U.S. government plans to fingerprint foreign cruisers at terminals

[Putterdude]

To everyone: What do you have to hide? Why not do it?

 

I have nothing to hide but I do have a problem with any government having my fingerprints and I have no knowledge who may have access to this information and how it may be used.

[dforeigner]

I asked you, very politely, to consider using the term "visitor" or "foreign national" in preference to "foreigner", a word which has some derogatory connotations.

 

You replied with sarcasm and references. Since you like references, look at this:

http://www.statelawyers.com/Practice/Practice_Detail.cfm/PracticeTypeID:52

 

 

I have copied some of it below:

 

 

 

"Immigration & Naturalization Law

 

 

 

U.S. Immigration Law deals with issues relating to foreign nationals who come to this country either temporarily or permanently, including the associated legal rights, duties, and obligations of aliens in the United States. It also deals with the application processes and procedures involved with naturalization of foreign nationals who wish to become U.S. citizens, as well as dealing with legal issues relating to people who are refugees or asylees, people who cross U.S. borders by means of fraud or other illegal means, and those who traffick or otherwise illegally transport aliens into the United States.

 

What is a Foreign National?

 

In the United States, like many other countries, native people (people born in the United States) are considered citizens. You are also considered a citizen of the United States if you are born overseas but one or both of your parents is a U.S. citizen, or if you came from another country and go through the process of naturalization-applying for and meeting the requirements for naturalized citizenship. If you are not a U.S. citizen, then you are considered a foreign national or alien. Aliens are categorized as: resident and nonresident, immigrant and nonimmigrant, documented (legal) and undocumented (illegal)."

 

 

As I already suggested, the correct terminology is "foreign national". "Alien" is an acceptable alternative. "Foreigner" is not. It is not a legal term when it comes to immigration issues.

 

 

So this makes you an authority on USC Title 8 and Title 19.

 

As the old saying goes, when in Rome... Here in the US, the term foreigner is not derogatory. This site is based in the US, therefore...

 

But in order to be respectful of other cultures, when traveling abroad, I will refrain from using the term foreigner.

 

And yes, the term foreigner is used as a legal term. As is its synonym alien. Maybe not in the particular Country you live in. But at the same time, we spell things different. Here the correct spelling is program. In the UK, you will use programme. You use traffick, while we use traffic.

 

 

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/foreigners

 

http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2006/12/26/military_considers_recruiting_foreigners/

 

http://travel.state.gov/visa/immigrants/types/types_1306.html

 

The Immigration and Nationality Act allows for the immigration of foreigners to the United States based on relationship to a U.S. citizen or legal permanent resident. Family-based immigration falls under two basic categories: unlimited and limited.

http://www.uscis.gov/portal/site/uscis/menuitem.5600b9f6b2899b1697849110543f6d1a/?vgnextoid=6b7389eef3d4b010VgnVCM10000045f3d6a1RCRD&searchQuery=foreigners

 

 

http://www.dhs.gov/xnews/releases/press_release_0101.shtm

 

The funding increases will support technologies that keep out potential terrorists:

• $380 million for the development of Entry Exit information technology for tracking foreigners entering the country and infrastructure upgrades
  
• $45 million for Non-intrusive Inspection Systems including Rail Vehicle and Container Inspection Systems, portal radiation detectors, tool trucks, isotope identifiers, and hand-held acoustic inspection systems
  
• $313 million for the Automated Commercial Environment, including funds for the International Trade Data System-ITDS

http://www.ice.gov/sevis/students/index.htm?searchstring=foreigners

 

Foreigners temporarily present in the United States as students, scholars, teachers, researchers, exchange visitors, and cultural exchange visitors are subject to special rules with respect to the taxation of their income.

[celle]

Oh no - what countries, Celle?

 

Just saw an amusing cartoon in the Sydney Morning Herald depicting our PM's first visit to the President of the USA. The President was standing, with small red and green flags in his hand, in front of a world map covered with mostly red flags, and a few green flags. He said "Are you for us, or against us?"

 

Dear little NZ had a red flag!

 

I did say I'd stop, but I'll respond once more, just for you my Aussie friend!

 

Sure. NZ might merit a red flag - we did stay steadfastly non-nuclear. On the other hand, we did support the US in Viet Nam.

 

Brazil has apparently "retaliated" by fingerprinting US citizens.

 

Japan, The EU and the UK are all comtemplating fingerprinting arriving visitors and implementing biometric scanning. It has even been suggested that Australia do so :eek:.

 

Have a look at these links (just a few of the many) if you are interested.

 

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/03/07/nheathrow107.xml

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/category/story.cfm?c_id=55&objectid=10480588

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2039483.0.Bid_to_collect_fingerprints_of_EU_travellers_to_beat_terror.php

http://www.edri.org/edrigram/number6.3/biometric-eu-travel

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2007/10/26/japan-fingerprinting.html

http://www.privacyinternational.org/article.shtml?cmd%5B347%5D=x-347-560378

[clearwaters]

It's astonishing to me that (I presume) an American citizen could say this. This country was founded on the principle that the government has no right to intrude on our persons, papers or property unless it has good cause to believe we've done something wrong. Our Founding Fathers began this nation, and wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights, because they knew from personal experience what governments can do when they have unfettered power to intrude upon the lives of citizens.

 

The question should be: Does the government have probable cause to believe I've committed a crime?

 

Those were the days before 911. We simply do not have the same freedoms we had 1-2-3 hundred years ago...

 

Everyone I know, my family, coworkers and friends all know when I'm on a ship. Nothing to hide.

 

Are you afraid that the fingerprinting process may be inaccurate? I can understand that...

 

I don't want any one messing with my eyes, however!

[MMDown Under]

I'm honoured to be the recipient of your final response.

 

I did know about Brazil, but didn't know about the rest, so look forward to reading the attached links - thanks.

 

The cartoonist knew the readers would know the reason for the red flag on NZ. :)

 

Fortunately, I've travelled overseas more than I've travelled in Australia, so, if overseas travel becomes too much of a hassle, we'll just go around the block a few times.

 

I've noticed an increase in government marketing of travel within Australia lately, so maybe they are on to something.

[celle]

So this makes you an authority on USC Title 8 and Title 19.

 

As the old saying goes, when in Rome... Here in the US, the term foreigner is not derogatory. This site is based in the US, therefore...

 

But in order to be respectful of other cultures, when traveling abroad, I will refrain from using the term foreigner.

 

And yes, the term foreigner is used as a legal term. As is its synonym alien. Maybe not in the particular Country you live in. But at the same time, we spell things different. Here the correct spelling is program. In the UK, you will use programme. You use traffick, while we use traffic.

 

 

dforeigner, I don't want to fight with you, but there are a few things I have to say.

 

Firstly, while this site is US-based, it is an international site and it is for all cruisers, not just those from the US. Consequently, it should not be a vehicle for expressing only US points of view, nor for expecting everyone to conform to them. The feelings and opinions of non-US contributors should be considered. When my polite request was met with your sarcasm, it did not say much that was good about your culture.

 

Secondly, I have never claimed to be an authority on anything. I do know, however, that "foreign national" is the internationally accepted term when it comes to immigration matters.

 

Thirdly, I concede from your multiple references that the term "foreigner" may not be derogatory when used in the US, and that it may be an acceptable term in some legal documents. However, "foreigner" can be perceived as derogatory by some people. It produces a "them and us" frame of mind, and its meaning alters with perspective. You would be a foreigner to someone, once you were outside the United States.

 

Fourthly, while my roots are from the UK, I do not come from there. And no-one in the UK or in my country spells traffic as "traffick". The differences in spelling reflect the fact that English is a living language.

 

You are welcome to your opinions. I don't share them. That is the right of both of us. Can we end this now by agreeing to differ? :)

[celle]

I'm honoured to be the recipient of your final response.

 

Sorry, mmDU - I had to respond one more time.

 

I'll stop now. I think this subject has run its course.

[Globaliser]

Are you afraid that the fingerprinting process may be inaccurate? I can understand that...

 

I don't want any one messing with my eyes, however!

The fact that something is being done to people who have nothing to hide but who find it extremely offensive ought to be enough to cause the authorities to stop and think about what they are seeking to achieve and whether it is effective to achieve it. If the US wants to build a rabbit-proof fence, that would be logical - except that this new measure is only going to be deployed against non-US citizens, leaving everyone who claims to be a US citizen un-fingerprinted.

 

The process isn't entirely accurate. And fingerprints can be hacked, although it's obviously more difficult than using a colour photocopier to forge a paper document.

 

Iris scanning is better and much more difficult to fool, and best of all requires no physical contact - but that's very slow and very cumbersome at present.

[skf]

Oh no - what countries, Celle?

 

Just saw an amusing cartoon in the Sydney Morning Herald depicting our PM's first visit to the President of the USA. The President was standing, with small red and green flags in his hand, in front of a world map covered with mostly red flags, and a few green flags. He said "Are you for us, or against us?"

 

Dear little NZ had a red flag!

Yeah, but was there still ink on the PM's fingers???

Steve

[MMDown Under]

Good question. :)

 

I know there was a diplomatic cooling between PNG and Australia, after Security requested PM, PNG to remove his shoes.

[AllieInMD]

Yes this country was - and it's still true for US Citizens - just not from those that are citizens of other countries.

 

As a US Citizen you are not being fingerprinted under this plan. As for people from other countries - they know this is the deal - if they really have an issue with it - they don't have to come.

 

We've been lax our entire history - now we're just starting to tighten things up - but it's nowhere near as restrictive as a lot of the world. Ever seen the requirements to get a visa for - say - Saudi Arabia? US immigration is a piece of cake......

 

 

It's astonishing to me that (I presume) an American citizen could say this. This country was founded on the principle that the government has no right to intrude on our persons, papers or property unless it has good cause to believe we've done something wrong. Our Founding Fathers began this nation, and wrote the Constitution and Bill of Rights, because they knew from personal experience what governments can do when they have unfettered power to intrude upon the lives of citizens.

 

The question should be: Does the government have probable cause to believe I've committed a crime?

[AllieInMD]

-Russia, China, Burma, North Korea, Iran, Vietnam & Iraq -

 

And if you 'screw up' in those countries, you sure won't be getting any of the niceties that the US Constitution extends to you here - even though you are not a citizen and not entitled to them. Last time I checked - foreigners are not paying taxes, not paying for the military, or fighting in the military - for those very freedoms. The worst prison in the USA still trumps the best hotel in Iraq.

 

-Like I have already said, pre-9/11 it was the US authorities who dropped the ball in regards to border controls, it wasn't the fault of the rest of the world. So why should the rest of the world pay for the US authorities lax and negligent procedures that allowed known criminals into their country, learn to fly in their country and then plan/execute the biggest act of terrorism carried out at any one time in history in their country.-

 

do you not see the irony and conflict in your statements? We WERE the land of the free - and that got us 911 - which you just said was our own fault. So now we're tightening it up - border control - making sure it doesn't happen again. Damned if we do, damned if we don't. Given the choice between offending some spoiled foreigners who want to traipse thru the US like they are citizens or risking another 9/11 - I'll go with ticking off the foreigners.

 

 

-For a country that prides itself on being the land of the free, its about time certain members of the US government got a dictionary and looked up what 'free' means.-

 

yes, land of the free - for its citizens. unfortunately this country HAS been too free - not restrictive - allow anyone in. what did it get us? 3000 dead bodies on 9/11 and 12 million illegals from mexico that drain our country of resources while not taking any of the responsibilities of being a citizen. the american people have had enough - since the feds won't do anything - the states are finally taking action. another wonderful feature of our government - self rule of the states.

 

it amazes me that people from other countries, especially countries with no freedoms (not talking you specifically) come here to enjoy our 'freedoms' - and yell about their rights here - especially when they are here illegally. Here's an idea - stay home and straighten out your own country before you complain about ours.

 

And it doubly amazes me that after the US took the hit of 9/11 that people would have the gall to complain about US immigration controls. We have a right to protect our soverign nation in any way we see fit - and if a foreigner doesn't like it - don't come here. And that was a much nicer version of 'protecting sovereign nation' than you'd get in the middle east

 

 

As far as I am concerned, I am not happy as it is infringing my right to travel freely without hindrance.

 

I can fly to Russia, China, Burma, North Korea, Iran, Vietnam & Iraq with my machine readable passport and be welcomed without having to be treated like a low-life criminal and being demanded to have fingerprints taken.

 

Like I have already said, pre-9/11 it was the US authorities who dropped the ball in regards to border controls, it wasn't the fault of the rest of the world. So why should the rest of the world pay for the US authorities lax and negligent procedures that allowed known criminals into their country, learn to fly in their country and then plan/execute the biggest act of terrorism carried out at any one time in history in their country.

 

I will be in the US for the first and last time later this year. I am absolutely against the demands that I must provide fingerprints when I land and before leaving. And 27 countries who have enjoyed the visa waiver scheme for countless years are being held effective hostage by the US authorities as they have demanded that the fingerprinting inward and outward be brought in and complied with by June 2009 or the visa waiver scheme will be withdrawn.

 

For a country that prides itself on being the land of the free, its about time certain members of the US government got a dictionary and looked up what 'free' means.

[AllieInMD]

actually - they are fairly well hackable by a skilled person ;)

 

retinal scans are not tho - they can't be fooled. however, there are - uh - 'political reasons' - that governments around the world don't want to use them.

 

Take my fingerprints at any port around the world. No worries. A fingerprint is the single most unhackable thing in the world.

[AllieInMD]

Yes, hasn't it been like that for forever? I seem to recall having to do so even long ago. I have a passport - I can use that - doesn't have to be a driver's license - not everyone over age 16 is licensed to drive.

 

So do you not have to show photo ID when flying domestically? That does sound odd (I have never flown domestically in the USA before).

[AllieInMD]

so - those guys on the planes - they were just 'visitors'?

 

and jeffrey dahmer just had an eating disorder (sarcasm)

 

 

No kidding!

"Politically correct" is a phrase often used by people without any valid thoughts of their own.

I prefer to think of callers from other lands as "Visitors" and not "Aliens" & little do I care what the Congress thinks.

[skf]

Good question. :)

 

I know there was a diplomatic cooling between PNG and Australia, after Security requested PM, PNG to remove his shoes.

Yes, I've heard tell of Princes & Governors-General with explosive shoelaces.

[KC_fn]

 

...do you not see the irony and conflict in your statements? We WERE the land of the free - and that got us 911 ...

 

 

You want us to no longer be the land of the free?

[Aquahound]

As far as I am concerned, I am not happy as it is infringing my right to travel freely without hindrance.

 

Traveling internationally is not a right. It is a privilege.

[skf]

You want us to no longer be the land of the free?

I think what Group A wants is for themselves to be absolutely free to do what they want, and everyone else will be free to do only what Group A wants.

Steve

[Dorset Cruiser]

If it is implemented and I still wish to cruise, I will have to go along with it - but will I choose to keep cruising? Fundamentally I am against taking fingerprints. I dislike being treated like a criminal (that is when you usually have your fingerprints taken). It is getting more and more difficult to put up with the way 'foreigners' are treated by the US - they are treating us all as criminals. I always thought the maxim was "innocent until proved guilty" not "guilty until proved innocent". I dread entering the US for a holiday - it is very offputting to be treated so badly.

 

And AllieInMD - it will do the US no good if every foreigner 'who did not like it' decided not to go the US. If the US lost all the foreign tourists who go there every year, you would soon notice it. You are already in a recession, just imagine how bad it would be if no foreigners visited on holiday.

 

Having said that, there's no happy medium in all this. We did a transatlantic back to Southampton last week and we left the ship and walked straight back into the UK, with our cases, and there was no customs or immigration presence. For all anyone knew our suitcases could have been full of drugs or guns, or anything:mad:

[Goldryder]

OK....I am going to make this even more contentious.

 

The US made the mistake prior to 9/11 by not checking everyone as they entered their country against the Interpol Watch list. So 4 or 5 on that list entered the US via Boston (IIRC).

 

So after the event that was on US soil but did not only affect US citizens, there were many other nationalities lost including Muslims who worked in the towers who lost their lives along with everyone else that day, the US decided to shut the door after the horse had bolted.

 

But in order to stay PC they decided that every single foreigner was a threat (potential or otherwise).

 

They could have really caused problems and singled out Muslims for this treatment, but no, they played nice and decided that everyone outside of the US is a potentially bad person and everyone will therefore be tarred with the same brush as those who they stupidly let into their country etc etc etc.

 

I do have a right to travel freely as I am not a criminal...it is a privilege but only cos I can afford it (albeit only just).

 

Thanks to the US letting in those idiots, the world is more unsafe than it has ever been. The immigration rules being brought in by the US authorities do nothing to make anyone safer...they just build the paranoia.

 

These immigration rules are based on nothing but paranoia, they stoke it up and they perpetuate it.

 

I find it sad that while people are still waiting for their homes to be rebuilt after Katrina, while people still have to suffer the indignities of racism, where people are losing their homes left, right and center....the government of the USA still pour millions of dollars into plainly idiotic and unworkable immigration rules that have rubbed everyone...airlines, cruise lines...IATA...ALPA...up the wrong way. And don't even think about the Middle East and the millions that is costing in lives & money.

 

The US government needs to get its own house in order before they start ordering tourists about and treating them like criminals.

 

If the country can do without the tourists money...fine..we'll take it elsewhere. The cruise lines might well do that soon too thanks to another idiotic and costly idea of propping up the lame duck called NCLA.

 

The sooner Bushbaby is out of office, the better. Then things might improve for everyone. Those who lost everything in Katrina might actually get homes instead of having to live in trailers that are slowly killing them. And the freedom to travel will include the US.

[*Luv2Cruz*]

Safety first:D

[dforeigner]

Safety first:D

 

Roger that. Contrary to some believes, freedom is not free. The US Government has decided to ignore this issue and now they are trying to play catch up.

[skf]

Ever time I read "Homeland Security" I can only visualize Brownshirts & swastikas.

[AllieInMD]

Not as much as we were - or even still are. You talk as tho the only choices are two extremes - totally free, or totally not - there is a middle ground.

 

Do I want to be the land of the free that is so worried about being PC that we risk our security? Do I want to be the land of the free that allows 12 million people to be here illegally, with more arriving every day? NO - unequivocally NO

 

 

 

 

You want us to no longer be the land of the free?