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

[celle]

-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.

 

I have kept out of this argument for some time now, but I just have to butt in again.

 

AllieInMD, your attitude is a perfect example of why the US is disliked in many parts of the world. Treat everyone like potential foes indeed! I suppose that explains the execrable behaviour of US troops in Abu Ghraib.

 

It's not "the nice route" that begets terrorist attacks. It's way that the US thinks it should dictate to other nations.

 

If the US had not meddled in the affairs of other countries (particularly in the Middle East, under altruistic guises when really protecting its own oil supplies) it would not have incurred so many enemies.

 

The US itself has aided terrorism in the past. Are you aware that much of the terrorism perpetrated by the IRA in Britain was funded by donations from good old America?

 

The US does not have any god-given right to tell other countries how to run their affairs. God is not on the side of the US, or any other country either - I should imagine that, if he exists, he might now be considering choosing another, more worthy, species as his favourite.

 

Time for everyone to chill out. This thread has long run its course and should be closed.

[celle]

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

 

Thse articles says that Japan is just starting doing this and that the EU is considering implementing fingerprinting by 2013.

 

That's only one other country apart from the US, so we are correct in thinking that it is mostly the US.

[cruisemamma99]

Thse articles says that Japan is just starting doing this and that the EU is considering implementing fingerprinting by 2013.

 

That's only one other country apart from the US, so we are correct in thinking that it is mostly the US.

 

 

Brazil has been doing it also.

 

 

 

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2004/01/05/terror/main591530.shtml

[Globaliser]

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

The Heathrow T5 plan is not moving forward, AFAIK. If you've seen any different, I'd be interested.

 

2013 is the proposed date for the EU fingerprinting scheme. It has to be agreed by 27 governments. Given that the UK's information/privacy regulator has already said "no" to the Heathrow T5 border control scheme (as that is what it is), it is far from being a foregone conclusion that this will go into effect.

 

And it will be a dark day if it does.

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.

...

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.

The choice of the word "denigration" may be mine. But it's simply a description of the attitudes that you have repeatedly posted on this thread: "We're Americans, so we're all right. Everyone else can go hang."

 

War is obviously different from attacks which are directly against civilians. But the attacks on 11 September 2001 were not an isolated event, nor were they the next step after the 1993 bombing of the World Trade Center. There has been a long chain of attacks against the US and US targets, including the East African embassy bombings and the attack on the USS Cole, basically driven by the same people and driven in large part by the same underlying motivation: a hatred for the US. I know Americans who ask, perplexedly, "Why do they hate us so much?" The answer is, they hate the US because they think that the US treats them badly.

 

And so the deaths of Americans in the insurgency in Iraq are largely the result of what the attackers see as the same struggle. In addition, the same insurgency has claimed large-scale civilian casualties in Iraq - "wholesale slaughter" of civilians happens almost on a daily basis, although I suspect that they're barely heard about or noticed in the US.

 

The tragedy is that the US is a country that has done - and still does - so much good in the world, and represents such an enormous force of good. But there are these dark underbellies which can taint everything. Returning to the subject of this thread, if you ignore the feelings of your visitors from friendly countries, if you tell them that this is the way we do it and we don't care how you feel, if you tell them that they should count themselves lucky even to be let in - you are just spreading the same antagonism towards your own countries, but this time amongst your friends. The amount of scepticism that there already is in Europe about the US is palpable and well known.

 

Do you really want to make it worse? Particularly by doing something which is actually ineffective and full of holes, at the same time as making your visitors feel bad? Is this constructive? You might want to reflect on that.

[Globaliser]

Brazil has been doing it also.

As I read that, only to Americans - in retaliation for what Americans are doing to the rest of us.

[nolaAlive]

As I read that, only to Americans - in retaliation for what Americans are doing to the rest of us.

 

You would not be wrong.

 

As for fingerprinting, who cares? The Federal Government already has mine.

 

Here is another example of reciprocity:

 

http://www.russianembassy.org/CONSULAT/TOUR-VIS.HTM

 

ATTENTION!

As of January 1, 2008 the U.S. State Department raises the fee for American visa from 100 USD to 131 USD.

On the basis of reciprocity the fee for Russian visa (standard processing time 6-10 business days) is also raised to 131 USD, effective from January 14, 2008. The fees for expedited visa processing will however remain unchanged.

[vjmatty]

 

If the US had not meddled in the affairs of other countries (particularly in the Middle East, under altruistic guises when really protecting its own oil supplies) it would not have incurred so many enemies.

 

So true....

 

And this protection of oil supplies has been so effective hasn't it? :rolleyes: Seems like we get all the misery of world interference with none of the benefits we are trying to acquire.

[Philip217]

Like many "foreigners" I will take my much more valuable currency and spend it in a country where I am made to feel welcome.

[skf]

Do you think the moderator will pull this thread because we are being naughty:D :D

No, I think the Moderator will pull the thread because Allieinmd is so long-winded.

Steve

[BobBeaSea]

Like many "foreigners" I will take my much more valuable currency and spend it in a country where I am made to feel welcome.

 

 

You are most definitely not alone. One of the most worrisome results of the events of the early part of this decade is the effect on overseas tourism and overseas travel in general to the U.S. It is abysmal and cause for serious concern, particularily as travel to the U.S. is a bargain today compared to 6 years ago. The current number of overseas travellers is at 1997 levels.

 

There are many reasons for this and America is going to have to sort this out. A lot of money is going elsewhere which could and should be heading to the States.

 

http://www.hospitalitynet.org/news/4034919.search?query=overseas+travel+to+u

[cruzmaven]

As to the US not needing tourism, think again. What would happen to poor old Mickey in Florida if the tourists suddenly decided to stop visiting him.

 

Every person who enters a Disney park has to put their index finger into a electronic scanning device that scans their fingerprints.

[pmfan]

I would be fine with it. Anything to make travel more secure. ;)

[Dorset Cruiser]

As to the US not needing tourism, think again. What would happen to poor old Mickey in Florida if the tourists suddenly decided to stop visiting him.

 

Every person who enters a Disney park has to put their index finger into a electronic scanning device that scans their fingerprints.

 

 

I haven't actually been to see Mickey for about 10 years but I supposed that security must have been increased since all the troubles.

[cruisemamma99]

Most tourists, U.S. and non U.S. want security and would not be put off by fingerprinting. Seaworld is doing it and obviously Disney is doing just as well.

[Dorset Cruiser]

Most tourists, U.S. and non U.S. want security and would not be put off by fingerprinting. Seaworld is doing it and obviously Disney is doing just as well.

 

 

I still say that a LOT of non-US tourists will be put off by the prospect of being fingerprinted at the major attractions in Orlando and will stay away.

[Globaliser]

I still say that a LOT of non-US tourists will be put off by the prospect of being fingerprinted at the major attractions in Orlando and will stay away.

Or won't go back, after experiencing it once.

 

So that shortfall in visitors to the US may yet grow.

[celle]

Most tourists, U.S. and non U.S. want security and would not be put off by fingerprinting. Seaworld is doing it and obviously Disney is doing just as well.

 

Yes, but why?

 

How does fingerprinting at an amusement park improve security? Unless these organisations are linked to a national security database, with access to fingerprints of known terrorists, I see no point.

 

Even if there is such a database link, what terrorist organisation is going to send a person whose prints are on record?

 

I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to how mass fingerprinting is supposed to improve security.

[vjmatty]

I have yet to hear a reasonable explanation as to how mass fingerprinting is supposed to improve security.

 

It is not supposed to improve security.... it is supposed to give the appearance of improved security while at the same time maintaining a national paranoia campaign, convincing Americans to allow the slow chipping away of our basic liberties. A clever strategy that unfortunately some of us fall for more quickly than others, as has been demonstrated by this thread. :(

[celle]

It is not supposed to improve security.... it is supposed to give the appearance of improved security while at the same time maintaining a national paranoia campaign, convincing Americans to allow the slow chipping away of our basic liberties. A clever strategy that unfortunately some of us fall for more quickly than others, as has been demonstrated by this thread. :(

 

I couldn't agree more.

 

Have a look at this:

http://laslo-blog.blogspot.com/2008/03/who-owns-your-fingerprint.html

 

I looked up "Disneyworld" and "fingerprint" on Google and discovered that Disney is saying the main reason for fingerprinting is to match up pass-holders with their passes, to prevent people handing on their passes to others. It's not about security folks, it's about protecting Disney's bottom line dollar. Is that a good reason for giving up your civil liberty?

 

No one on this thread, or elsewhere, has come up with a reasoned and reasonable explanation as to why fingerprinting protects US national security. If I heard a convincing reason, I would be less sceptical about the need for fingerprinting

 

If I learned that US citizens were immune from being terrorists, and only only aliens (foreign nationals) were a threat to US national security, then I would agree that fingerprinting only non-US citizens was appropriate. Until then, IMHO, it should be all, or none.

 

No one has explained what happens to those fingerprints once they are taken. Are they put into a databank? How long are they kept for? Who is given access to them?

 

If I am fingerprinted on entering and leaving the US this year, will my fingerprints still be on record (where?) next year.

 

There are too many unanswered questions for me to be happy about complying.

[wayne_trisha]

I couldn't agree more.

 

Have a look at this:

http://laslo-blog.blogspot.com/2008/03/who-owns-your-fingerprint.html

 

I looked up "Disneyworld" and "fingerprint" on Google and discovered that Disney is saying the main reason for fingerprinting is to match up pass-holders with their passes, to prevent people handing on their passes to others. It's not about security folks, it's about protecting Disney's bottom line dollar. Is that a good reason for giving up your civil liberty?

 

No one on this thread, or elsewhere, has come up with a reasoned and reasonable explanation as to why fingerprinting protects US national security. If I heard a convincing reason, I would be less sceptical about the need for fingerprinting

 

If I learned that US citizens were immune from being terrorists, and only only aliens (foreign nationals) were a threat to US national security, then I would agree that fingerprinting only non-US citizens was appropriate. Until then, IMHO, it should be all, or none.

 

No one has explained what happens to those fingerprints once they are taken. Are they put into a databank? How long are they kept for? Who is given access to them?

 

If I am fingerprinted on entering and leaving the US this year, will my fingerprints still be on record (where?) next year.

 

There are too many unanswered questions for me to be happy about complying.

 

 

You're not giving up any civil liberties by having your finger scanned at Disney. That private company can set rules you must abide by if you want to enter their private park. Don't want to get scanned, don't go.

 

I'm not sure why they are fingerprinting people but I don't mind being fingerprinted. Why not write DHS and ask them why they are fingerprinting visitors to the USA instead of getting advice from "security experts" posting on a message board dedicated to cruise travel.

[wayne_trisha]

It is not supposed to improve security.... it is supposed to give the appearance of improved security while at the same time maintaining a national paranoia campaign, convincing Americans to allow the slow chipping away of our basic liberties. A clever strategy that unfortunately some of us fall for more quickly than others, as has been demonstrated by this thread. :(

 

 

Is this your opinion or are you a security expert? What are my basic liberties anyways? How is fingerprinting foreigners visiting the United States chipping away at my basic American liberties? What liberty would I be giving up by being fingerprinted when everyone here knows to cruise you must prove who you are via birth certificate or passport?

[BobBeaSea]

Hell, why not fingerprint everybody. Lets also give everyone a retina scan and while we are at it, issue identity papers to all. It won't do a damn thing to stop a terrorist (foreign or domestic) but, dammit, at least we will know who the hell did it, assuming he/she hasn't blown up to smithereens :D

 

wayne_trisha, your "liberties" will be affected if other countries retaliate (which they have and will) by fingerprinting Americans entering their countries. Your prints will ultimately end up on a U.S. data base somewhere but not to worry, you've done nothing wrong and aren't planning to. If the government wants your prints, there should be no problem with that...right?

[celle]

You're not giving up any civil liberties by having your finger scanned at Disney. That private company can set rules you must abide by if you want to enter their private park. Don't want to get scanned, don't go.

 

I'm not sure why they are fingerprinting people but I don't mind being fingerprinted. Why not write DHS and ask them why they are fingerprinting visitors to the USA instead of getting advice from "security experts" posting on a message board dedicated to cruise travel.

 

In the last few days, I have spent considerable time researching official statements put out by various US government agencies and the DHS. They are all very large on rhetoric, but vague on details.

 

I am not getting advice from a message board devoted to cruise travel. I am expressing my view (which was asked for by the OP in the poll at the start of this thread.)

 

Th OP asked for opinions on the proposed fingerprinting of non US citizens when they are embarking on cruise travel.

 

I have read some of the so-called information put out by the DHS concerning fingerprinting visitors to the US. Not one press release has given specifics, just vague "feel-good " references. I think it is part of the paranoia that is encouraged in the name of homeland security and is designed to made US citizens believe that "something is being done" to combat terrorism.

 

This argument raises a few questions that those who "don't mind' having their fingerprints taken Disney and Sea World may not have considered. It is posted at: at:http://laslo-blog.blogspot.com/2008/03/who-owns-your-fingerprint.html

 

I have copied part of it below.

Who owns your fingerprint:?

SeaWorld and other theme parks (mostly Disney's) ostensibly introduced the fingerprinting as a way of preventing people from selling their multi-day passes. Which I guess makes a good business sense. However, two very important issues need to be raised.

 

First: How are these corporations going to use the data they collect? Right now they claim it is exclusively to match the pass with the person, but how long will it take before the government realizes the value of such database? Especially since many former Disney's employees are now working for US intelligence and security organizations (e.g., Eric Haseltine, Bran Ferren). Soon enough there will be a request from DHS, FBI, or some other three-letter agency to make this database available. iFrst they will claim it will help them catch terrorists. Then it will be child molesters, drug dealers; then other criminals. Next the turn will come for deadbeat parents, anarchists, anti-globalists, Muslims, militia members, and those punks with pants hanging below waists. The agencies will ask, the corporations will deliver (remember the retroactive immunity for AT&T?),"Life Above All" the members of our society are scared to death. Scared that a big bad terrorist will come and kill them in the night. and the general population will acquiesce. Not a murmur will be raised, not a word of protest, since, as I wrote in And to protect themselves they will gladly give up the remaining shreds of their liberty and privacy.

 

If we comply to fingerprinting and biometric scans in daily life, where will it end? In a police state where citizens have no right to privacy.

[pms4104]

If we comply to fingerprinting and biometric scans in daily life, where will it end? In a police state where citizens have no right to privacy.

It won't end until either all our privacies are invaded and our rights gone or there is a change in the U.S. government that puts an end to all the fear-mongering.

[wayne_trisha]

My confusion is this. When travelling you have to prove who you are. This can be done with different forms of identification. If you are in a database that says you don't fly, cruise, or whatever based on your ID tehn why does it really matter that you had your fingerprint scanned? It is a pretty effective means of identifying who you are just like a passprt but not likely to be faked. Why the concern about getting your fingerprint scanned?