Stephen Harding wrote:
Since you missed it, the reason for the fingerprinting is to
enhance national security. You know, that 9/11 thing.

It gives the illusion of enhancing security. Secondly, and more importantly
GET OVER IT. 9-11 was many years ago. Yeah, 3000 were killed that day and it
was a calamity. You should remember the human suffering and awfull images of
the day instead of focusing on revenge.

Secondly, when you look at Irak, the USA invaded the country illegally (UN
definitions are very clear: there are only 2 valid reasons to attack another
country: if it attacks you, or if there is a UN security council resolution
granting you the right to invade that country.) Neither of those happened so
the USA invaded it illegally.

In doing so, the USA has not only added about 700 americans to the number of
dead as a result of 9-11, but also killed about 10,000 Irakis during the war.

How many more will need to die before your need for revenge is fulfilled ?


And you
might as well get used to the idea too. Biometric passports
are on the way, as soon as some kind of biometric standard can
be agreed upon. Fingerprints, retinal scans, DNA, whatever.

The keyword here is "can be agreed upon". As soon as the fear mongering Bush
regime is ousted within the next 4 years, it is far more likely that some
system garanteeing data security could be agreed upon. (for instance, your
prints are not in passport but rather in your home country, and the receiving
country would send your information to your home country for verification and
would only get "YES" or "NO" with a garantee that the receiving country will
NOT hold your biometric information.

The same way that merchants who accept EFTPOS transactions are garanteed not
to hold/capture your PIN number.

I realize 3000 people, largely Americans, killed in a terror
incident probably doesn't effect you too much, but we consider
it a rather traumatic event here.

Why then do you consider not dramatic that your own government has illegally
invaded another country unnecessarily ("we told you so") and has killed about
700 of your won citizens unnecessarily, as well as ten thousands innocent
Irakis ?

Al Queda made no pretentions about being a civilised organisation. The USA
pretends to be civilised. It must be held to higher standards than Al Queda.

Isn't the UK supposed to start issuing national ID cards soon?
You must be in a tizzy!

There is nothing wrong with a national ID card. A government already has all
that information on you. But you are protected as a citizen of the country
that holds your information. You are not protected if that information is sent
to some foreign antion that has no data privacy laws.

Example: if to launch a nuclear missile, a general must put his thumb on a
reader, do you think that he will agree to have his prints taken when he
travels to a foreign country for vacation ?

Perhaps because they aren't targets of terror the way the
US is?

Ever wondered WHY you are such a target ? Hint, it isn't because you aren't
muslim, as your media like to make you think.