OCgringo Posted April 4, 2004 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 Well my take on it is that the terrorist have won already, Whatever rights to free speech , privacy, and a few others have been cut back in the name of " security" Maybe thats how it is and will not change , but I do not need to like it ! If the same measures were done in say 1984 , there would be a great protest. But now everyone just goes along with the program in the name of security. Maybe its living thru the Nixon era , but I just do not trust the goverment to use this information ONLY for the purpose they say just wait till they link passports- Credit cards-cell phone records etc together and the wrong people get access (added: lets not forget all the places you visit on the internet) Oh but its for "Security" reasons , no thanks ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJsushi Posted April 4, 2004 Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 Roppongi said:Gringo, I think you'll find many visitors actually welcome this move. If it prevents terrorist attacks, isn't it all worthwhile? A photo and a fingerprint ain't that much to ask if you've got nothing to hide. No it is not worthwhile. Governments have always at some point abused their powers. Giving them more specific data will eventually lead to more specific abuse. First it is a simple fingerprint and photo next it is a machine that statistically demonstrates that you have the propensity based on certain data to be a murderer, terrorist, raper, child molester, thief, woman beater, murderer, violate traffic laws, etc. All in the name of having a safer society. Sorry I don't believe in spending billions of dollars and passsing a bunch of freedom restricting laws to prevent a handful of malcontents from wreaking a little havoc. Better those billions are spent on education, social services and solutions to improve people's lives, so they won't be so malcontent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadaBing Posted April 4, 2004 Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 Roppongi said:Gringo, I think you'll find many visitors actually welcome this move. If it prevents terrorist attacks, isn't it all worthwhile? A photo and a fingerprint ain't that much to ask if you've got nothing to hide. I guess people's reactions side with their views on freedom vs. safety. I imagine it won't be too long before Mexico and Canada are included, and as recent events have shown, rightly so. You may be missing the point , what good is a finger print or a photo now ? If the whole world takes a " Tit for Tat " policy on this , then I have to stand in line for a finger print and a photo , BEFORE i get into the immigrations line ??? Why go anywhere if it's taking 1 & 1/2 - 3 hours from plane to taxi ? And why now and not on 9/12/01 ?? This all stinks of politics and re-election thinking which sucks !!! BadaBing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tiger Moth Posted April 4, 2004 Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 Well said! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadaBing Posted April 4, 2004 Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 Just to re-confirm your original post.... U.S. expands fingerprinting program to closest allies Saturday, April 3, 2004 Posted: 12:35 PM EST (1735 GMT) A program requiring visitors to the U.S. be fingerprinted and photographed before entering the country is being expanded to include travelers from America's closest allies. CNN's Jeanne Meserve explains (April 3) U.S. starts fingerprint program WASHINGTON (AP) -- A program requiring foreigners to be fingerprinted and photographed before entering the country is being expanded to include millions of travelers from some of America's closest allies, U.S. officials said Friday. The move affects citizens in 27 countries -- including Britain, Japan and Australia -- who had been allowed to travel within the United States without a visa for up to 90 days, according to the Homeland Security Department. Under changes in the US-VISIT program that will take effect by September 30, they will be fingerprinted and photographed when they enter through any of 115 international airports and 14 seaports. There are no changes in unique rules covering visits by Canadians and Mexicans. The Bush administration made the move after determining most of the so-called "visa-waiver countries" won't meet an October deadline to have biometric passports, said Asa Hutchinson, undersecretary for border and transportation security. Such passports include fingerprint and iris identification features that make the documents virtually impossible to counterfeit. Citizens from those countries still won't have to go through the consulate interviews, background checks, fingerprinting and photographing that people from other nations must do to obtain a visa. The US-VISIT program was passed by Congress in response to the September 11, 2001, attacks. In January, the U.S. government began fingerprinting and photographing visitors from nations other than the visa-waiver countries. About 5 million people have been processed so far and more than 200 with prior or suspected criminal or immigration violations have been stopped, according to Homeland Security. Hutchinson said adding the estimated 13 million annual visitors from visa-waiver countries should not create massive backlogs at airports and seaports. He said it takes only 23 seconds per person to take fingerprints and photos and check them against government files. However, fingerprinting the visa-waiver citizens could have ramifications for Americans when they travel abroad. When US-VISIT began last winter, Brazil retaliated by requiring Americans visiting that country to be fingerprinted and photographed. Hutchinson said he does not expect other countries will follow Brazil's example. He and other U.S. officials have been talking to their counterparts in the visa-waiver countries and told them their nations could be added to US-VISIT. None expressed strong reservations, he said. "Our allies, they will see this as a good security measure," he said. The visa-waiver countries are: Andorra, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brunei, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. " Hutchinson said he does not expect other countries will follow Brazil's example " hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha Yeah right............ BadaBing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JJsushi Posted April 4, 2004 Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 I have yet to see how all of this "extra security" will stop terrorism. The US knew who all the hijackers were prior to 9/11 and they knew where they were. Intelligence had files on all of these guys for years. How having more fingerprints and photos is going to prevent someone from committing an act of terrorism is beyond me. All of these extra little "enhancements" to existing laws and passing new laws just make life more troublesome for the masses. Lest we all forget it is easier to pass a law than repeal one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OCgringo Posted April 4, 2004 Author Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 my favorite quote "About 5 million people have been processed so far and more than 200 with prior or suspected criminal or immigration violations have been stopped, according to Homeland Security." It does not say if any of these 200 were on the suspected terrorist list , which was why they started this to begin with ! But now they have info on 5 million people to do with as they please, and millions more soon...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickfarang Posted April 4, 2004 Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 "...so far and more than 200 with prior or suspected criminal or immigration violations" According to this, they only stopped prior or __suspected__ criminal records. Only 200 our of 5 million? And how many of those poor souls were innocent of any wrong-doing and only victims of a bungling bureaucracy? "If it prevents terrorist attacks, isn't it all worthwhile?" I really doubt it would prevent a single terrorist attack. The things that would be effective are those that we don't see. Remember those 9/11 hijackers were in the U.S. legally, and those people cited as examples (the French and British citizens) probably would have been admitted under this program anyway. What concerns me is that the U.S. government will take it the next level, perhaps requiring visitors to notify immigration or a police station within 24 hours of changing their residence or hotel, or worse, having to go to a specific office every 90 days to report their address if they are in a large city (as opposed to doing it by mail), maybe even requiring large bank deposits with funds from out of the country in order to obtain visas over 90 days, submitting to health tests, and raiding night spots frequented by visitors and forcing them to take urine tests. Who would visit to the U.S. under those conditions? This Bozo has had his day. Time for a regime change in Washington. (No disrespect to a beloved clown intended). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadaBing Posted April 4, 2004 Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 Glad to see you have figured it out before our government has... BadaBing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadaBing Posted April 4, 2004 Report Share Posted April 4, 2004 rickfarang said:This Bozo has had his day. Time for a regime change in Washington. (No disrespect to a beloved clown intended). Uhh...IMOH...the time is right... BadaBing Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.