Anti-terrorism

[Guest]

U.S. Begins Tracking Foreign Visitors

[...]ATLANTA (AP) - Authorities began scanning fingerprints and taking photographs of arriving foreigners Monday as part of a new program that Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge said will make borders "open to travelers but closed to terrorists."[...]

[...]The U.S. system consists of a small box that digitally scans fingerprints and a spherical computer camera. It will gradually replace a paper-based system that Congress ordered to be modernized following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks.[...]

Brazil: Stricter checks on US visitors

[...]The measure does not apply to citizens of 27, mainly European, nations who do not need a visa to enter the United States.

"I consider the act absolutely brutal, threatening human rights, violating human dignity, xenophobic and worthy of the worst horrors committed by the Nazis," said Sebastiao da Silva in the court order released on Tuesday. [...]

The Brazilian Times

BRAZIL
Arrival of 600 Americans causes delays in Rio

Rio, January 7, 2004 (Agência Brasil) - The arrival of the ocean liner "Amsterdam" in the port of Rio led the Federal Police (PF) to add its contingent of Marine Department officers who handle passport control. The ship, which sails under a Dutch flag, anchored at around 7:30 A.M. with 990 tourists on board, of whom 600 are American.

Ten officers were designated to speed up the process of identifying the American passengers, who have to be photographed and fingerprinted, in compliance with an order issued by the Brazilian Judiciary [I suppose a search written in brazilian (?) would find these documents/sayings? - Ada]. The first American tourists left the terminal just before 10 A.M., nearly an hour after passengers of other nationalities were authorized to go. (DAS)

Quote from mirrorsaw (on original forum, see below)

[...]"Liberals want stiff laws against bugging. It's the wrong move. Legalize everything. Legalize bugging. Let's forget artificial secrets and concentrate on the mysteries. I can tell you bugging is nothing to worry about. I've been tapped, surveilled, tailed for ten years. Those who love have no need to hide their actions.

As so often happens, the extreme wing is half right for the wrong reasons. They say primly: If you have done nothing wrong, you have no fear of being bugged. Exactly. But the logic goes both ways. Then F.B.I. files and C.I.A. dossiers, and White House conversations should be open to all. Let everything hang open. Let government be totally visible. The last, the very last people to hide their actions should be the police and government. We operate on the assumption that everyone knows everything, anyway. There is nothing and no way to hide.

We laugh at government bugging. Let the poor, information-starved, bored, creatures listen to our conversations, tape our laughter, tap our transmissions. Maybe it will turn them on. We can only keep secrets from ourselves."

Timothy Leary writing in 1973 while in Folsom Prison, from: Neuropolitique - Secrecy & Disinformation are Suicidal Political Tactics in a Cybernetic Society

President Nixon dubbed him, "the most dangerous man in America". On one occasion a Judge held up one of his books and told Leary that he was sending him to prison because his ideas were dangerous. [...]

I found nothing with googling on the text nor the book (for validation), but something somewhat interesting with his name

Page 44

[...]Unlike the 1960’s countercultures there is no Timothy Leary writing manuals on how to reach freedom and spiritual enlightenment through LSD (Leary 1964).[...]

Page 48

[...]"Trance isn’t just music or culture. It’s a culture, it’s a way of life and it’s a statement. It’s a statement that we are allowed to free our minds. We can’t be slaves to any social must. We aren’t parasites. We aren’t removing ourselves from society. But we are saying that every person has the right to his uniqueness and to his full freedom – and that always frightened regimes. Full freedom of people always frightened regimes. That means you are freed from the concept of ‘have to,’ ‘must,’ ‘that’s how it should be.’ Somehow they lose control of you as people. – (Sivan, 29 years old)[...]

Link gotten from this forum. I have nothing to add, and don't know if what quoted here is true.


[Edit] Forgot some [...]'s

Okay, one question - who decides who's a terrorist, and could that someone use the term 'terrorist' as an excuse for squelching freedom of speech of that individual? What will happen to these 'terrorists' when they get 'caught' there - just sent home?

[moget?]

Nazism indeed. I was disgusted when I heard this news on the radio this morning.

Dear government, you just can't do that!

--moget?

[WarLocke]

I have this dream.

In this dream, I somehow have enough money to "purchase" a mid-size island (heh, like anyone can really own land).

And then, on this island, I create a sovereign nation. One that does not treat its own citizens as the enemy (see: the "OMG TERRORISM" jihad here in the USA) or have an "unofficial" official religion.

Then I wake up and realize that my dream will never become reality; so I sit back and wait for the day when Dubya hits the Big Red Switch because he thinks it's his VCR's eject button, thus launching a nuclear holocaust which will wipe the human race from the face of the planet.

And then the cockroaches will inherit the Earth.

[Sir_Die_alot]

Give me a f-ing break. I had to stick my thumb on a pad and get my photo taken for my drivers licence. This is nazism to you? Perhaps you should review your history.

[Guest]

I don't know you people's nationalities - but I presume near every American can only see this for "anti-terrorism" - as their religion - the popular media - a religion stronger than anything else - present anywhere - have tainted just about every mind, no matter how well informed.

[kandrathe]

Don't worry. Uncle Cheney wouldn't let him that close to the buttons. :) So you'll also be happy to know that part of our negotiations with the Russians was that most of our missiles should not be in a launch ready status.

My response to the topic. First, I am a American. For along time we have had very, very loose borders and very loose safeguards at our ports and airports. I was shocked when I started traveling around the world (about 20 years ago) at how intense security was in other nations. I was in Italy in the 80's and I saw policemen carrying submachine guns and I was appalled. I took one flight from an obscure Greek island to Rome and my luggage was removed piece by piece and examined, and then I was guarded by a soldier with an M16 until the plane arrived and I was aboard it. I don't need to describe how much scrutiny went into my visits to East Germany before the wall came down. Most Americans have no sense for what security (from terrorism) means.

Our challenge is in trying to keep extremists from infiltrating our open and free society, commandering aircraft (or worse) and killing thousands of people. If fingerprints are what it will take to make Brazil feel safe (sic), then more power to them. If Americans want security from that kind of threat, some changes are going to need to occur. The freedom to waltz into an airport and lay down some cash and hop on a flight to anywhere is just not going to happen anymore.

[Nystul]

This is the internet age. You cannot squelch free speech by checking people at the door. If a given person was previously required to show a visa (presumably revealing his true identity, unless he is a fraud) and state his intention for visiting the country, then updating the process by taking pictures and fingerprints is fundamentally different in what way? Sounds like much ado over nothing to me.

[Lord_Olf]

Hi Adamantine,

first of all, this sounds like an extreme measure to me, but I might feel different about it if I were an American citizen. What I know is that such a thing would most probably not be accepted here in Germany, as lots of NGOs inside and outside the country would go ape.

On the other hand, what I meant to mention: Why exclude the 27 mostly European states from these measures? That does not sound fair, and who's to say that the next bomb (which will hopefully never happen) might be exploded by, say, a German citizen? As a security measure, there's quite a hole in this plan, as I see it.

Also, there's the aspect of fairness... if one person has to do this, then everyone should have to do it. Yes, including US citizens. Paranoid? Maybe, but fair.

For my personal opinion: I find this measure quite extreme, pretty much like one step down from a "No (insert Nation under suspicion for harboring terrorists) allowed in here"-sign. I just hope that these measures will be more equally balanced (see above) in the future.

Take care,
Lord_Olf

[Selby]

Comparing modernizing of the tracking systems that have been in place for years to butchering 12 million people is a little bit of a stretch. Much ado about nothing if you ask me.

By the way, by starting off with Nazism and continuing on, I am pretty sure Godwin's Law has been violated.

http://info.astrian.net/jargon/terms/g/God...dwin_s_Law.html

[kandrathe]

On the other hand, what I meant to mention: Why exclude the 27 mostly European states from these measures? That does not sound fair, and who's to say that the next bomb (which will hopefully never happen) might be exploded by, say, a German citizen? As a security measure, there's quite a hole in this plan, as I see it.

Good point. The agreements that the US has with those 27 nations allows US citizens to travel unhindered with a US passport, and vice versa. Their is a level of trust given and controls in place for getting a US passport, but maybe not enough. The same might be true with Germany, in that it might be too easy for German passports to be issued (or forged). I think what we are seeing is that the US is trying to tighten the holes, while abiding by our former policies, and a breakdown in that open international trust we had taken for granted.

It is easy for me to travel to most of Europe (and vice versa again) and so that is good for our economies. Americans go to Germany bringing thousands of dollars to spend on the airfare, hotels, food, beer and buy way too many pewter momento's for their friends and relatives.

What I would like to see would be that US passports (and those of other nations) require much more scrutiny (including fingerprints) before being issued, and that they contain within the unreproducible page (like a hologram on our credit cards, or drivers licenses) that physical descriptive information like age, height weight, eye color, sex, blood type, and fingerprint like information that would make it impossible to use stolen or forged credentials.

For my personal opinion: I find this measure quite extreme, pretty much like one step down from a "No (insert Nation under suspicion for harboring terrorists) allowed in here"-sign. I just hope that these measures will be more equally balanced (see above) in the future.

I think we could all be enlightened by an analysis of the 9/11 terrorists prior travel activities, how they moved around from nation to nation, how they made use of the laxness in "restrictions" (security) to slip through nations undetected. You would find that we (in the US) are as guilty of "blindness" to the obvious. Here where I live in Minneapolis they arrested one of the 9/11 terrorists (on Visa violations at first) two months prior to 9/11. The people at the flight school called the FBI because it became appearant that he was interested in taking lessons on how to fly a 747, but wasn't interested in the classes on how to land a 747. But, that is another long winded fiasco. Suffice it to say that the local FBI office had enough information to believe that this guy was a part of a terrorist cell operating in the US, and forwarded the information to the head office where it got lost in a paper shuffle.

I just hope that these measures will be more equally balanced (see above) in the future.

I'm sure they will. In fact, I think the pendulum will return to the laxness side again once the threat levels remain low for long periods of time. Unfortunatly, I believe it's just going to take some time for that to happen.

[Occhidiangela]

If you don't like it, stay home.

[kandrathe]

butchering 12 million

I think that is the number of people systematically exterminated in camps by Nazi's. You need to also consider the human toll of all of the WWII aggression to appreciate how ridiculous it is to compare any authoritarianism to Nazism.

World War II: Combatants & Casualties

[jahcs]

Sir_Die_alot Posted on Jan 8 2004, 08:54 AM
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Give me a f-ing break. I had to stick my thumb on a pad and get my photo taken for my drivers licence. This is nazism to you? Perhaps you should review your history. 

Agreed. The system outlined in the article, photos, and electroinc finger printing, is not an invasive backround check. It is a more efficient entry tracking system that checks people against lists of known and suspected felons and terrorists. Before Sept 11 I saw more security at most concerts than at the airport. Americans were living in a dream world. Especially when we fly, our safety depends on the intent of those around us. A few simple precautions can greatly increase the safety of those on board and on the ground.

As a visitor in another country I would have no problem providing a fingerprint and photo upon entry. I am a guest.

I do not approve of the double standard regarding the origin of the visitors to the use of the system. Expanding it to include all international travelers I view as a sensible precaution that may help to prevent international "incidents" such as this. I might compare it to making people from Rhode Island and Kansas exempt from walking through the airport metal detectors while everyone else has to stand in line.

[Sir_Die_alot]

I agree no country should be exempt, however I also see the logic of not doing it especially at first. Had it been done the other way the same people screaming "Nazi" now would REALLY go nuts over the backlash of the new restrictions on visitors, who before, could cross borders like I cross the street. Also we all know the countries most AL-Quieda members are from are not in this exempt group.

Frankly I think all this Nazi garbage has to do with certain peoples' hatred of Bush. You don't call someone you like or have a neutral opionion of, but on a certain subject(s) you disagree with, a "Nazi". Just as some people like him to the point they are blinded to mistakes, so are some people who hate him blinded to the perfectly legitimate things his administration does. If Bush has a hand in it, it must be bad. Simpleton thinking.

[Vandiablo]

Um, I couldn't tell if you were quoting this, or saying it yourself:

I don't soak up the popular real life Swedish media (so I don't know if this news is all over it), since it's frightingly close to the American (for example that plane in skyscraper thing [which Swedes not being American don't have much commitment to, nor were there many people involved compared to other "horrible acts of terror {ie that nuclear US of A bombing of innocents}", nor hasn't the world seen worse] was herralded for months as the worst act in history).

...nor could I tell why it was in very small print (I've never seen font size 3 in Word before), except maybe that you were afraid someone might read it. (Or maybe that's what it was at that site??)

Whoever wrote it, I find it overly simplistic, misguided if not plain stupid, and offensive. I wrote a response, but have decided that it probably was someone else's post on that other forum.

[whyBish]

Good point.  The agreements that the US has with those 27 nations allows US citizens to travel unhindered with a US passport, and vice versa.  Their is a level of trust given and controls in place for getting a US passport, but maybe not enough.

Not just that, but those 27 countries will have similar requirements for passports as here, no criminal convictions etc.

I'm not against these new measures (not that my opion counts :P ), and I don't think that they are extreme, but I do doubt their usefulness. Would they have stopped the 11/9 attacks?

Playing devils advocate for a moment I think that the best way to protect the U.S. would be to take a racist policy of exclusion (or increased checking), which may seem 'unfair' but in terms of practicality would make sense. (I doubt it would contravene the US constitution since that applies only to its own citizens?)

[kandrathe]

There are quite a few people of Arabic and Middle Eastern descent in the US. One result of an obviously racist exclusionary policy would be to push that population towards (further) the radicals. What we don't need is a large group of US citizens sheltering and providing succor to terrorists and terrorist groups.

In the US the concept of "racial profiling" has been tainted in the US publics mind due to abuse by law enforcement. It would seem obvious though that a native of Iceland or Sweden is much less likely to be associated with terrorist groups than a native of Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, or Syria.

So how do you implement "racial profiling" without making it look like "racial profiling". I'm glad I'm not in politics.

One other note on Brazil that hasn't been mentioned in the press. Because of the PATRIOT act, my company is required to screen all the names of the people and companies that we do business with against a database supplied by the justice department of known "bad guys". About half that list is from South and Central America and is related to narcotics trafficing. I am guessing that the Bush administration is taking advantage of the "threat of terrorism" to do double duty on the travel restrictions to also make it harder for narcotics trafficing. So, why doesn't Tom Ridge just come out and say that?

[Sir_Die_alot]

Because of the PATRIOT act, my company is required to screen all the names of the people and companies that we do business with against a database supplied by the justice department of known "bad guys".  About half that list is from South and Central America and is related to narcotics trafficing.  I am guessing that the Bush administration is taking advantage of the "threat of terrorism" to do double duty on the travel restrictions to also make it harder for narcotics trafficing.  So, why doesn't Tom Ridge just come out and say that?

Because then the tye dye crowd would get up in arms that you are stopping the flow of thei... I mean "wasting time with a minor issue like drugs which isn't a crime it's a desease". :P

[Guest]

:o :o :huh: :o :(

[/quote]overly simplistic, misguided if not plain stupid, and offensive.[/quote]

I agree, and I would appretiate if you removed the quoting - I'll remove the text.

I wrote a response, but have decided that it probably was someone else's post on that other forum.

*Phew*


I apologize for adding any opinion at all - this is too complicated for me.

[Nystul]

There are quite a few people of Arabic and Middle Eastern descent in the US. One result of an obviously racist exclusionary policy would be to push that population towards (further) the radicals. What we don't need is a large group of US citizens sheltering and providing succor to terrorists and terrorist groups.

Not to mention that they include some of our finest surgeons, scientists, professors, etc., so we probably don't want to chase them out of the country with racist politics.

One other note on Brazil that hasn't been mentioned in the press. Because of the PATRIOT act, my company is required to screen all the names of the people and companies that we do business with against a database supplied by the justice department of known "bad guys". About half that list is from South and Central America and is related to narcotics trafficing. I am guessing that the Bush administration is taking advantage of the "threat of terrorism" to do double duty on the travel restrictions to also make it harder for narcotics trafficing. So, why doesn't Tom Ridge just come out and say that?

Indeed. My gut reaction when I read the start of this thread was "I wonder if the Brazilian judge's harsh reaction is related to the drug trade." Probably not, but it would make a lot of sense.