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

In article ,
Peter Kemp wrote:

And in case you hadn't noticed, there's a difference in MY doctor
knowing my medical records and not being able to hand them to the
authorities without a court order (just like the US in fact), and a
government not my own wanting my prints in case I someday do
something naughty.

Too subtle for you?

No, just too paranoid for me.

And that's going some.

I'm still waiting for the Evil Things that you think the US could do
with your prints.

"Well, they could *keep* them! And file them! And... and... someone
could look them up some day and find out that I, er, had *fingerprints!"

....but having your passport number and address, travel dates, video
images (from all of those London video cameras), and the like is no big
deal, for some reason...

--
cirby at cfl.rr.com

Remember: Objects in rearview mirror may be hallucinations.
Slam on brakes accordingly.

Tracking people ***doing*** what ??? The real point is being evaded...

Who cares if a policeman observes you cross the street if you're not
jaywalking???

Tim K

"James Robinson" wrote in message
...
Chad Irby wrote:

James Robinson wrote:

"Big Brother" is not restricted to totalitarian regimes. Again,
being a
democracy, does it make it better that they take photos and
fingerprints
from everybody?

But I don't see you complaining about the *real* Big Brother problem
of
all of the security cameras in England...

I don't consider that a particular problem, since they aren't
automatically tracking my whereabouts. It is no worse than the
systems
already in place in the US. Have you looked at the ceiling in your
local Walmart to see how many cameras they have?

The problem I have with taking fingerprints is that they are
specifically using them to track people, and marry up to central
databases of info on what I read in libraries, who I send Emails to,
and
what I purchase with my credit card. That is a much more insidious
agenda than simply replacing the beat policeman's eyes with a camera.

Good idea. Let's all pass out assault weapons so the terrorists
can get
hold of them more easily. And don't register them, so you can't
find
them.

Another fool who thinks that outlawing and/or registering firearms
will
keep criminals and terrorists from getting them...

My intent was to expose the inconsistency in your argument. You have
no
problem with the government tracking peoples movements and maintaining
a
database on your activities, but complain about the simple
registration
of firearms, when you acknowledge that is a waste of time.

Stephen Harding wrote:

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.

Kind of like how the US left countries like Cuba, Iran, Honduras, Chile,
Argentina, Grenada, Egypt, and many others, to chart their own course
when they were democracies?

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 policies of the Bush government have only increased that likelihood,
by acting unilaterally, and in continuing the biased treatment of Arab
countries in the region. At one time the US had a moral standing in the
world that was envied. It was the belief that diplomacy was the most
important approach to a problem, and violence was only the last resort,
when all other peaceful avenues had been exhausted. The attack on Iraq
has eliminated that unique position, and lowered the US to the ranks of
other bullies around the world. It was so unnecessary, and it will take
many years to regain the confidence of the rest of the world.

Stephen Harding wrote:

Marie Lewis wrote:

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message

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.

Far more have been killed in Europe and over a longer period. Somehow, we
seem to be able n ot to get our knickers in such a twist as you, who thought
you were invulnerable.
I am sorry for those who lost loved ones: but I fear the over reaction is
both intrusive and useless in catching terrorists.

Crapola! No one had experienced a 9/11 scale event!

The Spanish were quite rightly traumatized by the 3/11
experience that killed "only" 200, and they have had
quite a bit of terrorist experience over the past 30
years.

Let's see. When you consider the 3/11 deaths as a proportion of the
Spanish population, you come pretty close to the ratio of 9/11 to the US
population. It might not be at the same total, but would have a similar
effect on the views of the population. 3/11 becomes their day of infamy.

Beyond that, how do you think the Iraqis feel about the multiple attacks
on their country by the US leaving thousands dead and raining missiles
around their homes? That would be pretty traumatic, wouldn't it?
There's nothing like a battle on home soil.

Your "long suffering Europe/what's the big deal USA"
line doesn't carry much weight with me.

Your insensitivity to the effects of two world wars on the European
landscape is pretty obvious. The US has led a charmed existence for the
last hundred years, with no major wars fought on its home soil. It's no
reason to denigrate the people who have survived such things.

"Tim Kroesen" schreef in bericht
link.net...
Perhaps those critical to Americans should just 'go away' too...

You still don't get it. Nobody here is "critical to Americans". Many of us
are "critical to the current US government". There is a huge difference
between the two, as 75% of Americans are not guilty of electing the Bush
gang.

Sjoerd

Sjoerd; there's a ring around your eye from using that tired old trick
spy glass again... Do I really need to cite all the posts that don't
meet your own America/American bashing distinction???

Bottom line people; if you don't like America, Americans, or even our
visitation policies; stay home or go somewhere else. You expect the
same conduct from American tourists. Would I object to being
photographed and fingerprinted to visit Amsterdam next month; of course
NOT. Netherlands have the same rights to know who crossed their borders
as America does and I damn well have nothing to hide.

Should I then subsequently be singled out for additional scrutiny as I
cross other European borders if my passport was stamped; possibly; but
that goes with traveling to a well known drug liberal country and
culture, now doesn't it...

Tim K

"Sjoerd" wrote in message
...

"Tim Kroesen" schreef in bericht
link.net...
Perhaps those critical to Americans should just 'go away' too...

You still don't get it. Nobody here is "critical to Americans". Many
of us
are "critical to the current US government". There is a huge
difference
between the two, as 75% of Americans are not guilty of electing the
Bush
gang.

Sjoerd

john wrote:

I don't believe that the CIA and FBI had hardly enough Arab
translators.



You don't have to believe, I've read that in the NYT, Washington Post,
Chicago Tribune, Daily Oregonian and heard it on CNN, FNC, MSNBC.

gld

In message , Jim Yanik
writes
"Paul J. Adam" wrote in
:
As a side note, in the UK "duty of retreat" doesn't apply in your home:
you're allowed to use whatever means are reasonable and necessary to
defend yourself if attacked there.

Yes,it's just the definition of "reasonable and necessary" that's
questionable,arbitrary,and vague.

....which is interpreted by a jury of your peers if necessary. It's
worked for the last seven hundred years or so (there's case law going
back to the 1300s). A basic rule of thumb is "hurt them until they run
away, then stop unless they turn back".

IMO,once they're in my home,they're a threat to my life.
You cannot consider it otherwise,there's always that possibility.

No problem: you just need to raise a reasonable doubt on those lines in
the minds of the jury. If Fred Barras had been shot in the chest then
Tony Martin would probably have been acquitted.

--
When you have to kill a man, it costs nothing to be polite.
W S Churchill

Paul J. Adam MainBoxatjrwlynch[dot]demon{dot}co(.)uk

nobody wrote:

It was announced that the guy arrested in Canada was allegedly arrested based
solely on some USA NSA intercepts in the middle east that did not involve him.
(i.e. absolutely no evidence).



I haven't seen an update on this story on cbc.ca/news or globeandmail.ca
since the weekend.

Sounds like somebody had the same name as a criminal ... I read in the
NYT a year ago
about a Canadian man from Montreal, age 55, barred from a niece's
wedding in the US
because he had the same name as a 29 year old convicted car thief from
Vancouver, BC!
And he had a very common name, Ben Harrison or something like that.

To me, this is in the same league as the famous "intelligence" that forced
calcellation of AF and BA flights because of 5 year olds having the wrong name.



And a Welsh insurance agent, and a naturalized French citizen, elderly
woman,
who owns Chinese restaurants in her adopted country.

On top of that, an Indian CEO who booked a frequent flier seat to retain
his points;
his first and middle name, Abdul Haq, is similar to a Taliban figure who
was part of
a 55 person jail break in Kandahar last autumn.

gld

"Peter Kemp" wrote in message
...
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


Hurrah! Well said.