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

[Globaliser]

TIME TO CLOSE THIS THREAD -

 

nasty nasty nasty comments not suitable for cruise critic

I think that we were already there about 40 posts or so back.

 

And I have some more popcorn waiting.

[Dorset Cruiser]

Yes, run back to the UK and take a look at your glass house sweetie. Your friend still 'trying desperately' to get into the US? :)

 

I'll take my viewpoints anywhere I please 'sweetie' - there's that land of the free thing :)

 

okay - I'm biting again - yes the poor deluded girl is STILL trying to get a a permanent residency in the US - she has actually been in the US for three years, running her business and adding to your economy and I still maintain she is absolutely barking (one of our quaint English expressions). She has only been there that short time and already her perceptions of the 'evil' Muslims is totally off the wall. She honestly believes that there are now terrorists around every corner in the UK and from the emails she forwards to me, most of the misconceptions come from Americans. She has even said that if she does not get permanent residency, she can never come back to the UK because of all the terrorists. There are no more terrorists in our country than in the US.

 

Are you totally anti-Arab - oh I forgot Saudi Arabia is one of your allies, just like the UK, only they have oil don't they - musn't fall out with them even though they treat their women as second class citizens - I would steer clear of visiting that country, even if they are allies.

 

Have you ever travelled out of the US - you seem to have a very insular outlook. I am 61, and I suppose I should know better than to get into a slanging match with a stranger. I have children and grandchildren and I think I know a bit about the world around me. I LOVE my country - there is none better in the world - but I have also liked what I have seen of your country. The US and the UK are long-term Allies - your founding fathers came from our country.

 

I honestly am not going to post again as I think I am only winding you up and I never meant to do that - sorry.

[AllieInMD]

OOPS - my humblest apologies to New Zealand! :)

 

 

OK - to be honest I don't care about the rest of your post, (I have already said that it is a country's right to make rules about who is granted entry to their borders and how you get this right), and I am guessing you probably don't care about the correction I am about to make

 

BUT

 

I believe in any argument people should be factually accurate

 

PLUS

 

as a patriot (interesting how you normally only hear that word in the context of the USA, but anyway) of my lovely country New Zealand

 

IT WAS AN AUSTRALIAN MAGAZINE! - http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,336310,00.html

 

Of course this was then picked up by Drudge.:)

[cruisemamma99]

*SIGH* you do make such good sound bites - the problem with sound bites is they are fluff

 

The terrorists that bombed/flew aircraft were not under the auspices or control of the United Nations or any entity recognized by any world authority as a world community member. It's not like France attacked us.

 

Cause and effect - yep - good point. Americans and American interests have been under attack for decades. We were both asleep at the wheel and trying to be good little boys and girls in the world community - when we needed to strike back hard and tighten security. Had we done that after the 93 WTC bombing, the 2001 one probably wouldn't have happened. Had we tightened up and hunted down terrorists after the USS Cole, or after our marine barracks were bombed, or the other acts - we probably wouldn't have had 9/11.

 

You operate under the misguided belief that if we all act in a very nice politically correct manner, that the rest of the world will follow, everyone will get along, there will be no terrorism, and we can all sing kumbaya at the UN. Terrorists aren't interested in world peace, they aren't interested in getting along, they don't see anything we might do as 'mercy' - they see it as a weakness to exploit. They saw our weaknesses before, and the attacks continued - escalating to 9/11. We stopped being so 'nice' and we haven't had anything even close to that magnitude since.

 

We played nice - attacks escalated.

We play not so nice - attacks decreased.

Yep - cause and effect.

 

 

Its really simple, secure out borders like the rest of the world and not doing so has been our mistake long before Bush came into office.

 

Also, it not that we stopped being so nice; we just started to secure our borders and take a closer look at immigration. How many countries allow a woman to give birth over here, and her child is automatically given citizenship....not a one that I know of. Basically we are finally comming to terms with the mistakes we have made, and how they have impacted our society. Again were not being mean, we're just finally doing what all the other counties in the world have been smart enough to do.

[Globaliser]

How many countries allow a woman to give birth over here, and her child is automatically given citizenship....not a one that I know of.

Amongst others:-

• Argentina
  
• Barbados
  
• Brazil
  
• Canada
  
• Colombia
  
• Dominican Republic
  
• Jamaica
  
• Mexico
  
• Pakistan
  
• Peru
  
• Romania
  
• United States
  
• Uruguay
  

And countries that have the rule in a modified form:-

• Australia
  
• France
  
• Germany
  
• Ireland
  
• New Zealand
  
• United Kingdom
  

Again were not being mean, we're just finally doing what all the other counties in the world have been smart enough to do.

I'm not sure how many democratic countries in the world generally require every visitor to be fingerprinted on entry. Perhaps only one.

[AllieInMD]

Well, see - I don't think fingerprints is the best - but you all would REALLY scream if I suggested they had to have GPS implanted to gain entry ;) j/k!

 

Actually - I believe that the fingerprinting has less to do with tracking within the US than keeping out people who are already known or suspected to be a threat. And/or tying people and crimes together. Tying fingerprints to passports is the only current way to get around altered passports, or altered appearance. We also profile based on behavior - and their place of origin - origin of passport. Tracking suspected or known threats within our borders belongs to a different agency than immigration.

 

Hmm, interesting - seems the UK is doing the same. From the UK Home Office:

Anyone applying for a visa from 133 countries covering three quarters of the world's population now have their fingerprints checked against UK databases. Nearly 500 cases of identity swapping have been spotted already.

 

The milestones set out by the Minister are:

• within 15 days to check fingerprints before a visa is issued anywhere in the world;
  
• within 80 days to begin the introduction of a new points system for managing migration;
  
• within 100 days to introduce a single border force and police-like powers for frontline staff;
  
• within 330 days to begin issuing compulsory ID cards for those foreign nationals who want to stay;
  
• by Christmas to begin counting foreign nationals in and out of the country and to introduce compulsory watch-list checks for high risk journeys before they land

(ones unrelated to this topic deleted)

 

 

 

 

 

Just to return to the original topic for a second, how is fingerprinting people on entry and on exit going to keep track of where they are within the US?

 

Or are you privy to a new nationwide fingerprint-you-before-you-eat scheme that's about to be introduced by the DHS?

[cruisemamma99]

Amongst others:-

• Argentina
  
• Barbados
  
• Brazil
  
• Canada
  
• Colombia
  
• Dominican Republic
  
• Jamaica
  
• Mexico
  
• Pakistan
  
• Peru
  
• Romania
  
• United States
  
• Uruguay

And countries that have the rule in a modified form:-

• Australia
  
• France
  
• Germany
  
• Ireland
  
• New Zealand
  
• United Kingdom

I'm not sure how many democratic countries in the world generally require every visitor to be fingerprinted on entry. Perhaps only one.

 

 

Most countries do not give full citizenship like the U.S. and many that you listed require at least one parent to be a citizen. In France they cannot become a citizen until 18 and only if they meet the requirements. The main point is we are changing our policies, and btw the fingerprint scan is very quick so I don't see why some would be opposed to it.

[cruisemamma99]

I want to say thank you to Sake Dad who posted this on the

NCL Board.

 

http://www.usatoday.com/travel/cruises/item.aspx?type=blog&ak=48833436.blog&csp=Travel

 

In short, the USA will ask cruise lines to take fingerprints of foreign cruisers. I would like to know what you think about it.

 

If it interests someone, here is what I think about it, from the original thread:

 

''I will re-think about taking a cruise that leaves or return to the US if they implement this new policy. I have nothing to hide, I have a pasport for many years now and I've always done everything they want me to do but taking my fingerprints... I'm not a criminal and would HATE being treated as such just because I'm Canadian. Do they mean a US citizen cannot be the person to bring back contreband items, only foreing citizens? Also, isn't it well known that people from Quebec are all terrorists? (I hope you understand that I am being sarcastic on this one).''

 

 

All I can add is traveling has changed significantly since 911, and will continue to do so. Doesn't matter if you fly or cruise btw -

 

http://www.nationalterroralert.com/updates/2008/01/27/ten-finger-fingerprint-scan-to-enter-usa/

[dforeigner]

Firstly the US is not the superpower it used to be in the good old days of the Cold War...those days are long gone, and rightly so.

 

Secondly, the UK has had more terrorist attacks in the last 40 years than the USA had in one day. I was less than 100 yards away from an IRA bomb explosion in London in the 1970's. The USA has had it good and you got COMPLACENT about your security...just as you did a mere 6 months after 9/11.

 

At the end of the day matey, the USA showed how impotent it really is on 9/11 and you can rant and rave as much as you like, you can call our sovereign whatever you like...but fundamentally one thing will never change....the USA was complacent & impotent before 9/11 and it is just as bad now...only this time it is cutting off the hand that feeds, namely tourists and legitimate businesses and their money.

 

The USA is a shadow of what it was, at one time other countries used to look up to the US and everything it stood for.

 

 

Sadly, I will have to agree with most of what you have said. Although you are somewhat out of line (lack of real information perhaps) when it comes to the detainees in Guantanamo.

[ovccruiser]

UK citizen here, recently cruised to the Carribean from New York, and the US imigration, imo, is not doing the US tourist trade much good. Arrive at airport with filled in green card, fingerprinted, retina scan passport and green card stamped. On board ship, last port of call is St Thomas. Prior to this I had to pass through imigration control again on board ship at between 7:00 and 8:00 am:confused: I am on holiday for chris sake:) . Back to airport, passport check, proceed along walkway to next passport check and imigration control, had to remove shoes and belt walked through metal detector no problem. Waited to board aircraft, again passport checked. Why so many?

[dot73]

I recently got back from a cruise and when unpacking my carry-on knapsack at home, to my horror I discovered a pair of sharp scissors that I forgot to put in my check-in luggage. How in the world did security miss that in Ft. Lauderdale? When I was flying to Germany in the 70's and 80's on a regular basis to visit family, during the PLO attacks, every piece of carryon luggage was manually inspected by a security agent. There were never any long lineups as there was a large number of security personnel. I am of the opinion that an abundance of well trained, well paid security people will more likely spot the terrorists than technology. This is where the money should be going. Remember the guy who tried to bring in bombs through the U.S./Canada border in Washington State with plans to blow up LAX-- he was discovered because a good customs agent saw something not right that aroused her suspicion. Frankly, not profiling passengers due to political correctness, is ridiculous.

 

IMHO, fingerprinting on cruiseships will not make anyone any more safer. If a terrorist group wants to blow up a ship or take it hostage, they will not send anyone on board that has a criminal record and has fingerprints on file. None of the 911 terrorists had criminal records or were under any kind of suspicion. Instead, they will send a family (who may have been born in the U.S.) on board who will not be at all suspicious. There will already be collaborators on the ship, probably employees. These types of terrorists are ready to die for their cause and don't mind taking their families along with them.

Hopefully, this idea of fingerprinting cruise passengers will be thoroughly looked at and rejected.

[Globaliser]

Hmm, interesting - seems the UK is doing the same.

No, we're neither fingerprinting our friends nor making them feel like criminals, nor are we saying to our friends "we don't care how you feel about coming here, because you should consider yourself privileged to be allowed to come to this sacred ground at all".

Most countries do not give full citizenship like the U.S. and many that you listed require at least one parent to be a citizen.

All the countries in the first part of the list give full citizenship.

 

The number of countries that does this is getting smaller. But in response to your question: "How many countries allow a woman to give birth over here, and her child is automatically given citizenship....not a one that I know of", the answer is the US is far from being the only one.

[dforeigner]

UK citizen here, recently cruised to the Carribean from New York, and the US imigration, imo, is not doing the US tourist trade much good. Arrive at airport with filled in green card, fingerprinted, retina scan passport and green card stamped. On board ship, last port of call is St Thomas. Prior to this I had to pass through imigration control again on board ship at between 7:00 and 8:00 am:confused: I am on holiday for chris sake:) . Back to airport, passport check, proceed along walkway to next passport check and imigration control, had to remove shoes and belt walked through metal detector no problem. Waited to board aircraft, again passport checked. Why so many?

 

When you board the ship, you are exiting the US, therefore, passports are checked. When arriving at St Thomas, you were re-entering the US, so passports are checked again. At the Airport, you are leaving the US, so passports are checked.

[dforeigner]

I recently got back from a cruise and when unpacking my carry-on knapsack at home, to my horror I discovered a pair of sharp scissors that I forgot to put in my check-in luggage. How in the world did security miss that in Ft. Lauderdale? When I was flying to Germany in the 70's and 80's on a regular basis to visit family, during the PLO attacks, every piece of carryon luggage was manually inspected by a security agent. There were never any long lineups as there was a large number of security personnel. I am of the opinion that an abundance of well trained, well paid security people will more likely spot the terrorists than technology. This is where the money should be going. Remember the guy who tried to bring in bombs through the U.S./Canada border in Washington State with plans to blow up LAX-- he was discovered because a good customs agent saw something not right that aroused her suspicion. Frankly, not profiling passengers due to political correctness, is ridiculous.

 

IMHO, fingerprinting on cruiseships will not make anyone any more safer. If a terrorist group wants to blow up a ship or take it hostage, they will not send anyone on board that has a criminal record and has fingerprints on file. None of the 911 terrorists had criminal records or were under any kind of suspicion. Instead, they will send a family (who may have been born in the U.S.) on board who will not be at all suspicious. There will already be collaborators on the ship, probably employees. These types of terrorists are ready to die for their cause and don't mind taking their families along with them.

Hopefully, this idea of fingerprinting cruise passengers will be thoroughly looked at and rejected.

 

Actually, they did not miss the scissors. Small scissors are once again allowed on carry on items. I do not agree with this but TSA was the one that made the decision based on re-enforced cockpit doors, etc.

[cruisemamma99]

Funny how some on here think its the Americans, hopefully this will explain the whys and hows and how other countries are already doing this.

 

http://www.eturbonews.com/1891/more-extensive-tourist-fingerprinting-comes-u

 

 

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/europe/article3366326.ece

[Globaliser]

Funny how some on here think its the Americans, hopefully this will explain the whys and hows and how other countries are already doing this.

"Already"? Golly, is that the time? I didn't know it was 2013 already.

 

Nor have I heard that the proposal has been approved, particularly given its intrusiveness.

 

If you want to see what the attitude to fingerprinting is here in the UK today, look at what happened at Terminal 5.

 

There was to have been a system put in place to enable departing domestic and international passengers to mix: domestic passengers would be photographed and fingerprinted when they came through security from landside, or through immigration if arriving from overseas. This way, those boarding a domestic flight could be checked to ensure that they had either started their journey inside the UK, or had been cleared through immigration, and that they were not sneaking onto a domestic flight when they had no right to enter the UK.

 

As you'll see from that thread, the fingerprinting part of the system is considered to be illegal by the information/privacy regulator, and so it has been suspended.

[MichCook]

There are not 40K terrorists in the US. Canada's list is probably under 2000.

 

I respect your opinion, but wonder where you got your information?

[cruisemamma99]

"Already"? Golly, is that the time? I didn't know it was 2013 already.

 

Nor have I heard that the proposal has been approved, particularly given its intrusiveness.

 

If you want to see what the attitude to fingerprinting is here in the UK today, look at what happened at Terminal 5.

 

There was to have been a system put in place to enable departing domestic and international passengers to mix: domestic passengers would be photographed and fingerprinted when they came through security from landside, or through immigration if arriving from overseas. This way, those boarding a domestic flight could be checked to ensure that they had either started their journey inside the UK, or had been cleared through immigration, and that they were not sneaking onto a domestic flight when they had no right to enter the UK.

 

As you'll see from that thread, the fingerprinting part of the system is considered to be illegal by the information/privacy regulator, and so it has been suspended.

 

 

I've read it, its all moving forward no matter what the civil liberty people want. 2013?

[AllieInMD]

-None of the 911 terrorists had criminal records or were under any kind of suspicion. -

 

IIRC - not exactly correct. Several of the 9/11 highjackers had aroused suspicion. A flight instructor had contacted authorities about 'students' who had been clear they wanted to learn how to fly - but did not need to know how to take off or land. And actor James Woods spotted a 'dry run' of one of the highjackings prior to 9/11 and reported his suspicions. Problem was - our intelligence agencies were not talking to one another, nor was all the info being paid attention to. Not to mention - all of them were here on expired visas and our immigration was so lax, nobody was looking for them either. Had they known where they were, and seen they were taking flying lessons, it would have aroused suspcion - IIRC - there was already some intelligence gathered about highjackings/flying into targets being planned.

[AllieInMD]

*sigh* - just because someone is a British citizen does not mean they are a friend and not a terrorist - Richard Reid was a British citizen. And I don't expect Britain to let me in without a passport and they are welcome to take my fingerprints too - for the same reasons - not all Americans are friends and not terrorists.

 

Oh please - 'sacred ground' - you try to distract with snarky answers. The reality is that the USA IS sacred ground to me - it's my birthplace and I'm proud to be an American. That does not mean that I believe the USA in itself is more sacred than say Britain, or that it should be to any British citizen. America has a right to protect it's citizens and borders in any way it sees fit, as does Britain, and Saudi, etc. If I don't like their rules in place for doing so - I don't have to go there.

 

 

No, we're neither fingerprinting our friends nor making them feel like criminals, nor are we saying to our friends "we don't care how you feel about coming here, because you should consider yourself privileged to be allowed to come to this sacred ground at all".All the countries in the first part of the list give full citizenship.

[AllieInMD]

no kiddin - a Brit condescending to an American. In fact it was so laughable that I didn't even bother responding.

 

 

oh Gawd spare us the condescending lecture!!!

 

TIME TO CLOSE THIS THREAD -

 

nasty nasty nasty comments not suitable for cruise critic

 

My UK friends would be outraged at your comments, but there again I think they are from the intelligent part of Yorkshire.....................

[AllieInMD]

-But is it a good idea - for anyone - to do that in ways which antagonise your friends and whip up your enemies into a blind fury?-

 

The problem is that these days it's hard to distinguish between friend and foe, and with so much at stake - I'd rather treat all as potential foe than treat all as friend - too high a risk. Sorry hon -our enemies are already in a blind fury and have been for years. That's like saying 'we won't go after criminals because they might get mad and do something worse'. We try not to 'cry uncle' - we try. We don't 'denigrate' all foreigners - that's your word choice - not ours.

 

When push comes to shove - yes - I think we should not care so much about what the world thinks and trade political correctness for lives.

 

You think it leads to more violence, I think it prevents it - so it's a draw - except that I'm an American and I have a say (albeit small) about what the US does. And - we've already seen that the 'nice' route gets terrorist attacks - that's fact.

 

If you are referring to the war - sorry - apples and oranges in my opinion. The 9/11 attacks were wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians - not enemy combatants. There hasn't been an attack on US civilians like that since 9/11.

[AllieInMD]

-But is it a good idea - for anyone - to do that in ways which antagonise your friends and whip up your enemies into a blind fury?-

 

The problem is that these days it's hard to distinguish between friend and foe, and with so much at stake - I'd rather treat all as potential foe than treat all as friend - too high a risk. Sorry hon -our enemies are already in a blind fury and have been for years. That's like saying 'we won't go after criminals because they might get mad and do something worse'. We try not to 'cry uncle' - we try. We don't 'denigrate' all foreigners - that's your word choice - not ours.

 

When push comes to shove - yes - I think we should not care so much about what the world thinks and trade political correctness for lives.

 

You think it leads to more violence, I think it prevents it - so it's a draw - except that I'm an American and I have a say (albeit small) about what the US does. And - we've already seen that the 'nice' route gets terrorist attacks - that's fact.

 

If you are referring to the war - sorry - apples and oranges in my opinion. The 9/11 attacks were wholesale slaughter of innocent civilians - not enemy combatants. There hasn't been an attack on US civilians like that since 9/11.

[cruisemom42]

Just a gentle disclaimer. I don't think the majority of Americans feels the way that several "patriotic" posters on this thread do. IME, most of the people I've met and talked to in other countries understand this. Hoping you will also.

 

(Pass the popcorn please....:cool: )

[vjmatty]

Just a gentle disclaimer. I don't think the majority of Americans feels the way that several "patriotic" posters on this thread do. IME, most of the people I've met and talked to in other countries understand this. Hoping you will also.

 

(Pass the popcorn please....:cool: )

 

You're right.... I would say most of us have not been caught up in the fear campaign that the present administration has so transparently maintained.