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

The Reids wrote:

Following up to Stephen Harding

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

f*** off out of travel europe then

A very fair point, although the wording needs some work.

Apologies to the group.


SMH

On 5 Apr 2004 18:16:06 GMT, Bert Hyman wrote:

(john) wrote in
:

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.

Sorry, I don't entertain idiots who use third-grade insults.


Oh, sorry for the typo, Bertie.

But please don't let that stop you from explaining to us the purpose
of your handgun.

Shooting the crims was a public service.

Well I think that Government should take more active role in this to
make
the country more secure so there is no need to arm everyone just in
case.

And they all realistically admit that they cannot and do not provide
individual protection for any citizen.The police cannot be everywhere at
all times.

So,practically speaking,you are on your own.It's just a matter of what
level of defensive weaponry your government allows you to have.

Note that the criminals are NOT likewise restricted.

I'm not proposing a bodyguard to every citizen. More in line of making the
society safer and tackling the source of the problem. Poverty, unemployment,
drugs etc.
If I lived in Baghdad I would definately get a firearm, but that should not
be the case in modern western country. If you really need firearms to defend
yourself there is something to be fixed.
The interesting thing is that crimerate has been going down for years (in
Finland) but people are feeling more and more unsecure, it seems that media
and its hunger for news with more and more gore is unsettling people.

Shooting the crims was a public service.

Well I think that Government should take more active role in this to
make
the country more secure so there is no need to arm everyone just in
case.

In other words, you want the government to be *more* obtrusive, not less.

So you must *support* the fingerprinting thing, then, right? It's a
great way for the government to catch criminals and terrorists...

Well yes and no. Governments shouldn't try to micromanage countries because
they are too diverse and full of conflicting interests to be handled
efficiently, but they should take action in larger terms. Kinda same that in
running a consolidated corporation.
Think how many crimes could be solved if movements of every USA citizens
would be registered, their DNA and fingerprints saved in to a government
file ready for police to use.

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.

Stephen,

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.

We 'can' do something and that is the end of the matter? Well, no actually.
There is also the rather more nuanced question of whether you 'should'. If
Blunkett suggests imposing similar measures on US visitors then I for one
will cast my vote to evict him at the next election. Imposing blanket
criminal measures on guests in order to protect British citizens is simply
not acceptable. For context, I was in London when Canary Wharf was blown up,
in Manchester when they bombed the Arndale and 3 miles from Warrington when
they bombed there. I've been a great deal closer to terrorist bombs in my
time than the vast majority of Americans. (BTW: Add Moscow to that list
....the Chechens bombed that while I was there).

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.

The IRA killed more people than the WTC incident, they just took longer to
do it .....perhaps because they were bankrolled out of Boston rather than
Riyadh.

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

We'll see if Reichsfuhrer Blunkett gets away with that. My previous comments
regarding my vote applies.

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 UK was a target or Irish terrorism for 30 years. Did we ever slap
draconian travel monitoring on Irish citizens? No. Why? Because it is not
justified when the vast majority of Irish people are totally innocent. Did
British civilians die as a consequence? Probably. That is the price you pay
for living in a free society. The safest city in Europe is Minsk. Why?
Because they still have the KGB there.

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

Following up to The Reids

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

f*** off out of travel europe then
--

sorry, that's excessively impolite, please go away.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Walk-Photo-Wasdale-Thames- Walk-eat-drink-London "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Eat-walk-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 03:07:25 GMT, Chad Irby wrote:

In article ,
Jim Yanik wrote:

Chad Irby wrote in
om:

Actually, while a lot of people try to claim that, very few trains are
that efficient. Most UK trains, for example, are *more* polluting, when
you take electrical generation and coal use into account.

I wonder how -they- handle the fly ash problem from burning coal?

"They" don't count. they're poor, and don't live in really huge cities.

Basically, that's the attitude of many folks in the world...

I assume "they" in this case is the UK? In which case we do more or
less what the US does with it's fly ash - use it in concrete, road
building, cement and so on. It's not rocket science to use inert
minerals.

Although what living in cities has to do with fly ash I'm not
sure......
---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster

Following up to Stephen Harding

A very fair point, although the wording needs some work.

fair point

Apologies to the group.

talk to you again in more favourable winds.
--
Mike Reid
"Art is the lie that reveals the truth" P.Picasso
Walk-Photo-Wasdale-Thames- Walk-eat-drink-London "http://www.fellwalk.co.uk" -- you can email us@ this site
Eat-walk-Spain "http://www.fell-walker.co.uk" -- dontuse@ all, it's a spamtrap

On Sun, 04 Apr 2004 01:31:21 GMT, "Gord Beaman" )
wrote:

"Marie Lewis" wrote:


In my country UK) fingerprints mean you are suspected of having committed a
crime.
That is why we object.

Doesn't your military fingerprint it's members?...they do in
Canada...

Yup, all UK military are fingerprinted and DNA'd, to aid in
identification should you snuff it in the line....

Speaking for myself though, I work for the UK government, carry a
clearence, and have neither been printed, nor polygraphed, unlike my
US colleagues, and if I have to give my prints to any government
without having been even accused of a crime, it'll be mine first. And
Mr. Blunkett will have to give a damn good reason for it.
---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster