US fingerprinting and photographing visitors

[Dob]

On CNN (www.cnn.com) for the whole story.

But I was reading a [url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/3368839.stm]BBC[url] board and was amazed at how this new policy has angered so many people. What excactly is the US doing wrong here? I read alot of people screaming about human rights, but im not sure where the right to visit another country is guranteed by anything!

Personally I see no problem with this at all. If I was to visit Brazil and they did this to me...so? Im the guest, if you want to picture and fingerprint me to protect your citizens, knock yourself out. I have nothing to hide. If I dont like how you treat me, I just wont come back.

Does anyone think this new policy will seriously effect the US tourist industry? Or is this just another excuse for more US bashing??

[gluteus maximus]

If your country is on this list, you're not a terrorist.

EXEMPT COUNTRIES

Andorra, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brunei, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom (for citizens with the unrestricted right of permanent abode in England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, Channel Islands and Isle of Man)

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Guess the Axis of Evil is bigger than we were previously told.

I think the whole program of fingerprinting and photographing at ports of entry is just more scaremongering and another "reason" to appropriate more redundant funding for the USDHS that won't make anyone safer from terrorism. Who seriously believes they can effectively scan and screen the numbers (28 million/year) they're talking about?

[Duck Duck Goose]

Guess the Axis of Evil is bigger than we were previously told. Amen to that. :rolleyes: I mean, all of Latin and Central America? En masse?

Africa, ditto?

And the Caribbean? Jamaica? The British Virgin Islands?

No exceptions? They're just all collectively a bunch of gun-totin' Yank-hatin' hotbeds of terrorism?

Oy. :rolleyes:

And I notice Canada's not exempt--what's up with that?



One more vote here for "justify our phony-baloney jobs" scaremongering.

[Avenger]

Inkless fingerprints will be taken and checked instantly against a digital database for criminal backgrounds and any terrorist lists.

So the system kinda relies on all the terrorists and potential terrorists of the world volunteering their fingerprints for the "arrest me now" database? :rolleyes:

[Dob]

Who seriously believes they can effectively scan and screen the numbers (28 million/year) they're talking about?

Well from the CNN article they say this should only effect around 5million VISA visitors a year. Which while a large number is more manageable than 28million.

[absoul]

Baby steps.
From the linked article Ridge said "first significant step in a series of steps".

It's not like someday they'll say "We've won the war on terror! We no longer need to fingerprint anyone!" or "Our databases have too much information on incoming visitors. It's a shame we threw that much money at a system that was so easy to work around".

/half-hearted joke/ Can I just sign up for my serial number tattoo and tracking implant now? /half-hearted joke/

[Rashak Mani]

Well ... I'm a Brazilian and we certainly don't like to be labeled as "terrorist possible". Though why Brunei and Singapore are free is beyond me. So we now smudge american fingers with ink. (yep we don't have homeland security budgets it seems... )

Once more it stinks of bad diplomacy...

As for fighting terrorism it won't do much. Naturally a terrorist might come to Brazil and apply for Brazilian citizenship to try and get into the US. If the US had his fingerprints beforehand it would help... don't think they will. Unless they have some crazy image ID software.

Overall it seems like a nice way to avoid illegal immigration. Which the US has the right to monitor... they just don't need to label it homeland security.

[Rashak Mani]

ooppsss... need I mention the big threat from British Muslims ? Reid guy with the bomb shoe was british...

[yojimbo]

I don't see it as insulting or against people's rights. I just see it as stupid and useless.

The guys that organised an action like 9/11 were a lot of things but they weren't stupid. There are a lot of angry fundamentalist Muslims in Europe who won't be hindered by these checks. Also passports are probably not too hard to get for the enterprising and well funded terrorist.

It will use up valuable resources and still leave huge gaps. For it to possibly have any real meaning it would need to be a 100% affair.

It's BS window dressing IMO. Keep the people feeling that's something’s being done while keeping them on their toes as to the ongoing need for support for the "War of Terror"tm

[Bippy the Beardless]

Isn't there good sense in fingerprinting and photographing everyone who passes an international border anywhere? The requirement for Passports means that people don't have the right to cross boarders annonymously anyway, so this is just an increase in allready existing security. I don't though believe the data collection should be limited to travellers from only a subset of countries, though.

[milroyj]

Originally posted by Rashak Mani
Well ... I'm a Brazilian and we certainly don't like to be labeled as "terrorist possible". Though why Brunei and Singapore are free is beyond me. So we now smudge american fingers with ink. (yep we don't have homeland security budgets it seems... )

Once more it stinks of bad diplomacy...

So it's bad diplomacy if the U.S. does it, but OK if Brazil does it in retaliation?

[sailor]

Of course, only those arriving by airplane are fingerprinted and not those arriving by car because *everybody* knows terrorists would never arrive by car.

I'm with yojimbo on this, it is mostly a waste of money and resources which could be better employed elsewhere.

[Rashak Mani]

Originally posted by milroyj
So it's bad diplomacy if the U.S. does it, but OK if Brazil does it in retaliation?

Its called retaliation for a reason isn't it ? I'd rather we didn't have something to retaliate against... duh ?

[GorillaMan]

You can bet anyone arriving on a cruise ship will escape this watertight security control, too. Cause no terrorists travel in style, apart from the business-class highjackers of 9/11....

[sailor]

Originally posted by milroyj
So it's bad diplomacy if the U.S. does it, but OK if Brazil does it in retaliation? Reciprocity is often used in international relations and countries often do grant exemptions or impose duties on this account. When the USA raises its visa fees for foreign nationals many countries will immediately raise their fees for Americans. The USA also does the same thing with a number of things like exemptions for diplomats.

Personally I think it is a good thing because it makes people be consistent. I should not complain of being fingerprinted when I go abroad and yet demand others be fingerprinted when they come to my country. The truth is that if any other country had started doing this other than the USA they would be roundly criticized in America. If 15 or 20 years ago China or the USSR were doing this the US government would hold it as an example of government control etc.

[El_Kabong]

Does anyone think this new policy will seriously effect the US tourist industry? Or is this just another excuse for more US bashing??

After reading the linked article,
this one (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3875747/), and particularly this one (ttp://www.siliconvalley.com/mld/mercurynews/news/world/7443155.htm?template=contentModules/printstory.jsp), I made a couple of back-of-the-napkin calculations:

a) adding "10-15 seconds to the average one-minute processing time for each visitor" (CBP quote) will add about an hour and a quarter to the total processing time for a flight with 200 passengers. I note that Mexico and Canada are not listed as exempt, so unless informed otherwise, I'm assuming this would hold for overland entry points as well.

Actual delays will of course vary depending on how many customs officials are on duty. I am not overly optimistic, as I've read several press reports concerning a shortage of qualified inspection personnel, and a few recent horror stories, which I can't seem to find at the moment, of passengers from arriving flights enduring hours-long delays without being allowed to use the toilets or even sit down.

b) the MSNBC article mentions that false hits in testing have been less than 0.1 percent. Admirable, but that would still mean that out of every one million visitors processed, up to 1,000 may be misidentified as potential risks. Thus at least several thousand innocent visitors per year are pretty much guaranteed to be refused entry for incorrect reasons. I also expect that they will be treated rather harshly due to a common belief that "it's a computerized database, it can't be wrong" . I've twice been interrogated, once rudely and once not, upon entry into the US (and I'm a citizen) because of an incorrect notation in the CBP's database that my passport had been reported stolen, and there seems to be no mechanism in place to correct the erroneous information.

My conclusion: the new measures cannot help but have a negative effect on at least some visitors' perceptions of the US.

[pothead]

How does fingerprinting and photographing help? Does the U.S. have a database of every known terrorist? Wouldn't anyone who they've managed to fingerprint/photohgraph already be in good ol' Guantanamo Bay? I predict a lot of false-postives if the U.S. uses data from much of the rest of the world which doesn't have the necessary technology to have captured sufficiently accurate fingerprints.

[Rashak Mani]

Who is the main supplier of the machines being used ?

[manhattan]

Originally posted by Duck Duck Goose
And I notice Canada's not exempt--what's up with that? Canadians do not generally need a visa to enter the United States at all.

Here's the thing. Some folks in this forum will remember the complaints about the existing terror list -- people with same or similar names were being harrassed, transcription errors recently led to flight delays, etc. This program will, over time, reduce that problem while more specifically identifying undesirables. Will it catch everyone? Of course it won't. It's just a step in a process.

[milroyj]

Originally posted by Rashak Mani
Its called retaliation for a reason isn't it ? I'd rather we didn't have something to retaliate against...

But mommy, he hit me first, wah! :rolleyes:

[Rashak Mani]

But mommy, they hit us in the WTC ! Wah !

[SnoopyFan]

I'm wondering why the hell FRANCE of all places is exempt, much less the other 27 countries on the exempt list? France?

Didn't the US just basically give the terrorists relocation ideas?

If they're gonna do this they need to go all out and fingerprint everyone coming from another country.

[manhattan]

Originally posted by El_Kabong
[B] b) the MSNBC article mentions that false hits in testing have been less than 0.1 percent. Admirable, but that would still mean that out of every one million visitors processed, up to 1,000 may be misidentified as potential risks. Thus at least several thousand innocent visitors per year are pretty much guaranteed to be refused entry for incorrect reasons. Huh. Someone has something wrong. The New York Times article on the same subject (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/05/national/05CND-SECU.html?hp) indicates that total hits were in the .1% range -- false hits would presumably be a subset of this. Clearly, more data is needed here, or at least a better-written article by someone somewhere.

I also expect that they will be treated rather harshly due to a common belief that "it's a computerized database, it can't be wrong" . I've twice been interrogated, once rudely and once not, upon entry into the US (and I'm a citizen) because of an incorrect notation in the CBP's database that my passport had been reported stolen, and there seems to be no mechanism in place to correct the erroneous information. No question about that. U.S. customs agents are noted worldwide for their rudeness (well, customs agents just about everywhere are, but ours are bad even by those standards). Like people who rely on databases everywhere, they need better training. But do my cellphone provider first. ;)

[sailor]

Originally posted by milroyj
But mommy, he hit me first, wah! :rolleyes: As I said, many countries, including the USA, routinely use reciprocity as a basis for how they treat citizens of other countries. It is a very traditional thing in international relations and the USA does it like everybody else. Now, do you believe it is wrong when the USA does it? It so, why so?

[London_Calling]

I've got my Pit thread all drafted . . but maybe this will suffice.

I am not partaking in this infringement of (what I consider to be) my civil liberties. The neo-cons and their political gestures can shove it and, when it kicks in for Europeans, I shall take my spending power elsewhere until this idiocy is rectified.

Show me one example of how this aids security and I'll reconsider. Here's a challenge for anyone:

How would this policy have prevented 9/11 or any other acts of suicidal-type 'terrorism' ?

It actually reminds me of the Bo USA ! steel tariffs Bush imposed and had to back down from. As then, I await the Law of Unintentional Consequences with some interest.

So, unless otherwise proven, for me it's just another trip to downtown Wankerville with the NeoCon Bus Co.

I rather like the idea of Brazil . . . maybe Cuba . . .

[Rashak Mani]

You guys should see the questions asked in the US VISA application paper... its RIDICULOUS. Questions like:

"Have you ever been part of Genocide ?"
"Do you have the intention of doing something illegal/sell drugs?"

I need to get one and put the full list... so many stupid questions. Must have gotten worse since 9/11 of course.

[Dog80]

EXEMPT COUNTRIES

Andorra, Austria, Australia, Belgium, Brunei, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Liechtenstein, Luxembourg, Monaco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, San Marino, Singapore, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland and the United Kingdom (for citizens with the unrestricted right of permanent abode in England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, Channel Islands and Isle of Man)

Source: U.S. Department of Homeland Security


Is this list correct? I notice that my home country, Greece, is not included.

This is strange! Last time I checked, Greece was a member of EU and NATO.

[manhattan]

Correct, dog. What the countries on the list have in common isn't EU or NATO membership or even status as a US ally (although that is part of the consideration -- see below). What they have in common is membership in the Visa Waiver Program (requirements here (http://travel.state.gov/how_a_country_qualifies.html)).

Interestingly, the United States would probably not qualify under the VWP, as it is too easy to get citizenship here. Without further information, I'd WAG that's the same thing that tripped up your homeland -- you let too many non-Greeks in! Or it could be something as simple as Greece doesn't have in place a machine-readable passport program. Dunno.

[sailor]

This will have unintended consequences indeed. It already has. the policy was anounced some months ago and was not very clear so, even before it was required, I already know one family who changed their plans to visit NYC and they went to Argentina instead. They were not required then and are not required now to get fingerprints or anything else but the whole conused way in which the US government announced the requirement for machine-readable passports, biometrics, etc, made them think it might be risky to buy tickets to the US and find out at the last moment they were missing some crucial form or blessing. So they went to Argentina.

The USA earns millions of dollars every year from foreign tourism and that sector will probably be hit hard.

I already read an article that enrollment of foreign students in American Universities has declined steeply and they have increased just as steeply in the UK, Australia and other countries. These students pay full tuition and provide much needed support for the colleges they attend and help keep tition lower for American students.

As I say, it is not only the measures themselves but also how clumsily they have been implemented. When the world sees photos of parents or children crying because their family members were being expelled or jailed for some minor bureacratic glitch (which often is to be blamed on the government), when the world sees photos of families fleeing the USA to Canada, on foot, at night, in the winter snow because of the scare that people were being jailed for not registering and not being able to register... well, these things do not even register with most Americans but they register with the communities where those people come from.

I believe these measures are costing and will cost the USA a lot of money and a lot of enmity and that the benefits in no way justify those costs.

[Rashak Mani]

Greece was notorious for lax security... ?

[labmonkey]

Originally posted by Rashak Mani
But mommy, they hit us in the WTC ! Wah !


Oooh, and yet sooo concerned about the trampling of the poor visitors' rights, you're a real humanist, champ :rolleyes:

This initiative is misguided, true, but not really something to get all weepy over. Akin to the US's efforts to thwart drug traffickers at the borders or mandated waiting periods for gun buyers, the effect is most likely to be felt by regular people and those it is intended to target will easily find means to circumvent it. But then again, you already need a passport with a picture ID to go most anywhere, and swiping your thumb over an electronic device dosen't seem all that traumatic, its not like they're asking for blood and urine samples.. nothing nefarious, really, just kinda useless. So hey, lets hear some better ways to spend the money, I'm no security expert, but there's gotta be some...

[milroyj]

Originally posted by Rashak Mani
But mommy, they hit us in the WTC ! Wah !

Comparing mass murder to having one's fingerprint scanned at the airport is a joke, right? Nevertheless, it's in extremely poor taste.

[2Thick]

Originally posted by Rashak Mani
But mommy, they hit us in the WTC ! Wah !

milroyj = Owned

[mhendo]

Originally posted by sailor
Personally I think it is a good thing because it makes people be consistent. I should not complain of being fingerprinted when I go abroad and yet demand others be fingerprinted when they come to my country. The truth is that if any other country had started doing this other than the USA they would be roundly criticized in America. If 15 or 20 years ago China or the USSR were doing this the US government would hold it as an example of government control etc. Admirable sentiment, sailor. And, as you rightly point out, reciprocity is a key feature of international diplomacy. It is most obvious in areas such as trade--where Country A opens its borders to Country B, and Country B gives equal treatment to Country B--but is common in many other areas as well.

The babies at the US Embassy in Brazil, however, do not share your sentiments (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/06/1073268024215.html).The United States today expressed "regret" at Brazil's decision to begin fingerprinting and photographing Americans in response to similar border security measures introduced by Washington.

"While we acknowledge Brazil's sovereign right to determine the requirements for entry into Brazil, we regret the way in which new procedures have suddenly been put in place that single out US citizens for exceptional treatment that has meant lengthy delays in processing, such as the case today with a more than nine hour delay for some US citizens arriving at Rio's international airport," the US embassy said in a statement.Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaah! Some Americans might be subjected to a few delays. The injustice of it all.

What these dunces, and people like milroyj, fail to realise is that reciprocity in international relations merely means treating another country in the same way that they treat you. The boobs at the embassy can complain all they like about how the US policy is a well-though-out program tied to visa requiremments, while the Brazilian policy is just a single retaliatory measure, but it is not the Brazilian government's responsibility to worry about how America treats the citizens of other countries. All the Brazilian government need to be concerned about is how America treats Brazilians, and it has every right to treat Americans the same way. Why should Brazil start fingerprinting citizens of Australia, or Germany, or Kenya, if those countries don't fingerprint Brazilians?

Tit-for-tat measures aside, however, my biggest gripe with the US policy is that it seems extremely unlikely to yield much in the way of concrete results. As people have already pointed out, passports themselves act as security devices. Also, the fact that a visitor can be photographed and fingerprinted upon arrival hardly hinders at all his or her ability to commit an act of terrorism, particularly if it is a suicide mission.

Just imagine this program had been in place four years ago. Would it have prevented 9/11? IIRC most (all? i think a couple of visas had expired) of the hijackers were in the US legally, and having their photos and fingerprints wouldn't have changed that. Nor would it have prevented them from getting on those planes that day, box-cutters and all.

Personally, i think the whole program needs to be added to the list in this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=170838).

[Rashak Mani]

If the US had announced the measure was to curb illegal immigrants I don't think anyone would have complained much. There are loads of illegal Brazilians in the US... no terrorists though.

I doubt they would get enough budget for such a nice high tech system if they didn't say "terrorism".

As for the americans being fingerprinted in Rio and Sao Paulo... I am sorry for them. The measure was enacted right after the new year and I bet they are scrambling to get enough federal policemen back from their vacations to fotograph americans. The lines are getting very long... they should suspend the measure until procedures are truly ready.

They would be better served by handing out pamplets explaining to these good american tourists how Brazilians are being handled by US airport security. A few of my countrymen have been sent back without any explanations even when they had valid VISAS... some have been kept overnight in jail cells for no valid reason. I suppose Airport Security must fill a Quota of "suspects".

[Starbury]

Originally posted by sailor
Of course, only those arriving by airplane are fingerprinted and not those arriving by car because *everybody* knows terrorists would never arrive by car.


I believe that the plan is to implement fingerprinting at land borders by 2005.

[Aldebaran]

You people don't understand. It is to encourage us to visit the USA. They store pics and fingerprints to surprise us with gifts when celebrating your:

100the visit : a cup with US flag (I know glasses are prettier to decorate, but in this case by some miracle they reflect in time on certain sensitivities of Muslim visitors regarding the link alcohol --> glass)

200the visit : a free drink at the VIPs lounge of the airport if you have your cup with you. Alcohol hidden from your sight if you happen to be Muslim. If in this case you arrival falls in daylight during Ramadan you may wait for nightfall to come.

300the visit : same free drink using your cup, and a sticker with US flag to put on your luggage (yes, for every -forcibly opened- suitcase you have with you that day)

400the visit : free drink using your cup, a booklet full of luggage stickers no matter how many suitcases you have seen coming back open, and a watch with US flag as background for the figures.

500the visit : free drink using your cup, a booklet stickers, a US flag watch, and they don’t ask you if you plan to overstay your visa, since they are now about sure you shall come back anyway, visa OK or not.

600the visit : free drink in your cup, booklet stickers, US flag watch, no question about plans to overstay your visa, they forcibly open only one of your suitcases and you get it back sealed with tape printed with little US flags.

700the visit : free drink in your cup - now already a bit worn-out – booklet stickers, US flag watch, no questions about overstaying your visa, all your suitcases open yet decoratively and inviting sealed with US flag printed tape, a free drive to your hotel of choice in a car with waving US flags at the front.

800the visit : replacement of your US flag cup and a free drink in it, booklet US flag stickers, US flag watch that is upgraded to a Rolex imitation Made in Thailand, no questions about plans to overstay your visa, suitcases open after they asked you the keys and the US flag printed tape to seal them placed inside them for in case you loose your keys, free drive to hotel in US flags decorated car, Mobile phone with US flag decorated cover coming with the assurance that they don’t tape your calls done with it.

900the visit : free drink in relatively new US flag cup, booklet stickers, US flag Imitation Rolex Made in Thailand watch, no questions about visa-overstay-plans, suitcases open with key and US flag printed tape as gift in case you loose your keys, free drive to hotel in car with US flags waving and roof painted in US flag, US flag decorated Mobile Phone with free non taped calls for as long as you stay while non transgressing your visa, invitation from all US TV channels to come and explain how wonderful your stays in the USA are.

1000the visit : All gifts coming with the 900the visit and the assurance that the greatest gift of all is waiting for you when you leave for home.

You leave for home ending your 1000the visit to the USA :

You get blindfolded and feel the welcoming wind on the tarmac when going outside, tension builds up since a band starts playing the US national hymn, you feel the spotlights of all the invited US TV channels and wonder if they are going to execute you in public Taliban-style.
Then they take away the US flag printed blindfolding towel, the sun shines in your eyes and you can’t see clearly what happens there.
Yet all of a sudden you see it: your plane is decorated with a huge Stars and Stripes that completely covers it, the way to it is one big US flag, the staircase all Stars and Stripes, the band plays, the crowd cheers and applaud while waving uncountable little US flags while you approach a perfectly liking double of the President of the USA to accept from his hands the greatest gift of all :

A real, genuine, colourful, blinding, US made US flag.

You burst in tears and are still crying when you come home with your treasure.


That and nothing else is the reason behind this entire photo taking and fingerprinting.
People always want to see something bad whenever the US does something. You should be ashamed.

Salaam. A

[Duck Duck Goose]

Originally posted by manhattan
Canadians do not generally need a visa to enter the United States at all. Well, yeah, good point, except for... (http://travel.state.gov/tcn.html)
Citizens of Canada do not require a visa, except as described below.

Canadian citizens travelling to the US for these purposes require nonimmigrant visas:

- foreign government officials (A);
- officials and employees of international organizations (G),;
- NATO officials, representatives and employees if s if they are being assigned to the U.S. (as opposed to an official trip).
- treaty traders (E-1) ;
- treaty investors (E-2);
- fiance/es (K-1);
- children of fiancees (K-2);
- U.S. citizen's foreign citizen spouse, who is traveling to the U.S. to complete the process of immigration (K-3);
- children of a foreign citizen spouse (K-4) described above;
- spouses of lawful permanent residents (V-1) traveling to the U.S. to reside here while they wait for the final completion of their immigration process.
- children of spouses of lawful permanent residents (V-2) described above. ...I'm looking forward to hearing stories about outraged Canuck Suits being fingerprinted at the border... :D

Not to mention all those outraged Hubbies..."They treated me like a terrorist!" etc.

[labmonkey]

Originally posted by sailor
The truth is that if any other country had started doing this other than the USA they would be roundly criticized in America. If 15 or 20 years ago China or the USSR were doing this the US government would hold it as an example of government control etc.

Conjecture and speculation. My understanding is that the borders of Soviet bloc countries were tightly controlled. Comparing a snapshot and some fingerprints to being shot on your way over the barbedwire in Berlin is kind of a stretch, don't ya think? I don't remember hearing this much whining about Chinese and Soviet border controls among the genpop in the states, but hey maybe you remember better than me. The truth is whenever you travel outside your own country you are no longer a citizen and do not have the same or perhaps any protections, I know this from first hand experience. I was detained at the Canadian border for 3 hours, interrogated and had my car pulled apart (left that way) because a friend riding with me had a previous marijauna possesion charge. We were then fingerprinted and sent back across the bridge, all starting because the border gaurd didn't like how we looked. But hey, it's their country and they don't have to grant me anything.


Alde , too hilarious, but could you do me a favor and not make me wait so long for the punchline next time, the anticipation almost made me wet myself.

Shalom;j

[scr4]

Originally posted by gluteus maximus
If your country is on this list, you're not a terrorist.
<snip>
Not exactly. As explained in this BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3367893.stm), only people taking advantage of the Visa Waiver Program are exempt from the fingerprint/photo process. People who have pre-issued visas (work visa, student visa, etc.) are photographed and fingerprinted regardless of where they are from.

The next time I enter the US I will be carrying a work visa, so I too will be fingerprinted and photographed.

[5cents]

Originally posted by Rashak Mani
You guys should see the questions asked in the US VISA application paper... its RIDICULOUS. Questions like:

"Have you ever been part of Genocide ?"
"Do you have the intention of doing something illegal/sell drugs?"

I need to get one and put the full list... so many stupid questions. Must have gotten worse since 9/11 of course.

Visitor visa application (see page 2): http://travel.state.gov/DS-0156.pdf
Immigrant visa application (see page 6): http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/files/i-485.pdf
naturalization application (see pages 6 through 9, but especially 7 and 8): http://uscis.gov/graphics/formsfee/forms/files/N-400.pdf

There are some legitimate questions, but there are a bunch of ridiculous ones, too. Even the legitimate questions are a bit silly - if somebody lies and checks "no", its up to the US to figure out that they lied. Why bother asking in the first place if your going to have to do a background check anyway? It's hard to pick out the most ridiculous, but this is a start (taken from the Immigrant visa application):

Have you ever, in or outside the US, knowingly committed any crime of moral turpitude or a drug-related offense for which you have not been arrested?

So let me get this straight. You smoked a joint or two when you were at college, nobody (except a few friends) saw anything, and now the US is asking you to admit to it?

Have you ever within the past 10 years been a prostitute or procured anyone for prostitution, or intend to engage in such activities in the future?

You know, I just want to be a programmer, but if that doesn't work out, I think I'll sell my body.

Do you intend to engage in the US in espionage?

OK, so Outer Mongolia is sending a spy to the US. He sees this question, answers yes, and is caught.

Do you intend to practice polygamy in the US?

I not only plan to practice it, I plan to perfect it!

[Aldebaran]

Originally posted by 5cents
I not only plan to practice it, I plan to perfect it!

Wrong answer.

You must say:

This is how I plan to perfect it.
I intend to get a few mistresses, which is a lot easier and above that: a lot cheaper.


Salaam. A

[Rashak Mani]

Thanks 5cents... these questions are hilarious... my favorite though is:

"Do you seek to enter the US to engage in export control violations, subversive or terrorist activities, or any other unlawful purpose ? Are you a member or representative of a terrorist organization as currently designated by the US Secretary of State ? Have you ever participated in persecutions directed by the Nazi Government of Germany; or have you ever participated in genocide ?"

Like someone will bring their Al Qaeda Cub Scout member Card... or some old time Nazi officer is still alive. Or does being part of the Hitler Boy Scouts and shouting at jews count as being part ?

[Aldebaran]

Rashak,

Probably those who made up these forms believe that the whole world is completely honest and completely idiotic at that?

Say for yourself: How can you have the heart to lie when you see such naïvity spread all over such forms? You must be a real criminal if you can do that.

Salaam. A

[Mehitabel]

Dudes. Al Capone went down for tax evasion.

Of course, nobody expects the terrorists to fill out these forms truthfully. That's not the point. It's so when they do get caught doing something wrong, they can add an additional charge to the indictment of lying to an agent or something--and they'd have clear written proof.

[gum]

::yawn What's the big deal? Why not fingerprint just in case?

Yep, it will take longer, but I've been through customs at airports where they didn't check anything at all and I still had to wait for 14 hours.

Yep, it will cost a lot of money, but it'll create some jobs. :: rolling eyes::

Rashak Mani: But mommy they hit us in the WTC! wah! Was a pretty goddamn awful thing to say.

btw: Why isn't Vatican City on the list? You think the pope might have bombs under his skirt?

[Mehitabel]

But mommy they hit us in the WTC! wah!

Careful, this verges on Being a Jerk IMO. I don't think you fully understand what effect 9/11 had on us. I'll stop before I violate the new sticky.

Naw, the Pope's spoken out against the war AND the terrorism. It's like he can't make up his mind! :D

[Aldebaran]

Mehitabel,

Suicidal terrorists don't mind for "additional proof" about anything because they intend not to get "caught" alive.
And if they do get arrested before dying a Glorious Heroic Death, then I guess there are a lot of other charges to be made against them. And if they are not guilty of those, they automatically can't be charged for "lying on the Visa form".

Why can't you just admit that those questions must be invented by some lunatics who seem to be convinced that the whole world outside the USA is retarded.

Salaam. A

[gum]

Ummm, mehitabel, was your first remark addressed to me? I had a friend who died at the WTC.

[labmonkey]

Alde,will you be going out in a blaze of Glorious Heroic Death, or do you just admire the fucking deluded losers who do?

Salami. B

[Avenger]

Originally posted by Mehitabel
Dudes. Al Capone went down for tax evasion.

Of course, nobody expects the terrorists to fill out these forms truthfully. That's not the point. It's so when they do get caught doing something wrong, they can add an additional charge to the indictment of lying to an agent or something--and they'd have clear written proof.

Finally someone explains it. It's so that when 'the terrorists' murder a bunch of people, they can be charged with lying on their immigration form! Now it all makes sense!:D

labmonkey , has Aldebaran done something to offend you?

[labmonkey]

Originally posted by Avenger
labmonkey , has Aldebaran done something to offend you? [/B]

He is actually the only person I have ever pitted on these boards. Maybe its just me(however seeing the number of times he's been pitted I tend to believe otherwise), but I usually find his posts so neurotically anti-American and reactionary(and trust me, I am no flag-waving Bushite) that he often makes no sense. He bogs down what would otherwise be healthy debates into silly bashing of US'ers(his favourite term)...I understand he can say whatever he wants, and go ahead criticize US policy all you like, but he seems genuinely hateful, and ponies with only one trick get old...but I'm getting close to breaking the rules of GD, so I'll just leave it at that, since you asked.

[Rashak Mani]

Originally posted by Avenger
Finally someone explains it. It's so that when 'the terrorists' murder a bunch of people, they can be charged with lying on their immigration form! Now it all makes sense!:D

labmonkey , has Aldebaran done something to offend you?

Well these forms have had these questions for over 10 years that I remember... so the lawyer thingy is before 9/11... and I agree its just more ammunition for jailing people. Though naturally they might claim they only thought of committing the crime AFTER they got through customs. In which case proof of pre-meditation would have to be found.

Still doesn't change the fact that the questions are very silly... the first time I saw one of them I thought it was a practical joke.

[Mehitabel]

gum, I'm sorry for your loss.

No, it wasn't directed at you at all, but at Rashak Mani for making that terrible remark in the first place back on the first page.

[Aldebaran]

Avenger, I think labmonkey was only expressing his preference for a certain food from which there exists a large variety made of several different ingredients worldwide.

Salaam. A

[Eva Luna]

Originally posted by Mehitabel
Dudes. Al Capone went down for tax evasion.

Of course, nobody expects the terrorists to fill out these forms truthfully. That's not the point. It's so when they do get caught doing something wrong, they can add an additional charge to the indictment of lying to an agent or something--and they'd have clear written proof.

Precisely. It's why there is an entire hunk of the Justice Department - the Office of Special Investigations - which is devoted to doing things like archival research and interviewing witnesses living in other countries in order to prove that people like Nazi war criminals lied when they entered the U.S. as displaced persons. I imagine they are doing or will soon be doing the same with people who perpetuated genocide in the former Yugoslavia and in other places.

Why bother? Well, if you can show that someone entered the U.S. by committing fraud, you can revoke every immigration benefit (like U.S. citizenship) that was granted based on that initial fraud, no matter how long after the fact.

[Aldebaran]

Originally posted by Eva Luna
Why bother? Well, if you can show that someone entered the U.S. by committing fraud, you can revoke every immigration benefit (like U.S. citizenship) that was granted based on that initial fraud, no matter how long after the fact.

Of course, although it is in my opinion a rather far sought attempt to find additional evidence in these particular cases.
And of course other nations have a procedure including similar questions, depending on their conditions for immigration/citizenship.

Yet that doesn't change the fact that such quesitons are perceived by outsiders as being invented by people who take the rest of the world for retarded :)

Salaam. A

[Eva Luna]

Originally posted by Aldebaran
[Of course, although it is in my opinion a rather far sought attempt to find additional evidence in these particular cases.




It's not so much a matter of additional evidence IMO as a question of jurisdiction. Does the U.S. have the jurisdictional authority to prosecute crimes committed outside the U.S. that didn't affect any people who were U.S. citizens at the time? Probably not. Does the U.S. have the authority to prosecute someone who breaks U.S. immigration laws? One would be hard pressed to argue with that.

As for what the rest of the world thinks of us: well, nobody has ever accused U.S. immigration authorities of expending too much effort on P.R.

[mhendo]

Originally posted by Eva Luna
As for what the rest of the world thinks of us: well, nobody has ever accused U.S. immigration authorities of expending too much effort on P.R. Ain't that the truth.

And now it seems that, thanks to those geniuses at the TSA, people travelling to the US aren't even allowed to line up to use the crapper (http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2004/01/07/1073437336557.html).A US demand for airline passengers to be banned from queuing for the toilet would need to be handled tactfully by Qantas, acting [Australian] Prime Minister John Anderson said today.

Mr Anderson, who is also transport minister, said the government had no plans to similarly ban toilet crowding on incoming flights to Australia.

Qantas began informing passengers last night about the toilet queue ban but said it was too early yet to gauge customer reaction.

"The US Transport Security Administration are now requiring that passengers on flights to the US are not to congregate in groups in any areas of the aircraft, especially around the lavatories," a Qantas spokeswoman said.

<snip>

Mr Anderson said the directive seemed hard to handle.

"I guess what the US authorities are looking for is any kind of suspicious congregation of behaviour that might be in some way related to, you know, preparing for something nasty to launch an attack on a plane or something like that," he said.

"This is going to require a bit of commonsense and a bit of tact.

"I wouldn't want to overreact, but I'd have to say, as the reports at the moment, I have to say do sound a little bit hard to handle."Wow! Even the Australian government, one of the world leaders in American-ass-kissing over the past couple of years, thinks this is a silly idea.

As a representative of the Australian airline industry said:"It's obvious that whoever thought this up in the US authority hasn't travelled on a 14-hour flight to Australia."No shit, Sherlock! I made that flight only a few weeks ago, and not only are bathroom breaks a necessity, but one's comfort and health also require periodic walks up and down the aisle to get the blood circulating in one's legs again. Due to the country's isolation, flights to and from Australia have some of the highest recorded instances of potentially-fatal Deep Vein Thrombosis, and it's prudent to exercise on such long-haul trips.

The way the TSA is going, pretty soon embarking passengers will be chained to their seats and knocked unconscious for the duration of the flight. Hey, at least they could pack us in more tightly then, which would have the added benefit of increasing airline profit, another priority of the Bush administration.

[Mehitabel]

Good article in the Times (http://www.nytimes.com/2004/01/07/international/07TRAV.html?hp) about the varying reactions around the world to the new policy. Turns out, to my surprise, that some countries have their own air marshalls already besides Israel, including Germany and Switzerland, and that the French don't mind it much either.

mhendo, I'd be interested in a link from the TSA itself about that policy. Doesn't sound right. I suppose it's midsummer and silly season for Aussie papers so maybe they're exaggerating a bit?

[mhendo]

Originally posted by Mehitabel
mhendo, I'd be interested in a link from the TSA itself about that policy. Doesn't sound right. I suppose it's midsummer and silly season for Aussie papers so maybe they're exaggerating a bit? You might be right.

I searched Google News for the story, and got about 70 hits, including many US media outlets, but each of those was quoting the exact same Associated Press report. And, according to that report, news of the new TSA rule seems to be coming directly from Qantas itself. I'm not sure if this means that Qantas has received a special directive on the issue, or if it is simply the first airline to publicize the order. I can't imagine any reason why Qantas would announce such a policy by itself, or lie about the alleged TSA directive.

The TSA website has nothing that i could find, but this may not mean anything, as it would not be surprising if the airline was told before the general public. The Qantas website has no information either.

I'll keep an eye out and see if anything develops.

[gum]

Mehitabel Thanks. [not as much mine, as her family's loss]

The Dutch get Marshalls soon. (http://www.expatica.com/source/site_article.asp?subchannel_id=1&story_id=3426)

[sailor]

The requirement for armed police on flights demanded by the government of the USA is being discussed in this thread (http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=232660&pagenumber=2) where I make the case that it was was done very clumsily by notifying the airlines and not their governments. In the end it has been a fiasco and the USA is no longer making it a requirement. They should have thought that it was not enforceable before they made the demand. It was done were clumsily and in the usual fashion for this government.

[Rashak Mani]

Originally posted by Mehitabel
gum, I'm sorry for your loss.

No, it wasn't directed at you at all, but at Rashak Mani for making that terrible remark in the first place back on the first page.

You should have seen my comment in context... as a response to the post before implying that other countries are crybabies for reacting to US measures... while its the US that keeps pushing the terrorism blah blah blah to get things done.

[Broomstick]

Originally posted by Rashak Mani
I doubt they would get enough budget for such a nice high tech system if they didn't say "terrorism".I would have to agree.

As for the americans being fingerprinted in Rio and Sao Paulo... I am sorry for them.I don't. Sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. We have no right to expect better treatment than we give to visitors to our own country.

What I can't figure out is why more countries haven't done this.

Postive, helpful change won't occur until the average American realizes the difference between window-dressing and reality.

And if we're going to photo and print some visitors, we should do it for all visitors.

[Broomstick]

Originally posted by Mehitabel
mhendo, I'd be interested in a link from the TSA itself about that policy. Doesn't sound right. I suppose it's midsummer and silly season for Aussie papers so maybe they're exaggerating a bit?I doubt there's any exaggeration here.

For quite awhile, flights into and out of DC required all passengers to remain in their seats within 30 minutes flight time of the capital - no exceptions.

Also, we pilots have had to put with with a lot of BS from the TSA, none of which I particularly care to review here. Suffice it to say that those making decisions about our nation's aviation security are obviously NOT experts in aviation on any level.

Nor, on a certain level, do they care about the health and well-being of anyone other than themselves and a select few. If some Aussie tourists die from blood clots in their legs - oh, well, small sacrifice for security.*

Which is why a bunch of us keep beating the civil liberties drum - our freedom is being nibbled away, and occassionally consumed in large chunks.




* Please note that this is SARCASM and does NOT reflect my personal opinion.

[gouda]

I believe that this method will eventually become a standard screening process in every country (that can afford it). And why not - if it helps to keep out criminals otherwise not identifiable, then I'm all for it.

Having said that, discounting certain countries from the process is just plain stupid. Even a simple SWOT analysis would have shown up the inherent flaws in that!

Also, why not implement this system at the point of departure, rather than at arrival? Make the fingerpriting, etc. a part of the vsia approval process.

[sailor]

Originally posted by gouda
Also, why not implement this system at the point of departure, rather than at arrival? Make the fingerpriting, etc. a part of the vsia approval process. You are missing the point which is to identify the person actually entering the country. passports and visas can be counterfeit but your face and fingerprints ar more difficult to do.

[Eva Luna]

Originally posted by gouda
why not implement this system at the point of departure, rather than at arrival? Make the fingerpriting, etc. a part of the vsia approval process.

To a certain extent, it already is; name checks, and other security checks as DHS feels they become necessary (according to age, county of origin, and stuff listed on your application forms, which includes educational & professional background, military experience, and a host of other items) are run on visa applicants as part of the application process. This doesn't include running fingerprint checks - yet - but I can certainly imagine things heading that way.

But then, as you mentioned, large numbers of people are exempt from applying for visas in advance (most Canadians and most short-term business or tourism visitors from some high-volume countries), so without renegotiating or voiding some pretty large bilateral and multilateral treaties, you'd still have some pretty large gaps to cover.

[gouda]

Well, how about fingerprinting, etc. at the exact point of departure, i.e. while checking in? IMO, people are more likely to accept a little more delay before boarding a flight, as opposed to at the end of a flight. This could easily be implemented for all flights landing in US territory.

Of course, this then means sharing intelligence data on known/wanted criminals with every nation that has a plane flying into the US. Maybe not so implementable, then...

[5cents]

Originally posted by gouda
Well, how about fingerprinting, etc. at the exact point of departure, i.e. while checking in?

This is done (at least, customs pre-clearance, not fingerprinting) in major Canadian airports. This is done because of the volume of international flights between Canada and the US. Flights pre-cleared in Canada are treated as domestic US flights. So it can be done, but it isn't easy.

First, you need the cooperation of foreign governments to allow US customs into their country and their airport. Second, you need to have a separate, secure area in the terminal (or even a separate terminal) for passengers who have pre-cleared for flights to the US. Anything less and you have not assured pre-clearance.

This setup, although fairly convenient, does have its drawbacks. For one, lets say you are flying Sudbury -> Toronto -> New York. When your flight arrives in Toronto, you have to pick up your baggage and haul it through customs. This means that you can't have a tight connection, and you will have to drop off your bags twice (Sudbury and Toronto) and pick up your bags twice (Toronto and New York). If it was a typical international flight, you'd just drop off your bags once (Sudbury) and pick them up once (New York).

Also, what happens if the plane you are on breaks down once it leaves the gate at Toronto. Let's say it taxis out on one engine, but they can't fire up the other engine. So the plane returns to the terminal to switch planes, but there's no space at the US-bound gates. You either wait (perhaps a long time) for a spot to open up, or you get dropped off at a non-US-bound gate and get surrounded by security as you switch planes.