all very funny when we *started* to point out the amazing number of similarities between Hitler and Bush's rise. There was a terrorist act on a national monument (and even, in the 9/11 case, *attempted* on the national legislature, same as Germany) that produced national fear, whipped up by leader, used to convince legislature to pass through critical bills granting extensive police powers. Political opponents were accused of being soft on terrorism. Fear and xenophobia against religious (Islamic/Christian) and racial (Arabic/Jewish) groups was used to greatly infringe those people's rights and persecute them. A number of undesireable people, in violation of national law, were locked up in a camp to isolate them from the rest of society (Guantanamo Bay/Nazi concentration camps). Nationalistic fervor was whipped up and whipped up again to build up a popular base. Personal vendettas were made good upon with the new power (Bush-Hussein/Hitler-a number of enemies). Other countries were invaded and occupied on poor pretexts, banking on the fact that other, less powerful, countries would not be willing to organize or do more than protest (Iraq/several countries). A primary motivation for the invasion was resources (and later Nazi invasion into the USSR was significantly for oil). Business and government had close ties, and war profiteer corporations did a number of nasty things to take advantage of cronyism with major political figures (Schindler's List is a nice example). Right now the third largest employer of armed forces in Iraq (after the US and Britain)are private corporations -- big companies that are answerable only to an extremely friendly occupational government that grants Iraqis almost no rights and consists mostly of people trying to curry favor with their US occupiers to try to get a more advantageous political position in the future. Neither leader is brilliant, but both are prone to violence and grudge-holding. Both managed to seize control of the legislature at about the time they gained office. Neither has much regard for the lives of the people they have conquered -- we have been using unarmed Iraqi guards as inspectors of cars into restricted areas before US personnel come close, making human shields out of them. Neither feels that international opinion is of much import. Both quickly established powerful police organizations with far stronger powers than their predecessors, little oversight, and the ability to bypass much of the judicial system (OHS/Gestapo). Both started their invasions based on punishing the terrorists that attacked their nation, and immediately spread out once they had the power they needed. Both had rising unemployment in their countries, and a growing degree of xenophobia towards foreign laborers.
There are some differences. Hitler respected and even idolized what Britain had done -- Bush treats Britain as a lapdog. Hitler actively physically intimidated his physical opponents -- Bush does not. Hitler invaded, occupied, and eliminated the governments of no countries within his first four years as ruler, whereas Bush invaded, occupied, and eliminated the governments of two countries within his first four years as ruler. Hitler wound up eventually killing many more people than Bush has thus far, though Bush is currently ahead for the first four years of rule. Hitler did not actively attempt to control other countries through diplomatic means -- Bush has a team that works hard to control other contries without needing to overthrow their government. Bush has computers and telecommunication monitoring systems, but Hitler did not.
Screw Goodwin's Law. The man didn't write it in 2004.
I'll leave
Have you ever traveled to a foreign country? (Score:5, Insightful)
The document they require is nothing simple either. It's an official federal proof of identity. Getting it requires proving citizenship and identity. It's actually much harder in many countries. I'm a US/Canada dual citizen. My US passport was easy, just prove I'm my parent's kid that was that. My Canadian one is a bitch. They need lots more ID (copy of my driver license and US passport, and my physical citizen ID card), a sworn statement testifying to my identity by a notary public (or doctor, lawyer, etc) who has known me for a few years, etc.
Know what? They STILL want me to go through all the shit when I go to the US or Canada from the other. I can get away with less than a passport since I'm a citizen and the countries are on good terms, but it's more difficult. To any other country, forget it. It's a passport or nothing.
ID checks at the border are nothing new, and have needed official ID for a LOOOONG time.
Re:Your identification papers, Fraulein! (Score:5, Interesting)
Joseph Goebbels, the Third Reich's equivalent to Karl Rove, was a pioneer of the "wired office". He used radio, phone, and teletype links extensively. German had a very good switched teletype network in that period, and the Reich used it to control much of the country from Berlin, rather than delegate to local authorities.
Re:Your identification papers, Fraulein! (Score:4, Insightful)
I saw this statement in a news story the other day and it still strikes me as highly bizarre. What else would be number 3? The US and Britain are the only countries with any significant troop presence. You have to have a number 3 somewhere, were you expecting it to be "Iraqi gun nuts"?
Purpose to limit foreign visitors (Score:5, Interesting)
If you think I'm being paranoid, consider that the 20th century's worst dictator's unleashed their fury against "cosmopolitan" elements in their societies. Both Stalin and Hitler considered "foreign" elements a threat to their rule and crushed them without mercy. Part of keeping your own population docile in ensuring they never have the opportunity to see how citizens of other countries live.
The irony of this is ... (Score:4, Interesting)
As a canadian... (Score:5, Interesting)
Not sure I follow the logic (Score:5, Insightful)
Solution: insult them and tell them they're all effectively criminals. Then they'll like us more!
Do you ever get the feeling that someone important just doesn't Get It?
US border control is already bad enough without... (Score:4, Insightful)
You're warned that getting the slightest thing wrong on your declaration card will see you thrown into jail and the staff appear to have manners and an abrasive attitude that are certainly the worse than Australia, New Zealand, Singapore or the UK.
You can't help but get the overwhelming impression that, as a tourist, you're not so much welcomed as tollerated as a temporary visitor to the USA.
With all the new measures in place, and the presumption of guilt that accompanies them, I certainly wouldn't put the USA very high on my list of places to visit again.
Once you're through the airport it's a nice place and the people I met there were great -- but that border-control is a *real* turn-off.
Besides which, what's with LAX? I've never had to queue on the sidewalk to get to the check-in counter before -- it's crazy!
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:3, Insightful)
You're obviously sarcastic... (Score:5, Insightful)
But seriously, what about immigrants? One more way to marginalize that group. They already face language and cultural barriers, stereotypes, and a host of other problems... now they'll be printed, even if they become citizens later.
When the government starts printing people who have committed no crime and may later be citizens, it's clear that we're on the very edge of having full prints taken for something like a marriage license, then for a driver's license, and then at birth.
Even if our government doesn't start printing us for these things, there will be reciprocal arrangements with other countries. Cross any national border into a developed country, get printed, have that shared worldwide.
We already do have footprints taken at birth, so remember not to walk barefoot around the house of your murder victims.
Re:You're obviously sarcastic... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:You're obviously sarcastic... (Score:4, Informative)
prints (Score:5, Insightful)
*I also suspect, really just suspect, they've been doing a closeup retina scan print during the picture taking part of the license, if that's possible at a distance of a few feet. I don't know, though. I can't prove it, but last time I got mine renewed it sure was suspicious, EVERYONE in the line had two pics taken, and I asked about it, because before for years and years it was "one snap, sorry, you're stuck with that one, move along now" and the lady state cop gave me quite a squirrely answer and looked chagrined about it, like she was embarrased/angry at the same time.
And I mean really, what a scam anyway, prints and pics at the OFFICIAL border crossings, yet they turn a blind eye to the MILLIONS who cross illegally, and it's not all "out of work poor hispanics" who cross over, there's all kindsa folks sneaking across. Tell me this ain't weird..
The whole "war on terror" stuff is being taken advantage of in this stealth coup that's been going on, IMO. Look at all the 9-11 government prior knowledge stuff that is FINALLY making the mainstream news the past few weeks.
Re:prints (Score:5, Insightful)
I Just Cancelled My Ticket. (Score:5, Interesting)
This was not a decision taken lightly, but we just can't bring ourselves to donate any of the little money we have to a nation rapidly becoming the Fourth Reich and which treats its guests and visitors as if they are apprehended criminals undergoing processing down at the jailhouse.
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:5, Insightful)
Let's see... I used to be able to fly anywhere within the U.S. without having to show picture ID. Now, I must carry my papers and be prepared to show them at U.S. government checkpoints.
I feel much less safe than I ever did before since my life and the lives of all U.S. citizens will be affected far more by the U.S. government and the laws and rules it imposes on its citizens than by all the terrorists in the world. I'd rather be able to travel where I wished and read whatever books I wished without the government tracking my every move than have a false sense of being protected by the occasional loon who is hell bent on loading a rental truck full of fertilizer and blowing it up in front of an IRS office. There will always be terrorism as sure as there will always be the human emotions of anger and hate, and it's asinine to erode civil liberties in the name of either.
Anyone who thinks U.S. citizen's civil liberties aren't being violated is either not a U.S. citizen, or they have a poster of Ashcroft on their bedroom ceiling.
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:5, Interesting)
I know you mean well, but please do bear in mind that other countries [statewatch.org] had this policy for a while. I can only point and laugh that *all* of you go through this now instead of just a select, singled out minority.
In that particular instance that I linked to above, the choice given was stark: if you go to that country, follow the rules *they* impose on your visit, or don't go. Simple as that.
It's not like fingerprinting you is really a big deal in itself, especially if you don't intend staying on in the US. However, the message that this sends out very clearly is that the country no longer welcomes visitors. Hey, fingerprinting is something that I associate with being done just before you're marched into jail, not otherwise.
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:4, Insightful)
That's probably because many EU countries (I'm thinking of the nordic ones and the Benelux) are fundamentally more decent and liberal than the US. Just because the UK (with it's dodgy un-written "constitution") has regressed, it doesn't mean that the rest of the EU member-states have.
For example many of us have civil codes that are built on fair, just and easily understood principles rather than arbitrary precedant, proportional representation that means that every member of the electorate's vote counts, and a respectful approach to the environment.
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:3, Insightful)
No Problem.
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:5, Insightful)
I just can't wait to plan my next holiday to Disneyland!
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:5, Insightful)
> from the middleast his country will be safer.
Bull, bull, bull! Will you quit beating up this oh-so-convenient strawman? That is NOT why he is planning on pulling the troops back, but rather because he (and the Spanish majority) opposed putting them in on principle from the start. Now he gets a chance to act on his principles. The media and their willing followers can spin this whichever way they want, but this straw ain't gonna turn to gold.
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:5, Informative)
And they also decided to double the number of troops they have in Afghanistan. You remember that one? The country the terrorist actually came from?
-John
Re:Alright, this isn't even funny. (Score:5, Insightful)
Republicans are not for smaller government. They are for having government intrude in my bedroom and personal life. They are for giving big tax cuts to their rich buddies. The are for gouging the government with fat contracts to their contributors (Haliburton).
And I'm saying this as a Libertarian, not a Democrat. Republicans claim to be better for the economy, but the past 25 years show that to be wrong. At least the democrats aren't as happy to take away my rights.
Notice how the Republicans are the ones always proposing constitutional amendments to take away people's rights. Smaller government my ass.
And fingerprints stop hijackings, how? (Score:5, Insightful)
Fingerprinting hurts far less.
Interesting. I didn't know fingerprinting could prevent people from flying planes into buildings.
How, pray tell, would fingerprints distinguish a legal visitor who wants to go to disneyland, and a legal visitor who wants to hijack a plane and fly it into a building?
If the hijacker has no previous criminal record, as with 9/11 IIRC, why would this possibly be of use?
Re:And fingerprints stop hijackings, how? (Score:4, Insightful)
I posted elsewhere in this thread, but here's my basic feeling.
I don't think this will do squat for actually stopping terrorism directly.
What it will do is make it much much harder for someone to spoof an identity (ie, fake passport) for coming into the US.
Secondly, if a tourist does a crime and leaves fingerprints then it can help track that down. Regarding fingerprinting, I remember getting fingerprinted when I was little at school, do all Americans get fingerprinted as routine? If so, then it kind of makes sense to treat visitors as we do ourselves.
Anyway, the one good thing about this is that they're apparently making all countries citizens get fingerprinted, and hence all visitors have a level playing field. So it'll make a visitor from Morocco feel less humiliated at immigration than a visitor from Spain, for example.
Fingerprints are not as infallible as people think (Score:4, Informative)
Fingerprint link [newscientist.com]
What's the bet that the first Al-Queda terrorist arrested through matching fingerprints turns out to be an 80 year old nun from Canada?
Re:how would you feel? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:how would you feel? (Score:5, Insightful)
Ya know, there were things I didn't like about being behind the Iron Curtain during the hight of the cold war, military officers armed with automatic weapons boarding the train at the border crossing and such, and I vowed not to go back until the curtain lifted, but at least, In Soviet Russia, they didn't strip search me and they didn't photograph and print me. They checked my passport. That's what a passport is for. You should read the fine print on your own American issued passport.
Mine goes something like this:
"The Secretary of the United States of America hereby requests all whom it may concern to permit the citizen(s) of the United States named herein to pass without delay or hinderence and in case of need to give said citizen(s) all lawful aid and protection."
Clearly that must have been written by some former Secretary of State who had read his Homer.
As I might commend you to do.
The Odyssey is an allegory of how to treat guests in a civil manner, especially those of a foreign land.
Reading with careful attention might increase the turnout at your next soiree.
Civility breeds civility, and this step will do nothing to further the cause of our self-appointed leadership of the civilized world.
It will also do nothing to combat terrorism, thus making the injury even more insulting.
I fully expect people to not visit in droves.
KFG
Re:Spain (Score:5, Informative)
All it does is get my identity into a database for a foreign country to use against me. And since I'm not a citizen, I have no right to see how the information is being used or whether it's accurate.
I personally think Canada's security is OK. We'll arrest you when we have the evidence, as we recently did in Ottawa (where I live), not before.
BTW, if you think taking pictures and finger prints is going to increase security, you are living in a dream world. Try reading any of the last 5 or 10 Cryptograms [schneier.com]and let Bruce Schneier tell you why it will likely make us less secure.
It an unescesary invasion of my privacy. Having my fingerprints will not help the US deter or track terrorists.
Re:I, regrettfully, have to agree with this becaus (Score:5, Interesting)
And why do you think this happened? Because terrorists do not like Mickey Mouse?
I am an independent/idealist who operates on common sense.
Then please, use that common sense.
We, as people in the US, are walking around daily as the biggest targets in the world.
Why not do something about it? Why not find out why you are hated so much by groups of people? Why not try and step into the shoes of a 16 year old palestine boy who had his brother killed simply because he was at the wrong place at the wrong time? Why not try and see how supporting a dictatorship (Cuba before Castro, Persia (Iran) when the Shah ruled there, Irak!!!) makes the people under that dictatorship view the US as a whole? Years and years of dirty tricks and interfering and meddling in other countries' are causing what you see now. Why not criticize your government and tell them to order the CIA to keep its nose out of other people's business?
I love my country and I love my life.
Why in that order? Why do you put your country before yourself or your loved ones? Do you know that 'training' people in pre-WW-II Germany to 'love' their country no matter what (Blut und Boden, blood and ground) let to the rise of nationalistic fascism?
(...) kill for twisted beliefs (...)
Sure. Whatever you do, do NOT try to understand the other side. Just call their believes 'twisted' and be done with it. Thats so much more easy than having to think about why the status quo is as it became.
They were bombed, the innocent died, and they came together as a nation.
The innocent died; yes, this is exactely what the terrorists want. In their eyes innocent people on 'their side' die every day, while the 'civilised' world actively supports their killers. They see no way out, except by terrorism. And as I see it, the spanish people did not come together as a nation, but they 'rewarded' their right wing government with a clear defeat in the elections, resulting in a left wing government.
I hope people can understand and Turn-about is fair play if they want to mug/print me.
Either you never read 1984, or you did not understand it fully. This is exactly what Bin Laden wants: he wants the people in the west to have to go through road blocks, random searches, an overall loss of personal freedom. Why, because in his eyes we then suffer the same as a lot of muslims under US-backed governments.
Extremism is a world wide infection that if we don't squash it then we are all doomed as are our freedoms.
Sure! Squash 'em all. Just like the ETA, they should be squashed! Yeah, that's what really works! Just squash em long enough, and they will stop. Know what? Spain has been trying to squash the ETA for > 35 years now. Guess they haven't tried long enough, ey? Same goes for the IRA; they are illegal since 1936. Yup, kill them all. Once the current generation of terrorists has been killed, there will not ever be a new generation of terrorists, no sir.
Please get me straight: I strongly dissapprove of terrorism; I have no sympathy whatsoever for people who kill or injure innocent people. There is however no way we are going to get rid of this by the kneejerk reactions seen in the US and some other countries. Trying to understand terrorists and seeing how and why they came to be terrorists in the first place might just be more useful than fighting them, because you simply cannot win. History has taught us that. Please, for the love of freedom, open your eyes and your mind; do not let yourself be brainwashed by power-hungry politicians and their media. You seem like an intelligent person, please use that intelligence to try and look further than what you are being shown.
Re:I, regrettfully, have to agree with this becaus (Score:5, Insightful)
When you know what 'justification' a terrorist uses to kill innocent people, then maybe you understand that this and previous US governments have provided both wood and sparks to ignite this fire. US governments have shown in the past not to give a damn about people in other countries; US governments support whatever regime as they see best for their own plans. THAT feeds terrorism. If you want to put a stop to terrorism, take away its breeding ground: change US foregn policy.
Fuck excuse me for not giving a fuck about someone who murder INNOCENT people and has a reason for it. I don't give a shit.
Does this mean you are willing to let the reason a terrorist became a terrorist keep on existing? Kill one terririst, another will take its place, as long as that other thinks it's the only way. Take away the breeding ground for terrorism, and it will fade away.
People who kill innocent people should follow the same fate!
No, they should be put on trial in a court of law.
Tell you what the next time someone shoots, burns, mutilates someone from my country (...)
And here lies a mayor source of the problem. Why should it be limited to someone from your own country? Why not have the same feelings for a 14 year old palestine girl who was shot without reason? Or an old lady sitting in a bus in whatever Israelian city? Why do you not ask your government to put more pressure on Isreal to make peace, and not war?
They want the world to be ISLAM-ONly
Sure, some fundamentalists want that. Just as there are fundamentalist christian nutcases who want the whole world to be christian. Just like the US educational system wants to have all students swear an oth to some deity. The fact is, most muslims just want peacefull coexistance, as long as they may hold their own beliefs. Look into history: Spain was once occupied by the (muslim) Moors; under their reign christians as well as jews could openly have their own religion.
You should open your eyes and understand they have one objective and that is convert the world to Islam. Just like the Palestinians want to wipe Israel off of the map and not live with them.
Yeah, right. Most palestines just want to have freedom, food on the table, a house to live in, and decent education for their children; most of these things they do not have. The main reason they are opposed to Israel is because in their eyes Israel is keeping them from their basic human rights and needs, and I cannot blame them for that view.
I'm all for a discussion with groups not out to destroy mine or any others way of life but they wouldn't talk to us if we begged.
??? They tried and talked, but we did not listen. That pushed the extremists among them into terrorism.
They want all of us dead or converted but we know they prefer dead.
Nope, they just want to be left alone, in peace.
They have no value of life period.
And US governments do, right? You stated yourself: you want to put a bullet through the heads of terrorists. Ever thought that those terrorists looked at the US and thought: "Well, they are so peaceful, they have never illegally overthrown a democratic government they did not like, they never invaded another country the last 40 years, they have never lied to their own people."? Large groups of people around the world see the US as a bullying oppressor (even a large number of people in Europe see it that way). Change US government actions, and you'll change that view and take away the breeding ground of terrorism.
The only thing they understand is violence so that's what they'll get.
You did not react on my arguments that this did not help with the IRA, nor with the ETA. You simply repeat your mantra.
Lastly we can try to understand all we want but it w
Repeat after me: (Score:4, Insightful)
Everyone else knew this and yet you yanks still went ahead and invaded the place, thereby giving the Islamic fanatics yet another battle cry. Well done.
Next time, try actually making up your own minds instead of letting the garbage that passes for mass media in the US do it for you.