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

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.

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.

You might be right if the world was driven only by political idealogies.
Unfortunately, we live in a global economy, like it or not, and it'll be a very
cold day in hell when US corporations divorce themselves from their
international trading partners. Don't hold your breath waiting for it to
happen, 'cause it's not going to happen any time soon.

George Z.


SMH

George Z. Bush wrote:

"Stephen Harding" wrote in message

Sjoerd wrote:

"Stephen Harding" schreef in bericht

One less anti-American Euro in line at the airport
is fine with me.

I am not an anti-American. I am an anti-American-current-government. And I
won't stay home, there are 100's of beautiful countries in the world to
discover where they won't fingerprint me. And should I miss typical American
stuff, I can always visit Canada. :-)

You may have just insulted some Canadians with that
comment ya know!

OTOH, they might just be flattered. Why don't we let the Canadians speak for
themselves....I'm sure they can handle it without our help.

Hey George, you're back!

Hope all is well and look forward to arguing
with you in the future!


SMH

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 01:24:31 -0700, "Gary L. Dare"
wrote:

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.


I agree that the nature of terrorism changed with the arrival of
suicide bombers targetting the mass general public, and I suppose that
started with Palestinian terrorists in Israel, or are there earlier
examples? That calls for new ways of dealing with the problem, but not
at the expense of dramatically altering our way of life, as the
terrorists want.



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


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

Peter Kemp wrote in
:

On Sun, 4 Apr 2004 21:49:08 +0000 (UTC), Jim Yanik
wrote:

.Sometimes,their
cells reside in your countries,in order to take advantage of Western
resources not available in their original countries.

Too true. Like the cell that was found in Buffalo, NY, or the one that
wasn't found that did so much damage in 2001 (several of whom lived
near me in Maryland).

Hey,they were not BORN there,they came *from some other country*,and may
have used YOUR country as a waypoint,maybe to get a better fake ID.

Any western nation can unknowingly harbour such cells. If you believe
the US is immune you really need to get out more.

Show me where I have said that.

The proposed fingerprint tacking scheme won't do anyhitng except help
*after* the next attack, unless you seriously believe that all the
prints are being checked at the desk (trust me, they won't be - the
data set is far too large), and that the prints required are even on
file.

---
Peter Kemp

Life is short - drink faster




--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

"tadaa" wrote in :

Truly free countries realize that police cannot be everywhere,and
protect everyone.They allow citizens the means to defend themselves
and their homes.
Why are you so concerned about criminals shot while committing a
crime,and not for the poor guy who suffered repeated burglaries?
What does "violent convictions" have to do with it?

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.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

In message , AJC
writes
On Sat, 03 Apr 2004 19:18:12 -0500, Peter Kemp
wrote:
For standard tourist visas you are correct, anyone holding one goes
through the process. I've got a different type of visa as I'm in the
US on UK government business. Which is exempt from the procedures (and
also means that I tend to spend less time at immigration even than US
citizens).

That surprises me. You must have a very special visa.

Not that special - mine's the same.

--
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

In message , "Gord
writes
"Marie Lewis" wrote:
Doesn't your military fingerprint it's members?...they do in
Canada...

I can be categoric that we didn't between 1989 and 1996 - and I've not
heard of it being introduced since then.

--
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

In message , Stephen Harding
writes
I have no intention of shooting anyone.

Agree fully with Stephen on this: back when I was a pistol shooter I
cheerfully massacred hordes of cardboard silhouettes with no intention
of finding live targets, and that applied to everyone I knew who shot:
we enjoyed socialising while turning live rounds into empty cases, and
trying to improve our grouping or our course times or both.

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.

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.


--
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

In message , Chad Irby
writes
In article ,
"Marie Lewis" wrote:
No they are not! They are from Europe and from your "ally" the UK, where
fingerprints denote one's being a suspected criminal.

...or defending your home from violent criminals gets you put in jail...

No, it doesn't... as long as the bad guys have the wounds in the front
rather than the back.

--
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

On Mon, 05 Apr 2004 09:24:14 -0400, Stephen Harding
wrote:

Until then, its an internal matter
for the US to decide. Tough luck for you.

That's kind of a good 19th century attitude...I think it's not really
valid anymore in our interconnected world where one country's policies
affect many other countries.