Well, Janet Napolitano is on the case.
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=1520295
QuoteCan someone please tell us how U. S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano got her job? She appears to be about as knowledgeable about border issues as a late-night radio call-in yahoo.
In an interview broadcast Monday on the CBC, Ms. Napolitano attempted to justify her call for stricter border security on the premise that "suspected or known terrorists" have entered the U. S. across the Canadian border, including the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack.
All the 9/11 terrorists, of course, entered the United States directly from overseas. The notion that some arrived via Canada is a myth that briefly popped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and was then quickly debunked.
Informed of her error, Ms. Napolitano blustered: "I can't talk to that. I can talk about the future. And here's the future. The future is we have borders."
Just what does that mean, exactly?
Just a few weeks ago, Ms. Napolitano equated Canada's border to Mexico's, suggesting they deserved the same treatment. Mexico is engulfed in a drug war that left more than 5,000 dead last year, and which is spawning a spillover kidnapping epidemic in Arizona. So many Mexicans enter the United States illegally that a multi-billion-dollar barrier has been built from Texas to California to keep them out.
In Canada, on the other hand, the main problem is congestion resulting from cross-border trade. Not quite the same thing, is it?
I'm also watching you Canucks. Oh yes. WOLVERINE!
They want to burn your Black Barracks.
We have to stop all that damn cold air from crossing the border every winter.
I want to go back to the past when we didn't have borders. :weep:
She has time to learn about all this, because she has no life... remember? :)
Seriously, does anyone actually believe that any Cabinet-level appointees generally have any idea what goes on in their departments on a daily, weekly, or even yearly basis?
Go ahead build a wall.
Quote from: Caliga on April 22, 2009, 03:01:21 PM
She has time to learn about all this, because she has no life... remember? :)
Seriously, does anyone actually believe that any Cabinet-level appointees generally have any idea what goes on in their departments on a daily, weekly, or even yearly basis?
Annual basis? :perv:
"The future is we have borders."
She should post on Languish.
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 22, 2009, 03:02:40 PM
Go ahead build a wall.
That could make America safer; if we put Detroit and Buffalo on the Canada side...
Quote from: Savonarola on April 22, 2009, 03:11:16 PM
That could make America safer; if we put Detroit and Buffalo on the Canada side...
I think Sav should be the Homeland Security Secretary.
QuoteThe future is we have borders.
No U.S. world conquest?
Speaking of stupid people, a Polish MP recently raised a question during the PM question time whether the government is doing anything to stop "Polish storks" from being killed in the Med when they migrate South for winter. :D
Meanwhile, the press reported how evil Czech and German wolves cross our Southern border and kill poor Polish sheep.
Let the Canadians in, and next thing you know everyone will be drinking bag milk. :mad:
Quote from: DisturbedPervert on April 22, 2009, 03:23:14 PM
Let the Canadians in, and next thing you know everyone will be drinking bag milk. :mad:
:o
NOOOOOO!!!!111
I think she confused it with the millenium plot, which did try to enter from Canada.
Of course a few days ago she did also claim that it is not a crime to enter the US illegally. :huh:
Didn't the LA 9/11 part two plotters come in from Vancouver?
Like maple syrup, Canada's evil oozes over the United States.
The Canadians. They walk among us. William Shatner. Michael J. Fox. Monty Hall. Mike Meyers. Alex Trebek. All of them Canadians. All of them here.
Think of your children pledging allegiance to the maple leaf.
Mayonnaise on everything.
Winter 11 months of the year.
Anne Murray - all day, every day.
Mayonnaise?
Well we did catch some yahoo who planned to blow up Space needle back at beginning of decade trying to get in from Canada iirc :P
Quote from: garbon on April 22, 2009, 02:59:54 PM
I want to go back to the past when we didn't have borders. :weep:
You'll have to go waaaayyy back when cities were producing zero culture.
Quote from: Siege on April 22, 2009, 07:16:11 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 22, 2009, 02:59:54 PM
I want to go back to the past when we didn't have borders. :weep:
You'll have to go waaaayyy back when cities were producing zero culture.
Israeli cities still produce zero culture, as they are inhabited by a mix of Russians and Arabs.
Fuck you, Neil!
Are you calling me russian??
:mad:
Quote from: Siege on April 22, 2009, 07:54:07 PM
Fuck you, Neil!
Are you calling me russian??
:mad:
No, those are the ashkenazi, you're the arab kind of jew :D
Napolitano's appointment to Homeland Security chief is looking more and more like a "man caused disaster". :whistle:
Was the thinking that because she's the governor of a border state, she's automatically qualified for the job? I bet she can see Mexico from her house! :)
Quote from: Caliga on April 23, 2009, 07:03:49 AM
Was the thinking that because she's the governor of a border state, she's automatically qualified for the job? I bet she can see Mexico from her house! :)
In her defense, perhaps she felt she had to be equal in stating how those two US borders are looked upon, each as bad as the other. Else she'd fear angering someone by a politically correct faux pas. ;)
she has a point. after all, all of America's immediate neighbours are foreign countries! :o
She kinda reminds me of Janet Reno. :cool:
Quote from: saskganesh on April 23, 2009, 07:19:19 AM
she has a point. after all, all of America's immediate neighbours are foreign countries! :o
Or...maybe instead, the US is the foreign country..... :unsure:
Quote from: saskganesh on April 23, 2009, 07:19:19 AM
she has a point. after all, all of America's immediate neighbours are foreign countries! :o
It's worse than that; we have barbarous Gauls on our northern border. :o
And (according to them) they once sacked the Capitol. :o
Save us Gaia Julia Napolitana.
Think of the good things that would happened if we were sacked by the Canadians:
- beer (Molson, LaBatts, et cetera) for breakfast
- Every day is hockey day
- school aged children would learn curling instead of soccer
- Captain Canada and sidekick Barrister Boy would defend us, too
See? There's a ray of sunshine after all.
Curling in school, I wish.
Quote from: Hansmeister on April 22, 2009, 03:29:09 PM
I think she confused it with the millenium plot, which did try to enter from Canada.
Tried and was detected and the threat thwarted.
The system worked.
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 23, 2009, 10:21:57 AM
Curling in school, I wish.
I did some curling in high school. :huh:
Her stupidity is getting a lot of op ed play up here. Another piece in the globe:
QuoteJanet Napolitano needs to check her facts
LAWRENCE MARTIN
From Thursday's Globe and Mail
April 23, 2009 at 12:00 AM EDT
What is Bush throwback Janet Napolitano doing in Barack Obama's cabinet? One of the promises made by the new President, who is making one liberal breakthrough after another, was to end the politics of fear. But as Homeland Security Secretary, Ms. Napolitano is acting like fear personified - it's as if she's in the claws of Dick Cheney.
She was still suggesting this week that the 9/11 terrorists made their way across the Canadian border, despite the contrary having been publicly acknowledged dozens of times. This has even aroused our quiet man in Washington, Ambassador Michael Wilson, to arrange a private meeting with her to set the record straight.
Mr. Wilson and Prime Minister Stephen Harper have the right to be adamant on this file. The endless U.S. angst over security has led to a ramping-up of the border, which has cut into Can-Am commerce. It has led to the introduction of passport requirements, even though we're now almost eight years beyond 9/11. Canadians still have to take off their shoes for inspections at airports because - no telling what damage a pair of wingtips might do - there might be bombs hidden away in the leather.
Ms. Napolitano and others have repeatedly cited the case of the so-called millennium bomber, Ahmed Ressam, who had a trunkload of bomb-making materials when he tried to cross over from British Columbia. That was a decade ago. Mr. Ressam was caught - at the border. The system worked, as it has when other suspected terrorists have tried that route.
Ms. Napolitano's words in a CBC interview have triggered a rare unanimity of opposition in Canada. RCMP Commissioner William Elliott has spoken out, as has business leader Thomas d'Aquino. Mr. Harper raised the border issue with former president George W. Bush in blunt terms, but to no avail. He raised it in more mild terminology with Mr. Obama during his visit to Ottawa two months ago. The message, it seems, hasn't gotten through.
Ms. Napolitano, who also raised hackles in the interview by saying there should be some parity in border security measures for Mexico and Canada, was a highly regarded governor in Arizona. It may be that in being named as a woman to such a sensitive security post, she has felt an extra need to show toughness. We recall Hillary Clinton berating Mr. Obama before the presidential primaries over his idea of negotiating with enemies of the United States.
Mr. Obama has gone ahead with that policy, which has become an approach that even a Conservative such as Mr. Harper can appreciate. He lauded the President at the Summit of the Americas on the weekend for opening a new era in which confrontation is replaced by dialogue. Mr. Harper has carved out a good relationship with Mr. Obama and he should see to it that there is some very direct dialogue on the border issue. Progress has already been made with this administration on the NAFTA file. While campaigning, Mr. Obama vowed to renegotiate the trade agreement, but appears to have dropped the idea.
On the border question, Ms. Napolitano did issue a corrective to her 9/11 comments, saying she was misunderstood. [CC editorial - :rolleyes: more like she misunderstood the facts] But she went on to indicate that there will be no easing of restrictions, saying other terrorists have attempted to get into the United States by way of Canada.
That is probably true and there will probably always be such attempts. But where's the statute of limitations? Instead of easing border barriers as we get further from 9/11, the opposite has taken place. To some, like Ms. Napolitano, this seems to make sense.
But if we are to extend her line of thinking, there will never be a debarricaded border because there is always a chance of a successful attempt from the Canadian side, it being impossible to track down and incarcerate every would-be terrorist in the galaxy.
The other line of thinking is that, as the President has said, you don't let fear trump freedom. If you do, you just play into the hands, as the Prime Minister has said, of those you are trying to defeat.
There are a bunch of other articles that go on about how the extra border delays are hurting the economies of both nations but I wont bore you with that.
Quote from: Neil on April 22, 2009, 07:23:07 PM
Quote from: Siege on April 22, 2009, 07:16:11 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 22, 2009, 02:59:54 PM
I want to go back to the past when we didn't have borders. :weep:
You'll have to go waaaayyy back when cities were producing zero culture.
Israeli cities still produce zero culture, as they are inhabited by a mix of Russians and Arabs.
Is Gaza going to: flip?
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 23, 2009, 10:21:57 AM
Curling in school, I wish.
... we had that. :unsure:
also hockey was part of PE as well.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 23, 2009, 10:40:20 AM
There are a bunch of other articles that go on about how the extra border delays are hurting the economies of both nations but I wont bore you with that.
The bullshit factor in this "controversy" is high, as any would-be "terrorist' really wishing to cross from Canada into the US can probably do so perfectly legally no matter how absurd the restrictions get. It is pure symbolism over substance, you can't keep a would-be "terrorist" out because you can't identify a would-be "terrorist" *before* they commit their crime.
Meanwhile, this silliness is costing everyone (Americans and Canadians alike) money during a recession.
Well, this angst by Canada has gone far enough. Looks like we need an "Overseas Contingency Operation" in Canada, to clarify and rectify the "Man Caused Disaster" put forth by the Head of US Homeland Security. :bowler:
Sask & BB.
Well you anglos are a bunch of lucky SOB.
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 23, 2009, 11:39:18 AM
Sask & BB.
Well you anglos are a bunch of lucky SOB.
must be a winnipeg thing.
Quote from: saskganesh on April 23, 2009, 11:44:00 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 23, 2009, 11:39:18 AM
Sask & BB.
Well you anglos are a bunch of lucky SOB.
must be a winnipeg thing.
I'm pretty sure Winnipeg has more curling clubs per capita than anywhere else on the planet.
Looks like the Obama Administration has found its Joycelin Elders :lol:
Quote from: derspiess on April 23, 2009, 12:20:27 PM
Looks like the Obama Administration has found its Joycelin Elders :lol:
My brother used to make fun of her, her accent, and her positions nonstop. :lol:
"Master-BASHAWN is a sal-UTASHAWN"
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 22, 2009, 02:50:39 PM
Well, Janet Napolitano is on the case.
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=1520295
QuoteCan someone please tell us how U. S. Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano got her job? She appears to be about as knowledgeable about border issues as a late-night radio call-in yahoo.
In an interview broadcast Monday on the CBC, Ms. Napolitano attempted to justify her call for stricter border security on the premise that "suspected or known terrorists" have entered the U. S. across the Canadian border, including the perpetrators of the 9/11 attack.
All the 9/11 terrorists, of course, entered the United States directly from overseas. The notion that some arrived via Canada is a myth that briefly popped up in the wake of the 9/11 attacks, and was then quickly debunked.
Informed of her error, Ms. Napolitano blustered: "I can't talk to that. I can talk about the future. And here's the future. The future is we have borders."
Just what does that mean, exactly?
Just a few weeks ago, Ms. Napolitano equated Canada's border to Mexico's, suggesting they deserved the same treatment. Mexico is engulfed in a drug war that left more than 5,000 dead last year, and which is spawning a spillover kidnapping epidemic in Arizona. So many Mexicans enter the United States illegally that a multi-billion-dollar barrier has been built from Texas to California to keep them out.
In Canada, on the other hand, the main problem is congestion resulting from cross-border trade. Not quite the same thing, is it?
I'm also watching you Canucks. Oh yes. WOLVERINE!
The biggest flaw in her bad equation is that Mexicans actually WANT to go to the US. Canadians have no interest in moving to the US (more jobs here) unless they are actors or musicians ... who really don't count.
I haven't been across the line in over 10 years. meh. I get my USA right here at Languish. :p
Quote from: BuddhaRhubarb on April 23, 2009, 12:34:38 PM
The biggest flaw in her bad equation is that Mexicans actually WANT to go to the US. Canadians have no interest in moving to the US (more jobs here) unless they are actors or musicians ... who really don't count.
I haven't been across the line in over 10 years. meh. I get my USA right here at Languish. :p
The problem with Canadians is the constant stream of them heading south towards Florida on the Interstates in the winter. I have learned a few things about Canadians from this:
1) They can't drive worth a shit
2) The smug look they have on their faces when they have to place their godly feet outside the car at a gas station
3) They can't drive worth a shit
4) Canadian change. WHEN YOU GIVE ME A QUARTER BACK, IT BETTER BE AMERICAN BUB.
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 10:36:21 AM
Tried and was detected and the threat thwarted.
The system worked.
A good argument or leaving things as is if you believe the threat is static.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 23, 2009, 02:07:47 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 10:36:21 AM
Tried and was detected and the threat thwarted.
The system worked.
A good argument or leaving things as is if you believe the threat is static.
so you think the threat is increasing?
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 23, 2009, 01:13:25 PM
4) Canadian change. WHEN YOU GIVE ME A QUARTER BACK, IT BETTER BE AMERICAN BUB.
Why does this matter? It's still a freaking quarter, worth a freaking quarter.
Quote from: saskganesh on April 23, 2009, 02:58:42 PM
so you think the threat is increasing?
I think it is evolving.
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 23, 2009, 02:59:39 PM
Why does this matter? It's still a freaking quarter, worth a freaking quarter.
Because technically it isn't.
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 23, 2009, 02:59:39 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 23, 2009, 01:13:25 PM
4) Canadian change. WHEN YOU GIVE ME A QUARTER BACK, IT BETTER BE AMERICAN BUB.
Why does this matter? It's still a freaking quarter, worth a freaking quarter.
I don't want your goddamn quarters, that is why.
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 23, 2009, 03:00:15 PM
Quote from: saskganesh on April 23, 2009, 02:58:42 PM
so you think the threat is increasing?
I think it is evolving.
Clearly, the best way to counter this protean threat is to annoy people attempting to shop in Buffalo.
Quote from: Caliga on April 23, 2009, 12:23:25 PM
My brother used to make fun of her, her accent, and her positions nonstop. :lol:
"Master-BASHAWN is a sal-UTASHAWN"
The woman was a gold mine of quotes, from her cryptic analogy of "dancing with a bear" to professing to be a fan of "Eric Clapner" :)
Quote from: Malthus on April 23, 2009, 03:05:00 PM
Clearly, the best way to counter this protean threat is to annoy people attempting to shop in Buffalo.
I think I shared one of my border crossing stories here before. A couple of years ago my wife and I took our kids to Seattle to watch the Yankees play. After an hour wait at the border we finally rolled up to the border patrol officer. In years past they would normally recocognize us for what we were, tell us to have a good time and we would be on our way.
This time after I explained that we were going down to see the game he started grilling me about what who played what position. I had no idea for some of them. I felt like I was in a really bad WWII movie. Then, probably thinking he was cunning, he asked me what my real business going to the States was. I just looked at him in disbelief. After a moment of silence I told him again we were going to the baseball game. He then demanded to see proof and we produced the tickets. Thank god we didnt have "will call" tickets which is what we normally do. He then spent a good 5 minutes being a complete ass examining the tickets and wondering if they were fakes.
If that is how a middle aged conservative family man is treated at the border I wonder how bad it is for others.
As a result of that kind of harrassment on subsequent trips we have drastically cut our car trips to the US despite how much I love going to Washington State. If the US government wants to prevent us from coming, they are doing a darn good job of it.
Quote from: saskganesh on April 23, 2009, 04:21:28 PM
Quote from: Admiral Yi on April 23, 2009, 03:00:15 PM
Quote from: saskganesh on April 23, 2009, 02:58:42 PM
so you think the threat is increasing?
I think it is evolving.
into?
Something that is so threatening that it must be just like the threat from illegal mexican immigrants.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 23, 2009, 04:21:05 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 23, 2009, 03:05:00 PM
Clearly, the best way to counter this protean threat is to annoy people attempting to shop in Buffalo.
I think I shared one of my border crossing stories here before.
I've mentioned how US border patrol in Montana asked me with my Alaska license plate on car and Driver license "how long do you plan on staying in the country"
I just stared at him for like 15-30 secs before saying how ever long i feel like. :lol:
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 23, 2009, 04:21:05 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 23, 2009, 03:05:00 PM
Clearly, the best way to counter this protean threat is to annoy people attempting to shop in Buffalo.
I think I shared one of my border crossing stories here before. A couple of years ago my wife and I took our kids to Seattle to watch the Yankees play. After an hour wait at the border we finally rolled up to the border patrol officer. In years past they would normally recocognize us for what we were, tell us to have a good time and we would be on our way.
This time after I explained that we were going down to see the game he started grilling me about what who played what position. I had no idea for some of them. I felt like I was in a really bad WWII movie. Then, probably thinking he was cunning, he asked me what my real business going to the States was. I just looked at him in disbelief. After a moment of silence I told him again we were going to the baseball game. He then demanded to see proof and we produced the tickets. Thank god we didnt have "will call" tickets which is what we normally do. He then spent a good 5 minutes being a complete ass examining the tickets and wondering if they were fakes.
If that is how a middle aged conservative family man is treated at the border I wonder how bad it is for others.
As a result of that kind of harrassment on subsequent trips we have drastically cut our car trips to the US despite how much I love going to Washington State. If the US government wants to prevent us from coming, they are doing a darn good job of it.
Well, shit, maybe you really *were* a terrorist and you were planning to blow up the baseball game. That would explain you having the tickets, but not knowing details of the game that anyone who actually was going to the game would know - like the pitcher's shoe size.
Taking the wife & kids is just good cover. Terrorists don't give a shit about killing a few of their own women & children.
I suggest next time they give you an anal probe. You might be hiding a bomb up there - never know, what with this evolving threat and all. Can't be too cautious.
:D
I still like how Canada nearly flipped out on me when I entered their country without a license plate (new car). The same happened with a receptionist at one of the hotels that asked me for my license plate number. She kept saying "How can you not have a license plate?!"
Quite honestly I have over the years received much more hassle returning to Canada than I ever have driving into the US.
I think I told the story of my very first trip into Alaska (in '03 maybe?). I got to the border and I didn't have any proof of citizenship - only my drivers license. The border guard scolded me like a dog saying "bad Canadian" before letting me into the country 30 seconds later.
Compare that to the Canadian border guard after a day's trip to Skagway. When asked if we had purchased anything I said yes, a case of beer (which was in plain view in the box of my pickup). The young guy starts clucking saying how that isn't allowed. I finish his sentence saying "unless you pay duty". He starts to grill us, but then gets to "What do you do for a living".
"Crown Prosecutor" and "Corrections Officer".
Dejected he just waives us through, and never made me pay duty.
Quote from: garbon on April 23, 2009, 04:30:28 PM
I still like how Canada nearly flipped out on me when I entered their country without a license plate (new car). The same happened with a receptionist at one of the hotels that asked me for my license plate number. She kept saying "How can you not have a license plate?!"
True in fairness last time i drove across border (2 years now) Canada officials were much more of a pain in ass then had been on prior trips.
Still my favorite experience (and in retrospect was bad on my part)was when I arrived in England from Rome, on a one day stopover before headed back to the US. I was going to share a hotel room with a friend who was doing the same, having returned from Russia. The immigration officer asked to see my plane ticket (which I didn't have as it was electronic) and then asked to see info on the hotel I was staying at (which I also didn't have as she'd booked the hotel / I was meeting her at the airport). I'm just glad he didn't ask me for her phone number as I didn't have that either. -_-
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 04:31:55 PM
I think I told the story of my very first trip into Alaska (in '03 maybe?). I got to the border and I didn't have any proof of citizenship - only my drivers license. The border guard scolded me like a dog saying "bad Canadian" before letting me into the country 30 seconds later.
More proof of stupidity. In 03 all you needed to cross into the US and back was a drivers license. There was no need to scold.
QuoteCompare that to the Canadian border guard after a day's trip to Skagway. When asked if we had purchased anything I said yes, a case of beer (which was in plain view in the box of my pickup). The young guy starts clucking saying how that isn't allowed. I finish his sentence saying "unless you pay duty". He starts to grill us, but then gets to "What do you do for a living".
"Crown Prosecutor" and "Corrections Officer".
Dejected he just waives us through, and never made me pay duty.
When you reenter Canada there main task it to make sure you are not evading duty. I dont see any comparison to the idiot on the US border who scolded you for something you didnt need.
Quote from: garbon on April 23, 2009, 04:30:28 PM
I still like how Canada nearly flipped out on me when I entered their country without a license plate (new car). The same happened with a receptionist at one of the hotels that asked me for my license plate number. She kept saying "How can you not have a license plate?!"
How is it that you couldnt have a license plate. I dont understand that either.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 23, 2009, 05:26:03 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 23, 2009, 04:30:28 PM
I still like how Canada nearly flipped out on me when I entered their country without a license plate (new car). The same happened with a receptionist at one of the hotels that asked me for my license plate number. She kept saying "How can you not have a license plate?!"
How is it that you couldnt have a license plate. I dont understand that either.
Temporary 10 day piece of paper you put into your window?
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 23, 2009, 05:26:03 PM
How is it that you couldnt have a license plate. I dont understand that either.
You don't get a license plate number until you get your plates (which take time as they need to mail them). The only number I had was my VIN number (which is consequently what the border patrol guy took down and what I gave to the receptionist).
Quote from: katmai on April 23, 2009, 04:25:31 PM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 23, 2009, 04:21:05 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 23, 2009, 03:05:00 PM
Clearly, the best way to counter this protean threat is to annoy people attempting to shop in Buffalo.
I think I shared one of my border crossing stories here before.
I've mentioned how US border patrol in Montana asked me with my Alaska license plate on car and Driver license "how long do you plan on staying in the country"
I just stared at him for like 15-30 secs before saying how ever long i feel like. :lol:
:lol:
I'm sure he wanted to beat the fuck out of you.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 23, 2009, 05:24:56 PM
More proof of stupidity. In 03 all you needed to cross into the US and back was a drivers license. There was no need to scold.
I believe you're mistaken. It was changed post 9/11 that you needed proof of citizenship. I do remember back in the 90s when I would frequently go into ND that a license was all you needed.
Quote from: crazy canuckCompare that to the Canadian border guard after a day's trip to Skagway. When asked if we had purchased anything I said yes, a case of beer (which was in plain view in the box of my pickup). The young guy starts clucking saying how that isn't allowed. I finish his sentence saying "unless you pay duty". He starts to grill us, but then gets to "What do you do for a living".
"Crown Prosecutor" and "Corrections Officer".
Dejected he just waives us through, and never made me pay duty.
When you reenter Canada there main task it to make sure you are not evading duty. I dont see any comparison to the idiot on the US border who scolded you for something you didnt need.
[/quote]
Evading duty? I pointed to the case of beer sitting in plain sight in the box. He had no interest in collecting duty, he just wanted to be an ass.
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 05:59:55 PM
Evading duty? I pointed to the case of beer sitting in plain sight in the box. He had no interest in collecting duty, he just wanted to be an ass.
Because you pointed it out.
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 05:59:55 PM
I believe you're mistaken. It was changed post 9/11 that you needed proof of citizenship. I do remember back in the 90s when I would frequently go into ND that a license was all you needed.
Actually, although they mentioned doing it post 9/11, I don't think it went into effect until much much later.
http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/passport_requirement.asp
The above site suggests 2008 but I don't know if that is true.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 23, 2009, 05:26:03 PM
How is it that you couldnt have a license plate. I dont understand that either.
We've had this discussion previously. In the US (or at least in California) when you buy a car you don't have license plates on it, but you can still drive it around.
In Canada, this would be illegal. You can get a temporary registration (with a paper license plate you tape inside you windshield), but driving around with "dealer plates" is not something that's done here. This has confused garbon before.
Quote from: Jacob on April 23, 2009, 06:42:41 PM
This has confused garbon before.
Yeah the story is from when I saw you. :)
Quote from: garbon on April 23, 2009, 06:34:21 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 05:59:55 PM
I believe you're mistaken. It was changed post 9/11 that you needed proof of citizenship. I do remember back in the 90s when I would frequently go into ND that a license was all you needed.
Actually, although they mentioned doing it post 9/11, I don't think it went into effect until much much later.
http://www.consular.canada.usembassy.gov/passport_requirement.asp
The above site suggests 2008 but I don't know if that is true.
You have misread something. :console:
I said in 2003 you needed proof of citizenship such as a birth certificate.
Your link talks about the requirement for a passport.
Mischievous Canucks invading our pristine, fruited plains!! Stay in your own frozen, snow covered, Dragon infested lands! ;)
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 04:31:55 PM
Quite honestly I have over the years received much more hassle returning to Canada than I ever have driving into the US.
That has been my experience too.
BTW, a little off topic but just yesterday I had the interview to have the restrictions lifted from my residence permit. You guys(not BB) are stuck with me for another 10 years.
Also, a little more off topic, just today I received my acceptance into the UofI computer Science program. There is cause for celebration tonight. :)
Quote from: garbon on April 23, 2009, 06:44:34 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 23, 2009, 06:42:41 PM
This has confused garbon before.
Yeah the story is from when I saw you. :)
Ah... so we had this discussion before in person. Weird :huh: :)
Quote from: Maximus on April 23, 2009, 08:55:04 PM
Also, a little more off topic, just today I received my acceptance into the UofI computer Science program. There is cause for celebration tonight. :)
Damn foreigners, coming to our universities and stealing places from hardworking American folks.
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 07:02:04 PM
You have misread something. :console:
I said in 2003 you needed proof of citizenship such as a birth certificate.
Your link talks about the requirement for a passport.
Actually it also talks about proof of citizenship:
QuoteEffective January 31, 2008 U.S. Customs and Border Protection officers will no longer accept oral declarations of U.S. or Canadian citizenship from those traveling by land or sea.
U.S. and Canadian travelers will be required to present:
* A government-issued photo ID, such as a driver's license and
* A birth certificate or other proof of citizenship;
* Or - for youth 18 and under - a birth certificate alone
Quote from: PDH on April 23, 2009, 09:19:17 PM
Damn foreigners, coming to our universities and stealing places from hardworking American folks.
Don't forget the wimmin.
What are the odds of how long now that he has his GC till max dumps meri?
:P
grats Max on both accomplishments.
Quote from: garbon on April 23, 2009, 04:30:28 PM
I still like how Canada nearly flipped out on me when I entered their country without a license plate (new car). The same happened with a receptionist at one of the hotels that asked me for my license plate number. She kept saying "How can you not have a license plate?!"
:bleeding: you tried to cross an international border in a car with no license plate at all, and you were surprised to be harassed?
QuoteThis time after I explained that we were going down to see the game he started grilling me about what who played what position. I had no idea for some of them. I felt like I was in a really bad WWII movie.
Maybe he thought you were a Brandenburger. :huh:
Man, the way the Canaidan border gauards act is truly horrific.
[insert anecdotal story about how terrible they are, really for sure here]
Why, if they treat me like that, I just might stop going to Canada! Except when I want to of course - I sure as hell am not going to let some guy in a uniform decide where I go for entertainment.
YMMV, of course.
Quote from: Barrister on April 23, 2009, 04:31:55 PM
"Crown Prosecutor" and "Corrections Officer".
Dejected he just waives us through, and never made me pay duty.
this is like the best answer.
Quote from: garbon on April 23, 2009, 06:34:21 PM
The above site suggests 2008 but I don't know if that is true.
It still hasnt. The implementation was delayed but it looks like it will take effect this fall.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 08:50:36 AM
Man, the way the Canaidan border gauards act is truly horrific.
[insert anecdotal story about how terrible they are, really for sure here]
Why, if they treat me like that, I just might stop going to Canada! Except when I want to of course - I sure as hell am not going to let some guy in a uniform decide where I go for entertainment.
YMMV, of course.
No need to be a troll.
If you are not aware that US border guards are acting much different then they were in the past then consider yourself educated on the point.
If it doesnt concern you that people who would otherwise be making trips into the US but dont because of this shift in behaviour then fine. But for the some of our US posters might be concerned about that.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 08:50:36 AM
I sure as hell am not going to let some guy in a uniform decide where I go for entertainment.
YMMV, of course.
Also, cant let this pass. Its not some guy playing cop in a uniform, its a guy with enough power to seriously fuck you over if he takes a dislike to you.
my mum is a dual citizen; last time she crossed the border she was grilled at length because she was born in NYC but is a resident in Winnipeg. obviously, this is very suspicious behavior for someone crossing the Peace Bridge.
Notwithstanding the one anecdote, I cross the border several times per year and generally border guards are quite pleasant to deal with. Heck I think the more remote the border crossing, the more polite they are. The officers at the Top If The World Highway seem like they're going to invite you in for coffee.
Quote from: saskganesh on April 24, 2009, 11:13:52 AM
my mum is a dual citizen; last time she crossed the border she was grilled at length because she was born in NYC but is a resident in Winnipeg. obviously, this is very suspicious behavior for someone crossing the Peace Bridge.
I can see that. Why would anyone voluntarily live in Winnipeg.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:09:10 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 08:50:36 AM
I sure as hell am not going to let some guy in a uniform decide where I go for entertainment.
YMMV, of course.
Also, cant let this pass. Its not some guy playing cop in a uniform, its a guy with enough power to seriously fuck you over if he takes a dislike to you.
Right, I am sure he would really do so, as your anecdote has proven.
You really should stay in Canada if you are so afraid of a border guard, and their well known penchant for "fucking people over" for no reason.
Why, it's not like literally thousands of Canadians cross the border every single day without incident! The odds of some martinet "fucking you over" because he "takes a dislike to you" are simply too great to risk.
When me and Habs went to Canada, going across the border was very uninteresting in both directions. But I am sure we were the exception.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 11:15:46 AM
Notwithstanding the one anecdote, I cross the border several times per year and generally border guards are quite pleasant to deal with. Heck I think the more remote the border crossing, the more polite they are. The officers at the Top If The World Highway seem like they're going to invite you in for coffee.
Send some of them south and the problem is solved.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:16:23 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:09:10 AM
You really should stay in Canada if you are so afraid of a border guard, and their well known penchant for "fucking people over" for no reason.
If you want to live in blissful ignorance and beleive there is no problem at the US border then just carry on.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:18:37 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:16:23 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:09:10 AM
You really should stay in Canada if you are so afraid of a border guard, and their well known penchant for "fucking people over" for no reason.
If you want to live in blissful ignorance and beleive there is no problem at the US border then just carry on.
If you want to live on in hysteria over imagined problems at the border, then just carry on.
But when you refuse to visit the US, at least have the honesty to just say why rather than making up horror stories about border guards who "fuck you over" if they "take a dislike to you".
"ZOMG! They asked me questions, THE BASTARDS!"
They should setup a waterboarding station at the border to get the truth out of you guys.
Why are we so stupid? Why have we not learned how to use quotes on this board?
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 11:27:07 AM
Why are we so stupid? Why have we not learned how to use quotes on this board?
Too much lead in our waterhose drinking water. :(
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 11:27:57 AM
Too much lead in our waterhose drinking water. :(
I was thinking too much Canada.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:16:23 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:09:10 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 08:50:36 AM
I sure as hell am not going to let some guy in a uniform decide where I go for entertainment.
YMMV, of course.
Also, cant let this pass. Its not some guy playing cop in a uniform, its a guy with enough power to seriously fuck you over if he takes a dislike to you.
Right, I am sure he would really do so, as your anecdote has proven.
You really should stay in Canada if you are so afraid of a border guard, and their well known penchant for "fucking people over" for no reason.
Why, it's not like literally thousands of Canadians cross the border every single day without incident! The odds of some martinet "fucking you over" because he "takes a dislike to you" are simply too great to risk.
When me and Habs went to Canada, going across the border was very uninteresting in both directions. But I am sure we were the exception.
I've been hearing a lot of anecdotes about how the border crossing is much more time consuming, onerous and confrontational than it has ever been in the past - and the switch to full passport requirement isn't going to help. Obviously this isn't something universally true of every trip, more like a tone or trend towards unhelpfulness where helpfulness used to be more the norm.
Thing is, I imagine this will hurt Americans in the pocketbook. Canadians frequently cross the border to shop, but they are less likely to do so if it is an unpleasant ordeal.
You can never have too much Canada.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 11:15:46 AM
Notwithstanding the one anecdote, I cross the border several times per year and generally border guards are quite pleasant to deal with. Heck I think the more remote the border crossing, the more polite they are. The officers at the Top If The World Highway seem like they're going to invite you in for coffee.
:D
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 11:27:07 AM
Why are we so stupid? Why have we not learned how to use quotes on this board?
It's the quick reply + quote that is the problem. It doesn't place the cursor after the [/quote] so we type into it.
Quote from: Malthus on April 24, 2009, 11:29:04 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:16:23 AM
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:09:10 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 08:50:36 AM
I sure as hell am not going to let some guy in a uniform decide where I go for entertainment.
YMMV, of course.
Also, cant let this pass. Its not some guy playing cop in a uniform, its a guy with enough power to seriously fuck you over if he takes a dislike to you.
Right, I am sure he would really do so, as your anecdote has proven.
You really should stay in Canada if you are so afraid of a border guard, and their well known penchant for "fucking people over" for no reason.
Why, it's not like literally thousands of Canadians cross the border every single day without incident! The odds of some martinet "fucking you over" because he "takes a dislike to you" are simply too great to risk.
When me and Habs went to Canada, going across the border was very uninteresting in both directions. But I am sure we were the exception.
I've been hearing a lot of anecdotes about how the border crossing is much more time consuming, onerous and confrontational than it has ever been in the past - and the switch to full passport requirement isn't going to help. Obviously this isn't something universally true of every trip, more like a tone or trend towards unhelpfulness where helpfulness used to be more the norm.
Thing is, I imagine this will hurt Americans in the pocketbook. Canadians frequently cross the border to shop, but they are less likely to do so if it is an unpleasant ordeal.
See, all I ever hear is anecdotes though. It is one of those urban legends - fostered by people who just love to bitch about the stereotype of paranoid America.
Listen to CC - he is going on about how border guards will "fuck you over" if they "take a dislike to you" - but his own anecdote includes no fucking over, and apparently nobody taking any dislike to him.
Talk about complete exaggeration for effect. Of course, the thousands of people who cross every single day without incident - why, that isn't interesting, and nobody posts about it. But we will assume that every time you cross you run the real risk of being "fucked over".
You are probably a hell ofa lot more likely to get "fucked over" by the incompetent drivers on the road than you will that some border guard will "take a dislike to you" and make your life hell.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 11:27:57 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 11:27:07 AM
Why are we so stupid? Why have we not learned how to use quotes on this board?
Too much lead in our waterhose drinking water. :(
Speak for yourself - my hoses are lead safe! I CARE ABOUT THE CHILDREN!
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 24, 2009, 11:32:52 AM
It's the quick reply + quote that is the problem. It doesn't place the cursor after the so we type into it.
I use quick reply and I usually manage it well.
The Canadian Borders officers want to be paid more & carry guns. The added difficulties are a pressure medium
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 11:35:12 AM
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 24, 2009, 11:32:52 AM
It's the quick reply + quote that is the problem. It doesn't place the cursor after the so we type into it.
I use quick reply and I usually manage it well.
There is something bizarre going on. After that message posted, I went back to edit it since I apparently screwed up the quotes somehow (not sure how, I didn't embed quotes or anything).
But it is fine - there is no enclosing quote tags. Shrug.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:34:07 AM
See, all I ever hear is anecdotes though. It is one of those urban legends - fostered by people who just love to bitch about the stereotype of paranoid America.
It's not just anecdotal though. The US has implemented numerous new requirements on Canadians entering the US. Lineups at the Canada-US border are lengthier, and it takes longer to cross.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 11:42:02 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:34:07 AM
See, all I ever hear is anecdotes though. It is one of those urban legends - fostered by people who just love to bitch about the stereotype of paranoid America.
It's not just anecdotal though. The US has implemented numerous new requirements on Canadians entering the US. Lineups at the Canada-US border are lengthier, and it takes longer to cross.
But that isn't what we are talking about - we are talking about the penchant for US border guards to "fuck people over" who the "take a dislike to".
And the new requirements apply to Americans going back into America as well.
I wonder if any of this has been quantified? How long does it take on average, and how much has it increased since 9/11? How much of that is due to new security measures, and how much to increased congestion?
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 11:42:02 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:34:07 AM
See, all I ever hear is anecdotes though. It is one of those urban legends - fostered by people who just love to bitch about the stereotype of paranoid America.
It's not just anecdotal though. The US has implemented numerous new requirements on Canadians entering the US. Lineups at the Canada-US border are lengthier, and it takes longer to cross.
Yup, this.
Though there are also plenty of anecdotes on to of the objective and verifiable difficulties about how border guards are less, well, nice & helpful then they used to be.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:44:56 AM
But that isn't what we are talking about - we are talking about the penchant for US border guards to "fuck people over" who the "take a dislike to".
And the new requirements apply to Americans going back into America as well.
I wonder if any of this has been quantified? How long does it take on average, and how much has it increased since 9/11? How much of that is due to new security measures, and how much to increased congestion?
Berk you are beign a twit.
If I didnt have those tickets and if I had simply had them waiting at the will call window at the stadium, which I usually had done, he would have turned us around.
That would have fucked up our whole weekend. But like I said if you want to put your head in the sand and ignore that fact that people like me are travelling less to spend money in the states then that is of course your choice. And likely what your politicians are counting on when when make stupid policy decisions like the Canadian border must be treated the same as the Mexican border.
I look forward to seeing how many pages this thread has ballooned up to when i get back tonight with the Berkut vs Canadian rumble brewing :P
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:51:18 AM
people like me are travelling less to spend money in the states then that is of course your choice.
Good riddance.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:51:18 AM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:44:56 AM
But that isn't what we are talking about - we are talking about the penchant for US border guards to "fuck people over" who the "take a dislike to".
And the new requirements apply to Americans going back into America as well.
I wonder if any of this has been quantified? How long does it take on average, and how much has it increased since 9/11? How much of that is due to new security measures, and how much to increased congestion?
If I didnt have those tickets and if I had simply had them waiting at the will call window at the stadium, which I usually had done, he would have turned us around.
Wow, you read minds now as well? Impressive! You Canadians, always full of surprises!
So tell me, how many people without tickets get turned around every day?
I think someone is being a twit here, but it isn't me. It might be the person generalizing their singular reported experience into a general case, and then somehow managing to assume that even though he was NOT turned around, or "fucked over" why, we should act as if he had, and everyone else is, all the time!
Of course, you have zero actual evidence that any of this has ever actually happened, or happens with any kind of actual regularity. Just a single story of you NOT being turned around, you NOT being "fucked over", and in fact you going along to watch the game.
I guess that is a good reason to not go to any more games - why, what if he lets you through after answering a few questions again????
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 11:51:18 AM
fact that people like me are travelling less to spend money in the states
If that is happening, for "people like you" I am guessing it has nothing to do with being allowed to go the game after answering a few questions.
Probably some other dynamic in effect, although I guess bitching about "border security" is a decent way to pretend like it has something to do with something other than yourself.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:58:40 AM
If that is happening, for "people like you" I am guessing it has nothing to do with being allowed to go the game after answering a few questions.
Probably some other dynamic in effect, although I guess bitching about "border security" is a decent way to pretend like it has something to do with something other than yourself.
I don't know, I mean I think there is some value in not wanting to do something after a negative experience. I went to Tijuana once, I probably won't go back again. I had two crazy nights of making out with women; I also don't think that I'll do that again. :(
Quote from: katmai on April 24, 2009, 11:52:15 AM
I look forward to seeing how many pages this thread has ballooned up to when i get back tonight with the Berkut vs Canadian rumble brewing :P
You should thank me for making such fabulous threads.
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 12:00:51 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:58:40 AM
If that is happening, for "people like you" I am guessing it has nothing to do with being allowed to go the game after answering a few questions.
Probably some other dynamic in effect, although I guess bitching about "border security" is a decent way to pretend like it has something to do with something other than yourself.
I don't know, I mean I think there is some value in not wanting to do something after a negative experience. I went to Tijuana once, I probably won't go back again. I had two crazy nights of making out with women; I also don't think that I'll do that again. :(
Even if it is just an imagined negative experience?
What if you went to Tijuana, had a great time, enjoyed yourself, but just thought "hey, that could have gone badly if space aliens had space-napped me
as we all know they are won't to do!"?
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 12:03:37 PM
Even if it is just an imagined negative experience?
What if you went to Tijuana, had a great time, enjoyed yourself, but just thought "hey, that could have gone badly if space aliens had space-napped me as we all know they are won't to do!"?
Fair...although presumably dealing with the border guard was unpleasant for CC (regardless of whether or not it escalates).
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 12:17:37 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 12:03:37 PM
Even if it is just an imagined negative experience?
What if you went to Tijuana, had a great time, enjoyed yourself, but just thought "hey, that could have gone badly if space aliens had space-napped me as we all know they are won't to do!"?
Fair...although presumably dealing with the border guard was unpleasant for CC (regardless of whether or not it escalates).
Unpleasant perhaps, but using it as ammunition to justify hysteria about border guards fucking people over they don't like in his imagination, and then saying that Canadians won't come to the US because of something that didn't actually happen is a bit ludicrous.
What DID actually happen? He came to the border, a border GUARD asked him some questions about what he was doing, and he went on and enjoyed the game. I am failing to see what is worth getting so worked up about.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 12:23:53 PM
Unpleasant perhaps, but using it as ammunition to justify hysteria about border guards fucking people over they don't like in his imagination, and then saying that Canadians won't come to the US because of something that didn't actually happen is a bit ludicrous.
What DID actually happen? He came to the border, a border GUARD asked him some questions about what he was doing, and he went on and enjoyed the game. I am failing to see what is worth getting so worked up about.
Although mistakenly said otherwise, part of the unpleasant bit is a fear that it would escalate. If a bunch more Canadians feel that way, because they perceive that border guards are being more uptight...then I don't see anything wrong with that.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 12:23:53 PMUnpleasant perhaps, but using it as ammunition to justify hysteria about border guards fucking people over they don't like in his imagination, and then saying that Canadians won't come to the US because of something that didn't actually happen is a bit ludicrous.
What DID actually happen? He came to the border, a border GUARD asked him some questions about what he was doing, and he went on and enjoyed the game. I am failing to see what is worth getting so worked up about.
You don't cross borders very often, do you?
I mean of the international kind.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 12:33:56 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 12:23:53 PMUnpleasant perhaps, but using it as ammunition to justify hysteria about border guards fucking people over they don't like in his imagination, and then saying that Canadians won't come to the US because of something that didn't actually happen is a bit ludicrous.
What DID actually happen? He came to the border, a border GUARD asked him some questions about what he was doing, and he went on and enjoyed the game. I am failing to see what is worth getting so worked up about.
You don't cross borders very often, do you?
I mean of the international kind.
He mentioned he was in Canada a few months ago, and found crossing the border wholely unremarkable.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 12:33:56 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 12:23:53 PMUnpleasant perhaps, but using it as ammunition to justify hysteria about border guards fucking people over they don't like in his imagination, and then saying that Canadians won't come to the US because of something that didn't actually happen is a bit ludicrous.
What DID actually happen? He came to the border, a border GUARD asked him some questions about what he was doing, and he went on and enjoyed the game. I am failing to see what is worth getting so worked up about.
You don't cross borders very often, do you?
I mean of the international kind.
Actually, I cross them more than most Americans, probably even more than most Euroes and Canadians, since apparently Euroes don't have borders anymore.
I even cross the US-Canadian border. It is rather dissapointingly routine. Although last time at NBW the guard did ask Habs some questions about the weather in Georgia - we were wondering if he was trying to trick Habs into admitting he was a terrorist, or just wishing he was in fucking Georgia, since it was about -400 degrees in Niagara at the time.
Man, could you imagine how bad it could have been if he had "taken a dislike to me"? I might have been forced to stay in Canada....forever!
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 11:34:52 AM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 11:27:57 AM
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 11:27:07 AM
Why are we so stupid? Why have we not learned how to use quotes on this board?
Too much lead in our waterhose drinking water. :(
Speak for yourself - my hoses are lead safe! I CARE ABOUT THE CHILDREN!
One day, you'll bring the kids for a tour of Uncle Grumbler's History Emporium and they'll eat some of his Napoleonic guys.
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 12:27:15 PMAlthough mistakenly said otherwise, part of the unpleasant bit is a fear that it would escalate. If a bunch more Canadians feel that way, because they perceive that border guards are being more uptight...then I don't see anything wrong with that.
I travel to the US a fair bit for work. I don't have a choice in the matter. Once there, I quite enjoy the US and it's a country I wouldn't mind spending time and money in for leisure. However, my experiences crossing the border has caused me to decide that I don't want to deal with the hassle, so I'll go elsewhere. Similarly, when flying internationally there are often route options involving transfers in the US. I always avoid these; the potential hassle at the border simply not being worth it.
I'm obviously just one individual, so the financial impact is miniscule. However, if it is part of a larger trend that sort of decision making will have an economic impact.
In terms of further anecdotes, many of my peers travel to the states in various capacities; for work or pleasure. In my observation, it takes two or three bad experiences at the border before you start avoiding going to the US as a conscious decision. The first one or two times it just provides you with a "fucking US border guards" anecdote, but shortly thereafter it's just not worth the hassle.
Canadian border guards have always been good to me, though obviously they're dicks to some people (like the Polish guy who got killed last year). I expect you tend to learn to live with your own border guards being dicks because if you go somewhere, you have to get back home so you don't have a choice. But where you do have a choice, this sort of stuff matters.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 12:35:26 PMHe mentioned he was in Canada a few months ago, and found crossing the border wholely unremarkable.
Once != often.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 12:47:36 PM
Canadian border guards have always been good to me, though obviously they're dicks to some people (like the Polish guy who got killed last year).
To be fair to the fine officers of the CBSA that was the RCMP who killed the polish guy. :(
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 12:47:36 PM
I expect you tend to learn to live with your own border guards being dicks because if you go somewhere, you have to get back home so you don't have a choice.
I'm not use to having trouble with American border guards, when entering the country, whether by car or plane. I usually have more trouble trying to leave the country (which in the case of flights is just American security). :(
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 12:38:10 PMActually, I cross them more than most Americans, probably even more than most Euroes and Canadians, since apparently Euroes don't have borders anymore.
I even cross the US-Canadian border. It is rather dissapointingly routine. Although last time at NBW the guard did ask Habs some questions about the weather in Georgia - we were wondering if he was trying to trick Habs into admitting he was a terrorist, or just wishing he was in fucking Georgia, since it was about -400 degrees in Niagara at the time.
Man, could you imagine how bad it could have been if he had "taken a dislike to me"? I might have been forced to stay in Canada....forever!
Well good for you that you haven't had any bad experiences.
Should you ever find yourself in a situation where it's beyond routine processing, you might find the realization of utter helplessness unsettling. After that point some of these routine questions and attitudes might become more unsettling as well when you experience them.
To be honest, this is a feature of any border crossing. They can fuck you up or just be what seems to you unduly intimidating. Generally when that happens, you blame the country where it happens and write that place off as a place to go. Recently, anecdotally and according to the date mentioned upthread, there seems to have been a bit of an upswing in that sort of behavour. This will have an impact, though that is somewhat mitigated by the fact that the US is so big and important (especially to Canada) that you can't write it off; but some people, myself included, are not spending out leisure dollars there because the border makes it not worth it. That's not really a spite thing, and less of a fear about things going wrong than simply an aversion to hassles; I don't want to start a vacation with some humourless jerk treating me like a shifty illegal immigrant terrorist and being rude about it.
As for your last bit, the way in which border guards can cause trouble for you is somewhat different when they're from your own country. The one thing they won't do is keep you out.
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 01:00:35 PMI'm not use to having trouble with American border guards, when entering the country, whether by car or plane. I usually have more trouble trying to leave the country (which in the case of flights is just American security). :(
I suspect it's a little different entering your own country and entering a foreign country.
Security is a hassle everywhere, though more so in the US I've found (haven't been to Israel though).
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:03:47 PM
I suspect it's a little different entering your own country and entering a foreign country.
Agreed. Just wanted to add that it might not be because we are used to it; but more that it doesn't happen as much to us.
So, to recap the thread, we should waterboard every canadian when they are interrogated at the border, right?
Wow - Jacob you're starting to push me over to the BArkut side of things.
I really don't think discussions about how border guards can "fuck you up" really adds anything to the debate. What does that even mean for starters? Assuming a non-corrupt country like the US, about the only risks you face going through a border are to have your goods searched. And while that is a pain in the ass, unless you're foolish enough to try and smuggle contraband it is only an inconvenience.
They have the right to deny you entry, but honestly short of having a criminal record I've never heard or anyone, ever, being denied entry without some justification. And plenty of people with criminal records routinely cross over to the US.
There are plenty of new requirements and restrictions being palced on people crossing the border and those can and should be discussed. But discussing times where you feel "unsettled" or "utter helplessness" isn't very productive.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:01:52 PM
but some people, myself included, are not spending out leisure dollars there because the border makes it not worth it.
Fair enough. I suppose if being asked questions and imagining horrible things happening (these things enver actually happen of course, except to someone third cousins sisters brothers wife's best friends boss) causes some kind of emotional stress, you should probably avoid it.
QuoteThat's not really a spite thing, and less of a fear about things going wrong than simply an aversion to hassles;
Sure. I think the entire thing is about 70% bullshit, 30% actual hassle. Just a way for people to express the herd mentality "us vs them" angst about the Big Meany near dictatorship US where the hassle is so great that it isn't even worth dealing with.
Just look at all these anecdotal examples we have of people traveling to the US and being turned back! Oh wait, I mean they COULD be turned back. Hypothetically.
How many times did that happen to you Jacob?
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:15:28 PM
There are plenty of new requirements and restrictions being palced on people crossing the border and those can and should be discussed. But discussing times where you feel "unsettled" or "utter helplessness" isn't very productive.
Actually, it is very productive. You just have to know what they are trying to produce.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 12:47:36 PM
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 12:27:15 PMAlthough mistakenly said otherwise, part of the unpleasant bit is a fear that it would escalate. If a bunch more Canadians feel that way, because they perceive that border guards are being more uptight...then I don't see anything wrong with that.
I travel to the US a fair bit for work. I don't have a choice in the matter. Once there, I quite enjoy the US and it's a country I wouldn't mind spending time and money in for leisure. However, my experiences crossing the border has caused me to decide that I don't want to deal with the hassle, so I'll go elsewhere.
So Jacob, how many times have you traveled to the US, and what was the pervasive "hassle" that made it not worth it?
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:15:28 PM
Wow - Jacob you're starting to push me over to the BArkut side of things.
I really don't think discussions about how border guards can "fuck you up" really adds anything to the debate.
If a border guard has the power to put me on a no fly list - which they do - has the power to turn me away and ruin all my plans - which they do - and the excercise that kind of power by asking the kind of asshead questions I was asked why would I ever want to put myself in that position.
In other words, while there are a lot of nice things to see and do in the States, there are also nice things to do in other parts of the world and I can get to those places without any of the hassle of entering the US. Therefore, the US loses out. Pretty simple.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:15:28 PM
Wow - Jacob you're starting to push me over to the BArkut side of things.
I really don't think discussions about how border guards can "fuck you up" really adds anything to the debate. What does that even mean for starters?
My father, a truck driver, crosses the border weekly. «Fucking you up», in his case, meant that the time he lost it and finally asked for a little curtesy, after countless humiliations, «hassle» and «bullshit», he was detained for five hours under spurious «inspections» and missed his delivery time. Other cases of people I know involve being searched thoroughly and missing the connecting flights (which you have to pay for).
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 01:26:34 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:15:28 PM
Wow - Jacob you're starting to push me over to the BArkut side of things.
I really don't think discussions about how border guards can "fuck you up" really adds anything to the debate.
If a border guard has the power to put me on a no fly list - which they do - has the power to turn me away and ruin all my plans - which they do - and the excercise that kind of power by asking the kind of asshead questions I was asked why would I ever want to put myself in that position.
So asking you questions is "exercising that kind of power" that is the same as "turning you away and ruining your plans" or putting you on a "no fly list"?
Hysterical much?
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:19:23 PMHow many times did that happen to you Jacob?
I've been turned back three times (though luckily, in all cases it's been a "not going to let you in" rather than a "denied entry" which has been entered in the database - because those apparently make the hassle permanent). One of those times the guard went to great lengths explaining that he could, if he felt so inclined, take the car out back and completely tear it apart looking for drugs (though this had nothing to do with the stated reason for refusing us entry). And no, he was of course under no obligation to put it back together or not cut up the seats and so on.
I've had border guards be jerks to me a lot more times than that.
That said, I have also had numerous US border guards be pleasant and professional or simply efficiently professional as did their thing.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 01:30:58 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:15:28 PM
Wow - Jacob you're starting to push me over to the BArkut side of things.
I really don't think discussions about how border guards can "fuck you up" really adds anything to the debate. What does that even mean for starters?
My father, a truck driver, crosses the border weekly. «Fucking you up», in his case, meant that the time he lost it and finally asked for a little curtesy, after countless humiliations, «hassle» and «bullshit», he was detained for five hours under spurious «inspections» and missed his delivery time. Other cases of people I know involve being searched thoroughly and missing the connecting flights (which you have to pay for).
Oh my, countless humiliations! COUNTLESS!
"Spurious" inspections! Thorough searches! All happening to someone else, of course.
I wonder what the actual story is here - dad told some border guard to go fuck himself or something?
I actually know someone who is a border guard. I think I will ask her how often they "take a dislike to people" and "fuck them up" just because they asked for some courtesy.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:32:21 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:19:23 PMHow many times did that happen to you Jacob?
I've been turned back three times (though luckily, in all cases it's been a "not going to let you in" rather than a "denied entry" which has been entered in the database - because those apparently make the hassle permanent).
Why?
Looks like Berkut is doing his best to avenge himself for being wound up about his garden house.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:19:23 PM
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:01:52 PM
but some people, myself included, are not spending out leisure dollars there because the border makes it not worth it.
Fair enough. I suppose if being asked questions and imagining horrible things happening (these things enver actually happen of course, except to someone third cousins sisters brothers wife's best friends boss) causes some kind of emotional stress, you should probably avoid it.
QuoteThat's not really a spite thing, and less of a fear about things going wrong than simply an aversion to hassles;
Sure. I think the entire thing is about 70% bullshit, 30% actual hassle. Just a way for people to express the herd mentality "us vs them" angst about the Big Meany near dictatorship US where the hassle is so great that it isn't even worth dealing with.
Just look at all these anecdotal examples we have of people traveling to the US and being turned back! Oh wait, I mean they COULD be turned back. Hypothetically.
How many times did that happen to you Jacob?
Berk, you have a point that "unpleasantness" is impossible to quantify and difficult to distinguish sometimes from simple prejudice.
But I cannot so easily dismiss numerous accounts from different people, many of whom are *not* the types who typically revel in "...the herd mentality "us vs them" angst about the Big Meany near dictatorship US ..." - such as my own parents. They go across the border
all the time - more than once a month - to visit my brother who lives in the US; being retired, they want to see their grandchildren. They are not your "anti US" types. They tell me it is more and more of a hassle, with definite attitute issues an the part of the guards becomming more frequent. They are retired grandparents, my dad a former professor, kindly and soft-spoken - hardly the sort likely to cop an attitude with border guards.
Other people say the same. In fact almost everyone says it. Why should I not believe it?
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:32:21 PM
. One of those times the guard went to great lengths explaining that he could, if he felt so inclined, take the car out back and completely tear it apart looking for drugs (though this had nothing to do with the stated reason for refusing us entry).
But you knew before you got up that morning that in fact border guards do have the power to do just that - why is it so terrible that he said so
and then did not do it?
Are you arguing that in fact they should not be allowed to search cars for drugs, or turn people away for whatever reason?
Would it have been better if he had actually done it?
Quote
I wonder what the actual story is here - dad told some border guard to go fuck himself or something?
I actually know someone who is a border guard. I think I will ask her how often they "take a dislike to people" and "fuck them up" just because they asked for some courtesy.
Please do ask that someone. Then I will proceed to cast aspersions and doubts over your acquaintance and tell you what *really* happened, just like you do.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:35:11 PMWhy?
I am not going to tell you for three reasons:
1. It'd be rather incautious to discuss specific details on a permanent medium such as the internet.
2. You're not engaging this discussion in any kind of good faith.
3. It's none of your business.
Quote from: crazy canuck on April 24, 2009, 01:26:34 PM
If a border guard has the power to put me on a no fly list - which they do - has the power to turn me away and ruin all my plans - which they do - and the excercise that kind of power by asking the kind of asshead questions I was asked why would I ever want to put myself in that position.
All kinds of officials have the theoretical power to do all kinds of nasty things to you. Once someone is arrested I have a ridiculous amount of power to make a person's life hell. BUt I never abuse it.
Do you know of anyone who has been put on a no fly list? Do you know of anyone who was turned away?
Jacob, I am surprised to hear you've been told you couldn't enter the US. Did they state any reason why?
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:36:22 PM
Looks like Berkut is doing his best to avenge himself for being wound up about his garden house.
It is a little bizarre.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:39:09 PM
BUt I never abuse it.
Unfortunately(?), you aren't every gov official.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:38:49 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:35:11 PMWhy?
I am not going to tell you for three reasons:
1. It'd be rather incautious to discuss specific details on a permanent medium such as the internet.
2. You're not engaging this discussion in any kind of good faith.
3. It's none of your business.
Thats fair enough. But I would note that there are legitimate reasons to turn someone away at the border. There are some that may not be fair to you personally (perhaps due to people you were travelling with), but the mere fact of a person being turned away is not by itself proof of terrible treatment.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 01:37:36 PMPlease do ask that someone. Then I will proceed to cast aspersions and doubts over your acquaintance and tell you what *really* happened, just like you do.
From his demeanour and the discussion in this thread I'm guessing that Berkut is thinking being a border guard sounds very attractive.
Quote from: Malthus on April 24, 2009, 01:36:35 PM
Berk, you have a point that "unpleasantness" is impossible to quantify and difficult to distinguish sometimes from simple prejudice.
But I cannot so easily dismiss numerous accounts from different people, many of whom are *not* the types who typically revel in "...the herd mentality "us vs them" angst about the Big Meany near dictatorship US ..." - such as my own parents. They go across the border all the time - more than once a month - to visit my brother who lives in the US; being retired, they want to see their grandchildren. They are not your "anti US" types. They tell me it is more and more of a hassle, with definite attitute issues an the part of the guards becomming more frequent. They are retired grandparents, my dad a former professor, kindly and soft-spoken - hardly the sort likely to cop an attitude with border guards.
Other people say the same. In fact almost everyone says it. Why should I not believe it?
Two things:
1. I am not saying you should not believe it - I am saying getting hysterical about things that haven't actually happened is silly and betrays a deeper issue. They *might* have turned me away! They *might* take a disliking to me! Golly, this only happens in the US,
of course!
2. Just because everyone says something is so, doesn't make it so. This kind of "groupthink" is common, in fact, and self-reinforcing.
Perhaps the incidences of "hassle" is really not that different, but the perception of the US has declined considerably, and more specifically, the US government, such that now people notice it and comment on it a lot more. More people comment, more people notice, they comment more, suddenly it seems like this epidemic, where in reality, maybe little has actually changed.
Most of the time crossing the border is uneventful. Sometimes you are unlucky, and your car is the 14th in line, so it gets to be the car that is pulled out and searched. Maybe now it is every ten cars instead of every 20. Maybe now there are 50% more people trying to cross, so in fact it all seems more time consuming and a greater hassle.
Or maybe it is really the case that in fact the US Border Patrol is going out of their way to make visitors not want to come to the US. So far, I haven't seen anything but anecdote and hearsay to suggest that the issue is anything worthy of the hysteria though.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 01:37:36 PM
Quote
I wonder what the actual story is here - dad told some border guard to go fuck himself or something?
I actually know someone who is a border guard. I think I will ask her how often they "take a dislike to people" and "fuck them up" just because they asked for some courtesy.
Please do ask that someone. Then I will proceed to cast aspersions and doubts over your acquaintance and tell you what *really* happened, just like you do.
I didn't tell you what happened - how would I know, since I wasn't there?
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:39:09 PMJacob, I am surprised to hear you've been told you couldn't enter the US. Did they state any reason why?
Yes they did, in each case.
Quote from: Maximus on April 24, 2009, 01:39:53 PM
It is a little bizarre.
I think he is upset because he perceives that the US is being single out for being particularly bad.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:38:49 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:35:11 PMWhy?
I am not going to tell you for three reasons:
1. It'd be rather incautious to discuss specific details on a permanent medium such as the internet.
2. You're not engaging this discussion in any kind of good faith.
3. It's none of your business.
1. Nobody knows your name, and it seems relevant - perhaps you were turned away for a perfectly valid reason.
2. Of course - those who don't agree with you clearly must not be discussing things in "good faith".
3. None of this is any of my business, or your business, or anyones business. What does that have to do with anything?
I will just note that when asked for specifics of your being "turned away" you refused to answer. talk about not discussing things in good faith!
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 01:42:57 PM
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 01:37:36 PMPlease do ask that someone. Then I will proceed to cast aspersions and doubts over your acquaintance and tell you what *really* happened, just like you do.
From his demeanour and the discussion in this thread I'm guessing that Berkut is thinking being a border guard sounds very attractive.
That is some good faith discussion you have going here. Ad hom attack always is a great way to show what good faith you have in honest discussion.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:43:02 PM
Perhaps the incidences of "hassle" is really not that different, but the perception of the US has declined considerably, and more specifically, the US government, such that now people notice it and comment on it a lot more. More people comment, more people notice, they comment more, suddenly it seems like this epidemic, where in reality, maybe little has actually changed.
Most of the time crossing the border is uneventful. Sometimes you are unlucky, and your car is the 14th in line, so it gets to be the car that is pulled out and searched. Maybe now it is every ten cars instead of every 20. Maybe now there are 50% more people trying to cross, so in fact it all seems more time consuming and a greater hassle.
Or maybe it is really the case that in fact the US Border Patrol is going out of their way to make visitors not want to come to the US. So far, I haven't seen anything but anecdote and hearsay to suggest that the issue is anything worthy of the hysteria though.
There is more than just perception at work here. The US has taken numerous steps to tighten its borders (including its Canadian border) since 9/11. It has made it more difficult to get into the US.
One of my colleagues was just at a joint enforcement conference in Alaska, and met with Alaskan DAs. He said that they spent a huge amount of time talking about terrorism - and this is Alaska, not New York. On the ground Alaska deals with the same crime issues as we do.
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 01:44:57 PM
Quote from: Maximus on April 24, 2009, 01:39:53 PM
It is a little bizarre.
I think he is upset because he perceives that the US is being single out for being particularly bad.
Not at all, actually - more just find the hysteria people engage in over things that they imagine to happen, then spread that hysteria rather interesting.
"Oh, did you hear what happened to CC at the border! They almosst didn't let him in!"
"Oh really, well I heard about this guy who was once turned away three time!"
"Oh my gosh! It is getting so bad!
Etc., etc.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:47:06 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:43:02 PM
Perhaps the incidences of "hassle" is really not that different, but the perception of the US has declined considerably, and more specifically, the US government, such that now people notice it and comment on it a lot more. More people comment, more people notice, they comment more, suddenly it seems like this epidemic, where in reality, maybe little has actually changed.
Most of the time crossing the border is uneventful. Sometimes you are unlucky, and your car is the 14th in line, so it gets to be the car that is pulled out and searched. Maybe now it is every ten cars instead of every 20. Maybe now there are 50% more people trying to cross, so in fact it all seems more time consuming and a greater hassle.
Or maybe it is really the case that in fact the US Border Patrol is going out of their way to make visitors not want to come to the US. So far, I haven't seen anything but anecdote and hearsay to suggest that the issue is anything worthy of the hysteria though.
There is more than just perception at work here. The US has taken numerous steps to tighten its borders (including its Canadian border) since 9/11. It has made it more difficult to get into the US.
One of my colleagues was just at a joint enforcement conference in Alaska, and met with Alaskan DAs. He said that they spent a huge amount of time talking about terrorism - and this is Alaska, not New York. On the ground Alaska deals with the same crime issues as we do.
There is no question that US border security has been stepped up considerably since 9/11. The question is whether or not this has really had the rather astounding practical effects for the average person crossing the border that everyone is talking about.
I would bet, like I said earlier, this is 30% real increased hassle, and 70% bullshit. Or maybe 40/60.
I agree that there is more than perception at work - the question is how much more. It is unfortunate that the discussion had to become just another ad hom pissing match once I started asking for actual or specific examples.
The quality of strippers in Windsor has declined slightly since 2001.
Quoteaccording to Homeland Security secretary Michael Chertoff, in October 2008 the No Fly list contained only 2,500 names
Whew, and CC was almost one of them!
I suspect that it might take a bit more than not knowing who plays second to get on the US no fly list.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 01:41:37 PMThats fair enough. But I would note that there are legitimate reasons to turn someone away at the border. There are some that may not be fair to you personally (perhaps due to people you were travelling with), but the mere fact of a person being turned away is not by itself proof of terrible treatment.
I agree that being turned away is not proof of terrible treatment.
In all of the cases there was, of course, a legitimate reason. Otherwise I wouldn't have been turned away. In one of the cases it was accompagnied by what I can only describe as explicit intimidation; in one case it was accompagnied by what I'd term pointeless petty hassles (e.g. "you can't take these things with you to the US, you have to dispose of them. OK, done? Alright, we're not letting you in"; and in the last case it was actually quite sympathetic "I'm going to turn you back for this explicit reason, if you come back with X and Y like this it shouldn't be a problem. You triggered an arbitrary flag and the format of the proof that you have that it doesn't apply to you isn't convincing in this context though it normally is, though you couldn't know that, but this and that will be sufficient." - of course on the second time through, no one gave a fuck about my proof and just waved me through.
In fact, I am not claiming to have been treated terribly. I am claiming that there have been enough hassle and there is enough risk (small, but with potentially dire consequences) that it has affected my behaviour.
The one instance of intimidation combined with the one instance of petty spitefulness combined with the many instances of plain rudeness and hostility has had an impact.
There's also a Canadian no fly list, btw.
Obviously, the answer is then to broadcast the information that when border guards are using that threat, people should never actually take it seriously, should fearlessly tell border guards to mind their manners, should answer in the same tone they are asked question, should refuse to answer to questions when they feel it is irrelevant, should boldly threaten border guards to lodge complaints - since their threats are actually empty, their powers well-checked, and travellers' fear and humiliations are unfounded.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:46:57 PMThat is some good faith discussion you have going here. Ad hom attack always is a great way to show what good faith you have in honest discussion.
The good faith discussion ended a while ago. My mistake was assuming you were interested in that to begin with :)
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 24, 2009, 01:57:01 PM
There's also a Canadian no fly list, btw.
I bet they could put me on that if they didn't like me. I might have to pass on NBW next year.
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 01:44:57 PM
Quote from: Maximus on April 24, 2009, 01:39:53 PM
It is a little bizarre.
I think he is upset because he perceives that the US is being single out for being particularly bad.
damn. If that's the case, I think I've read this thread more than a few times before.
Berkut is from Arizona as well correct?
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:02:39 PM
I bet they could put me on that if they didn't like me. I might have to pass on NBW next year.
We can only hope.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 02:00:34 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:46:57 PMThat is some good faith discussion you have going here. Ad hom attack always is a great way to show what good faith you have in honest discussion.
The good faith discussion ended a while ago. My mistake was assuming you were interested in that to begin with :)
That is a very cheap cop-out for engaging in personal attacks rather than discussion.
I didn't make this about YOU, I don't see why you feel the need to make it about ME - rather than the obvious reasons people resort to fallacies.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 02:04:00 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:02:39 PM
I bet they could put me on that if they didn't like me. I might have to pass on NBW next year.
We can only hope.
Very nice. Your good faith shines through. Maybe you could insult my mom while you are at it?
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:02:39 PM
Quote from: Grey Fox on April 24, 2009, 01:57:01 PM
There's also a Canadian no fly list, btw.
I bet they could put me on that if they didn't like me. I might have to pass on NBW next year.
I'm writing Senator Kinney now. it should be no problem, really. :canuck:
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 02:00:02 PM
Obviously, the answer is then to broadcast the information that when border guards are using that threat, people should never actually take it seriously, should fearlessly tell border guards to mind their manners, should answer in the same tone they are asked question, should refuse to answer to questions when they feel it is irrelevant, should boldly threaten border guards to lodge complaints - since their threats are actually empty, their powers well-checked, and travellers' fear and humiliations are unfounded.
No, people should just quit being hysterical over what they heard happened to someone else, and note that thousands of people cross the border without incident every day, and you will almsot certainly have no real trouble yourself as long as you make sure your id and such is in order.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:06:53 PM
No, people should just quit being hysterical over what they heard happened to someone else
There are a number of first-person anecdotes in the thread, which didn't "happen to someone else."
Quote
Two things:
1. I am not saying you should not believe it - I am saying getting hysterical about things that haven't actually happened is silly and betrays a deeper issue. They *might* have turned me away! They *might* take a disliking to me! Golly, this only happens in the US, of course!
2. Just because everyone says something is so, doesn't make it so. This kind of "groupthink" is common, in fact, and self-reinforcing.
Perhaps the incidences of "hassle" is really not that different, but the perception of the US has declined considerably, and more specifically, the US government, such that now people notice it and comment on it a lot more. More people comment, more people notice, they comment more, suddenly it seems like this epidemic, where in reality, maybe little has actually changed.
Most of the time crossing the border is uneventful. Sometimes you are unlucky, and your car is the 14th in line, so it gets to be the car that is pulled out and searched. Maybe now it is every ten cars instead of every 20. Maybe now there are 50% more people trying to cross, so in fact it all seems more time consuming and a greater hassle.
Or maybe it is really the case that in fact the US Border Patrol is going out of their way to make visitors not want to come to the US. So far, I haven't seen anything but anecdote and hearsay to suggest that the issue is anything worthy of the hysteria though.
Well, you are unlikely to hear anything but anecdote. "Anecdote" is just people's experiences, and what else is there to determine the matter? It is hard to scientifically measure stuff like "attitude", and that is exactly what people are commenting on - a general attitude of unhelpfulness which many people have experienced.
I do not agree that this simply reflects people's opinions of the US in general. If that was the case, you would imagine that the election of Obama (very popular here) would change the perceived border situation for the better - but that hasn't happened.
Isn't it rather more rational to link it to the actual policy changes? When you have the chief bureaucrat in charge of border security saying stuff like 'we should treat the Canadian border crossing like that to Mexico', isn't it at least partly likely that the views of the chief may filter down to the actual people manning the border?
http://www.vancouversun.com/business/fp/Comments+simply+border+bizarre/1524885/story.html
QuoteIn her brief tenure, Napolitano, a one-time Arizona attorney-general, has bizarrely suggested that measures implemented at the Mexican border also should be applicable to Canada's border.
She has spoken of a need to move from a culture of "no border" to "border."
At a Washington, D.C., conference this week, Napolitano remarked that Canada, under its immigration and refugee provisions, allows in people who would be inadmissable in the U.S.
Also this week, in a CBC interview, she gave the impression some of the 9/11 perpetrators had crossed the border from Canada. This myth has been promulgated in the past by other American politicians, notably Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
With stuff like this comming out of Homeland Security, combine that with:
1. actual increase in bureaucratic barriers; and
2. plenty of "anecdote" of instances of unhelpfulness and hassles.
The needle shifts from "mostly group-think, nothin in it" to "yeah, there is a definite problem here".
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 02:00:34 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 01:46:57 PMThat is some good faith discussion you have going here. Ad hom attack always is a great way to show what good faith you have in honest discussion.
The good faith discussion ended a while ago. My mistake was assuming you were interested in that to begin with :)
:thumbsdown: Poor show JAcob.
Berkut rarely if ever goes into "full troll" mode. This is how he has a good faith discussion. You know that.
Quote from: ulmont on April 24, 2009, 02:09:17 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:06:53 PM
No, people should just quit being hysterical over what they heard happened to someone else
There are a number of first-person anecdotes in the thread, which didn't "happen to someone else."
Actually, there is exactly one - Jacobs. Which carry some weight, certainly, although his immediate retreat to personal attacks and dragging the discussion into the gutter make me wonder what exactly he is doing in the thread, since he clearly doesn't actually want to talk about anything.
The rest are what happened to someone else, and CC imagination about what could have happened to him. What *actually* happened to him was that he was stopped at the border, asked some questions, then went on and watched a baseball game.
So there is a decided lack of actual examples of these terrible things that supposedly justify the hysteria.
There is a difference between: «that happened to my father» and «that happened with the neighbour of a guy I know vaguely».
Quote from: Malthus on April 24, 2009, 02:10:09 PM
With stuff like this comming out of Homeland Security, combine that with:
1. actual increase in bureaucratic barriers; and
2. plenty of "anecdote" of instances of unhelpfulness and hassles.
The needle shifts from "mostly group-think, nothin in it" to "yeah, there is a definite problem here".
Well, the needle has more than two positions, I suspect. I've said from the start that it is neither all one or the other, as CC et al insist.
And the comments from whatsherface show little other than that she is a political appointee idiot. And since she wasn't in charge when any of the supposed travesties of border crossings that didn't happen, it seems a little unfair to blame it on her. Give her some time though, I am sure she can fuck it up. Although what is likely is that everyone will ignore her and the actual policy decisions will be made by the career people who actually run things.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 02:15:14 PM
There is a difference between: «that happened to my father» and «that happened with the neighbour of a guy I know vaguely».
Indeed there is - but that doesn't mean we have the entire story, or even that YOU have the entire story, or that what happened is typical or routine.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 02:15:14 PM
There is a difference between: «that happened to my father» and «that happened with the neighbour of a guy I know vaguely».
I have some sympathy for your father Oex, but really if you lose your cool at the border I think you'd know what might happen. It was compounded by the fact your father was on a deadline that he missed, but that was not the border's fault.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:12:14 PM
Actually, there is exactly one - Jacobs. Which carry some weight, certainly, although his immediate retreat to personal attacks and dragging the discussion into the gutter make me wonder what exactly he is doing in the thread, since he clearly doesn't actually want to talk about anything.
The rest are what happened to someone else, and CC imagination about what could have happened to him.
CC's story says that he was questioned at the border in such a way that he does not want to come back to the US.
So that's two out of three (Barrister being the exception) Canadians reporting personal experiences crossing the border with US border officials that make them not want to come back to the US.
That does sound like a problem, for tourism if nothing else.
Perhaps, but it is a problem without a solution if there reasons for not wanting to come to the US don't really have anything to do with their irrational fear of the border crossing.
To the extent that there is a solution, it would be a PR/info compaign by the US to combat this kind of hysteria, combined with some examination of actual problems with crossing that can be dealt with without compromising security. I suspect the latter is ongoing - or I hope it is.
The latest comments from the genius in charge would certainly put that into question. They certainly don't help to quell this kind of perception.
"Going to see the Yankees play? Sir, could you please pull your vehicle over to the side here and step out? You have been randomly selected for waterboarding and beatings."
Quote from: MadBurgerMaker on April 24, 2009, 02:25:12 PM
"Going to see the Yankees play? Sir, could you please pull your vehicle over to the side here and step out? You have been randomly selected for waterboarding and beatings."
I meant the Mets!
Red Sox?
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:06:53 PM
No, people should just quit being hysterical over what they heard happened to someone else, and note that thousands of people cross the border without incident every day, and you will almsot certainly have no real trouble yourself as long as you make sure your id and such is in order.
:lol:
I like the idea that if one just complies properly, law enforcement and the like won't cause you problems.(/incidents). If only it played out in reality. :(
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 02:27:42 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:06:53 PM
No, people should just quit being hysterical over what they heard happened to someone else, and note that thousands of people cross the border without incident every day, and you will almsot certainly have no real trouble yourself as long as you make sure your id and such is in order.
:lol:
I like the idea that if one just complies properly, law enforcement and the like won't cause you problems.(/incidents). If only it played out in reality. :(
It does. Mostly.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:16:09 PM
Quote from: Malthus on April 24, 2009, 02:10:09 PM
With stuff like this comming out of Homeland Security, combine that with:
1. actual increase in bureaucratic barriers; and
2. plenty of "anecdote" of instances of unhelpfulness and hassles.
The needle shifts from "mostly group-think, nothin in it" to "yeah, there is a definite problem here".
Well, the needle has more than two positions, I suspect. I've said from the start that it is neither all one or the other, as CC et al insist.
And the comments from whatsherface show little other than that she is a political appointee idiot. And since she wasn't in charge when any of the supposed travesties of border crossings that didn't happen, it seems a little unfair to blame it on her. Give her some time though, I am sure she can fuck it up. Although what is likely is that everyone will ignore her and the actual policy decisions will be made by the career people who actually run things.
But I'm not blaming it on her - it seems more likely she's a symptom rather than a cause, a bit more evidence that there is if you like a corporate attitude most unhelpful to visitors which is at work in the bureaucracy which runs the border.
The usual account is that this sort of thing is a backlash that started as a result of the 9/11 business.
What you should understand is that Canadians living close to the border think of themselves as not unlike Americans. In many cases they have relations on both sides of the border. They are used to the previous deal, which for years was basically that the border guards were friendly and helpful - maybe a bit wacky about drugs, but they usually did not treat Canadians as hostile aliens.
This whole 'ought to be a real border, just like that with Mexico' thing is a bit of a shock. Canadians are not used to being treated like suspicious third-worlders when going to shop in Buffalo or see a baseball game, and they don't like it much - leading them to prefer staying at home.
Now, you may not see any evidence to convince you that anything has changed, but from where I stand you are sounding like Canute denying that the tide comes up.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:27:23 PM
Red Sox?
Well shit..being waterboarded and beaten is better than the guy just dragging you into the woods and executing you. :P
Quote from: Malthus on April 24, 2009, 02:29:19 PM
Now, you may not see any evidence to convince you that anything has changed, but from where I stand you are sounding like Canute denying that the tide comes up.
I didn't say that, so how am I supposed to respond to it?
No. We will never have «the entire story»: as Malthus already said, it will always be impressions, anecdotes, and conflicting points of view, just like whatever version the border guards will have will not be the entire story, nor any sort of government-sponsored study of «the experience of crossing the border». People have here offered up anecdotes and feelings of their own experiences, which you have brushed aside based on your own feelings. Fair enough. I am more likely to trust and know my father than you are, and will likely trust my father's word over that of a border guard, absent the case where my father would be a lying conniver. Likewise, you can hardly complain that, after all these years on the forum, people react strongly to you telling them they must be exagerating, their experiences are false or misleading, that they are guilty of group-think or united in their «US-is-big-meanie view». People act and modify their behaviour based on their experiences and feelings - you do the same on the forum.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 02:18:04 PM
I have some sympathy for your father Oex, but really if you lose your cool at the border I think you'd know what might happen. It was compounded by the fact your father was on a deadline that he missed, but that was not the border's fault.
Sorry, I do not qualify saying «Could you be a little bit more polite, please» as «losing your cool», just like I do qualify detaining someone needlessly and threatening him to arrest him with handcuffs for refusing to cooperate an abuse of power. And if asking someone to be polite is «asking for trouble», then I question where our moral compass is.
I suppose I do - and certainly the forums rather tired penchant for a group of people latching onto the latest bitch about the US is well known - including the people always involved, and their typically quick resot to name calling and such when someone challenges their assumptions.
You are right - the version from the guards in question won't be the entire story either - but since they are not the ones []ipersonally[/i] affected by whatever happened, they are more likely to be telling the complete story, although that is not by any means certain. What is certain is that we don't have their story at all, fair or not.
Now, lots of people have had something happen to them with officials in all kinds of contexts. I wonder what percentage of the situations, if an outside observer objectively evaluated them, would end up with the conclusion that the people involved were largely blameless? I don't know the answer, but I bet it is rather rare.
And I never said anyone MUST be exaggerating, I said they sounded like they were and invited more detail to show that they were not - the response was an immediate resort to personal attacks on me, as you have just done in your post. How my status on the forum could possibly ahve any bearing on border security and hassle is rather beyond me, in any case.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 02:41:02 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 02:18:04 PM
I have some sympathy for your father Oex, but really if you lose your cool at the border I think you'd know what might happen. It was compounded by the fact your father was on a deadline that he missed, but that was not the border's fault.
Sorry, I do not qualify saying «Could you be a little bit more polite, please» as «losing your cool»,
I would - it is clearly a challenge. Why would you say that to someone? If they are not being polite, do you think asking them to be polite is going to make them become polite?
Talking back to law enforcement never goes well. Shrug. I bet it works the same even if you are going into Canada. If some border patrol guy is being short or rude, making some smart ass comment about how he could be more polite is going to just make him decide that you have something to hide.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:49:14 PM
You are right - the version from the guards in question won't be the entire story either - but since they are not the ones []ipersonally[/i] affected by whatever happened, they are more likely to be telling the complete story, although that is not by any means certain. What is certain is that we don't have their story at all, fair or not.
You think border guards have no stake in trying to portray themselves as blameless ?
QuoteI don't know the answer, but I bet it is rather rare.
That's the thing. We don't know the answer either, but we bet it is not that rare. We have offered anecdotes and personnal experiences, you have offered your gut feeling. It is not like your gut feeling is inherently more credible than isolated anecdotes.
Quoteimmediate resort to personal attacks on me, as you have just done in your post. How my status on the forum could possibly ahve any bearing on border security and hassle is rather beyond me, in any case.
Where ? :huh:
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:53:55 PMmaking some smart ass comment about how he could be more polite is going to just make him decide that you have something to hide.
Actually, I think he'd take it personally and start acting like an ass. Although usually one doesn't have to do much of anything to get law enforcement to act like asses.
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:53:55 PM
I would - it is clearly a challenge. Why would you say that to someone? If they are not being polite, do you think asking them to be polite is going to make them become polite?
So if any sort of people in authority treats you like shit, the correct behaviour is to smile and say you're sorry ? How can that be considered appropriate ?
To try to be fair to borderguards, they have a fairly tough job.
They have to deal with hundreds or thousands of people per day (well, maybe not up here...). They know that illegal substances get smuggled through every day, but all they have to go by are people's reactions to the questions they ask. It's hardly scientific, but its all they've got. If they're asking weird questions its probably not your specific answer they're interested in, but in the manner in which you answer it.
Plus any job where you have to deal with the public day in and day out is going to wear on you.
So Oex, you're right. I would hope that a borderguard would have a thick skin and continue to deal with your father in a calm and impartial manner. Berkut is right being asked to be polite is a slight insult, but peace officers should be able to rise above it. That officer sounds like he over-reacted, but that needs to be considered in comparison to your fathers weekly cross-border trips over the years.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 02:56:46 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:49:14 PM
You are right - the version from the guards in question won't be the entire story either - but since they are not the ones []ipersonally[/i] affected by whatever happened, they are more likely to be telling the complete story, although that is not by any means certain. What is certain is that we don't have their story at all, fair or not.
You think border guards have no stake in trying to portray themselves as blameless ?
No, I think border guards have no stake in randomly screwing with people "needlessly", so stories that they do so I take with a grain of salt, since the people the story is about are generally trying to portray themselves as poor victims of some officious thug.
Then you dig a little bit and almost always find out that they did something wrong, reacted badly, and are now trying to blame it on someone else, and in fact it was not needless at all.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 02:58:54 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:53:55 PM
I would - it is clearly a challenge. Why would you say that to someone? If they are not being polite, do you think asking them to be polite is going to make them become polite?
So if any sort of people in authority treats you like shit, the correct behaviour is to smile and say you're sorry ? How can that be considered appropriate ?
:huh:
It's reality. If you're in an unequal power relationship (I don't care if its teacher-student, border guard-border crosser, or judge-lawyer) if you're being treated like shit the best reaction is to smile and apologize.
Its not fair, but its how the world works.
Now if the behaviour is truely abominable there may be recourse later on, but its never a good idea to call someone on that bad behaviour.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 02:12:11 PM:thumbsdown: Poor show JAcob.
Berkut rarely if ever goes into "full troll" mode. This is how he has a good faith discussion. You know that.
Whatever. His hyperbole about hysteria in response to personal stories, his casting of aspersions at everyone and everything is puerile and tiresome.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 02:58:54 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 02:53:55 PM
I would - it is clearly a challenge. Why would you say that to someone? If they are not being polite, do you think asking them to be polite is going to make them become polite?
So if any sort of people in authority treats you like shit, the correct behaviour is to smile and say you're sorry ? How can that be considered appropriate ?
If a border guard treats me like shit, I certainly am not going to call them on it, no. Why would I? What would there be to gain?
But my point is that I suspect that your dad was not "treated like shit", but rather got smart with some guard trying to do his shitty job.
That is not certain, and of course he is your dad, so you are going to believe his version of the story. I am just saying that in 9/10 cases, the *real* version of the story is rather different than the "I was minding my own business when the officer for no reason started hassling me!"
Maybe your dad is the 1/10.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 03:03:20 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 02:12:11 PM:thumbsdown: Poor show JAcob.
Berkut rarely if ever goes into "full troll" mode. This is how he has a good faith discussion. You know that.
Whatever. His hyperbole about hysteria in response to personal stories, his casting of aspersions at everyone and everything is puerile and tiresome.
I ahve not casted aspersions on anyone. You say this yet of course it is always in response to my posts questioning your assumptions, without any actual example.
The only making this personal and jumping into the gutter is you. Why is that?
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 03:01:52 PM
:huh:
It's reality. If you're in an unequal power relationship (I don't care if its teacher-student, border guard-border crosser, or judge-lawyer) if you're being treated like shit the best reaction is to smile and apologize.
Its not fair, but its how the world works.
Now if the behaviour is truely abominable there may be recourse later on, but its never a good idea to call someone on that bad behaviour.
QFT. Regardless of whether you think you're superior to the person actually holding all the cards in the situation, discretion is the better part of valor. Pick your damned battles.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 02:59:10 PM
To try to be fair to borderguards, they have a fairly tough job.
They have to deal with hundreds or thousands of people per day (well, maybe not up here...). They know that illegal substances get smuggled through every day, but all they have to go by are people's reactions to the questions they ask. It's hardly scientific, but its all they've got. If they're asking weird questions its probably not your specific answer they're interested in, but in the manner in which you answer it.
Plus any job where you have to deal with the public day in and day out is going to wear on you.
So Oex, you're right. I would hope that a borderguard would have a thick skin and continue to deal with your father in a calm and impartial manner. Berkut is right being asked to be polite is a slight insult, but peace officers should be able to rise above it. That officer sounds like he over-reacted, but that needs to be considered in comparison to your fathers weekly cross-border trips over the years.
I have no problem with any of that. I can take border guards being bland, asking general questions, being not overtly friendly. I do not need a new friend at the border, I need someone being professional and courteous. «Please, Sir». «Thank you, Sir». I know my father. For all of that, or for a lack of thank yous and pleases, he would never comment - my father is a shy, unassuming guy. That, for him, is a good border crossing. It is the constant snide comments, suspicion, the insults, and, in this case, complete lack of respect that made him ask for a little more politeness. If dealing with the public wears you thin, take a break, or do not use your power to actually cover your own lacks.
For a year after this incident, every other border crossing took more than two hours for him - and he is part of the Nexus programme... When you are a truck driver, you have to factor him time. That cost him a lot.
An isolated incident ? Perhaps. But as is the case with isolated incidents with people who have lots of power, the repercussions are huge - especially when you rely on your ability to cross the border frequently This is why I can't blame people who fear border crossing and hate being treated like shit and having to swallow it all.
That being said, there *are* incidents of good border crossings - I remember discussing the Seven Years War with one (result of the traditionnal «What's the topic of the conference» question, in my case). But for people who cross frequently, like my father and his comrades, the feeling has definitely been one of more and more condescension and aggressiveness at the border.
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 03:01:52 PM
It's reality. If you're in an unequal power relationship (I don't care if its teacher-student, border guard-border crosser, or judge-lawyer) if you're being treated like shit the best reaction is to smile and apologize.
Its not fair, but its how the world works.
Well, then, this marks a difference between us, for I believe it is simply an encouragement to continue to be treated like shit. I would much rather have people with power who have values and integrity, than endorsing people who enjoy petty powertrips and leaving them be petty tyrants. This would be impunity.
Of course, there is a difference with being a smartass.
I think I will send an email to my friend and see what she says about whether or not border crossing has become more of a hassle in the last decade, and if so, how much more.
She doesn't actually work as a guard anymore, she is an investigator now, so I don't know if that means she will have a more objective view of it, or whether she will just not know.
She had a good story about having some guy who had a warrant out for his arrest come through her crossing point once. Her computer didn't tell he why he was flagged, just that he was. So she made up some excuse for why he couldn't proceed and called her supervisor. This was at 3 am or so, so there wasn't really anyone else around.
Turns out he was under suspicion for killing his wife and her two sisters with an axe. She was asked by a very excited FBI agent to detain him as long as possible without alerting him so they could come and pick him up, but NOT to arrest him, since she had no backup there at the time.
She ended up having a very nice chat with him in the border station while some paperwork was "cleared up" for about 20 minutes before the Feds swooped in and picked him up.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
Well, then, this marks a difference between us, for I believe it is simply an encouragement to continue to be treated like shit.
Is it possible that your perception of being treated like shit does not really match up to you actually being treated like shit?
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
than endorsing people who enjoy petty powertrips and leaving them be petty tyrants.
Why do you think they choose their careers? ;)
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 03:06:28 PMThe only making this personal and jumping into the gutter is you. Why is that?
You remind me of a border guard, but since you're not I can tell you off :p
That said - nyah ah, you're the one who started it.
Quote from: Jacob on April 24, 2009, 03:38:55 PM
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 03:06:28 PMThe only making this personal and jumping into the gutter is you. Why is that?
You remind me of a border guard, but since you're not I can tell you off :p
That said - nyah ah, you're the one who started it.
Nice.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
Quote from: Barrister on April 24, 2009, 03:01:52 PM
It's reality. If you're in an unequal power relationship (I don't care if its teacher-student, border guard-border crosser, or judge-lawyer) if you're being treated like shit the best reaction is to smile and apologize.
Its not fair, but its how the world works.
Well, then, this marks a difference between us, for I believe it is simply an encouragement to continue to be treated like shit. I would much rather have people with power who have values and integrity, than endorsing people who enjoy petty powertrips and leaving them be petty tyrants. This would be impunity.
Of course, there is a difference with being a smartass.
I think its a matter of picking your battles.
Remember the judge from my quote who called me "machiavellian"? He was the biggest asshole on the bench I'd ever seen. He was constantly condescending, arrogant and rude. There wasn't a soul that liked him
But I'd never call him on it. I'd never say "Sir, please treat me with some respect". He wasn't going to get any better. Instead he'd get worse if you tried to do that. And he had all the power in the world over me in that situation.
Like I said - it's not fair, but its the smart thing to do.
Now that being said I had a couple of transcripts on him, and if he ever really crossed the line I fully intended to report him to the judicial committee. Its all a matter of picking your battles.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 02:41:02 PM
Sorry, I do not qualify saying «Could you be a little bit more polite, please» as «losing your cool», just like I do qualify detaining someone needlessly and threatening him to arrest him with handcuffs for refusing to cooperate an abuse of power. And if asking someone to be polite is «asking for trouble», then I question where our moral compass is.
Well, if your dad has a french accent, I would imagine the border guard assumed that he was an Arab. After all, Americans tend to be rather dim.
Quote from: garbon on April 24, 2009, 03:25:34 PM
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 24, 2009, 03:21:23 PM
than endorsing people who enjoy petty powertrips and leaving them be petty tyrants.
Why do you think they choose their careers? ;)
They couldn't be cops?
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 24, 2009, 12:01:22 PM
Quote from: katmai on April 24, 2009, 11:52:15 AM
I look forward to seeing how many pages this thread has ballooned up to when i get back tonight with the Berkut vs Canadian rumble brewing :P
You should thank me for making such fabulous threads.
It's why you can never leave, and if you try to I'll come to Ohio and hunt you down! :hug:
Quote from: katmai on April 24, 2009, 05:17:37 PM
Quote from: Ed Anger on April 24, 2009, 12:01:22 PM
Quote from: katmai on April 24, 2009, 11:52:15 AM
I look forward to seeing how many pages this thread has ballooned up to when i get back tonight with the Berkut vs Canadian rumble brewing :P
You should thank me for making such fabulous threads.
It's why you can never leave, and if you try to I'll come to Ohio and hunt you down! :hug:
:hug:
But I am going to be on much less this summer, and possibly longer.
Quote from: Berkut on April 22, 2009, 03:06:05 PM
"The future is we have borders."
She should post on Languish.
No shit. Plus, join the Church of the SubGenius.
I love Berk :lol:
Quote from: Berkut on April 24, 2009, 03:25:24 PM
Is it possible that your perception of being treated like shit does not really match up to you actually being treated like shit?
Of course. Just like your perception of border crossing does not really match up the reality of border crossing.
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 26, 2009, 09:07:18 AM
Of course. Just like your perception of border crossing does not really match up the reality of border crossing.
Well, if we are being metaphysical, no one's perceptions really match up with reality. :smarty:
Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2009, 09:17:24 AM
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 26, 2009, 09:07:18 AM
Of course. Just like your perception of border crossing does not really match up the reality of border crossing.
Well, if we are being metaphysical, no one's perceptions really match up with reality. :smarty:
Wrong.
Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2009, 09:17:24 AM
Well, if we are being metaphysical, no one's perceptions really match up with reality. :smarty:
What if my perception is that my perceptions doesn't match up with reality? I sense a slippery slope here, and I don't mean a Greasy Yi, either.
I think someone has a chip on their shoulder when it comes to people in authority.
Quote from: Neil on April 26, 2009, 09:19:45 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2009, 09:17:24 AM
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 26, 2009, 09:07:18 AM
Of course. Just like your perception of border crossing does not really match up the reality of border crossing.
Well, if we are being metaphysical, no one's perceptions really match up with reality. :smarty:
Wrong.
Exception noted.
Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2009, 02:54:00 PM
Quote from: Neil on April 26, 2009, 09:19:45 AM
Quote from: grumbler on April 26, 2009, 09:17:24 AM
Quote from: Oexmelin on April 26, 2009, 09:07:18 AM
Of course. Just like your perception of border crossing does not really match up the reality of border crossing.
Well, if we are being metaphysical, no one's perceptions really match up with reality. :smarty:
Wrong.
Exception noted.
Thank you.
This day in history:
QuoteMay 24th 1942. In the United States... When the Royal Canadian Air Force's 115th Fighter Squadron lands at Alaska's Annette Island, a US Customs officer refuses to let the pilots out of their planes until they pay duty on their arms and equipment. It takes a message from Secretary of State Cordell Hull granting the Canadians Distinguished Foreign Visitor status to permit them to enter American soil.
Source: La Seconde Guerre mondiale au jour le jour.
Quote from: Oexmelin on May 25, 2009, 07:04:20 PM
This day in history:
QuoteMay 24th 1942. In the United States... When the Royal Canadian Air Force's 115th Fighter Squadron lands at Alaska's Annette Island, a US Customs officer refuses to let the pilots out of their planes until they pay duty on their arms and equipment. It takes a message from Secretary of State Cordell Hull granting the Canadians Distinguished Foreign Visitor status to permit them to enter American soil.
Source: La Seconde Guerre mondiale au jour le jour.
Yeah, well 65 years ago today Alanbrooke had dinner with Winston Churchill during which Churchill was critical of FDR's plan to broadcast a message to Germany on D-Day and positive concerning the war in the Pacific.
Still, it goes to show you that customs people the world over are as petty as it is possible to be.