They serve only to frustrate the public, not to prevent a team of
trained terrorists from entering the country.
It may prevent idiots from trying to hijack a plane though, but chances
are with the old systems they'd have been tracked
and caught anyway.
These measures are public knowledge, so avoiding them would also be
quite easy to do if one were so inclined and paying attention.
Now we have all sorts of conflicting reports for the reason that British
Airways flight was so repeatedly delayed.
What were they hoping to acheive by delaying it so long and on more than
one occasion?
Why not just march every passenger into an interrogation room and grill
them for crying out loud and get it over with.
It seems that's where travelling to the US may reach one day for all
non-white, non-US passengers.
-Gel
-----Original Message-----
From: Jochem van Dieten [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yes.
It probably *is* a good idea. You might even argue that it is a good
idea to track your nationals going abroad as well.
But I am wondering why it is not implemented using existing tools first?
Because the problem is not identifying people at the border, the problem
is keeping track of them after that so for instance you can pick them up
the second their visa expires. In hindsight, all the 9/11 attackers
could be tracked back using their conventional passport. So apparently,
for identifying people at the border that suffices. Why not base your
tracking on that?
It is just another thing on the checklist:
- don't overstay your visa if you intent to blow up the White House
- order pork on the plane when you want to blow up the Pentagon
- don't use the same creditcard for buying a ticket and buying the Koran
at Amazon
Jochem
---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.544 / Virus Database: 338 - Release Date: 11/25/2003
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
