Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest RBG

Heathrow Terminal 5 To Fingerprint All Passengers

Recommended Posts

Guest RBG

Thats what they are trying to do anyway because it will make the airport safe from terrorists obviously...Seeing as all Terrorists go round with a sign on there head saying im a terrorists...I dont believe that 9/11 or 7/7 was caused by Muslims directly and intentionally..But if these sort of Terrorists do exist then obviously they are gonna be brainwashed and have a clean record so hows scanning there prints going to stop them from blowing up a plane...Not like there going to be able to arrest them after...How you spose to smuggle a bomb on a plane if you cant even bring on drinks anymore...Getting worse even faster then i expected...They used the bait line...'If you got nothing to hide you got nothing to fear'If this does go threw f*ck going Terminal 5...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Vaseline

SENDING IM SENDING I CANT STOP SENDINGSTAY AWAKE COS U GON SEE CARRERS ENDINGWILLYS NOT A PRICK HES GOT RECORD DEALS PENDINGCOME TO MY ENDS JUST TO SEE IF IM DEFENDING

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Smell Of Death
What runs through terminal five, all the good sh*t I'm guessing
excatlythem "if u want to make it seem as though they have an option, make the option you favour less out of reach" movesor whatever they say

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest RBG
No, you will not be fingerprinted. Instead you will have your photograph taken after checking in and before boarding.
And you are 100% sure of this because...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Think you will have to be fingerprinted 4 times before getting on the plane also.
FOUR TIMES blink.gif Gotta be havin a laugh.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Smell Of Death
as rbg said if you were gnna blow up a plane or hijack onewhat godd would finger printing do
initcnt have some re-offending suicide bomber

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

its getting so obviousall these laws preventing terrorism is just an excuseits just to track people and perhaps prevent same with the anti terrorism actbasically you can stop black and asians without any reason other than they are black or asian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BAA has abandoned plans to fingerprint every passenger passing through Heathrow's Terminal 5 after it was warned the move may breach data protection laws.In a statement this afternoon, the airports authority said it had made the decision "following a meeting with all relevant parties, including the Information Commissioner and the Border and Immigration Agency."It continued: "The introduction of fingerprinting for domestic passengers and international passengers transferring on to domestic flights at Heathrow will be temporarily delayed."BAA will be opening Terminal 5 using a photographic identification process during this time which is already in place.""We will be working closely with the information commissioner and the Home Office over the next few weeks to agree the best approach going forward."The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) warned the airport operator on Monday that the security measure may breach the Data Protection Act.BAA wanted to fingerprint all domestic passengers who use the £4.3bn terminal, as well as international passengers transferring on to internal flights.It planned to take fingerprints as passengers passed through security and to check them again at the gate, to ensure the individual boarding the plane is the same person who first checked in.BAA argued that without the measures it might be possible for a potential terrorist to arrive at Heathrow on a transit flight and exchange boarding passes with a colleague in the departure lounge.That person could then join a domestic flight to enter the UK without being checked by immigration authorities.But the ICO asked BAA why it needed to use fingerprinting at Heathrow when other airports like Gatwick and Manchester rely on photographs to ensure security at their common departure lounges.Deputy information commissioner David Smith told the Mail on Sunday: "If we find there is a breach of data protection legislation, we would hope to persuade them to put things right."If that is not successful we can issue an enforcement notice. If they don't comply, it is a criminal offence and they can be prosecuted."http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/mar/26/3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
its getting so obviousall these laws preventing terrorism is just an excuseits just to track people and perhaps prevent same with the anti terrorism actbasically you can stop black and asians without any reason other than they are black or asian

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BAA has abandoned plans to fingerprint every passenger passing through Heathrow's Terminal 5 after it was warned the move may breach data protection laws.In a statement this afternoon, the airports authority said it had made the decision "following a meeting with all relevant parties, including the Information Commissioner and the Border and Immigration Agency."It continued: "The introduction of fingerprinting for domestic passengers and international passengers transferring on to domestic flights at Heathrow will be temporarily delayed."BAA will be opening Terminal 5 using a photographic identification process during this time which is already in place.""We will be working closely with the information commissioner and the Home Office over the next few weeks to agree the best approach going forward."The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) warned the airport operator on Monday that the security measure may breach the Data Protection Act.BAA wanted to fingerprint all domestic passengers who use the £4.3bn terminal, as well as international passengers transferring on to internal flights.It planned to take fingerprints as passengers passed through security and to check them again at the gate, to ensure the individual boarding the plane is the same person who first checked in.BAA argued that without the measures it might be possible for a potential terrorist to arrive at Heathrow on a transit flight and exchange boarding passes with a colleague in the departure lounge.That person could then join a domestic flight to enter the UK without being checked by immigration authorities.But the ICO asked BAA why it needed to use fingerprinting at Heathrow when other airports like Gatwick and Manchester rely on photographs to ensure security at their common departure lounges.Deputy information commissioner David Smith told the Mail on Sunday: "If we find there is a breach of data protection legislation, we would hope to persuade them to put things right."If that is not successful we can issue an enforcement notice. If they don't comply, it is a criminal offence and they can be prosecuted."http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/mar/26/3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOLIf you lot think finger printing a thumb/index or two is bad THEN DON'T GO TO NEW YORK.THEY GOING TO BE 'FINGER PRINTING' A MINIMUM OF 10 FINGERS THEY MIGHT AS WELL DO THE WHOLE HANDWHATS THE POINT OF NEGLECTING THE OTHER TWO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BAA has abandoned plans to fingerprint every passenger passing through Heathrow's Terminal 5 after it was warned the move may breach data protection laws.In a statement this afternoon, the airports authority said it had made the decision "following a meeting with all relevant parties, including the Information Commissioner and the Border and Immigration Agency."It continued: "The introduction of fingerprinting for domestic passengers and international passengers transferring on to domestic flights at Heathrow will be temporarily delayed."BAA will be opening Terminal 5 using a photographic identification process during this time which is already in place.""We will be working closely with the information commissioner and the Home Office over the next few weeks to agree the best approach going forward."The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) warned the airport operator on Monday that the security measure may breach the Data Protection Act.BAA wanted to fingerprint all domestic passengers who use the £4.3bn terminal, as well as international passengers transferring on to internal flights.It planned to take fingerprints as passengers passed through security and to check them again at the gate, to ensure the individual boarding the plane is the same person who first checked in.BAA argued that without the measures it might be possible for a potential terrorist to arrive at Heathrow on a transit flight and exchange boarding passes with a colleague in the departure lounge.That person could then join a domestic flight to enter the UK without being checked by immigration authorities.But the ICO asked BAA why it needed to use fingerprinting at Heathrow when other airports like Gatwick and Manchester rely on photographs to ensure security at their common departure lounges.Deputy information commissioner David Smith told the Mail on Sunday: "If we find there is a breach of data protection legislation, we would hope to persuade them to put things right."If that is not successful we can issue an enforcement notice. If they don't comply, it is a criminal offence and they can be prosecuted."http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2008/mar/26/3
It is only delayed.It will be standard procedure soon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL bare bollux in this threadim a security officer at t5ALL DOMESTIC passengers will have their fingerprints and picture taken when handed their boarding card before being searched, so that wen they board their flight British Airways will rescan their boarding card and verify that they r hu they r suposed 2 b thats itinternational transfers will b scanned. ur fingerprints will b scanned TWICE and b DELETED in 24 hoursthat is all

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

oh you'll also like this,there is also 'sniffers' in t5u walk through it and it analyses the air around ur skin, hair, clothes etc. if u hav substantial particles of drugs on u the alarm goes offsay u blazed the mornin b4 ur flight, u'll b safesay u hav a 10bag in ur pocket, ur f*cked

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i think it will be a good thing if the fingeprint thing goes ahead.the greatest airport is charles de gaulle in paris, oh my lord, it looks like something out of star trek future generation......... ye it aint relevant to this thread but this thread has just reminded me of how great that airport actually is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
i think it will be a good thing if the fingeprint thing goes ahead.the greatest airport is charles de gaulle in paris, oh my lord, it looks like something out of star trek future generation......... ye it aint relevant to this thread but this thread has just reminded me of how great that airport actually is.
Why do you think it is a good thing?This from the telegraph Nigel Rumfitt QC, terrorism specialist, explains why he is opposed to compulsory fingerprinting at Heathrow Everyone using the new Terminal 5 at Heathrow for domestic flights will have to be fingerprinted. Who says so? Not Parliament. The British Airports Authority, a Spanish-owned private company, and British Airways say so. Why? It's a government requirement, they tell us. But in free societies, government requirements come in the form of laws. Who made the requirement, when and in what terms? Fingerprinting has been around for more than 100 years. In this country it has been used only to catch and identify criminals. No doubt that is why it carries a stigma. Compulsory mass fingerprinting is regarded as "unBritish", but the present Government seems determined to change our attitude. A few years ago, with little publicity, the law was altered to allow the indefinite retention of fingerprints and DNA taken from suspects later acquitted or even released without charge. Police powers of arrest have been extended recently, allowing the more widespread obtaining of this data. Nonetheless, the Government has not yet dared to make mass fingerprinting compulsory. What this Government fears to do openly it tries to do by stealth. Because you cannot be compelled to provide your fingerprints, both BAA and British Airways are saying that by choosing to fly through Terminal 5 you are "consenting" to the taking of your prints. That is disingenuous, to put it mildly. True, some people will not mind; others will object, but will not be prepared to abandon an important journey in order to register that objection. In practice, and without legislation, we will have become a nation that restricts the internal movement of its citizens by government decree. Imagine how people would have reacted in the 1950s to the proposition that before boarding the Flying Scotsman at King's Cross you had to provide your fingerprints because the Home Secretary thought it a good idea. These measures, it is said, will protect us against terrorism. That is nonsense. Modern Islamist terrorists want the world to know who they are. That's why they make video wills to show everyone exactly who has been martyred for the cause. Would any recent terrorist outrage have been prevented by ID cards or fingerprint records? If it would, why bring in vital security measures by the back door and confine them to domestic flights? Another danger is that, at Terminal 5, illegal immigrants can swap boarding passes with domestic passengers and get into the country unchecked. This is because greedy BAA wants all passengers – domestic and international – to mingle in the same shopping mall before flying. If this is only about verifying identity at the gate, why take four prints and not just one? Why keep these prints on file for "only" 24 hours instead of destroying them at the gate? To what use will the prints be put in that time? The Data Protection Act, quoted by BAA, in fact allows police access to this material. This is not about security. It is about paving the way towards the database state, making it easier to force us to "consent" to giving our fingerprints when we apply for a passport. That's the final step before the compulsory ID card. I already refuse to visit the United States because of oppressive security and I have indicated to BAA that I shall refuse to provide fingerprints unless I can be satisfied that it has a legal right to demand them. If the law has been changed to allow BAA to behave in this way, I shall find another airline. Nigel Rumfitt QC is a specialist in serious crime, including terrorism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×