Bill Pittman

Just a quick report on our experiences crossing the NY State-Quebec
border over the last few days.

Going north, we crossed into Quebec on NY 374. The Canadian customs
person asked where we were going. When we told her Rigaud, her main
comment was that the Canadian Customs college was there, and we might
hear some loud parties! (We couldn't find it.) She did not ask for any
kind of ID.

Southbound, we crossed back into NY on NY 189. The US customs person
asked where we were from (Schenectady), whether we were citizens (we
showed him our passports), where we had been in Canada, and why. We told
him "pleasure" (B&B in Rigaud). He asked me my occupation (retired) and
what it had been when I was working. He seemed very puzzled, but not
particularly spooked, at having us cross in such an isolated place. He
asked to look in the trunk, which had one suitcase & nothing else. He
also wanted to know whether we were bringing anything back, and we said
no. (We forgot about the thermos of coffee that we had picked up at the
B&B.)

My major impressions: Canadian customs people just want to be assured
that you have a good reason for going there. US customs people also want
some personal background and a general confidence that you're not hiding
anything. Also, people in both directions are inquisitive about "why
crossing HERE, rather than some freeway?"

No big deal. Don't know what the situation would have been if we had had
Arab names or had given evasive answers that might have suggested drug
operations.

John Chapman

Last Monday, I was traveling by bus from Vancouver to Seattle, from
where I was to embark on a four day mini-cruise. The bus was held up
for about 20 minutes while 2 officers poured over my ID, which included
a passport. All sorts of crazy questions like whether I have been to
Indonesia (once, 15 years ago). I am 55 year old retired white male who
had crossed the US border on at least 500 occasions without the
slightest trouble or bother. Neither agent would reveal the cause of
their concerns. Bureaucratic overkill since 9/11 IMO. Altogther a very
unpleasant experience. JOHN

Bill Pittman wrote:
    > Just a quick report on our experiences crossing the NY State-Quebec
    > border over the last few days.
    > Going north, we crossed into Quebec on NY 374. The Canadian customs
    > person asked where we were going. When we told her Rigaud, her main
    > comment was that the Canadian Customs college was there, and we might
    > hear some loud parties! (We couldn't find it.) She did not ask for any
    > kind of ID.
    > Southbound, we crossed back into NY on NY 189. The US customs person
    > asked where we were from (Schenectady), whether we were citizens (we
    > showed him our passports), where we had been in Canada, and why. We told
    > him "pleasure" (B&B in Rigaud). He asked me my occupation (retired) and
    > what it had been when I was working. He seemed very puzzled, but not
    > particularly spooked, at having us cross in such an isolated place. He
    > asked to look in the trunk, which had one suitcase & nothing else. He
    > also wanted to know whether we were bringing anything back, and we said
    > no. (We forgot about the thermos of coffee that we had picked up at the
    > B&B.)
    > My major impressions: Canadian customs people just want to be assured
    > that you have a good reason for going there. US customs people also want
    > some personal background and a general confidence that you're not hiding
    > anything. Also, people in both directions are inquisitive about "why
    > crossing HERE, rather than some freeway?"
    > No big deal. Don't know what the situation would have been if we had had
    > Arab names or had given evasive answers that might have suggested drug
    > operations.

John Beaderstadt

John Chapman wrote:
    > Neither agent would reveal the cause of
    > their concerns.

Did you really expect them to?

> Bureaucratic overkill since 9/11 IMO.

So, how many should have died on that day for you to have a different
opinion?

--
Beady's Eighth Law of Social Harmonics: "Avoid eye contact; shut up;
keep walking."

John Chapman

John Beaderstadt wrote:
    > John Chapman wrote:
    > > Neither agent would reveal the cause of
    > > their concerns.
    > Did you really expect them to?

Yes I do, or at least tell me if there was a problem at all, so I could
deal with it at the local US consulate, for example.
    > > Bureaucratic overkill since 9/11 IMO.
    > So, how many should have died on that day for you to have a different
    > opinion?

This is a very specious argument, as I doubt terorrism had little if
anything to do with my incident at the border. Further, I have traveled
to the US many times since 9/11 (as their computers would show) without
the slightest problem. A relatively free exchange of people and goods
between the US and Canada is both essential and desirable for both
countries.
    > --
    > Beady's Eighth Law of Social Harmonics: "Avoid eye contact; shut up;
    > keep walking."

Pan

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 00:39:21 GMT, John Beaderstadt
wrote:

    >John Chapman wrote:
    >> Neither agent would reveal the cause of
    >> their concerns.
    >Did you really expect them to?
    > > Bureaucratic overkill since 9/11 IMO.
    >So, how many should have died on that day for you to have a different
    >opinion?

I submit that that has little to do with anything. The New York Daily
News recently ran an article detailing the fact that 14 of their
reporters smuggled all manner of weapons aboard domestic flights, and
not one of them was stopped from doing so. Annoyance does not
constitute effective security.

Michael

Bob Grumbine

John Chapman wrote:
> I doubt terorrism had little if anything to do with my incident
> at the border. Further, I have traveled to the US many times
> since 9/11 (as their computers would show) without the slightest
> problem. A relatively free exchange of people and goods between
> the US and Canada is both essential and desirable for both
> countries.

In John's earlier post he said:
> I am 55 year old retired white male who had crossed the US border
> on at least 500 occasions without the slightest trouble or bother.

With all that frequency of border crossings and knowledge that there
is at least some sensitivity about how 9/11 style perps get into the
United States, is there any reason why you have not signed up for
the quickie pass arrangement which Canada and the United States have
set up for frequent crossers?
Bob Grumbine :-)##

+++++++++++++++ # email [email protected]
Robert E. "Bob" # postal PO Box 260203, Lakewood CO 80226-0203
Grumbine, MBA # voice 303-232-4520
Bob's travelogue is http://ww-
w.dimensional.com/~bgrumbin/travel.htm

Fred_Scuttle

" So, how many should have died on that day for you to have a different
opinion?"





A rather stupid and insensitive comment John Beaderstadt.

John Beaderstadt

Bob Grumbine wrote:

    > With all that frequency of border crossings and knowledge that there
    > is at least some sensitivity about how 9/11 style perps get into the
    > United States...

Which brings up the twin issues that INS has been taking a great deal of
heat for applying its standards for admission too loosely, and that the
terrorists enter and remain in this country by blending in as completely
as possible with legitimate visitors and residents. Yet, knowing this,
visitors and residents still complain that tighter security shouldn't
apply to *them*.

--
Beady's Eighth Law of Social Harmonics: "Avoid eye contact; shut up;
keep walking."

Austin500

"John Chapman" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
    > Last Monday, I was traveling by bus from Vancouver to Seattle, from
    > where I was to embark on a four day mini-cruise. The bus was held up
    > for about 20 minutes while 2 officers poured over my ID, which included
    > a passport. All sorts of crazy questions like whether I have been to
    > Indonesia (once, 15 years ago). I am 55 year old retired white male who
    > had crossed the US border on at least 500 occasions without the
    > slightest trouble or bother. Neither agent would reveal the cause of
    > their concerns. Bureaucratic overkill since 9/11 IMO. Altogther a very
    > unpleasant experience. JOHN
    > Bill Pittman wrote:
    > >
    > > Just a quick report on our experiences crossing the NY State-Quebec
    > > border over the last few days.
    > >
    > > Going north, we crossed into Quebec on NY 374. The Canadian customs
    > > person asked where we were going. When we told her Rigaud, her main
    > > comment was that the Canadian Customs college was there, and we might
    > > hear some loud parties! (We couldn't find it.) She did not ask for any
    > > kind of ID.
    > >
    > > Southbound, we crossed back into NY on NY 189. The US customs person
    > > asked where we were from (Schenectady), whether we were citizens (we
    > > showed him our passports), where we had been in Canada, and why. We told
    > > him "pleasure" (B&B in Rigaud). He asked me my occupation (retired) and
    > > what it had been when I was working. He seemed very puzzled, but not
    > > particularly spooked, at having us cross in such an isolated place. He
    > > asked to look in the trunk, which had one suitcase & nothing else. He
    > > also wanted to know whether we were bringing anything back, and we said
    > > no. (We forgot about the thermos of coffee that we had picked up at the
    > > B&B.)
    > >
    > > My major impressions: Canadian customs people just want to be assured
    > > that you have a good reason for going there. US customs people also want
    > > some personal background and a general confidence that you're not hiding
    > > anything. Also, people in both directions are inquisitive about "why
    > > crossing HERE, rather than some freeway?"
    > >
    > > No big deal. Don't know what the situation would have been if we had had
    > > Arab names or had given evasive answers that might have suggested drug
    > > operations.


I agree.Harassing 55 year old Canadians or Americans who have probably
been crossing the border for 30 years is not going to stop terrorism.The
answer whether you like it or not is profiling.Interrogate those most likely
to commit the crime.Some nationalities are much more likely to commit crimes
of terrorism than others.One of the requirements of a customs officer should
be common sense.

Austin500

"austin500" wrote in message
news:kZzq9.13304$345-
[email protected]...
    > "John Chapman" wrote in message
    > news:[email protected]...
    > > Last Monday, I was traveling by bus from Vancouver to Seattle, from
    > > where I was to embark on a four day mini-cruise. The bus was held up
    > > for about 20 minutes while 2 officers poured over my ID, which included
    > > a passport. All sorts of crazy questions like whether I have been to
    > > Indonesia (once, 15 years ago). I am 55 year old retired white male who
    > > had crossed the US border on at least 500 occasions without the
    > > slightest trouble or bother. Neither agent would reveal the cause of
    > > their concerns. Bureaucratic overkill since 9/11 IMO. Altogther a very
    > > unpleasant experience. JOHN
    > >
    > > Bill Pittman wrote:
    > > >
    > > > Just a quick report on our experiences crossing the NY State-Quebec
    > > > border over the last few days.
    > > >
    > > > Going north, we crossed into Quebec on NY 374. The Canadian customs
    > > > person asked where we were going. When we told her Rigaud, her main
    > > > comment was that the Canadian Customs college was there, and we might
    > > > hear some loud parties! (We couldn't find it.) She did not ask for any
    > > > kind of ID.
    > > >
    > > > Southbound, we crossed back into NY on NY 189. The US customs person
    > > > asked where we were from (Schenectady), whether we were citizens (we
    > > > showed him our passports), where we had been in Canada, and why. We
told
    > > > him "pleasure" (B&B in Rigaud). He asked me my occupation (retired)
and
    > > > what it had been when I was working. He seemed very puzzled, but not
    > > > particularly spooked, at having us cross in such an isolated place. He
    > > > asked to look in the trunk, which had one suitcase & nothing else. He
    > > > also wanted to know whether we were bringing anything back, and we
said
    > > > no. (We forgot about the thermos of coffee that we had picked up at
the
    > > > B&B.)
    > > >
    > > > My major impressions: Canadian customs people just want to be assured
    > > > that you have a good reason for going there. US customs people also
want
    > > > some personal background and a general confidence that you're not
hiding
    > > > anything. Also, people in both directions are inquisitive about "why
    > > > crossing HERE, rather than some freeway?"
    > > >
    > > > No big deal. Don't know what the situation would have been if we had
had
    > > > Arab names or had given evasive answers that might have suggested drug
    > > > operations.
    > I agree.Harassing 55 year old Canadians or Americans who have
probably
    > been crossing the border for 30 years is not going to stop terrorism.The
    > answer whether you like it or not is profiling.Interrogate those most
likely
    > to commit the crime.Some nationalities are much more likely to commit
crimes
    > of terrorism than others.One of the requirements of a customs officer
should
    > be common sense.
p.s. I should say customs or immigration officer.

John Beaderstadt

austin500 wrote:

    > The
    > answer whether you like it or not is profiling.

Please present whatever evidence is in your posession that Chapman does
not, or did not on at least one occasion, fit a profile or perform an
action that made it seem that he fit a profile.

    > One of the requirements of a customs officer should
    > be common sense.

And what evidence do you have, other than the word of a perfect
stranger, that the customs officer did not use common sense or follow
established procedure?

--
Beady's Eighth Law of Social Harmonics: "Avoid eye contact; shut up;
keep walking."

John Beaderstadt

Fred_Scuttle wrote:

    > A rather stupid and insensitive comment John Beaderstadt.

Why? Chapman's complaint is that he was unjustifiably inconvenienced,
and that the severity of the 9/11 attacks were not sufficient
justification for that inconvenience. Why do you think it is invalid to
ask, in that same context, how severe the attacks should have been in
order for him feel that the inconvenience was justified?

If it will make you feel better, though, I'll rephrase the question:
Mr. Chapman, what would have to happen to the United States before you
would uncomplainingly submit to a 20-minute delay in entering our country?

--
Beady's Eighth Law of Social Harmonics: "Avoid eye contact; shut up;
keep walking."

Rita

On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:24:31 GMT, John Beaderstadt
wrote:

    >Fred_Scuttle wrote:
    >> A rather stupid and insensitive comment John Beaderstadt.
    >Why? Chapman's complaint is that he was unjustifiably inconvenienced,
    >and that the severity of the 9/11 attacks were not sufficient
    >justification for that inconvenience. Why do you think it is invalid to
    >ask, in that same context, how severe the attacks should have been in
    >order for him feel that the inconvenience was justified?
    >If it will make you feel better, though, I'll rephrase the question:
    >Mr. Chapman, what would have to happen to the United States before you
    > would uncomplainingly submit to a 20-minute delay in entering our country?


I am sorry for the inconvenience visitors to the U.S. must put up
with, but it is their choice to come here or not knowing that border
security has been increased with good reason. If I were to visit a
country that had endured an attack like that of 9/11 I would fully
expect there would be stringent security and delays.

Visitors to the U.S. do have a choice -- come or not but don't
complain about whatever we feel must be done to prevent
future terrorist attacks. We can't cover everything 100%, I know,
so some will be inconvenienced more than others.

Austin500

"Rita" wrote in message
news2plquok5n4qlkpfpmer8dse-
[email protected]...
    > On Mon, 14 Oct 2002 15:24:31 GMT, John Beaderstadt
    > wrote:
    > >Fred_Scuttle wrote:
    > >
    > >> A rather stupid and insensitive comment John Beaderstadt.
    > >
    > >Why? Chapman's complaint is that he was unjustifiably inconvenienced,
    > >and that the severity of the 9/11 attacks were not sufficient
    > >justification for that inconvenience. Why do you think it is invalid to
    > >ask, in that same context, how severe the attacks should have been in
    > >order for him feel that the inconvenience was justified?
    > >
    > >If it will make you feel better, though, I'll rephrase the question:
    > >Mr. Chapman, what would have to happen to the United States before you
    > > would uncomplainingly submit to a 20-minute delay in entering our
country?
    > I am sorry for the inconvenience visitors to the U.S. must put up
    > with, but it is their choice to come here or not knowing that border
    > security has been increased with good reason. If I were to visit a
    > country that had endured an attack like that of 9/11 I would fully
    > expect there would be stringent security and delays.
    > Visitors to the U.S. do have a choice -- come or not but don't
    > complain about whatever we feel must be done to prevent
    > future terrorist attacks. We can't cover everything 100%, I know,
    > so some will be inconvenienced more than others.



Targetting and harassing 69 year old grandmothers from Duluth who are
returning from a vacation in Paris,or 75 year old retired air force
colonels who are returning from a golfing trip in Scotland isn't effective
immigration control.The US airline,hotel and tourist industry would be in a
sorry state if all foreign tourists decided not to visit the US.They love
the US and the people but there are lots of other countries in the world
who would be happy to get their business.Don't throw out the baby with the
bathwater. :-)

John Beaderstadt

austin500 wrote:
    > Targetting and harassing 69 year old grandmothers from Duluth...

Did I miss something? At what point did someone claim this was happening?

--
Beady's Eighth Law of Social Harmonics: "Avoid eye contact; shut up;
keep walking."