TO THE ENGLISH, AMERICA IS A DANGEROUS PLACE NOW

The Buffalo News/Baltimore Sun ^ | January 18, 2004 | Todd Richissin

[Marianne]

LONDON - Not so long ago, when the world seemed a safer place, Britons such as Julia and Paul Chattenton would hop on a plane to the United States with little concern beyond how awful the meal would be and whether the flight would be delayed.

Last week, though, as the couple waited for their British Airways flight to New York, they stood in Heathrow Airport more than two hours before their scheduled departure and worried, just a little, about whether they would be allowed into the United States. And they told themselves to remember to call their parents after they checked into their hotel, because the United States just isn't safe anymore.

[Marianne]

That is because the United States is requiring visas for all people holding passports issued after September if the document does not have a special biometric chip embedded in it, . . .
Hmmmmmm!
(emphasis added)

[Imal]

$100 for a visa? I would not pay it.

I'm all for making our borders more secure, particularly our porous northern and southern borders, but charging people $100 to get in is an outrage.

[Theresawithanh]

I guess I get more of a "hmmmmmmmmm" type reaction to why some of the passengers worry, "just a little bit" about whether they'll be let in to the United States in the first place.

It's a different world since 9-11-01.

[waterstraat]

If there pilots are not armed(as they insist), and if their plane deviates at all from the flight path, I say shoot them down.

[kitkat]

They'll be welcomed with open arms when they get here. The Brits are America's friends.

As for the $100 for a visa, anyone who can afford a trans-Atlantic flight can go the extra $100.

[VOA]

"Beginning in October, thousands of Britons will be required to first visit the
U.S. Embassy in London, submit to an interview about their plans and background and then
pay more than $100 for a visa, if one is granted. "

Well, if I run into any Brits soon and they still came despite these hoops...
I'll thank them and pay for their meal.

[Batrachian]

The misplaced anger that foreigners feel, not towards the Islamic fanatics that attacked us, but towards the U.S. for implementing security, is contemptible. As always, the news media is ready, willing, and able to act as a megaphone for anyone with any criticism whatsoever for the U.S.

If their anger is justified in any way it's because of the political correctness that says blue-haired old ladies are just as much of a security threat as young Arab men with one-way tickets.

[Cogadh na Sith]

The visa is if they want to stay beyond 90 days and work. It's 100$ for a 'green card' essentially.

They can still visit for a passport stamp.

This article is crap...

[nwrep]

I thought visitors from Western Europe (UK in particular) were exempt from these rules.

[wiseone]

I thought EU ,canada ,mexico were exempt?

[Prodigal Son]

If there pilots are not armed(as they insist), and if their plane deviates at all from the flight path, I say shoot them down.

And then would you cry foul if the French shot down a plane of ours for deviating at all from its flight path?

[Uncle Miltie]

They could fly to Tijuana, and walk in. Work too. Marry up after 6 years or so, and stay. What's the problem?

[Batrachian]

The only thing Mexicans need to get in is a pair of feet.

[Cicero]

humm. We visited the UK in 1974 for a year's stay at Cambridge. As I recall, we had to answer all sorts of questions, and had to prove our ability to support ourselves, before entering. When we traveled through Europe we needed passports, had to go through customs as we crossed each border, and in a couple of instances had to open our luggage for inspection.

When I visited Europe earlier, in 1952, I had to leave my passport with the concierge at each hotel I stayed at. And in England I had to report at intervals to the police.

This is pretty much normal. It's the way countries protect themselves. People in recent years have been spoiled by the absence or relative easiness of such customs crossings. Europeans, of course, have dropped customs between their borders. But you pay a price for such carelessness, and after 9/11 the US can no longer afford to pay it.

[kaboom]

This means that, in the interest of international reciprocity, all countries required to provide biometrics will now make it a requirement for US travelers to also provide biometric data in a passport smart chip (even if they don't have the technology to read it).

Furthermore, all biometric data on US travelers abroad will be contained in some database for future abuse. My foil is still in the kitchen drawer, thank you very much.

Go Pat's!!!

[cheesebus]

What a nonsense article. Isn't Britain planning on instituting a national ID card? Don't they have the most security cameras in the world? And these Brits are saying Americans are the ones flipping out with security? As previously mentioned, the $100 visa will only be for those who want to work here. The millions of other Britons visiting the US will undoubtedly have an easier time going through Immigration here than Americans visiting the UK.

[Prodigal Son]

What you say is true.

[NTegraT]

"The misplaced anger that foreigners feel, not towards the Islamic fanatics that attacked us, but towards the U.S. for implementing security, is contemptible."

I couldn't have said it better. Always blaming America for everything instead of where it belongs.

[prairiebreeze]

Well said

[PokeyJoe]

I'm all for making our borders more secure, particularly our porous northern and southern borders, but charging people $100 to get in is an outrage.

yeah, why should they pay when they can fly to Mexico and cross into the US without paying any $$.