Go Back  FlyerTalk Forums > Travel&Dining > Travel Safety/Security > Checkpoints and Borders Policy Debate
Reload this Page >

Want to be admitted into US VWP, then agree to FAMs?

Community
Wiki Posts
Search

Want to be admitted into US VWP, then agree to FAMs?

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old Sep 26, 2015, 10:49 am
  #16  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by Alex71
Safe harbor will be dead in six months.

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articl...ourt-aide-says
Welcome as that is, that article and its topic is not news to me. As good a job as Bot has done so far, there is still a ways to go; and he won't get into all of it.

There is more than one safe harbor item that undermines the privacy of free persons in the EU.

Last edited by GUWonder; Sep 26, 2015 at 4:35 pm
GUWonder is offline  
Old Sep 28, 2015, 6:51 pm
  #17  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 79
I hate the more air marshals part, especially if they are from the US!


They have a really bad habit of taking seats from innocent passengers who made those reservations MONTHS AGO and airlines just act like sheep and follow their orders all while, at times, not compensating the affected passengers!

If they are going to arrive in the plane, make those reservations well in advance or the airline NOT sell those seats so it will not affect passengers making those seat reservations from shock for being informed of not being given to them hours before boarding their flight!


It is going to suck that they are going to put more of those goons in foreign airlines and having my reserve seat possibly compromised (has not happened to me yet, but to some of my friends....it has and one was force to take a later plane because they "overbook" him) !
FateSucks is offline  
Old Sep 30, 2015, 4:53 am
  #18  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold, Hertz PC, National Exec
Posts: 6,736
Originally Posted by Boggie Dog
They require a visa that takes forever to get and costs lots of money for US visitors and let eveyone else in with normal procedures. One tiny country just saying no might be all that is needed for other countries to follow.
The Peruvian tourist industry might have a teensy objection to that strategy.
cestmoi123 is offline  
Old Oct 6, 2015, 2:10 pm
  #19  
FlyerTalk Evangelist
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: HEL
Programs: lots of shiny metal cards
Posts: 14,105
The logic of VWP and FAM is flimsy at best.

VWP eligible citizens may very well arrive from non-VWP countries to the US and also VWP countries might not have flights to the US.

The implied worry is that VWP countries are somehow more dangerous for air travel, hence the need for more FAMs. So flights ex-FRA need (more?) FAMs but not ex-WAW.

I fail to see the connection.
WilcoRoger is offline  
Old Oct 7, 2015, 2:41 pm
  #20  
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: CPH
Programs: EuroBonus
Posts: 431
This one

* Required use of the INTERPOL Lost and Stolen Passport Database to screen travelers crossing a Visa Waiver country’s borders,

Is not possible for Shengen countries to fulfill - we don't have any passport control on internal borders (at least normally), so how to check against Interpol's database?

DanishFlyer
DanishFlyer is offline  
Old Oct 7, 2015, 5:10 pm
  #21  
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: NYC
Programs: DL PM, Marriott Gold, Hertz PC, National Exec
Posts: 6,736
Originally Posted by DanishFlyer
This one

* Required use of the INTERPOL Lost and Stolen Passport Database to screen travelers crossing a Visa Waiver country’s borders,

Is not possible for Shengen countries to fulfill - we don't have any passport control on internal borders (at least normally), so how to check against Interpol's database?

DanishFlyer
I presume that Shengen gets treated as one country for the purposes of this...
cestmoi123 is offline  
Old Nov 30, 2015, 12:20 pm
  #22  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
cestmoi123, that presumption doesn't hold up -- protest as the EU/EEA may --as it's meant to be bilateral on the national to national level, including with what I indicated previously and below:

Originally Posted by GUWonder
The USG wants that too. I'd rather not encourage anyone to play ball the way the USG wants to in this regard, as the USG really wants an international mass surveillance system when it comes to international travelers -- and more countries copying the USG in this regard is doing what the USG wants but wouldn't be able to do as easily by itself.

There is a nagging suspicion in some circles that at least with regard to some queries against the Interpol lookout databases that the query-use has been hacked to enable USG/Five Eyes' surveillance of passenger/passport movements.
US announces changes to the VWP:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/25791545-post9.html

All to do exactly what I indicated in the first paragraph in the above quote.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Nov 30, 2015, 12:28 pm
  #23  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by WilcoRoger
The logic of VWP and FAM is flimsy at best.

VWP eligible citizens may very well arrive from non-VWP countries to the US and also VWP countries might not have flights to the US.

The implied worry is that VWP countries are somehow more dangerous for air travel, hence the need for more FAMs. So flights ex-FRA need (more?) FAMs but not ex-WAW.

I fail to see the connection.
The US sees VWP-using flight passengers as being less thoroughly reviewed by USG employees than US visa-using flight passengers.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2015, 3:59 pm
  #24  
Moderator, Omni, Omni/PR, Omni/Games, FlyerTalk Posting Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Between DCA and IAD
Programs: UA 1K MM; Hilton Diamond
Posts: 67,129
Originally Posted by GUWonder
The USG wants that too. I'd rather not encourage anyone to play ball the way the USG wants to in this regard, as the USG really wants an international mass surveillance system when it comes to international travelers -- and more countries copying the USG in this regard is doing what the USG wants but wouldn't be able to do as easily by itself.
I also think that it wouldn't bother the average American much at all if foreign governments made it hard to travel there for US citizens. Because the average American doesn't travel abroad. Sigh.

I for one hate the tit-for-tat (such as w/r/t ridiculous visa fees, fingerprinting everyone, etc.), as in the end it only helps the two governments and hurts travelers.
exerda is offline  
Old Dec 2, 2015, 4:24 pm
  #25  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by exerda
I also think that it wouldn't bother the average American much at all if foreign governments made it hard to travel there for US citizens. Because the average American doesn't travel abroad. Sigh.

I for one hate the tit-for-tat (such as w/r/t ridiculous visa fees, fingerprinting everyone, etc.), as in the end it only helps the two governments and hurts travelers.
Yes, that is what I would say too.

Unfortunately, too many people see global travel as a privilege for "the other" rather than as a natural right deserving protection and minimal encumberance in the absence of extenuating circumstances. This hostility to international travel is showing up again in the form of a pending legal change to revoke/deny passports of even more Americans.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Dec 3, 2015, 7:26 pm
  #26  
 
Join Date: Mar 2015
Posts: 79
When airport staff swiped your passport, do they see the countries and times you have visited other countries?

Apparently, my passport was redflagged by the ticket agent when boarding my Icelandic plane from Boston. She made a comment that I travel quite frequently (only once and maybe twice a year, so what?). They did NOT strip me but TSA felt it was "necessary" to pat my legs and arms after going through that x-ray machine even though it says I have nothing on me....and I felt eyes following me everywhere even after passing through security.

They thoroughly checked my checked luggage before it got into the plane...the reason?

A solo male with questionable "origins" (questionable as in, they cannot figure out my ethnicity just by my appearance, even though my name is a dead give away what it is) who travels frequently (none of them being Middle Eastern countries).

I really not enjoying this racial/ethnic profiling being allowed in my own country, especially when one is NOT going to a hostile country.

Last edited by FateSucks; Dec 3, 2015 at 7:54 pm
FateSucks is offline  
Old Dec 4, 2015, 1:59 am
  #27  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by FateSucks
When airport staff swiped your passport, do they see the countries and times you have visited other countries?
Generally, not. Although they more generally can see the other flights you've taken on the same ticket/ticketed PNR.

Originally Posted by FateSucks
Apparently, my passport was redflagged by the ticket agent when boarding my Icelandic plane from Boston. She made a comment that I travel quite frequently (only once and maybe twice a year, so what?). They did NOT strip me but TSA felt it was "necessary" to pat my legs and arms after going through that x-ray machine even though it says I have nothing on me....and I felt eyes following me everywhere even after passing through security.

They thoroughly checked my checked luggage before it got into the plane...the reason?

A solo male with questionable "origins" (questionable as in, they cannot figure out my ethnicity just by my appearance, even though my name is a dead give away what it is) who travels frequently (none of them being Middle Eastern countries).

I really not enjoying this racial/ethnic profiling being allowed in my own country, especially when one is NOT going to a hostile country.
Your boarding pass hit by a haraSSSSment screening flag? A lot of that is automated, but manual selection for haraSSSSment screening is also sometimes part of the picture.

All free Americans being treated equally is not part of the American flying experience, not even when dealing with our own government. Animal Farm comes to mind.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Dec 4, 2015, 7:44 am
  #28  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: WAS
Programs: enjoyed being warm spit for a few years on CO/UA but now nothing :(
Posts: 2,507
for what purpose should some of us not be more equal than the others?
Section 107 is offline  
Old Dec 4, 2015, 9:37 am
  #29  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
Originally Posted by Section 107
for what purpose should some of us not be more equal than the others?
With regard to the USG choosing to make some free Americans haraSSSSment targets without regard to due process rights of such free Americans.
GUWonder is offline  
Old Dec 15, 2017, 2:33 pm
  #30  
Suspended
Original Poster
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Watchlisted by the prejudiced, en route to purgatory
Programs: Just Say No to Fleecing and Blacklisting
Posts: 102,095
The US demands for being in the US VWP have gotten even more egregious, as agreeing to FAMs or the like is only part of what is being demanded now by the USG::
GUWonder is offline  


Contact Us - Manage Preferences - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service -

This site is owned, operated, and maintained by MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Designated trademarks are the property of their respective owners.