|
[Date Prev] [Date Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]
Re: More info that US passports will get RFID and digital signatures |  |
- To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Subject: Re: More info that US passports will get RFID and digital signatures
- From: Brian Beesley <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Date: Mon, 1 Nov 2004 10:24:05 +0000
- In-reply-to: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Organization: University of Ulster
- References: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
- Reply-to: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 |
| |
On Saturday 30 October 2004 16:32, Roland Perry wrote:
>
> There have been several schemes, which ebb and flow as various dates
> come and go. One of them was, as you say, that any passport issued after
> Oct 2004 must be biometric to gain entry to the USA without a Visa.
> That's been put off for a year by the US-VISIT being extended to VWP
> countries. But lots of people in the USA are very unhappy about that.
> Richard Reid, they will tell you, was a Brit.
The point here being that the proposed new scheme would not have stopped
Richard Reid getting on the plane anyway. In fact none of the so-called
security measures relating to identifying passengers would have had any
effect whatsoever in preventing 9/11, even if they could operate free of
either type of error.
Richard Reid _should_ have been detected by personal search irrespective of
documentation relating to his identity.
In fact, it probably didn't make much difference, as his "bomb" would have
been rather unlikely to bring the aircraft down even if it had been detonated
to maximum effect.
>
> So I expect that by this time next year, unless postponed again, while
> all VWP travellers will have to use US-VIST, once again those with a
> non-biometric passport issued after the Oct 2005 will be requiring a
> Visa.
My guess is that the USA probably has a lot more to fear from its "leaky"
land borders with Mexico and Canada than it has from travellers arriving
through official channels. Another problem that documentation does nothing to
address.
All this is about exercising power over travellers so as to be seen to be
doing something to counteract the fear of terrorism built up by the state's
reaction to a few actual incidents. Maybe there is a police state agenda,
though in the case of the US IMHO it's more likely to be an unforseen
consequence of the "war against terror" - they simply don't or won't see that
using fear as a weapon is in itself a terrorist tactic.
Brian Beesley
| |