![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Fingerprints
(This is not directed at the Good Americans I know, obviously. You're all welcome to take refuge here.)
This fingerprinting of selected people entering the US is really bugging me on multiple levels. However, I assumed that people in the US would be just as annoyed by it as everyone else. Some of them are not. And here are a few choice quotes, revealing an insularity and downright ignorance that still manages to stun me:
I hadn't considered the tourist aspect of it.
and
I don't even think that tourism will be affected too negatively based on the rules in place. Most of the countries with citizens rich enough for international tourism are exempt anyway. And the super-rich of the countries who are not exempt don't account for enough people to be of enough consequence. Bad press and misinformation about the rules [...] will probably have more of a negative impact.
(If you wrote either of these, and you want me to credit you for it, please let me know. It feels a little churlish to point at people and say "HE said that!")
What really amazes me, though, is the sheer temerity of the American authorities in protesting Brazil's requirement of fingerprints from visiting Americans. I mean... what? what the hell? It's ok for the US to do it, but not any other country?
This fingerprinting of selected people entering the US is really bugging me on multiple levels. However, I assumed that people in the US would be just as annoyed by it as everyone else. Some of them are not. And here are a few choice quotes, revealing an insularity and downright ignorance that still manages to stun me:
I hadn't considered the tourist aspect of it.
and
I don't even think that tourism will be affected too negatively based on the rules in place. Most of the countries with citizens rich enough for international tourism are exempt anyway. And the super-rich of the countries who are not exempt don't account for enough people to be of enough consequence. Bad press and misinformation about the rules [...] will probably have more of a negative impact.
(If you wrote either of these, and you want me to credit you for it, please let me know. It feels a little churlish to point at people and say "HE said that!")
What really amazes me, though, is the sheer temerity of the American authorities in protesting Brazil's requirement of fingerprints from visiting Americans. I mean... what? what the hell? It's ok for the US to do it, but not any other country?
no subject
Hear that noise? It's my head against the wall.
My second or third thought (after oh my god, this is so wrong, people shouldn't have to go through this, our government really has its head up its ass) was "oh yeah, this'll help the tourism industry" and then "man, when I go overseas on vacation again, I'll have to lie and say I'm Canadian."
no subject
That said, it may be that I've not been following the whole affair closely enough but I've yet to hear any government yelling for joy at the thoughts of their citizens having to by photographed and fingerprinted on entry to the USA, it's a pain in the arse for everyone involved and the US has the loudest voice in objecting as usual. Part of it I think is the mentality that perhaps they're the only nation on earth to suffer the effects of terrorism and as such the only ones justified in implementing these measures.
Myself, I think it's the beginning of a good idea, it'll take time and effort before it's useful and it almost certainly will be one more way to cause trouble for political dissidents but I would hope that perhaps once the patriot act is repealed (and unless I missed something it still has a limited lifespan since patriot act 2 was not passed through - one of the elements of PA2 was to make PA1 and 2 permenant, PA1 had a limited lifespan) the biometric data might serve as a more reliable method of detecting problems than giving airport security guards a "list of things to look out for". I'll always favour scientific methods of tracking and catching criminals over the judgement of someone who spends their day standing on their feet bored to hell.
Ultimately though as I have said before, a nation's immigration policies are its own business. If the US wants to fingerprint people then more power to them, if other countries want to do it then fair enough too.
no subject
Oy. Do you know how angry I am about the prospect of maybe having to BUY a visa so my British husband can visit my homeland? *sigh*
no subject
no subject
no subject
The USA has introduced these security meassures in an effort to curb terrorism. I am not saying it will help, but they had a good reason. Brazil only did it because they are petty. I can understand the US being upset.
no subject
Doesn't Brazill have a problem with Americans doing drugs in their country, and exporting them? That is *just* as good a reason (if you're anti-drug) as some terrism idea. (because, really, there are NOOOO American-born n' bred terrorists.)
no subject
I am getting sick and tired of the U.S. Governments paranoia that the rest of the world is out to get them.
Between ourselves (Ireland) and the U.K. we have dealt with over 30 years of terrorism, yet neither government felt it necessary to fingerprint tourists between each country. Is it a case where the U.S. government are keeping the country and the populace on a war footing so they can push through laws that will ultimately infringe on the constitutional rights of the people (freedom of speech, e.t.c.), or is it a prelude to some form of ethnic or racial cleansing in the U.S. because foreigners cannot be trusted or anyone without 3 generations of american born family cannot be trusted?
As for the Brazilian issue.... GO BRAZIL!!!!!
this is a case of America saying "Don't do what I do,do what I say!"