Britons visiting America will now have to register 72 hours

[republique]

we had the incident of 9/11 so unless everyone else had planes crashing into their financial center's building, then it is not a two street.

For your information 9/11 got nothing to do with Europe or non visa nationals. I understand if the restrictions are imposed on the nationals of the countries responsible for such attacks but Europeans???? Come on... get a life. Again Europe had similar small scale attacks so why can't we embrace ourselves by imposing similar restructions on non visa nationals such as Americans??? Sorry mate that doesn't justify the registration scheme.

Europe can do whatever it wants, whether it wants other people to register or not . And again as I said to you before Americans wouldn't care

We don't know that yet..

The only person it seem to bother is you. And it is not our problem that it bothers you.

Would you be happy for a third country to hold your details for 15YEARS???

You don't comprehend very well. Thats right. Europe didn't suffer a 9/11 like USA and that is why it is not a two way street. For that reason, the USA is requiring registration. Why you can't understand that is beyond me?
Yeah and the rest is conjecture but you started it with how would usa like it if Europe did to USA what it is doing to the rest of the world and I told you what I thought the reaction would be. For you to turn around and say we don't know yet is just ridiculous. Then don't ask if you don't want the answer.

[Christophe]

Maybe but I doubt it. France tried to do it at one point and it became too much admin for them that they gave up

Well, US citizens (along with all non-EU non-Swiss citizens) required visas to visit France from about 1986 to about 1991 or so (I don't remember the exact dates, but it was that period — in the pre-Schengen days, of course).

I'm not saying that it will happen, I'm am merely saying that it could, and the US scheme, and the Australian ETA (now well established), might be early examples of the way that these things go in other jurisdictions as well.

Yeah I already referenced the France situation

I don't know if the situation changed because of excessive administration, but one of the things about an electronic systems is that the amount of administration is very much less than is needed for running a paper-based visa system.

[republique]

Maybe but I doubt it. France tried to do it at one point and it became too much admin for them that they gave up

Well, US citizens (along with all non-EU non-Swiss citizens) required visas to visit France from about 1986 to about 1991 or so (I don't remember the exact dates, but it was that period — in the pre-Schengen days, of course).

I'm not saying that it will happen, I'm am merely saying that it could, and the US scheme, and the Australian ETA (now well established), might be early examples of the way that these things go in other jurisdictions as well.

Yeah I already referenced the France situation

I don't know if the situation changed because of excessive administration, but one of the things about the electronic systems is that the amount of administration is very much less than is needed for running a paper-based visa system.

Well that's what a French immigration attorney told me. However France has a bias in favour of Americans anyway and they did it during the time of the bombings so they imposed on it lots of non EU{ countries but too many Americans were travelling there and they couldn't deal with it and they didn't believe the Americans were the issue so they abandonned it.

[Christophe]

Well that's what a French immigration attorney told me. However France has a bias in favour of Americans anyway and they did it during the time of the bombings so they imposed on it lots of non EU{ countries but too many Americans were travelling there and they couldn't deal with it and they didn't believe the Americans were the issue so they abandonned it.

And lots of other countries too — they stopped requiring visas of citizens of Sweden, Austria other western European countries then not in the EU, Canada, Japan, New Zealand, Australia (once Australia introduced the ETA system and stopped requiring paper-based visas of US citizens for short visits)...

[yankeegirl]

From what I've read about the new program, it was modelled at least in part on the Australian system, as an earlier poster mentioned.

I obviously cannot speak for the 300 million other Americans, but I don't think I'd be too bothered if other countries implemented a similar scheme. Each country has a right to monitor their own borders however they see fit, and if someone thinks it is too cumbersome, they can choose not to go there. I think certain aspects of the UK immigration process was a pain in the mule, but the UK is a sovereign nation and if I wanted to be here I had to do things their way.

As far as whether it's being done out of a feeling of superiority, I personally don't think it is. I certainly can concede that there is an element of that with some other US policies, but in this case I think it just has more to do with wanting to keep an eye on who is coming in and out. I also think we're going to see more of this with other countries, given the various terrorist attacks worldwide coupled with the advances in technology. I'm not overly fond of ANY new policy anywhere that infringes on ones' privacy, but with the state of things these days, I think it's coming down to trying to balance safety vs. privacy, and more and more people seem ok to give up their privacy for a feeling (real or imagined) of security and safety.

[eliasuk4u]

obviously cannot speak for the 300 million other Americans, but I don't think I'd be too bothered if other countries implemented a similar scheme. Each country has a right to monitor their own borders however they see fit, and if someone thinks it is too cumbersome, they can choose not to go there. I think certain aspects of the UK immigration process was a pain in the mule, but the UK is a sovereign nation and if I wanted to be here I had to do things their way.

I agree. Aslong as there is a balance of this scheme on both side of atlantic, it should be ok which we are going to see sooner or later.

I think it just has more to do with wanting to keep an eye on who is coming in and out

This is what I have been telling all the way along that it has to be both side not just one side.(Two way not just one way)

I also think we're going to see more of this with other countries, given the various terrorist attacks worldwide coupled with the advances in technology.

I totally agree.

[republique]

obviously cannot speak for the 300 million other Americans, but I don't think I'd be too bothered if other countries implemented a similar scheme. Each country has a right to monitor their own borders however they see fit, and if someone thinks it is too cumbersome, they can choose not to go there. I think certain aspects of the UK immigration process was a pain in the mule, but the UK is a sovereign nation and if I wanted to be here I had to do things their way.

I agree. Aslong as there is a balance of this scheme on both side of atlantic, it should be ok which we are going to see sooner or later.
Now you agree? Do you know what you are agreeing to? There is no balance, we are doing it and no one else is doing it, at least not yet so it isn't quid pro quo.

I think it just has more to do with wanting to keep an eye on who is coming in and out

This is what I have been telling all the way along that it has to be both side not just one side.(Two way not just one way) You have not been saying that. You have been saying it is because of superiority and I told you that it isn't. Keeping an eye on people coming in and out isn't a two street. We are doing what we want. Monitoring who goes in and out isn't quid pro quo.

I also think we're going to see more of this with other countries, given the various terrorist attacks worldwide coupled with the advances in technology.

I totally agree.

Based on your responses, I don't think you are reading it correctly or understanding some nuances because you just agreed to what i have been saying all along

[eliasuk4u]

You don't give up, Don't you?

I agreed that it had to be balanced on both side not just America should be protected but every country has to protect itself from threat therefore If Europe implement any registration or restrictions on non visa nationals such as Americans, American should and will abide to that. I DID NOT agree to what you said that it has to be one way not bothways..

Again, you did not understand what I mean one way and two way. Let me explain you in PURE american english. If America implement registration scheme and expect non visa nationals to abide by that then Europe should do the same thing on non visa nationals by this both can keep an eye on who is coming in to their country and not, According to you, Only America should have this restrictions which non visa nationals have to follow, if its imposed on them they won't do it... What a typical hypocratic policy.

and atlast I was refering to yankeegirl comment that this restrictions will be soon followed by other countries because of advance in technology which America WILL and MUST follow if they want to come to non visa required countries such as European countries.

[republique]

You don't give up, Don't you?

I agreed that it had to be balanced on both side not just America should be protected but every country has to protect itself from threat therefore If Europe implement any registration or restrictions on non visa nationals such as Americans, American should and will abide to that. I DID NOT agree to what you said that it has to be one way not bothways..

Again, you did not understand what I mean one way and two way. Let me explain you in PURE american english. If America implement registration scheme and expect non visa nationals to abide by that then Europe should do the same thing on non visa nationals by this both can keep an eye on who is coming in to their country and not, According to you, Only America should have this restrictions which non visa nationals have to follow, if its imposed on them they won't do it... What a typical hypocratic policy.

and atlast I was refering to yankeegirl comment that this restrictions will be soon followed by other countries because of advance in technology which America WILL and MUST follow if they want to come to non visa required countries such as European countries.

Fine, let's agree to disagree
My point is that it doesn't have to be balanced. The USA can do it and the other countries can do it or not do it. It is up to each govt to decide what they want to do. And this equality thing you think should happen does not apply because every country decides what it wants to do and if the usa wants people to register, then that is their business and it has nothing to do with superiority. Hopefully you understand now.

[jei2]

I don't think it's feasible to have tit-for-tat restrictions against the US. Speaking realistically, countries have to impose requirements that are right for them.

Even my little island of Bim slung the very famous (now ex) wife of a very famous pop star into jail for having banned substances on her person some years back. Factors of much needed tourism, patronage from richer more conservative millionaires plus a bit of "there's more where you from" arrogance were undoubtedly in play.

The same works for the US. They have pressures too and have woken up to the need for greater security since 9/11. Nothing wrong with that. Even if there is an element of feeling superior to the rest of the world (and every American I've ever met has frankly expressed this belief), we all know that America is not the only landmass on the planet.

Personally I'd prefer the extra hassle of staying alive and slobbering over a Texas sized corn dog than seeing the next US landmark loom up a bit too close and personal in front of me.

Otherwise I'm not going.

[eliasuk4u]

Fine, let's agree to disagree

You think it should NOT be balanced and I think SHOULD be balanced. So yeah. lets agree to disagree!Phew, Atlast you agree to something.

an element of feeling superior to the rest of the world (and every American I've ever met has frankly expressed this belief)

Thank you! I rest my case.

[republique]

I don't think it's feasible to have tit-for-tat restrictions against the US. Speaking realistically, countries have to impose requirements that are right for them.

Even my little island of Bim slung the very famous (now ex) wife of a very famous pop star into jail for having banned substances on her person some years back. Factors of much needed tourism, patronage from richer more conservative millionaires plus a bit of "there's more where you from" arrogance were undoubtedly in play.

The same works for the US. They have pressures too and have woken up to the need for greater security since 9/11. Nothing wrong with that. Even if there is an element of feeling superior to the rest of the world (and every American I've ever met has frankly expressed this belief), we all know that America is not the only landmass on the planet.

Personally I'd prefer the extra hassle of staying alive and slobbering over a Texas sized corn dog than seeing the next US landmark loom up a bit too close and personal in front of me.

Otherwise I'm not going.

Thank you some sanity in this thread. This other guy eliasuk, takes the smallest thing and makes it bigger than it is.

[eliasuk4u]

I don't think it's feasible to have tit-for-tat restrictions against the US. Speaking realistically, countries have to impose requirements that are right for them.

Even my little island of Bim slung the very famous (now ex) wife of a very famous pop star into jail for having banned substances on her person some years back. Factors of much needed tourism, patronage from richer more conservative millionaires plus a bit of "there's more where you from" arrogance were undoubtedly in play.

The same works for the US. They have pressures too and have woken up to the need for greater security since 9/11. Nothing wrong with that. Even if there is an element of feeling superior to the rest of the world (and every American I've ever met has frankly expressed this belief, we all know that America is not the only landmass on the planet.

Personally I'd prefer the extra hassle of staying alive and slobbering over a Texas sized corn dog than seeing the next US landmark loom up a bit too close and personal in front of me.

Otherwise I'm not going.

Thank you some sanity in this thread. This other guy eliasuk, takes the smallest thing and makes it bigger than it is.

Yes, Thank you for making it clear which I was trying to do to Mr. republique for some time now which he is failing to understand.

[thirdwave]

The UK has a large 'hostile population' which has its eyes set on (mostly but not exclusively) Western targets both within the UK and elsewhere. As UK nationals are not required to obtain visas before visiting the US, the only way to minimise this threat would be to have a system of screening individuals, similar to the one being currently proposed.

I don`t know if anyone recalls the US proposal in 05/2007 to introduce visas for Muslims from EU Countries, including Britain? It was later abandoned as it was felt to be too complicated and discriminatory. Its likely that this latest move is part of the same process..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... itons.html

[republique]

The UK has a large 'hostile population' which has its eyes set on (mostly but not exclusively) Western targets both within the UK and elsewhere. As UK nationals are not required to obtain visas before visiting the US, the only way to minimise this threat would be to have a system of screening individuals, similar to the one being currently proposed.

I don`t know if anyone recalls the US proposal in 05/2007 to introduce visas for Muslims from EU Countries, including Britain? It was later abandoned as it was felt to be too complicated and discriminatory. Its likely that this latest move is part of the same process..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... itons.html

ABSOLUTELY correct. And since the UK and has a good relations with the UK, they can ask the UK to do it and they understand. Instead of this nonsense regarding superiority and getting offended for no reason

[Spark]

I don`t know if anyone recalls the US proposal in 05/2007 to introduce visas for Muslims from EU Countries, including Britain? It was later abandoned as it was felt to be too complicated and discriminatory. Its likely that this latest move is part of the same process..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... itons.html

Personally, that seems like a better idea to me if I'm perfectly honest, but then again I wouldn't have let their ancestors mass-migrate to the West in the first place, and it has nothing to do with beloved, just common sense.

[eliasuk4u]

The UK has a large 'hostile population' which has its eyes set on (mostly but not exclusively) Western targets both within the UK and elsewhere. As UK nationals are not required to obtain visas before visiting the US, the only way to minimise this threat would be to have a system of screening individuals, similar to the one being currently proposed.

I don`t know if anyone recalls the US proposal in 05/2007 to introduce visas for Muslims from EU Countries, including Britain? It was later abandoned as it was felt to be too complicated and discriminatory. Its likely that this latest move is part of the same process..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... itons.html

ABSOLUTELY correct. And since the UK and has a good relations with the UK, they can ask the UK to do it and they understand. Instead of this nonsense regarding superiority and getting offended for no reason

Phew! Not again republiue, I thought we agreed to disagree. well if you insist...
The reason its abandoned is because of the dicriminatory nature of the proposal against Muslims (which happens even now anyway. Thats the reason most to the muslims are avoiding visiting US) and obviously Britian was against that scheme and might have started a diplomatic row between two countries.
Ok, so how about the American muslims visiting Europe?? Aren't they supposed to consider as threat to Europe same as US considering British muslim as threat to them??? Is this considered as nonsonse?

[eliasuk4u]

I don`t know if anyone recalls the US proposal in 05/2007 to introduce visas for Muslims from EU Countries, including Britain? It was later abandoned as it was felt to be too complicated and discriminatory. Its likely that this latest move is part of the same process..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... itons.html

Personally, that seems like a better idea to me if I'm perfectly honest, but then again I wouldn't have let their ancestors mass-migrate to the West in the first place, and it has nothing to do with beloved, just common sense.

Personally, I don't think that will ever happen to be honest.

[republique]

The UK has a large 'hostile population' which has its eyes set on (mostly but not exclusively) Western targets both within the UK and elsewhere. As UK nationals are not required to obtain visas before visiting the US, the only way to minimise this threat would be to have a system of screening individuals, similar to the one being currently proposed.

I don`t know if anyone recalls the US proposal in 05/2007 to introduce visas for Muslims from EU Countries, including Britain? It was later abandoned as it was felt to be too complicated and discriminatory. Its likely that this latest move is part of the same process..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/ ... itons.html

ABSOLUTELY correct. And since the UK and has a good relations with the UK, they can ask the UK to do it and they understand. Instead of this nonsense regarding superiority and getting offended for no reason

Phew! Not again republiue, I thought we agreed to disagree. well if you insist...
The reason its abandoned is because of the dicriminatory nature of the proposal against Muslims (which happens even now anyway. Thats the reason most to the muslims are avoiding visiting US) and obviously Britian was against that scheme and might have started a diplomatic row between two countries.
Ok, so how about the American muslims visiting Europe?? Aren't they supposed to consider as threat to Europe same as US considering British muslim as threat to them??? Is this considered as nonsonse?

Why are you making it about you. You have some ego. I just agreed with someone else. How come you think you have to reply and invoke my name.

[eliasuk4u]

I suggest you read this post http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewtopic.php?t=13009 before posting any more comments.

You have some ego.

This is a public forum so please be sensible and avoid any personal/ abusive comments.

If your commentary:

• is dearly beloved

• is sexist

• is abusive, personally or generally

• is derogatory or denigrates

• is defamatory

• is intolerant (of beliefs, religion, culture, etc.)

Because of the nature of your comments so far as well as leading to sensitive subject (religious) which might offend others, I withdraw from this discussion. I no longer wish to discuss this issue. Thank you.

[republique]

I suggest you read this post http://www.immigrationboards.com/viewtopic.php?t=13009 before posting any more comments.

You have some ego.

This is a public forum so please be sensible and avoid any personal/ abusive comments.

If your commentary:

• is dearly beloved

• is sexist

• is abusive, personally or generally

• is derogatory or denigrates

• is defamatory

• is intolerant (of beliefs, religion, culture, etc.)

Because of the nature of your comments so far as well as leading to sensitive subject (religious) which might offend others, I withdraw from this discussion. I no longer wish to discuss this issue. Thank you.

You are getting desperate when you have to make stuff up. Pretty sad.

[JAJ]

Thread has degenerated into a slanging match hence I have closed it.