 |
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
TCO
|
 |
Richmond, VA
Jan 1970 time: 00:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Atahualpa
Well TCO, I don't want to question America's rights as what to do with their borders (except when it would fail with human rights), BUT the whole world has shifted to be way more global than before and America is profiting a LOT from that, so you can't neglect one thing and use the other.
The days where you can say: **** the rest we can do what we want are numbered; the more everyone gets involved in everyone elses business just like America gets involved in pretty lot businesses pretty everywhere on the globe, wouldn't you agree?
In fact it would be nice to see more kind of cooperation, but the US stance is always perceived as: do as we say!
So true, I've been trying to help a Russian (Uzbek) enter the EU. He told me it would be easier if I sign a paper saying that I will take responsibility for him and pay for all the costs that he could possibly have here (provide lodging, food, pay for medical treatment should he become ill, accidents,...). Yeah sure 
Well now he needs a hotel room and whatnotelse.
In any case everyone please watch your language. |
Put this in your pipe and smoke it. You ARE NOT a citizen of the US. When Americans go over and tell other people what to do, I have no problem with them being held up as insensative. But every frigging Mozart-kugel eating lederhosen-wearing Steirer buhr thinks he can tell us what do with our death penalty and our border controls and our defense budget. Butt-out *******! 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Alexander's Horse
|
 |
Panmunjon, hands up!
Jan 1970 time: 15:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
It seems to me that the Administration would definetly have benefited from a more cooperationalist attitude towards the deal and not, here is what we require, now do it type of attitude. |
As an insider I can tell that after 9/11 there was a lot almost blind panic from the Administration, remember at the time there were fears of further attacks including possibly using NBC weapons, they really did believe that, anything seemed possible.
This played out officially as the USG just announcing new security measures and telling its allies and others you have to comply with measure x or y, or do x or y. That grated a lot, especially because some of the measures were not very well thought through. Some of the people the administration appointed as security "Tsars" didn't have a lot of experience, especially dealing with other countries and there were some abrasive personalities involved - ex cops and the like.
Consultation and cooperation was not their strong suit. These were more command and control, kick ass guys. Also remember the US agencies were in turmoil while the homeland security administration was being set up.
When flaws and problems were pointed out the attitude was often very defensive like you really weren't "on the team" but often countries were just pointing out practical problems. This biometric passport business was caught up in all of that.
So there Rufus, put that in your pipe and smoke it.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Dr Strangelove
|
|
Hey this law is nothing. According to the local paper soon American citizens will need a passport in order to re-enter the US from Canada and Mexico. I wonder if this will withstand a Supreme Court challenge?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Rufus T. Firefly
|
 |
is one way of saying it, though I prefer "mensch"
Sep 2000 time: 07:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Dr Strangelove
Hey this law is nothing. According to the local paper soon American citizens will need a passport in order to re-enter the US from Canada and Mexico. I wonder if this will withstand a Supreme Court challenge? |
I don't see why not. Right now, technically, you have to be able to prove that you're an American citizen (or legal permanent resident) to re-enter the US from Mexico or Canada. There are several different documents that are acceptable as proof of citizenship, but the problem is that none of them, except a passport, is particularly secure or difficult to duplicate (I used to use my voter's registration card, which was merely typed on a piece of stiff paper, much like a Social Security card).
And just a guess: if the Feds succeed in pressuring the states into adopting secure, biometric drivers licenses, they'll probably demand that the licenses also contain citizenship info, in which case they'll be used as a substitute for passports for North American travel.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
DanS
|
 |
Kickball Capital of the World
Jan 1970 time: 00:32
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Kropotkin
This is not really a big deal. It's been going on for ages - as some people have already pointed out. Countries that do not feel that this is very urgent doesn't really feel like changing everything as fast as the security-crazy americans (at the same time, out of personal experience, the security of Newark International Airport seems pretty easy going compared to Arlanda outside Stockholm). It will cost money and mean some work. So they ***** a bit about it for a couple of years. A few years after the change have been implemented, no one will really understand what the fuzz was all about.
Meanwhile, 12-year olds like TCO have something to write about on their favorite forum. It's all water under the bridge. |
Minus the TCO part, I agree with this. It's just jawboning on the part of the US. Squeaky wheel getting the grease, etc. If our congress thinks it will work to be squeaky, then I'm all for it.
Last edited by DanS on 06-04-2005 at 19:40
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Rufus T. Firefly
|
 |
is one way of saying it, though I prefer "mensch"
Sep 2000 time: 07:32
|
|
I had to bring this thread back from the dead. Ladies and Gentlemen, I give you the current administration; not just blowhards and bullies, but incompetent blowhards and bullies:
quote: U.S. will not be able to read high-tech foreign passports
By Greta Wodele, National Journal's Technology Daily
The United States will not be prepared to read high-tech passports of foreign visitors this fall, even if Congress does not extend the deadline for certain foreign countries to have the imbedded biometric technology.
"We will not make that deadline," Elaine Dezenski, acting assistant secretary at the Homeland Security Department's border and transportation security directorate, told the House Judiciary Subcommittee On Immigration, Border Security and Claims during a hearing Thursday. Dezenski said the department would not have enough passport readers deployed to every port of entry by Oct. 26, 2005.
That date reflects a one-year extension approved by Congress last year requiring every country participating in the "visa waiver" program to have facial recognition technology imbedded into passports or other travel documents by this fall.
Many of the 27 countries in the program have said they would once again need another extension to meet the October deadline. Dezenski said 80 percent of travelers from visa waiver countries would not be in compliance. The European Union has asked Congress to extend the deadline until Aug. 28, 2006.
But House Judiciary Committee Chairman James Sensenbrenner, R-Wis., has said recently it is unlikely that Congress would support another extension, arguing several members of the European Union could have used a "less technically ambitious approach" to fulfill the biometric passport requirement.
Other lawmakers, both Republicans and Democrats, on the Judiciary panel argued Thursday for an extension.
Dezenski said Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff would meet with Sensenbrenner next month to discuss the issue. Last year, the department asked for a two-year extension, but Congress only provided one extra year. Former Secretary of State Colin Powell said last year the Bush administration asked for two years out of prudence to help ensure that the secretary would not later have to ask for a second extension.
The visa waiver program, which includes close U.S. allies like Australia and the United Kingdom, allows foreign visitors to travel to the United States for tourism or business for 90 days or less without obtaining visas.
Supporters of an extension argue that visa-waiver countries contribute billions of dollars to the U.S. economy each year. Without an extension, U.S. consular offices overseas would have to begin issuing more than 5 million more visas, which would create backlogs and long lines at consular offices. |
Europe, you may commence sneering in 3. . . 2 . . . 1 . . . now

|
|
|  |
 |
|
Ned
|
 |
of Aptos, CA
Oct 1999 time: 21:32
|
|
I really would'nt worry. Sensenbrenner is the right wing lunatic who was so bold as to hold up the new Director of National Intelligence legislation for a clause that would have required some proof of being legally in the United States in order to get a driver's license. He was so far off the beaten path on this crazy scheme that even the president was against him.
Pay no heed. Congress is not about to allow this lunatic to harm economic relations with Europe. When there is a choice between economic and security, you can be assured you know where your American congressmen is.
Last edited by Ned on 26-04-2005 at 00:34
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:32. Apolyton Time is 00:32. |
top of page
|
|
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|