Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

US Citizens To Require ''Clearance'' To Leave?

CowboyNeal posted more than 7 years ago | from the hotel-americana dept.

987

jo7hs2 writes "The U.S. Department of Homeland Security has proposed a system which will in essence make it mandatory for you to have permission before leaving or entering the country, effectively putting everyone on a no-fly list unless the government says otherwise. Interestingly, the proposal does not seem to cover personal travel, only that on some sort of carrier like an airline or cruise vessel. While this certainly is concerning, it isn't exactly new, as a passport is already required for circumstances covered under the proposal."

cancel ×

987 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

it doesn't smell good... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715557)

I would be scared

scary (1)

crankshot999 (975406) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715561)

now the government can stop me from leaving the country on public transport if they want to!

Tuesday (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715573)

God, I hope this rubbish starts ending on Tuesday.

Please, go vote and get these people out of our lives!

nothing to hide, no reason to worry? (1, Interesting)

jdunn14 (455930) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715575)

Papers please, Comrade?

Thank you US gov't. Wanna just light that annoying "Bill of Rights" on fire? Seems more direct.

Re:nothing to hide, no reason to worry? (1)

Zarniwoop_Editor (791568) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715599)

In soviet union ... Country leaves you.
Sigh.

What are you guys doing Tuesday? (2, Informative)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715653)

...that, of course, is the day you go to the polls and let these people know that all this stuff is A-OK with you.

(credit to Jim Schutze for phrasing)

Re:What are you guys doing Tuesday? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715813)

Dude, you got a Diebold!

captcha: discover (good one)

Re:nothing to hide, no reason to worry? (2, Insightful)

sgt_doom (655561) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715831)

Exactly so, Comrade jdunn14!

While this certainly is concerning, it isn't exactly new, as a passport is already required for circumstances covered under the proposal."

This is ratcheting up the control of the citizenry - and it is exactly like the Soviet system. Anyone who disagrees with this assessment is both ignorant and uneducated - there is no middle ground on this, period!

I am once again struck by the 2004 presidential election. At that time I lived in Seattle, and the young, seemingly educated women I spoke with amazed me in that they were going to vote for Bushski. After extolling them with all the negative legislation he had signed into law (that is, stuff that was negative against American workers' rights, women's rights, unions' right to exist, etc.) they were still adamant to vote for him. Likewise, the incredible stupid number of union workers I spoke with.

This is an especially sore point with me as an ancestor of mine gave his life on behalf of the union movement. When I was back in Seattle for several weeks awhile ago, I did a amateur survey and found that 10 out of 10 union members didn't know jack about the NAFTA Super Highway, nor about the DHS-Maritime Infrastructure Recovery Program, nor about the union-busting regs set forth by the US Labor Relations Board! This populace is truly screwed.....

Lobbying power? (1)

eck011219 (851729) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715581)

If this is true and threatens to go into effect, we'll find out how strong the airlines' lobby is. This would kill a stack of business for them, I'd think.

Re:Lobbying power? (1)

sgt_doom (655561) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715933)

A word to the wise, eck011219. No one is this administration cares about business, all that crapola about the growing American economy is just that - crapola! Subtract all the debt taken on both at the corporate levels and personal levels and subtract the debt that remains to be paid for all the borrowed money to pay for the infusion of money into the military-industrial-corporate-prison-complex, and you have a shrinking economy. The infrastructure is crap - everything is regressing in this society (the USA) and moronic clowns go triapsing about repeating the latest Thomas Friedman drivel (you know, that billionaire jackass who wants your job offshored ASAP!):

We just have to out-innovate!

Sgt. Doom: Yeah, but I spent my adult working life out-innovating and all my innovations, and jobs along with them, were offshored!! What total mindless drivel!

wait, what? (1, Offtopic)

yincrash (854885) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715583)

permission for EVERY entrance and exit? Does the DHS even have the infrastructure to handle that?

Re:wait, what? (1)

Mateo_LeFou (859634) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715605)

No, you will be taxed an additional 10-20% to help cover it. Anyone who opposes this tax increase will be demonized as someone who "voted against saving our asses from the terrorists ZOMG!!!!11 Z". Lather, rinse, repeat.

Man, america has peaked...

Re:wait, what? (1)

glsunder (241984) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715659)

Those crazy neocons will do ANYTHING to not have to pay for people's healthcare. What's next? A war???

Re:wait, what? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715785)

America is so 'Lol'.

Re:wait, what? (1)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715947)

One fgrep per international airplane flight or cruise ship departure sounds feasible.

hahah (1)

Keyframe2 (940074) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715585)

ah damnit people :/

just wait (1)

Dance_Dance_Karnov (793804) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715587)

soon you'll have to file 'travel plans' with DHS to go further than 50 miles from your house.

Re:just wait (1)

Joe The Dragon (967727) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715861)

NO they will just use the new gps based tolling system.

Last I checked (1)

Ark42 (522144) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715603)


I didn't need a passport to go on a cruise, and I didn't need a passport to fly to Cozumel, Mexico.

Re:Last I checked (1)

nacturation (646836) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715613)

I didn't need a passport to go on a cruise, and I didn't need a passport to fly to Cozumel, Mexico.

And even if you did, isn't it the *destination* country that looks at your passport when you leave?
 

Re:Last I checked (1)

Ark42 (522144) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715641)

I don't know, I don't have a passport, and I've never had one in the past. I've been to quite a few Caribbean islands (for half a day of course) and nobody there (Jamaica, Cayman, Puerto Rico, several non-US Virgin Islands) has ever needed as passport from U.S. citizen on a cruise ship. Same goes for the airports flying to and from Mexico.

Re:Last I checked (1)

the eric conspiracy (20178) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715801)

Even though it was permissible to do this in the past I never felt comfortable travelling outside the US without a passport. I've travelled with some non-US citizens working or studying in the who have had problems entering the US on return - after seeing this I've always felt it was a good idea to have the documentation.

Re:Last I checked (2, Informative)

Southpaw018 (793465) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715625)

Not only that, but this provision requires you to request clearance upon every entrance/exit from the country. With a passport, you just need the passport. You don't have to get your 'papers in order' first.

I call BS on jo7hs2.

Re:Last I checked (1)

CRCulver (715279) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715691)

Laws requiring a passport to travel to Mexico from 2008 have already gone into effect.

Re:Last I checked (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715713)

Didn't, but will. January 8th 2007. Check it out.

Offtopic though, because this article is about the future, not what you personally had to do on a previous vacation.

Re:Last I checked (1)

drpimp (900837) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715739)

I heard of this months ago, although, I just got back from Cabo, when I came back, US customs person said after the turn of the year, my birth certificate will no longer work for me to leave/enter the country. My BIRTH CERTIFICATE .... guess some things have no credibility anymore. Shit passport might as well be a RFID chip implanted into my now, then I can't lose it and have to wait weeks to leave again . BTW It must have been a while since you checked this has been pending for some time now.

Starting January 1st, you will need a passport for (1)

jfinke (68409) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715741)

any cruise that leaves the country.

Passport Passport Requirements If you are planning travel for 2007 or beyond, please take a minute to review the passport policy below. If you don't already have a valid passport, be sure to avoid the rush and give yourself plenty of time to apply for one. Once you've got a passport in hand, the whole world is yours to explore.

U.S. Citizen Passport Requirement

Air Travel

Effective January 8, 2007, passports will be required for all U.S. citizens flying to or from all international destinations. This includes all areas of the world in which our ships sail, such as the Bahamas, Bermuda, Canada, the Caribbean, Mexico, Europe, Asia, Central and South America.

Cruise Travel

As early as January 1, 2008, subject to U.S. Government amendment, passports will be required for all U.S. citizens cruising to or from all international destinations. This includes all areas of the world in which our ships sail, such as the Bahamas, Bermuda, Canada, the Caribbean, Mexico, Europe, Asia, Central and South America.

http://www.royalcaribbean.com/beforeyouboard/passp ortGuidelines.do;jsessionid=0000kBVFJqoUxBesiUlnSf waVxz:10ktdmnut [royalcaribbean.com]

Re:Last I checked (1)

DCheesi (150068) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715745)

I believe that that is about to change. I remember seeing something to the effect that after date xx/xx/xx you will have to have a passport to enter or leave the US, even to "friendly" destinations like Canada or the caribbean. I'll try to dig up the reference... ah, here we are:

http://travel.state.gov/travel/cbpmc/cbpmc_2223.ht ml [state.gov]
(scroll down a bit)

Hmm, I wonder if this story is a misinterpretation of that policy change? The dates are in January...

Re:Last I checked (1)

Rocketship Underpant (804162) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715767)

"I didn't need a passport to go on a cruise, and I didn't need a passport to fly to Cozumel, Mexico."

The editor is a dunce. Passports, when required, are required by the country you enter, not the country you leave! (Except in Soviet Russia, and increasingly Soviet America.)

Passports are an irrelevant side issue. Go vote. (1)

Beryllium Sphere(tm) (193358) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715905)

"...the [Supreme] Court held that the right to travel is an inherent element of "liberty" that cannot be denied to American citizens. Although the Executive may regulate the travel practices of citizens, by requiring them to obtain valid passports, it may not condition the fulfillment of such requirements with the imposition of rules that abridge basic constitutional notions of liberty, assembly, association, and personal autonomy."

Kent v. Dulles
357 U.S. 116 (1958)

Summary from http://www.oyez.org/oyez/resource/case/1053/ [oyez.org]

EPIC cites other cases in their comments on the proposed rule [epic.org] :
"The Supreme Court has long recognized that there is a constitutional right to travel
internationally. The right to travel is "not a mere conditional liberty subject to regulation and
control under conventional due process or equal protection standards . . .," but "a virtually
unconditional personal right." Shapiro v. Thompson, 394 U.S. 618, 642-643 (1969); see also
Aptheker v. Secretary of State, 378 U.S. 500, 505 (1964); Kent v. Dulles, 357 U.S. 116, 126
(1958)"

Vote, damn it. If you haven't before, call your local Secretary of State's office and ask what the rules are. You might be registered automatically in some places. You might be able to cast a provisional ballot if not. Check http://www.canivote.org/ [canivote.org] if you prefer, but in the name of everyone who has crawled through mud, spent years with combat flashbacks and nightmares, or *died* to preserve basic rights, drive to your polling place. It won't solve the problems but it's an indispensable first step.

Godwin invoked! (2, Funny)

goldspider (445116) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715611)

"Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are two countries in recent history
that didn't allow their citizens to travel abroad without permission."


"Friends of Liberty" loses!

Re:Godwin invoked! (1)

vadim_t (324782) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715627)

Godwin's law doesn't apply if the mention of nazis is completely appropiate.

Re:Godwin invoked! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715671)

It's a legitimate comparison, so the ridiculous "Godwin's Law" does not apply.

You stupid cunt.

Blindness Invoked! (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715867)

No, goldspider loses the ability to learn from Nazi atrocities when they're repeated in front of goldspider's own eyes.

You still think this is a game to be won by nonsense rule lawyering, when you're helping destroy your own country?

Re:Blindness Invoked! (1)

goldspider (445116) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715899)

Last I heard (from many leftist groups, IIRC) skepticism isn't un-American. Show me the congressional bill that would have to be in the works for this entire story to deserve any credibility.

Unless, of course, you believe laws are being enacted completely outside of the constitutional legislative process. If that's the case, you have much bigger things to be worried about.

Re:Godwin invoked! (1)

yoder (178161) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715907)

That Godwin crap has become yet another tool to be used by UltraCons just like "if you're not with us you're with the terrorists", "You have to give up essential liberties for more security", and "Those Daemoncrats would invite the terrorists into our country and give them the bombs and weapons to use against us". In other words, it's completely worthless in any adult conversation.

Re:Godwin invoked! (1)

goldspider (445116) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715937)

I just think we could have more civil, reasonable, intellectual discussions if people weren't so quick to compare everything and everyone they are against to Nazis. Is that too much to hope for?

I guess (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715615)

Keeping terrorists out is too hard, so they've decided on another mission.

Re:I guess (1)

toQDuj (806112) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715669)

Oh yes, for your own security, we will not allow you to go outside to play anymore.

Mr. smartypants of the main post also makes one of the loosest links ever, as he tries to compare travel permission with a passport. Sheesh.

B.

Question (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715617)

Does Cowboy Neal need clearance?

North Korea (1)

MECC (8478) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715621)

FTA:"Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are two countries in recent history that didn't allow their citizens to travel abroad without permission. If these regulations go into effect, you can add the United States to this list."

They left out North Korea.

Re: North Korea (1)

Black Parrot (19622) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715661)

> > Nazi Germany and the Soviet Union are two countries in recent history that didn't allow their citizens to travel abroad without permission. If these regulations go into effect, you can add the United States to this list.

> They left out North Korea.

Ba'athist Iraq?

Re:North Korea (1)

Anne Honime (828246) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715857)

They left out North Korea.

Nope, because NK citizens are not allowed to travel at all. Hence, no permission to ask for.

Re:North Korea (1)

Sassinak (150422) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715913)

I think they mean two that tried that had a LOT of other things going on. (and ironically failed).

Two things bug me about this.

Number #1. Has anyone noticed that much of these laws that are either being debated or enacted are done quietly. (no public discussion, no public forum, just done quietly and the majority of people won't know until they are actually directly effected, and by then, the argument will be "well, we've been doing this for a while and its for your protection"

Number #2: Its scary because I happen to know that much of what has happened in the world theater is well documented. So I wonder what twist the US will put on this. Remember, much of these oppressive acts in other countries were done for at the time reasonable reasons, and the people supported them. Somewhere along the time, things went from bad to worse very quickly. I don't think the US will take the EXACT slide, but they are definitely at the cliff's edge, and history has shown that eventually someone will jump. And all for some indefinable "enemy" or "unwanted ideologies/thoughts" which quickly turned xenophobic or just plain nutty.

Oh well, we had a good run.

To all those that keep saying... (1)

Sassinak (150422) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715629)

That what is happening is NOT reminicent of Nazi Germany, is not similar to Mr. Orwell's 1984, etc...

Smile... you are on candid camera.

Yes, but... (1)

Ireneo Funes (886273) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715633)

Yes, but will this new beyond-draconian system run Linux?

Occupy an embassy? (1)

wertarbyte (811674) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715645)

So, when will american citizens occupy the canadian embassy until the canadian foreign minister steps on the balcony [wikipedia.org] and announces: "We have come to you to tell you that your departure..." *cheeringcrowd*

Re:Occupy an embassy? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715725)

They have to build a wall first. Oh wait, they're already planning to, aren't they?

Republican President, June 12 1987 (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715647)

"Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall!"

In Soviet States... (2, Insightful)

slidersv (972720) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715651)

Look on the bright side... Can't think of one right now, but i'm sure someone thinks there is one...

How can these laws pass at all? So, is it a matter of time before they pass a law against some religion, and invade alternative of Poland?
Oh wait, the invasion happened already. Nevermind...

Re:In Soviet States... (1)

digitaleden (935960) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715735)

I wonder when they'll pass a law banning atheism...

Not quite the same as passport screening (1)

l2718 (514756) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715657)

First of all, the US government can't deny you a passport (even if they want you on a no-fly list!) -- see Kent v. Dulles [findlaw.com] . Secondly, US Citizens have the right to enter and leave the US (I can't find the USSC citation -- sorry). This proposal is thus manifestly unconstitutional -- unless they try claiming that "you have the right to leave the US, but not by the means of transportation of your choice". This has worked for the government in the cases about the right to travel anonymously and the airport identification requirements.

Re:Not quite the same as passport screening (1)

headonfire (160408) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715685)

"you have the right to leave the US, but not by the means of transportation of your choice".

how the fuck does -that- work, exactly? if i want to leave by an "unapproved" method, are they gonna pay for the alternative?

this is a load of bollocks all round.

Re:Not quite the same as passport screening (1)

slidersv (972720) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715911)

Yes, they ARE going to pay for the alternative. It's called walking, and you'll get 10% off on your next purchase at GAP.

Re:Not quite the same as passport screening (1)

Sassinak (150422) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715721)

Actually, there are laws circulating in the house that are speaking of denying people from obtaining a passport.

And lets be honest. Assuming the government does not deny a person a passport, what good will it do if you can't use it for its intended purpose (ie: international travel) UNLESS, they want to backdoor a National ID system via Passport (well, you need a US passport to travel domestically because we don't trust the states ID/DL system).

But hey, that won't happen right?

*thumbing through the history books*

naaa..

Re:Not quite the same as passport screening (1)

budcub (92165) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715921)

When I filled out an application for a passport in Janurary 2002 there were a number of "interesting" questions on the application. The one I recall best was "Have you ever served in the military for a foreign country/government?" I haven't, but what if I had? I know one guy who's serving in the US Army and he's a citizen of Mexico, has a green card an all that.

Re:Not quite the same as passport screening (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715873)

Only swimming

American WOmen!!11!1! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715667)

Come to our fabulous Europe as long as you can.!11!!1!

You're welcome... (really!)

Re:American WOmen!!11!1! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715797)

American women? No thanks, we've already got MUCH more than our fair share of obese, incessantly blabbering, uneducated and impolite females. We call them Arabs.

Med vänliga hälsningar,
A Swede

(Note how this will be marked "troll", whereas if I had only complained about the Americans, it would have been marked "funny".)

How long ... (1)

jo42 (227475) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715683)

Before you need the governments permission to leave your country?

Before you need the governments permission to leave your state?

Before you need the governments permission to leave your county?

Before you need the governments permission to leave your city?

Before you need the governments permission to leave your home?

Re:How long ... (1)

Ireneo Funes (886273) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715711)

Before you need the government's permision to leave the front of your new stat-sponsored two-way TV?

Re:How long ... (1)

blugu64 (633729) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715895)

Shhhh!!! My Favorite program Two Minutes Hate is on! I don't think it's a re-run either

Re:How long ... (1)

udowish (804631) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715747)

I knew this idea was coming. And I do think that soon you people in the states will need a "valid" reason to leave your country. So much for your blessed "freedoms". Hey, you can always come visit me here in Canada...If you get permission :)

Re:How long ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715903)

First they blocked people from leaving the country and I was quiet because I'm afraid to fly. Then they restricted movement from state to state, but I don't drive. Then they imposed a curfew on my city, but I am afraid of the dark. Then they put us all on house arrest and there was no one left to deliver my pizza.

Foreign Schools (2, Insightful)

cab15625 (710956) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715699)

Another aspect in which this would "help" the Americans is in limiting the number of American youth would would be at risk of exposure to foreign ideals through studies abroad. Today, any American who can afford it could be exposed to all sorts of crazy ideas, just by enrolling in a foreign school. If they also had to ask permission before leaving the country, then many of them would probably not risk their souls in this way.

Re:Foreign Schools (1)

tbyte_s_user_on_slas (969373) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715791)

Another aspect in which this would "help" the Americans is in limiting the number of American youth would would be at risk of exposure to foreign ideals through studies abroad.
Somebody mod the parent funny please :)

And what about standby travel? (1)

ladybugfi (110420) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715701)

Sooo, civil liberties issue aside, will this actually remove the option of traveling overseas standby or on a very short notice? Or will DHS have politic^H^H^H^H^H^H^H officers on every international airport to validate people on the spot?

Polish passports... (5, Interesting)

b0s0z0ku (752509) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715705)

As someone whose parents had to cross the Jugoslav border to Italy in the trunk of an old Fiat because the Polish government wouldn't grant them a passport to leave the communist bloc, I resent this and find it disgusting. If someone's accused of charges that they can fight in a civilian court, then I can understand temporarily taking their passport away. But a civilian court offers the accused a clear means to fight the charges.

Military tribunals and secret decision-making like this are horrible ideas because there's no accountability involved. But what about hard-core terrorists like Osama, those responsible for WTC I and WTC II among other things? If anything, this applies more. I want to see the bastards on trial in a New York courtroom, in public, accountable to the very populace whom they injured and whose families they murdered. Then, since New York has no death penalty, a nice long term in Sing Sing in the same cellblock with the Aryan Brotherhood. Justice doesn't have to be meted out by military courts to be tough or fair.

-b.

Re:Polish passports... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715919)

Hello american dumbass; justice means obeying the rule of law, not allowing prisoners to be attacked just because you think that's a good idea.
Of course, we can't expect persons such as yourself to understand the fundamentals of humans rights and human decency, heh.

Re:Polish passports... (1)

maxume (22995) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715951)

Evil, even as an answer to evil, is still evil, and has nothing to do with justice.

I'm skeptical (2, Interesting)

goldspider (445116) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715707)

I'm afraid I don't take these "Friends of Liberty" folks at face value. Their assertions are backed up by a volume of evidence found in similar conspiracy theories. NONE WHATSOEVER.

If Reagan were alive and fit today... (1)

Senes (928228) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715709)

...he'd be beating the crap out of anyone responsible for this proposal.

Re:If Reagan were alive and fit today... (1)

mrjb (547783) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715885)

Maybe Arnie is a better bet these days.

Clearance vs passports, & presumption of freed (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715727)

The OP is incorrect in saying that passports are the same thing as requesting clearance. They are not.

Once you have a passport, you can fly out to nearly anywhere at any time (if the destination has allowed you an entry visa), without a by-flight request for personal clearance. The Man can of course stop you at the checkout, and your passport may even act as a trigger for such an action, but that is *NOT* the same thing as asking for clearance for each separate exit.

The distinction is pretty fundamental. It centers on presumption of freedom. Passports give you that.

It's not "like a passport" that we already use... (5, Insightful)

TBone (5692) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715751)

This is nothing like the fact that we already are required to use a passport for a number of these same reasons.

A passport is documentation to foreign countries that you are a documented U.S. citizen.

Being required to "check out" of the country with DHS, despite all the calls of "Godwin rule" invocations, is exactly like Soviet Russia, Communist Cuba and China, and Nazi Germany, in recent history.

Seriously, if you people don't get out and vote these facists out of office, you're going to be just like the guy from WWII who wrote the poem about how, when there was no one else left, they came for him, and there was no one left to stop them. Enough with the "But I don't have anything to hide". When are you going to realize it's not about, and never has been about, "hunting the terrorists" and "making us safe", it's about "controlling the people", through fear, and travel restrictions, and spying? The more people say "But I dont have anything to hide, let them go ahead", the more they win.

Re:It's not "like a passport" that we already use. (1)

Sassinak (150422) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715943)

*clapping*.. This one gets it.

Exactly

When I was a kid (1)

hackstraw (262471) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715765)


This was one of the selling features of living in the US vs USSR. We were free to come and go, in the USSR travel was very restricted.

Personally, I'm disgusted.

Hunt for Red October Ob Quote (4, Insightful)

HungWeiLo (250320) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715771)

One day, older American will weep and younger Americans will be confused by lines like:

Capt. Vasili Borodin: I will live in Montana. And I will marry a round American woman and raise rabbits, and she will cook them for me. And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle." And drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?
Captain Ramius: I suppose.
Capt. Vasili Borodin: No papers?
Captain Ramius: No papers, state to state.
Capt. Vasili Borodin: Well then, in winter I will live in... Arizona. Actually, I think I will need two wives.
Captain Ramius: Oh, at least.

younger Americans will be confused by lines like (1)

Tim Ward (514198) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715929)

And I will have a pickup truck... maybe even a "recreational vehicle." And drive from state to state. Do they let you do that?

One day that will not be allowed, no.

Economic effects (3, Informative)

pubjames (468013) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715779)


Over here in Europe I am increasingly hearing people who say they don't want to travel to the USA at the moment, whether for tourism or business. The effect of this kind of thing on tourism would be fairly easy to measure, however the effect on business generally - if businessmen outside of the USA don't want to travel there - is impossible to know.

I thought the Republicans were supposed to be "pro-business" - surely they can understand the potential negative consequences of this kind of thing? Having said that, they don't seem to be worried about the negative effects of their neanderthal foreign policies, so perhaps not.

Re:Economic effects (1)

Pig Hogger (10379) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715939)

Over here in Europe I am increasingly hearing people who say they don't want to travel to the USA at the moment, whether for tourism or business.
Not only in Europe.

It's a beautiful day here, today. I only need to walk 5 minutes to climb a hill near where I live and I can see both the Adirondack Mountains and the Green Mountains of Vermont.

Yet I don't look forward to go there.

Back in 1984... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715807)

Back in 1984 I lived in Yugoslavia. I was a child, but I still remember how the system worked. One of the things were long LONG queues at the border crossings with Austria and Italy (yes, we were not completely behind the iron curtain, we were actually permitted to travel abroad). I also remember an institution called UDBA - it meant "agency for national security", but its main task was to find the ones who disapproved the system - (like, you were in a bar with your "friends", said something funny about Tito - the president, and they would get you) - and send them to an isolated island for a long, long time... Some never returned and those who did had completely changed personality.

I think the people of the US should be afraid. Raise against your crazy government before it's too late...

Stop this Criminal Act (2, Insightful)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715811)

What the fuck is wrong with people who will go out and vote more power to Bush and his fucking fascist government this Tuesday?

Torture, shredded Habeas Corpus, thousands of kidnapped people in CIA prisons around the world, "signing statements" vowing to break the law he just signed, martial law powers, leaving the country only by his permission... Bush has turned himself into the king of a fascist kingdom,

If you know one of these monsters voting for the Republican Congress in collusion with Bush, do everything you can to get them to vote people into Congress on Tuesday who will stop this destruction of America.

Can you say? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715817)

In the immortal words of John Stewart: Can you say anything if you just ask?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ki2GWdOIYxw [youtube.com]

Ultimately our responsibility. (1)

yoder (178161) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715821)

Even though it is very easy for us to sit back and say "those SOBs, how dare they do this to us?" We are the lazy SOBs who didn't fight hard enough to keep those SOBs out of office. Now our fight will be 10 times more difficult and 10 times longer and require 10 times the sacrifice to undo what has been done. And this is not about republicans doing something that the Democrats would not. Even if by some Deibold miracle the Democrats should take back the House, Senate and eventually the White House, they will not feel sufficiently motivated to undo what the republicans have already done for fear of being labeled "soft on National Security". That just means that the republicans bide their time until the next shift in power when they can pick up where they left off. If we US citizens can pry ourselves away from our computers and tvs long enough to get involved in the workings of our government then we could possibly fix this horrible situation. I just don't see that happening, though, because as history has shown only the extremists and single issue pundits take the time and make the sacrifices to make their voices heard in congress.

The damage that is being done will not be undone no matter who is in power after the elections, unless there is a groundswell of pressure from the general population, and I just don't see that happening because 8 out of 10 people don't know and don't care what their government is doing.

Onward Christian Soldiers (1)

Doc Ruby (173196) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715833)

Bush is an antichrist. It's in the book.

They have been doing this already (1)

Dr Reducto (665121) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715835)

If you read the article:

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (HSA) has proposed that all
airlines, cruise lines-even fishing boats-be required to obtain
clearance for each passenger they propose taking into or out of the
United States.


DHS has been getting manifests for all flights into the country (a smart move that actually is pretty effective), it just seems like they are expanding the program (to other transport methods and now, people leavkng the country) so that they know who is coming and going in the country. YOU don't have to get clearance....the airline/boat/bus has to get clearance, so for all practical purposes, international travel will not change for Americans (unless you are that small percentage that always ends up getting "randomly" screened)

Pre-election FUD (5, Informative)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715843)

Okay, so we have a story on a political website ("Friends of Liberty") with a link only to published comments by another political website ("PapersPlease.org") concerning a proposal where the original RFP [gpo.gov] was posted July 14 of this year. Where was the outrage then, where was the irate Slashdot article then?

Could it possibly be that this regulation would not have the effect that the far left claims that it would have?

If you read the regulation proposal, what this regulation change would actually do is require manifests to be transmitted to US Customs before the aircraft pushes back from the gate, rather than 15 minutes after takeoff (which is the current regulation), so that DHS can have do-not-fly list passengers removed from the flight before it takes off rather than causing a possible situation in the air.

This attempt at political chicanery on Slashdot's part is so transparent it's laughable.

Re:Pre-election FUD (1)

DaRat (678130) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715883)

Huh? How is this nonsense from the far left? Seems more like standard conspiracy theorist dogma more from an extreme Libertarian angle or even far right "small government, don't control me" nonsense.

What the hell? (1)

dapsychous (1009353) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715849)

This is getting all too surreal. First they start ignoring private property rights, then they amass the right to detain anybody anytime for any reason, with or without cause. Then they enact a bill that allows them to declare martial law at any time for any reason, now they are sealing the borders to US citizens that want out?

It sounds like they're gearing up for something. I'm not typically one to be part of the tinfoil brigade, but I think something seriously BAD is on the horizon. Maybe Alex Jones [infowars.com] was right?

For every 5 anti-gun soccer moms and hippies, they're a psychopath in the Utah desert with an arsenal ready to be passed out. I have $5 that says there'll be a 2nd civil war within ten years.

Just another step in the same direction (1)

Aaarrrggghhh (987643) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715851)

These losses of privacy and requiremens to "show our papers" has been ongoing, even within the US. It immediately reminds me of John Gilmore's [toad.com] protest against having to show his papers [papersplease.org] in order to take a domestic US flight [postgazette.com] (or travel on Amtrack or stay in a hotel). If he didn't have anything dangerous on his person, why did he have to prove his identity? This stuff is not really making anyone more secure, but it might make the airlines more money by preventing transference of tickts.

Perhaps people just feel more secure when they believe something is being done. even if nothing is, and even if it really sucks.

passport != permission (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715859)

It certainly is something new. A passport is issued every 10 years and you aren't required to notify the government in advance of your travel or get permission to leave the country.

Before this bill is enacted, I'll leave the country permanently.

Keep your shirt on ... (1)

golodh (893453) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715869)

Well ... pardon me for being just a little bit sceptical about this. In short: I'll believe it when I see it.

The pdf file referred to in the article is authored by the "The first amendment project" (I hadn't heard of them before), and refers to a "Notice of Proposed Rulemaking" (NPRM). I believe that there are probably lots of NPRM's that never make it into any sort of bill that is to be submitted to the House or the Senate.

Now while I can believe that some people in the current administration would entertain such thoughts, any such proposal would have to pass both the House and the Senate, and somehow I just can't see that happening.

In addition there are doubts about whether it's contitutional to bar people from travelling abroad unless authorised to by the government, so that any such laws will be open to challenge in a New-York minute.

Slight difference (1)

UnknowingFool (672806) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715875)

While this certainly is concerning, it isn't exactly new, as a passport is already required for circumstances covered under the proposal.

For a while, a passport was not required for Mexico and Canada. Before, a birth certificate was good enough. This is a bit of a nitpick but you do not require a passport to leave any country. You need a passport to enter a country. That's why nobody checks passports as you depart. Now, this rule makes it that your passport is checked leaving and entering. It's a small but important difference.

Interesting, maddening, BUT... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16715877)

TFA provides no supporting evidence at all. Yes, IF it's true, this would be a major blow to American liberties. IF true, it would be one more step towards an Orwellian state. If true, it would be smacked down by the U.S. Supreme Court, but how can we judge the accuracy of the article when no support is given whatsoever?

Of course, we've made many steps towards becoming an Orwellian state already anyway, so, given the likelihood of finding another Reagan (none), I think I'm voting Dem for a while!

Has anyone looked at that site? (1)

wedge603 (1011423) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715915)

It written by a bunch of conspiracy nuts. They think the Federal Reserve 'banking cartel' runs the planet.

One step closer to a dictatorship. (1)

s1oan (992550) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715925)

...just another step closer to a dictatorship. This is the real victory of the terrorists.

Where is the link to the proposed regulation? (1)

GIL_Dude (850471) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715931)

It's hard to believe an entirely slanted opinion piece on some random website (sorry, I never heard of sianews and don't have any reason to trust them). The one link they give at the bottom of the page is to a PDF supposedly filed against this proposal, and it comes from some site I never heard of too. Couldn't either the submitter, editor, or the site themselves point to one lousy thing that supports that this is more than some joke on a larger scale than maybe the Onion does? I mean, I can easily believe that this could be true, but how about a document on a site that at least ends in .gov or something? The way it sits, I could have made the whole thing up - so why should I trust that someone else didn't?

BTW, if it IS true, then damn that sucks. Maybe they should also have pointed us to where we can help fight the proposal?

Permission? I think not. (1)

BlackHawk (15529) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715941)

While this certainly is concerning, it isn't exactly new, as a passport is already required for circumstances covered under the proposal.
Having a passport is required, but having permission is not, and that difference is critical. We do not, and should not require permission from our government to travel. Period.


On the 7th, I'll be voting. And I'll be voting to attempt to wrest my government back from the extremist assholes that my fellow countrymen... the ones with less foresight... saddled us with for the last 6 years.

In Soviet America... (1)

CheeseburgerBrown (553703) | more than 7 years ago | (#16715953)

...er.

Wait a minute.

Does this mean if Robin Williams visits the former Soviet empire somebody will help him defect and we'll never have to face the possibility of there ever being any such thing as The Bicentennial Man 2?

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>