Air America breaking news: "USA to fingerprint ALL visitors !!!"

Alan Pollock wrote:

Seriously, driver's licenses are used as ID in the US.

Try to think. Figure it out. Oh wait. Nex



Which states take fingerprints for driver's licenses? I know first-hand
that Illinois and Oregon do not ...

gld

AJC wrote:

Exactly. The UK, Spain and other democracies have lived with terrorism
for many years. It is not always easy but it is important to keep a
balance between security and liberty. If you end up turning a country
in to a police state out of fear of terrorism, then the terrorists
have won.
--==++AJC++==--



I disagree with the former, since Al Qaeda and its sympathizers/imitators
are out to perpetuate a version of "total war" with mass casualties, versus
the "a few die, many watch" style of terrorism of the past 150 years or so.

But I do agree with the latter, sadly ... )-;

The effect is more pronounced when the self-declared leader of freedom
loses freedom, versus former aristocracies/monarchies/dictatorships who
evolve through democracy and increasing freedoms.

gld

"Gary L. Dare" wrote in message
...
nobody wrote:

Well technically, since health care workers are employed by the
government,
then it is true that government employees have access to your records :-)



Most countries fund health insurance, like the US does with Medicare, not
public HMO's like the UK National Health Service where employees are,
practically speaking, like civil servants. Even there, doctors can be
found
in independent offices taking some of their income contracting to NHS.

gld


You don't know much about the NHS, do you?

john wrote:

On 04 Apr 2004 20:00:19 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:


In "Marie Lewis"
wrote:


"Bert Hyman" wrote in message
. ..

In nobody wrote:


Your handgun serves only one purpose: to kill or seriously injur a

human.

Really? Do tell.


He has done so.

If you think he has, you're wrong.



Well, hymen, why don't you explain to us the purpose of your handgun.

Target practice.... I see a silhouette of a man...... (Wasn't that Queen?)

Gary

No fingerprints for Russia, but a passport photo with visa application.
EVERYBODY requires a visa application.

Not precisely true. Several ex-USSR states are visa free and the
Belarus-Russia border is as non-existent (in terms of immigration control)
as those within Schengen.

Eryk


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.593 / Virus Database: 376 - Release Date: 20/02/2004

Alan Pollock wrote:

In rec.travel.usa-canada Stephen Harding wrote:

I am coming around to absolutely despising Europeans, or
at least a fairly large subset of them!

My take is simply to not take the stupid, blanket-hatred posts too seriously.
Read the reasonable ones and completely ignore the Marie Lewis's you come
across.

The voice of reason!

You are correct of course. And I don't really even come close
to despising Europeans although their constant harping on how
evil the US is and especially Bush gets tiring.

Liberal in the US say pretty much the same thing about Bush as
the Euros do, so I guess it's actually more than a Euro/US thing,
and basically Left/Right politics.

As for the general tone of Anti-Americanism (which most will swear up and down
isn't the case), don't forget that it's a tender time for Euros at the moment.
If the US can be of help in their effort to combine, why not? Let them bitch
and moan. They're good at it. Been doing it for centuries against each other,
*and* other social classes within their own countries.

Where is all the tradition, all this pent-up cultural imperative to go now
that it's deemed uncool? Nex

Well the US and Europe are going their separate ways. I'm hoping
the divorce is a rapid one personally, and certainly better for
both I've come to believe.


SMH

Marie Lewis wrote:
"Stephen Harding" wrote in message

Marie Lewis wrote:

Why are you not concerned with government use of your passport
information as it is already defined? "They" have your name
and photograph and address.

I helped to elect my government. And they do NOT have my finger prints so
why should yours have them?

There are many policy differences between the US and Europe.
When you become an American citizen you can indeed ask that
question, and use your freedoms to promote your ideas of
what government should do. Until then, its an internal matter
for the US to decide. Tough luck for you.

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

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.

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

You're not concerned "they" might send the black helicopters
out for you? Or do the black helos only fly around American skies?

Never heard of the "black helicopters." Must be an American thing.

Or perhaps more successfully hidden by your own government?

The bottom line is this is an internal national policy decision
undertaken by a democratic form of government with a lot of
checks and balances built into the system to prevent abuse,

Ha!

I lay helpless at your feet, overcome by the power of your
reason, logic and intellect.

at least over the long run, and in a context of protecting our
citizens from horrific international terrorism.

Then why do other countries not need finger prints?

Perhaps because they aren't targets of terror the way the
US is? Every whacko prefers to go after number one, and
that would be the US.

The fact that your anti-Americanism leads you to believe the
US is some sort of banana republic where the evil President[tm]
enjoys removing personal freedoms from all is a problem of
your own prejudice and bigotry.

I hope and pray that most of your fellow countrymen have more sense than
you: and more discrimination.

Not even a response to my comment above. Did you even understand
it? No matter.

By all means, take your damn euros and spend them in a "better
place"!

We shall. Or visit Canada.

Canada, an excellent choice from my experience.

I don't have much sympathy for them.

Oh, how terrible!! We are *really* upset not to have your sympathy.
Not.

That's precisely the problem, and why such individuals
aren't regarded by me as any loss.

I am coming around to absolutely despising Europeans, or
at least a fairly large subset of them!

I'll take that as a compliment. Anyone or anything you hate must have
something good.

Another blast of your powerful sense of reason, logic and
intellect!

I tremble.


SMH

nobody wrote:

Your handgun serves only one purpose: to kill or seriously injur a human. Same
with machine guns. If you own such a deadly weapon for self defense, the fact
remains that if you must use the gun, it will be to either kill or severely
injur the person you believe is going to attack you. It is normal that a
government woudl want to verify your motives for the gun and also test your
ability to judge whether pulling the trigger is necessary or not.

I'll pass on the gun debate.

Suffice to say that because guns are of no interest to you
does not mean someone else can have a valid interest, and use
of them.

I find it interesting that you feel a deep background check
is OK for someone wishing to own a firearm, because "it's only
used for killing", yet fingerprinting someone coming into the
US, for anti-terrorist reasons (also an activity largely
defined as killing and injuring someone) seems to be a problem.

Or do you not have problems with the fingerprinting?

When a tourist enters the country, it isn't the fingerprints that are
important, it is what is in his luggage. Unless, of course, the deadly weapons
he will use to cause harm to your country are freely available in your country.

No, it's the terrorist himself that is important, thus the
need for effective identity recognition.

Please note that there have been plenty of terrorists in the USA, especially
the ones who go in a shooting rampage in schools etc. All done with "made in
the USA" all over (the person, the victims and the weapon).

Yes. So what?

The thing is that no matter how strick you become at airports, terrorists will
always find a way around. You cannot stop a determined terrorist. And there
are many terrorists you don't know about (like the guy who blew up the
Oklahoma city building).

Thus the reasons for increased security measures.

The real "war on terrorism" is stopping whatever a countrie does that
irritates people so much that they take to terror to fight back.
Unformtunatly, for short term politicians, the results of such a policy don't
come soon enough. But it is the only way to really stop it.

You mean appeasement? History doesn't show that technique
to be especially effective.


SMH

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 08:58:57 -0400, Stephen Harding
wrote:

Alan Pollock wrote:

In rec.travel.usa-canada Stephen Harding wrote:

I am coming around to absolutely despising Europeans, or
at least a fairly large subset of them!

My take is simply to not take the stupid, blanket-hatred posts too seriously.
Read the reasonable ones and completely ignore the Marie Lewis's you come
across.

The voice of reason!

You are correct of course. And I don't really even come close
to despising Europeans although their constant harping on how
evil the US is and especially Bush gets tiring.

Liberal in the US say pretty much the same thing about Bush as
the Euros do, so I guess it's actually more than a Euro/US thing,
and basically Left/Right politics.


That paragraph actually sums up the vast differences in the ways of
understanding things, not just between the US and Europe, but more the
US and much of the rest of the world. Liberalism is in no way
identifiable with left-wing politics, far from it. It is completely at
odds with any socialist/communist ideals. Ruling liberal political
parties in places as far apart as Europe and Australia are placed
firmly at the centre or centre-right of the political spectrum, with
labour, socialist and other left-wing groupings very much in
opposition to them.


--==++AJC++==--

john wrote:

On 04 Apr 2004 20:00:19 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

In "Marie Lewis"
wrote:

"Bert Hyman" wrote in message

In nobody wrote:

Your handgun serves only one purpose: to kill or seriously injur a
human.

Really? Do tell.

He has done so.

If you think he has, you're wrong.

Well, hymen, why don't you explain to us the purpose of your handgun.

The purpose of my guns were hunting, which I no
longer do, and "plinking", shooting cans or targets
and such.

I have no intention of shooting anyone. Massachusetts
law doesn't let you off the hook if you shoot someone
that has broken into your home. You are required to
leave the premises if escape is possible.

Only if escape is not possible, and you have good reasons
to believe your life, or the lives of persons in the
premises are in danger, is shooting a legally viable
option.

There is no doubt a "feeling" of being protected in
having a gun on premises, but for most persons, I'd be
very surprised if there is actual intent to shoot someone
breaking into their home or threatening their person.

In fact, the fast majority of gun incidents involve the
bad guy leaving the scene once a gun makes its appearance.
No shots fired at all!


SMH