BajaNomad

Web searches at U.S. border bring scrutiny to new level

The Sculpin - 5-14-2007 at 12:49 PM

From the International Herald Tribune....not quite Baja related, other than it could happen on this border....

Kinda scary since the determination of whether a crime was committed was somewhat arbitrary.....


Web searches at U.S. border bring scrutiny to new level

By Adam Liptak

Monday, May 14, 2007
Andrew Feldmar, a Vancouver psychotherapist, was on his way to pick up a friend at the Seattle airport last summer when he ran into a little trouble at the border.

A guard typed Feldmar's name into an Internet search engine, which revealed that he had written about using LSD in the 1960s in an interdisciplinary journal. Feldmar was turned back and is no longer welcome in the United States, where he has been active professionally and where both of his children live.

Feldmar, 66, has a distinguished résumé, no criminal record and a candid manner. Though he has not used illegal drugs since 1974, he says he has no regrets.

"It was an absolutely fascinating and life-altering experience for me," he said last week of his experimentation with LSD and other psychedelic drugs. "The insights it provided have lasted for a lifetime. It allowed me to feel what it would be like to live without habits."

Feldmar said he had been in the United States more than 100 times and always without incident since he last took an illegal drug. But that changed in August, thanks to the happenstance of an Internet search, conducted for unexplained reasons, at the Peace Arch border station in Blaine, Washington.

The search turned up an article in a 2001 issue of the journal Janus Head devoted to the legacy of R.D. Laing, with whom Feldmar had studied in London about 30 years before.

"I traveled to many regions many times with the help of many different substances," Feldmar wrote of his experiences with Laing and other psychiatrists and therapists. "I took peyote, psilocybin mushrooms, cannabis" and other drugs, he added, "but I kept coming back to LSD."

He was asked by a border guard whether he was the author of the article and whether it was true. Yes, he replied. And yes.

Feldmar was held for four hours, fingerprinted and, after signing a statement conceding the long-ago drug use, sent home.

Mike Milne, a spokesman for the Customs and Border Protection agency in Seattle, said he could not discuss individual cases for reasons of privacy. But the law is clear, Milne said. People who have used drugs are not welcome here.

"If you are or have been a drug user," he said, "that's one of the many things that can make you inadmissible to the United States."

He added that the government was constantly on the hunt for new sources of information. "Any new technology that we have available to us, we use to do searches on," Milne said.

Feldmar has been told by the American consul general in Vancouver that he may now enter the United States only if he obtains a formal waiver.

"Both our countries have very similar regulations regarding issuance of visas for citizens who have violated the law," the consul, Lewis Lukens, wrote to Feldmar in September. "The issue here is not the writing of an article, but the taking of controlled substances."

The waiver process would require a lawyer, several thousand dollars and dishonesty, Feldmar said. He would have to say he has been rehabilitated.

"Rehabilitated from what?" he asked. "It's degrading, literally degrading."

Ethan Nadelmann, the executive director of the Drug Policy Alliance, which works to ease drug penalties, said Feldmar's case proved how arbitrary U.S. drug policy can be. "Roughly a majority of the population of the United States between the ages of 18 and 58 has violated a drug law at least once," he said.

Feldmar said, "I should warn people that the electronic footprint you leave on the Net will be used against you. It cannot be erased."

Bob and Susan - 5-14-2007 at 01:20 PM

"I should warn people that the electronic footprint you leave on the Net will be used against you. It cannot be erased."

this IS true but...

he didn't have to sign anything...
he should have just asked for a lawyer...
he was in the USA

the cost...nothing
just ask for a public defender...

we would have just "sent him back"
he's a canadian...

TMW - 5-14-2007 at 01:32 PM

I think it shows just how screwed up our Home Land Security system and drug policy is. His sin was he admitted using an illegal drug, what was it 30 years ago. He was not charged with a crime then so why would it matter now. There's millions of people in the U.S. illegally and some are bad people. Why don't our hot shot blood hounds turn their computers on them.
I guess if I admitted to making and using alcohol during prohibition they'd throw me in the slammer. Not to worry I ain't that old.

Visitation Rights

MrBillM - 5-14-2007 at 01:38 PM

Although recent and current events in major U.S. cities might make one think otherwise, there is NO RIGHT for ANY Foreign National to enter the United States, just as there is none for a Foreigner to enter Mexico.

The U.S. Government has the sole power to determine which Foreigners it wishes to admit. Period.

DENNIS - 5-14-2007 at 01:44 PM

Right-on Bill ---

And thank god or somebody that border protection at ports of entry are above political correctness. At least, I think they are.

Packoderm - 5-14-2007 at 02:29 PM

Well I guess our Paul McCartney tickets are no good anymore if they aren't going to let him in the country either. I guess they've got to look like they're doing something. By the way, just exactly who made this our country's policy. I don't remember hearing anything about any of my elected representatives voting for or against such a policy.

flyfishinPam - 5-14-2007 at 02:55 PM

Ironically, I googled the Dr's name and found another more detailed article"

http://thetyee.ca/News/2007/04/23/Feldmar/

this story mentions other persons who were denied entry for various reasons and they are a bit more freightening cases of refusing to allow entry to internationally recognized scholars thus barring them from attending meetings, presentations and forums of varuious types. I guess Dr Feldmar should consider himself lucky to be allowed to go back to Canada instead of being shipped off to guantanamo and tortured. The patriot act's very name is an insult to the true patriots that fought for our freedoms (which are now being eroded) in the establishment our country over 200 years ago. How much longer will it be before scientists and professors or "dissents" will be detained for whatever and or forced to leave or "disappeared"? Dr Feldmar lived through this being a hungarian with parents what survived N-zi germany. and didn't GW publicly admit to using cocaine?! Its interesting that the nation with the highest per capita drug use, the largest consumer of drugs the cause of other countries peoples sufferings due to narcotrafficing, will turn away someone who admitted to using LSD in a country (great Britain in the early 1970's) in which at the time of this use was not an illegal action? scary, when will we ever learn to pay attention to history and not repeat the same mistakes over and over?

Bruce R Leech - 5-14-2007 at 02:56 PM

Don't do Illegal things and it cant come back to haunt you. :yes:

If you do illegal things dont write about it and publish it on the Internet:wow:

you play you pay:lol:

TMW - 5-14-2007 at 03:10 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by MrBillM
Although recent and current events in major U.S. cities might make one think otherwise, there is NO RIGHT for ANY Foreign National to enter the United States, just as there is none for a Foreigner to enter Mexico.

The U.S. Government has the sole power to determine which Foreigners it wishes to admit. Period.


What about the UN in New York. Can the U.S. keep a person invited to speak or was appointed to be a deligate from some country from coming to the UN? I don't think we've ever stopped any one from attending the UN from Castro to North Korea.

flyfishinPam - 5-14-2007 at 03:13 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Bruce R Leech
Don't do Illegal things and it cant come back to haunt you. :yes:

If you do illegal things dont write about it and publish it on the Internet:wow:

you play you pay:lol:


then I think its a good idea to "google yourself" :lol: to see what may be out there on you. What's to stop someone from posting in a message board about say...porn, or terrorism or whatever with someone elses name?? if you "google yourself" regurarly you'll see what's available about yourself.

so the moral of the story is:

google yourself often
and if you see something you don't like learn the google webmaster tools and remove it!

even "law abiding citizens" can become falsley accused and penalized, so this is no joking matter, really :tumble:

flyfishinPam - 5-14-2007 at 03:21 PM

Hey bruce is that you on the F150online forum.com? and all those listings on the nomad forum?

TMW - 5-14-2007 at 04:21 PM

The owner of a company I do business with is named John T Davis. He says everytime he would use that name when flying he would be hassled by airport security. So he started using J Thomas Davis and the problem went away.

The Gull - 5-14-2007 at 04:29 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by TW
The owner of a company I do business with is named John T Davis. He says everytime he would use that name when flying he would be hassled by airport security. So he started using J Thomas Davis and the problem went away.


Or use Fidel Castro...

David K - 5-14-2007 at 05:02 PM

How will Bill Clinton get back if he leaves the U.S.??? :lol:

TMW - 5-14-2007 at 05:17 PM

I googled my name and came up with this story from the Washington Post by Emil Steiner. No it was not me.

Thomas Wimberly: Three Strikes, Two Hot Dogs & No Sense
Vet Jailed 71 Days For Not Stealing Hot Dogs!



Maybe We Should Pay More Attention to How These Are Made (Helayne Seidman) Thomas M. Wimberly, an elderly veteran living on social security, spent 71 days in jail because he forgot to pay for two hot dogs at a convenience store. The 75-year-old from Wichita, Kansas is the latest in a long line of farcical cases which illustrate how poorer citizens get lost in the illogical inconsistencies of our criminal justice system.

Here's how this one went down. Last summer, Wimberly left his dog, Smokey Bear, in a shopping cart to go inside a convenience store. He picked up a chocolate bar for himself and a couple of franks for Smokey. Although Wimberly paid for the chocolate, he claims Smokey started jumping out of the cart, and so he ran outside to stop him. That reflex may have cost him two months of his life because an off-duty police officer noticed he hadn't paid for the hot dogs, which he used to calm Smokey, and arrested him on the spot.

Wimberly was booked for theft, but after a municipal judge dismissed the charges, he assumed, as any sensible person would, that the fiasco was over. However, even though the total value of the wieners in question was $2.11, Kansas law requires felony prosecution if a suspect has two prior convictions, which Wimberly has, and so the city sent his case to the district attorney's office, which issued a summons. For whatever reason, that summons was "returned as undelivered," and so a bench warrant was issued for his arrest.

Of course, Wimberly, who is "hard of hearing, walks with a stooped gait and shapes his words around missing teeth," had no idea any of this was going on until he was brought in and told to cough up $5,000 in bail or get locked up. As a senior living on a fixed income, even the 10 percent bondsmen fee constituted more than twice his rent. And with only an overworked public defender arguing on his behalf, Wimberly spent the next 33 days behind bars until the judge granted him a no-cash bond on the stipulation that he report to a center across town from his apartment.

This worked well through last winter, until Wimberly got sick and missed a check-in. With no phone, he couldn't call to explain and so was hauled back whereupon the judge issued a $100,000 bond. Unable to pay, Wimberly was thrown back in the slammer, charged with a crime that doesn't even carry "time behind bars [if convicted], only probation." There he stayed until last week, when he finally got his day in court and a measure of commonsense. Jurors took little time to decide that the charges against him were "stupid," and Wimberly was set free. That said, he is still facing a trespassing charge stemming from his attempt to re-enter the convenience store in order to pay for the hotdogs... let's hope he doesn't get the chair.

Cases like these serve as stark reminders of how our justice system functions not as a fair scale, but rather a blind robot following commands. Those commands are executed with no regard for commonsense, unless their creators (the Legislature) so endow them. And given the politics of creating loopholes for criminals, what congressmen is going to risk his or her job to do so? That is why it is up to the masters of law (judges) to rein in those commands when they lead to abominations like this one.

Unfortunately, the current climate of over-burdened jurisprudence slants toward a strict interpretation that favors the letter of the law even if when it undermines the spirit. Though some may argue that it is a small price to pay for safety and justice, I would venture to say that such procedures are not only more costly from a taxpayer's standpoint, but actually create more crime than they prevent in the long run. No one who goes through such ridiculous humiliation as Mr. Wimberly experienced could come out with anything but contempt for the law; and with that mindset, a "criminal" cannot be rehabilitated or even controlled, only hardened.

security vs liberty

tehag - 5-14-2007 at 05:31 PM

Perhaps a little misquoted, but not materially:

"Anyone willing to trade liberty for security deserves neither."

Benjamin Franklin

elgatoloco - 5-14-2007 at 05:47 PM

"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. "

Words to live by.

I say, "It's about time"...

Mexray - 5-14-2007 at 06:33 PM

...That our Federal Govt's agents are enforcing this county's immigration/Visa regulations in a more 'aggressive' way.

For anyone who has traveled to other countries around our globe, you will find strict rules and regulations on visitors entering, visiting, etc. If one has a questionable background, or problems on previous visits, they may encounter difficulties with authorities at their borders!

I believe it's about time our Govt. is taking steps to 'tighten' up the Reg's that have been rather lax on our Northern and Southern borders, for years. What's wrong with turning back a foreigner with a questionable background? Just because they have been granted entry before shouldn't make any difference!

Entry into OUR COUNTRY is a privilege - just as it is for us to visit other foreign countries.

I say it's about time other's begin playing by International rules we US Citizens have been abiding by to visit other countries, for many years!!!

vgabndo - 5-14-2007 at 06:46 PM

Its all too bizarre. Selective enforcement of useless laws.
Isn't it true that under the patriot act, a person who knowingly consorts, and shares the world view of a known sponsor of terrorism, is supposed to be thrown into Gitmo and interrogated until he proves he's not a threat to world peace? The detainee in this case would be the President for hanging out with his father who was a known sponsor of international terrorism for his support of the "Contras" in their attemps to overthrow the government of Nicaragua.

You can't tell the players without a program. A very slippery slope it is. I have not a doubt in the world that there is a political computer file on me in Washington DC, and I have never been arrested or charged with a crime, AND I'm a veteran and a patriot.

I've long wondered what comes up on the screen at the kiosk when they run your license plate northbound at the border. In todays land of the free and home of the brave, I suspect we're not allowed to know what they read about us on their screen.:fire:

[Edited on 5-15-2007 by vgabndo]

[Edited on 5-15-2007 by vgabndo]

Lee - 5-14-2007 at 07:01 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by elgatoloco
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. "

Words to live by.


"Give me liberty or give me death." or

"Give me Librium or give me Meth."

:cool:

bajaguy - 5-14-2007 at 07:52 PM

Originally posted by vgabndo:
Its all too bizarre. Selective enforcement of useless laws.........

Just like trying to get an answer regarding FM-3 procedures from different Mexican Consulates or local Mexican Immigration offices................

oldhippie - 5-14-2007 at 08:28 PM

I'm legally changing my name to Joe Smith. Google all you want, I've done it all, including talking to God and starting the Mormon church. Don't mess with me.

I understand "George Bush was arrested for smoking crack".

There, that should get rid of the (expletive deleted) the next time he tries to enter the country and ole heart attack Dick does a Google search. But wait, then Dick will be president.

"Dick Chaney shot a friend in the face with a shotgun". Ok, he's out too.

oldhippie - 5-14-2007 at 08:30 PM

or is it "Dick Cheney shot a friend in the face with a shotgun". Whatever, they're both banned.

Taco de Baja - 5-15-2007 at 07:23 AM

I should be ok. My Googled name mainly has hits to some lawyers and a judge :yes: .....

...Or, maybe, that's a bad thing....:?:

TMW - 5-15-2007 at 07:29 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Mexray
...That our Federal Govt's agents are enforcing this county's immigration/Visa regulations in a more 'aggressive' way.

For anyone who has traveled to other countries around our globe, you will find strict rules and regulations on visitors entering, visiting, etc. If one has a questionable background, or problems on previous visits, they may encounter difficulties with authorities at their borders!

I believe it's about time our Govt. is taking steps to 'tighten' up the Reg's that have been rather lax on our Northern and Southern borders, for years. What's wrong with turning back a foreigner with a questionable background? Just because they have been granted entry before shouldn't make any difference!

Entry into OUR COUNTRY is a privilege - just as it is for us to visit other foreign countries.

I say it's about time other's begin playing by International rules we US Citizens have been abiding by to visit other countries, for many years!!!


If Mexico starts checking, the lines will be backed up to Canada. Within the European Union they do not check people crossing the borders.

TMW - 5-15-2007 at 07:33 AM

While talking about security, does anyone know who checks the airplane cleaning people? In most airports nobody does. Also in many airports pilots can bypass security check points. So much for tough security.

bajalou - 5-15-2007 at 07:40 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Taco de Baja
I should be ok. My Googled name mainly has hits to some lawyers and a judge :yes: .....

...Or, maybe, that's a bad thing....:?:


Better watch out keeping that kind of company.

Minnow - 5-15-2007 at 09:10 AM

Before my wife got her permanent resident card she had to do a blood test and a drug screening.:o Thats right, if you fail, no green card. Good thing college kids in Mexico aren't like they are in the states.:lol:

A Crock of Complaints.

MrBillM - 5-15-2007 at 09:11 AM

For years it wasn't feasible to do these database searches on an extensive basis. Technology has changed that. Now that we are seeing increased enforcement of Already exisiting regulations, the Libbies are whining that, somehow, this is going to erode Liberties. Exactly HOW ? The Foreign Drug Guy hasn't lost anything guaranteed to him as a Canuckian. He is still free to disseminate his views. His presence on U.S. soil won't affect the civil liberties of U.S. Citizens and the ICE people can't deny re-entry to them regardless of what the background check shows.

As far as the United Nitwits is concerned, the government CAN and HAS denied entry to Foreigners invited to New York to speak. Only those with Diplomatic Credentials are immune and even that isn't absolute. In an extreme case, the State Department can and has refused to recognize the Credentials.

For those who think that is terrible, the answer is Simple. Get the U.N. out of the U.S. and Good Riddance. It is an organization that has been a complete failure in performing its primary purpose. Only in some of the minor ancillary efforts has it shown any competence at all. It was located in New York as a result of pressure from the Soviet Union. They wanted the opportunities to bring spies into the country under Diplomatic cover. The recorded history of their successful activities in that respect is well-documented.

Minnow - 5-15-2007 at 09:32 AM

Come on Bill. Look at all the good Kofi Annan did.:lol:

Hook - 5-15-2007 at 10:10 AM

Of course, the most absurd aspect of this is that foreigners admitting to victimless crimes will be barred...............but the foreigners who have made it illegally into the country will be granted some kind of amnesty and social security status. Their kids, too.

Happened once in the Reagan Administration............will happen again.

This Canadian's crime was that the work he performed in the US wasnt for a large agribusiness or hotel chain...........he was performing work that Americans WOULD do. BAD, BAD!!!!!!

Minnow - 5-15-2007 at 01:55 PM

Come on Hook, look at the big picture. We all know by now that taking illegal drugs supports terrorists. Just as in MX, where the philosophy is that demand dictates supply. Tail wags the dog so to speak. It would then reason that if you take drugs, you support terrorism.

[Edited on 15-5-2007 by Minnow]

Lee - 5-15-2007 at 02:03 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by Minnow
Before my wife got her permanent resident card she had to do a blood test and a drug screening.:o Thats right, if you fail, no green card. Good thing college kids in Mexico aren't like they are in the states.:lol:


Baja would have alot less Californians if it started doing blood and drug testing. Thank God the druggies have a place to go.

:cool:

vgabndo - 5-15-2007 at 02:47 PM

Lets not lose touch with the reality that the last big get together of Nomads in Baja was at least partly to take drugs and then judge the different varieties. Alcohol, a drug, still does more social damage than ALL the street drugs put together. I hope all the Nomads had designated drivers, or slept it off where they were. Properly controlled, recreational drugs can be a lot of fun. :lol:

The dis-allowed scientist used LSD twenty years ago. Dick Chaney was drinking when he shot his friend in the face.

Like I said, the selective law enforcement is bizarre.

Iflyfish - 5-15-2007 at 04:38 PM

Well, lets see, that would have excluded Einstein and Freud from entering the country too.

Man, oh, man.

A bit of history.

In the seventies they were experimenting, legally, with LSD, as a form of "psychomemetic" a drug that would mimic psychosis to learn more about it and hopefully to better treat it. Because of it's powerful affect on emotions it was also being considered and in some cases was used as a form of Psychotherapy. It was introduced to Harvard as a result of a European industrialist taking the drug, as a part of his own psychotherapy, and re-experiencing his birth. He felt that his experience cured him of a life long depression. He was so enthusiastic he promoted and supported research in the use of the drug in Psychotherapy and that is part of the story of how it got to Harvard researchers Leary and Alport and to many other labs around the country. The CIA experimented extensively with the drug as they saw potential to either use it in interogation of spies or for innoculating our agents from chemical means of extracting information from them. There were experiments carried out by the CIA in which many people were exposed to the drug, some without their knowledge or consent.

My point here is that the author, who was excluded from this country, who cannot now visit his children, was not a crazy, drug crazed addict, but a serious researcher and Psychotherapist. This is a sad story indeed. There is law and there is justice, sometimes they are not the same.

Iflyfish

QuePasaBaja - 6-21-2007 at 03:29 PM

The thing that concerns me, is that simply ANYONE can compose an article, and use your name. Infact if you know someone that visits the US on a regular basis, and you dont want them there any more, simply compose an article using thier name and stating that they have committed illegal acts, such as taking drugs or smuggling others in.


That is what I find so scarry. This board is spiderd by Google on a regular basis. Unless the Correct files are in place to prevent it. So if you are using your real name, and statements can and will be used against you.

So cut the jokes, as they may one day bite you in the ars.

Mango - 6-22-2007 at 10:50 PM

I was gifted by my parents with the most popular name for boys when I was born. I was also gifted with the 18th most popular last name by my family.

I can open any phone book in the US and find about 4 or 5 pages of my last name; usually three to four other people with my same name.

When I was in elementary school. There were two other kids (one in the same classroom as me even!) that had the same first and last name. The kid in my class had the same middle initial even.

One day I received a packet of meal stamps in the mail for the cafeteria that we did not order. I always took my lunch to school. They were for one of the other kids with my same name. After phone calls to the other parents, and to the school we were unable to find and return them or find the rightful owner. After about two weeks, my mother told me to just go ahead and use them.

Skip ahead several years to high school. Now only one kid with my same name; except, now the kid with my name is a troublemaker. (I always received good marks in citizenship)

One day I was in English class, working away... when a message comes over the intercom for me to report to the office immediately. Everyone knew I was in big trouble; because, they knew that students were rarely called to the office via the loudspeaker in the classroom vs. more subtle methods.

Shocked and confused I reported to the principals office. As I walked in the receptionist, who knew me and babysat me as a child, told me, "I don't know what you did, but Mr. Cavinni is peeed."

I walked into the principals office. He had his chair faced away from the door, and commanded that I, "Take a seat," after he heard me walk in.

After sitting down in the chair across from his desk, my principle suddenly wheeled his chair around 180 degrees and slammed his hands down on his desk. His initial look of furry and anger quickly turned to confusion as he asked, "Who the hell are you?!?"

I replied with my name, and he said, "No your not." I thought to myself, "Oh.. this again..." I pulled my student ID out of my wallet and showed him I was who I said I was and explained about past confusion between me and the other kid with my same name. Off I went back to class.. no big deal.. until..

A few months later, I get home from school and put my key in the front door to unlock it. My father, who must have come home from work early, opens the door for me and confronts me looking rather angry.

"Do you have anything to tell me?!"

Shocked and confused I thought for a minute, Damm.. what did I do? hmm.. no way he could have found out about that.. hmm.. and that was two weeks ago, could it be.. hmm.. no, he wouldn't be this peeed..

"No", I said, "I don't think so."

"Your US Government teacher just called and told me you skipped your final!", he said

I thought..Oh shi...wait.. "I don't even have US Government dad, that is a class for Juniors and I am a Sophomore!"

I then explained to my father about my evil "twin"

To this day (post 911) I am amazed I can even get on a plane or cross the border. I have done nothing wrong but suspect someday I will have more problems.

If we need to rely on border guards to determine who should and should not be put on "blacklists".. we have big problems with our intelligence agencies.. I would really hope that people gathering intelligence and adding peoples names to lists wouldn't be sitting in a little booth at border. The border guards job should be to determine if someone is on a "blacklist" or not, if their documents are real or false, if the person is who they say they are, and if they are smuggling anything, etc.

I think we would be far better off to leave adding people to "blacklists" to the CIA/NSA/FBI etc... We can assume they have a college degree (no guarantee that they learned anything) and can check and verify fact from fiction before the determine somebody's fate long before they get to our borders. That is, unless you want some guy with a GED sitting in a 3ft x 3ft booth in 110 degree heat to be your judge and jury for something you may not have even done.

bajaguy - 6-22-2007 at 10:58 PM

how many kids could have a first name of Mango????:lol: