We’re in Australia where nearly everyone we meet, including expats and Canadians, asks why America has seemingly lost the plot on internationalism in a global world. People don’t even mention the Bush administration, but politely ask: “Do you think the American empire is starting to decline?” Ouch. Now Felix Salamon reports that:
Already taking two fingerprints from every non-citizen entering the country, the DHS has now announced that it will require ten fingerprints at Dulles from November 29, and at JFK and eight other airports in early 2008. … By the end of 2008, the Department of Homeland Security wants to fingerprint everybody exiting the country as well. … The DHS wants the airlines to do it at the gate, but they hate the idea, which would seem to positively guarantee further delays. The alternative is to do it at the security screening, which of course is such a pleasant breeze right now. … So millions are inconvenienced to no end. No wonder London is looking increasingly welcoming…
I cannot even imagine the experience of being finger-printed while traveling. It’s outside the pale of my imagination and I would certainly think twice about traveling to a country where they put me, my family and colleagues through it.
Since as it has no real effect on security and will only damage the US economy, what could be motivating such patently bizarre behavior?
November 20th, 2007 at 7:07 pm
Well, you’re gonna be in Japan next month, which means you’re gonna get finger-printed on your way in. The process has added another 30 minutes to the wait at the immigration check point. Not only are you finger-printed, but then you have to wait while they run your prints (two of them) through a computer network to check if you’re a terrorist or have been previously booted out of the country.
November 20th, 2007 at 8:14 pm
Fear and political opportunism.
November 20th, 2007 at 9:46 pm
To Dan’s post add incompetence, 19th century world-view, and jingoist ideological thinking. They have no clue, nor curiosity, about the world beyond their verandas.
If this matches the brilliance of requiring liquids to be in commercially unavailable 1 quart plastic bags, expect them to use the old-fashioned black fingerprinting ink which smears on everything and requires handwashing afterwards.
November 20th, 2007 at 10:44 pm
Shouldn’t a passport more or less cover the question of identification coming and going? Fingerprints seem rather redundant. Sure, fake passports can be bought, but for a lot of $, and with that kinda dough there are probably ways to get around the fingerprint process as well.
Also, weren’t all the 9-11 hijackers in the country legally, with spotless criminal records? Finger prints wouldn’t have stopped them (unless it caused them to miss their flights!). So exactly what purpose is this supposed to serve?
November 20th, 2007 at 10:46 pm
From the DHS website:
The transition from collecting two digital fingerprints to collecting 10 fingerprints from international visitors is one of the department’s top priorities because it furthers the department’s ability to keep dangerous people out of the United States, while making legitimate travel more efficient.
The last 6 words stand out — this makes legitimate travel *more* efficient?
February 29th, 2008 at 11:44 pm
Its a nice blog….. well done.