"When is a passport not a passport?" Topic

When you're going to the US apparently…

link

Seems the US now insists that everyone has to have a biometric e-passport.

Appreciate the need for security, but not a good way of imp[roving America's reputation with the rest of the world…

Seems the US now insists that everyone has to have a biometric e-passport.

Read the article. In there you will find something closer to the truth.

The change was in response to the US insisting 27 countries whose citizens enjoy visa-free travel – including Ireland and the UK – issue passports with biometric chips.

Unless you consider those 27 countries to be "everyone".

And even that quote is not accurate. The US can't "insist" that any other country do anything. They simply said that they will not accept visa-free (which is a convenience for favoured countries) travel without an e-passport. You can still come in through from any of those countries with a 20th-century type paper passport and a visa.

BTW, the biometric identity requirement is the same standard as required for an EEA national identity card by the UK for visa-free travel:

link

Miss Elphick says British Airways assured her Mr Nash would be ok to travel on his existing passport before she booked the trip.

This is what I found interesting. Why would someone rely on a commercial entity to answer a government regulatory question related to what they consider to be a large expenditure?

OK, I'll amend it to ' but not a good way of improving America's reputation with the 27 countries who are, I assume, are the 'safe' countries'

The reason you rely on a commercial entity is because you except them to know what is allowed/not in their area of expertise.

Well the UK does have a 'special' relationship with the US whatever that means harhar!

Seems the US now insists that everyone has to have a biometric e-passport.

Unless they are illegal immigrants.

OK, I'll amend it to ' but not a good way of improving America's reputation with the 27 countries who are, I assume, are the 'safe' countries'

You forgot, "… with the same requirement the 'safe' EEA countries already trust each other."

Every country has a list of countries they recognize, with different requirements to enter and leave. The hubbub is because this is a change, not because of the nature of the change. The EEA countries didn't have this level of trust until after biometric technology was available for ids, so their trusted relationship started out requiring the this technology.

The reason you rely on a commercial entity is because you except them to know what is allowed/not in their area of expertise.

Must be a British thing. Apparently it doesn't work.

Unless they are illegal immigrants.

You can't be an illegal immigrant. Immigration is a process. If you didn't follow the process, you aren't an immigrant.

If you take the dice out of your hand and place them on the table, choosing which way to orient them, you didn't make an 'illegal dice roll' because you didn't make a dice roll.

Use whatever term you prefer. The term "illegal immigrant" is understood to mean those folks who entered the country illegally.

Would you prefer we called them invaders?