Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
Games Entertainment

Foreign E3 Journalists Body Searched, Deported 78

Posted by simoniker from the sonic-and-mario-brandishing-rubber-gloves dept.
Thanks to Janko for pointing out a press release at Reporters Without Borders denouncing the US authorities for deporting French games journalists sent to cover E3. The complaint alleges that "..these journalists were treated like criminals - subjected to several body searches, handcuffed, locked up and fingerprinted", after arriving in Los Angeles on (arguably misleading) tourist visas to cover the E3 trade show. It doesn't seem to have been just the French, either - messageboard reports indicate at least 5 British journalists from a variety of publications had a similar treatment. Who'd have thought attending E3 could be so.. dangerous?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Foreign E3 Journalists Body Searched, Deported More

Foreign E3 Journalists Body Searched, Deported

Comments Filter:

  • Jeez (Score:2, Interesting)

    by rhuntley12 ( 621658 )
    6 body searchs? That seems just a tad bit in excess, don't you think?

    • Re:Jeez (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Well, they lost a glove on the first one, and it took a bit of poking around to find it again...

    • Re:Jeez (Score:1, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward
      How is the above post a troll?
      I agree with it entirely. 6 body searches on game journalists? Use your brain people. When is the US going to pull it's head out it's ass so it can stop sticking it's hands up other peoples?

  • French? (Score:5, Funny)

    by isorox ( 205688 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @04:05AM (#6013710) Homepage Journal
    Surely you mean Freedom journalists?
  • Well, we all know that games cause violence, and foreigners are terrorists (especially when our alert is on HIGH!). So if you have people coming overseas coming to a large game conference....

    Sorry. I just couldn't resist. :D

  • seperate groups (Score:2, Interesting)

    by visualight ( 468005 )
    Okay, two groups of french journalists, both covering the same event, but arriving on different days, get treated like this. Might it be retribution against the French for not doing what the U.S. ordered them to do (Iraq)? It does seem like the French are being singled out.

    • Re:seperate groups (Score:2, Informative)

      by DjReagan ( 143826 )
      The French are being singled out? What part of "It doesn't seem to have been just the French, either - messageboard reports indicate at least 5 British journalists from a variety of publications had a similar treatment" don't you understand?

    • Re:seperate groups (Score:3, Insightful)

      by Virus1984 ( 624552 )
      Might it be retribution against the French for not doing what the U.S. ordered them to do (Iraq)?

      Event if it was it shouldn't have happened...no one, I repeat NO ONE is supposed to do whatever the USA tell them to do; especially when the order is to wage war on some random country just because.

      • Re:seperate groups (Score:4, Insightful)

        by kalidasa ( 577403 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @09:33AM (#6014577) Journal

        And the fact that 5 British journalists were also subjected to this, despite the fact that the British supported the US in the war, means what? Maybe that your theory is all wet?

        I'll tell you what I think happened. They came into the country on tourist visas, and when they were asked why they had come to the US, they said "we're journalists going to a games conference." The Homeland Security goons looked at the visas, saw that they either lied to get their visas or were lying to the goons, and determined them to be security risks. Hence the cavity searches.

        So the moral of the story is...if you have a tourist visa and the Homeland Security goons ask if you're here to go to Disneyland, you SAY YES!

        • Re:seperate groups (Score:3, Insightful)

          by andyt ( 149701 )
          Just a point of info : I don't believe they lied to get their visas. The UK (and, I think, France) has a "Visa Waiver Program" with the USA. This states that you don't need a visa if you're travelling to the USA for non-business use for a period of up to 6 months.

          So, yes, they should have got a working visa (a J-1?) but they didn't lie.. they just didn't think they needed one.

          These are all Europeans, used to being able to travel anywhere in Europe and report on trade shows and what-have-you without restri
        • " So the moral of the story is...if you have a tourist visa and the Homeland Security goons ask if you're here to go to Disneyland, you SAY YES!"

          Crap. The visa waiver programs for European citizens is for "business and pleasure". As a business man, no one wants to go through a "work visa" application, when all he does is making business with American partners. What's the differenc between physical presence and other means of communication you can conduct your business with, be it telephone, mail or videoco
      • Nice try, Virus1984...or should I say, Mr. HUSSEIN????

    • Re:seperate groups (Score:1, Insightful)

      by Darkstorm ( 6880 )
      Might it be retribution against the French for not doing what the U.S. ordered them to do (Iraq)?

      The US was not orering the French to do anything, as I remember it the French said they would veto anything that the US wanted to do. The French had lots of contracts with Iraq and Sadam, so it came down to money. Since terrorist are becoming brave again and are looking to cause more terror, the US is stepping up on its security. Did the Security people single out the French reporters? I wouldn't be suppri

      • Re:seperate groups (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Cackmobile ( 182667 )
        "If the French want better treatment from the US, then they should act like a friend to the US"

        A friend doesn't mean doing what ever they want you to do. Friends offer each other advice and disagree on different things.

        BTW That whole incident shows why the UN is flawed. Why should 5 countries have the right to veto and get their own way. Everything should be voted on and no one have special powers.
        • BTW That whole incident shows why the UN is flawed. Why should 5 countries have the right to veto and get their own way. Everything should be voted on and no one have special powers.

          I agree, still wouldn't be perfect but would be a big improvement.
        • I don't know what the other veto holders might do (maybe China), but the US already ignores the UN when necessary, we'd probably walk away altogether if deprived of our veto.

          It's still unfair for 5 countries to have the veto, but I don't think it's a flaw, because I don't think making controversial decisions is or should be in the UN's mission.

          The UN serves best as a forum for debates and to pool the resources of the member nations in achieving a widely supported goal. It's not supposed to be a world gov

      • Re:seperate groups (Score:2, Insightful)

        by rEWDBOi ( 169608 )
        So it's okay to harrass one country's citizens just because the leader of said country disagree with the leader of another country about political issues? It's just plain racist b#llsh*t to say "the French" per se had that point of view. I don't know if you're aware of the fact that people might disagree with their leaders. I know I do. But I guess you just do whatever your leader tells you to. I think that's called fascism. Or at least it's part of the concept of fascism.
        • It's just plain
          racist b#llsh*t to say "the French" per se had that point of view.
          Actually, it would be more correct to say "nationalist b#llsh*t," which is indeed something the US is drowning in lately.

  • Surprise? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Mad Quacker ( 3327 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @04:23AM (#6013761) Homepage
    This is about rights that are no longer protected or respected by our government. Many people say in response to criticism of the patriot act and the atrophy of civil rights long before that "How are you less free now? What can't you do now because of xxx" - Well here it is. The bill of rights and could dissappear tomorrow, and america would be little different, except for the unlucky. You could be an unlucky one today.

    Some of you may cite the fact that they are not citizens, but that is just a loophole considering anyone can be declared an enemy combatent.

    We are in a critical period in our history, the age oil is peaking, and there is a single super power on the planet redefining itself - apparently into a extreme right fascist global empire. Pay close attention.

    • Re:Surprise? (Score:3, Insightful)

      by jfisherwa ( 323744 )
      "Well here it is. The bill of rights could disappear tomorrow .."

      It's a passing phase due to the government accentuating the after-effects of "9/11." Our society has such short-term memory that this will all be forgotten by the next generation. Looking at the history of America, this has always been both unfortunate and a blessing rolled into one, but always something we simply need to accept.

    • Re:Surprise? (Score:1, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward
      You guys are missing the point. When you come to America to work, you do so on a B-1 "visit for business" visa as opposed to a B-2 "visit for tourism" visa. Certainly it seems these guys were treated a little roughly, but it was utterly stupid of their employers not to ensure they applied for the appropriate visas.

      Really, complaining about this is like complaining about being pulled over for speeding. On the one hand, yes, it is a pretty minor offense, but on the other other hand if you break the law t

      • Re:Surprise? (Score:1, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward
        Actually, I don't understand this, as I have worked in the US on a visa waiver, and declared that I am here for business: it is allowed now (at least for UK citizens) so I do not see what they need visas for and why they were treated so.

        So I think they have every right to be complaining.

      • we know something we call Human rights. Even if you have a wrong visa (but you still have one!) then why you have to be cuffed and locked up?

        Really, would a terrorist get any visa? And if they do, would they mix them up? Terrorism can't be an excuse to do anything you want, there are some rights everyone should have, and one of them is, innocent till proven, so why treat them like they are not?

    • Re:Surprise? (Score:4, Insightful)

      by regen ( 124808 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @09:33AM (#6014581) Homepage Journal
      This is about rights that are no longer protected or respected by our government.

      No, this is about rights they never had. They came over here to work, and they had tourist visa. They should have gotten the correct type of visa. The US has in the past been lax about enforcement of this for short term assignments such as this, but Europe has not.

      France is much worse. Have you ever tried to work in France. The country is so heavily unionized, and it is so difficult to get a temporary work visa. A company I used to work for had a plant in southern France. We occasionally would have to sent prototype electronics to this plant for work they were doing. Because they were prototypes, the company wanted to have an employee bring them over. US employee couldn't do this because of french visa issues. French employees had to fly to the US to pick up the part and bring it back.

      The French are only getting what they have been dishing out for years. Serves them right.

      • Re:Surprise? (Score:4, Insightful)

        by (trb001) ( 224998 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @10:17AM (#6014856) Homepage
        Would that I had mod points for you, my friend. This is a classic example of border patrol doing what they're supposed to. Sorry if it took them slightly over a day to figure out there was no harm being done by the people with the incorrect visas, but they weren't roughed up, didn't have their rights stripped from them, had a speedy trip from accusal to judgement and were transported safely back home.

        I salute the officers on this case.

        --trb
        • Just figured I would join in reinforcing the concept of actually having some idea what the truth of the story is before believing at face-value a news report from a biased source. I opened this thread expecting to see a lot of bleeding hearts, and was pleasantly surprised to see people instead actually congratulating Customs on doing their damn jobs :)

      • I'm (sortof) British and I'm about to attend a confrence in LA. This is work in a way as I am presenting a paper. Should I have a work visa to give freely to the world my latest research? I dont have a work visa and dont see any justification to be "subjected to several body searches" because I want to go to a confrence. I am about to spend a huge ammount of money staying there and I am giving a great big lump of research away for free to everyone. I don't see any need for action like this in exchenge.

        It

  • Yeah right, this is about games, uh huh (Score:4, Funny)

    by WolfWithoutAClause ( 162946 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @04:25AM (#6013765) Homepage
    Ok, let's get this straight. A bunch of journalists try to enter America without the proper paperwork, and get this, they get locked up and then deported! What a tyrannical government! It's an outrage I tell you! An outrage!
    • Last time I checked, citizens of an EU country don't need a visa for a stay in the USA of up to 90 days, even if they're working.

      Of course, why should we expect that this publication should tell the Feds' side of the story, or do anything else resembling "proper" journalism, eh? ;-)

      r.
      • Last time I checked, citizens of an EU country don't need a visa for a stay in the USA of up to 90 days, even if they're working.

        Really? No, I don't think that's right.

        If you have a Business Visa then maybe (sounds like these guys didn't). If you have a Tourist Visa (which people from the EU usually routinely get given), then you are NOT supposed to work at all. The immigration officers have a certain amount of discretion (presumably based on guidelines), but that's all. The guidelines vary somewhat over

        • Re:Yeah right, this is about games, uh huh (Score:4, Informative)

          by richi ( 74551 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @05:41AM (#6013960) Homepage
          Yes, really, old chap. For many years now, the USA have run what they call a "Visa waiver program" (sic). My US visa expired years ago, but I still enter the US for work roughly 10 times per year, simply by filling in an I-94(W) "landing card".

          r.
          • An interesting side effect of the Visa waiver program is that you can totally circumvent the entire Fiance Visa program. To marry a foreigner and have the person move into the US to live with you, you have to apply for a fiance visa. Then the foreigner has to wait in the foreign country until it goes through. It has an automatic 6-month waiting period. However, if the foreigner lives in a country that's part of the Visa waiver program, s/he can come over on the 90-day waiver period, marry during that ti
            • Have you tried this? A serious question. From personal experience, I know that there is language in the fiance visa application or other similar document that states that it is illegal to enter the US with the intent of marriage without the correct fiance visa. When you petitioned to change to permanent residency (conditional or non-conditional) did they question you about this circumvention?

              I assume they can, if they want, deny the change in status, deport the fiance and make you apply for a spouse visa an

              • Yeah, I actually did this without incident. I didn't want to wait six months with my fiance in a foreign country, so we used this loophole to get her in the country. They weren't too pleased when we had our immigration interview, but they didn't give us any trouble.
                • Ok. Glad it worked out.

                  Speaking of immigration interviews, I was slightly disappointed I never had to answer the "test for fraud" questions like, "What type of shampoo does your spouse use?" or "Where do you most often eat dinner and with what type of dishes?" I guess I watch too much TV. They just videotaped us swearing that we were obeying all the rules and sent us on our way.

          • Typical slashdot reaction. All the lefties come flying out of their coffee shops shouting about how the end is nigh, 1984 is here, the Government has gone to the darkside... yada yada yada.

            Yet in the same breath, on the next article these same people will shout how the borders are still not secure, how Homeland Security is doing nothing. How airport security and immigration services are morons.

            Yet they do their job, by the book, and people gasp that they are some militia of Bush that's been indoctrine to
        • If you are British, then since the UK and US have an agreement, we don't need to have visas. Whether France, along with the rest of the EU, has such an agreement, I really do not know.
        • So if i am to attend a business trade show, i need a different visa than if i was to attend a consumer trade show?
          Sounds a bit Catbertish... oops, sorry, patriotic is the word, right?
      • Of course, why should we expect that this publication should tell the Feds' side of the story, or do anything else resembling "proper" journalism, eh?

        Excellent point. I don't even see in the article where it says something like "a State Department official declined comment" or "a US Customs representative refused to comment until an internal investigation was completed."

        It seems like an organization of "reporters" should take the time to investigate a story before simply slapping it on a web page (and if

      • Just came across a good article which explains some of the issues, here [reason.com] at Reason Online.

        A quote: the journos were "..trying to enter the U.S. the same way European journalists have been coming for the last 17 years: on the Visa Waiver program, which allows the citizens of 27 friendly countries (from Andorra to Switzerland) to visit the States up to 90 days without a visa, as long as the trip is for "business or pleasure." Journalism, according to American consular writ, does not qualify as either."

  • Could have been worse. (Score:5, Informative)

    by Kris_J ( 10111 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @04:29AM (#6013774) Homepage Journal
    They could have been named David Nelson [oregonlive.com].

  • Just one more proof that (Score:3, Insightful)

    by imaniack ( 638051 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @05:24AM (#6013925)
    Terrorists have already won. :(

  • My bad... (Score:5, Funny)

    by Scorchio ( 177053 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @07:55AM (#6014197)
    I slipped the authorities £20 to intercept my manager and lead designer, who got to go to the show. I think my descriptions must have been a little vague.

  • After all... (Score:3, Funny)

    by keiferb ( 267153 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @09:59AM (#6014734) Homepage
    We -are- at a terrorism level of "Taupe" in the US. That means the "authorities" can do whatever they want to whomever they want. God bless taupe.

  • Ummm... So? (Score:1, Interesting)

    by PeeweeJD ( 623974 )
    Yeah, all the body searches are over the top (if ya didn't find anything the first time...) But what is the big deal? Should "journalists" be allowed to enter a country with out the proper parperwork just because they are "journalists"?

    A couple years ago, we may have said the same thing about a bunch of people form the middle east that wanted to go to airline pilot school in Florida... We all know what happened to those guys...

  • The visa issue (Score:3, Informative)

    by Kyouken ( 669707 ) on Thursday May 22, 2003 @10:27AM (#6014912)
    Accually, I was detained for a few hours some years back over the same issue. The visa waiver thingy means you can't accually -work- while being in the US, you can interview people, write articles etc., but you can't publish anything -while- you're in the US. For this you need a special visa or something, which I didn't have, and I suspect the French journalists didn't have either. The kind officers of the US Immigration Service (or something) eventually let me go, but they could've easily put me on the first plane back. Or body searched me a few times, detained me for 24 hours and -then- put me on a plane. After this incident, I never ever ever get into specifics over what kind of work I'll be doing at E3. I suspect the French journalists may have answered 'mais oui, i will publish my articles while I'm here' for all this to have happened. I also suspect the fact that they're French didn't exactly get them any favours.
  • A few years back a man lost an eye at a Tony Hawk pro skater demo at E3 (someone lost controll of a skateboard and he caught it right in the cornea).

    Its all fun and games until somebody looses and eye, or gets repeated cavitie searches.
  • I've always thought that the work visa was necessary to work in a USA job. Why would they need one instead of a tourist visa if they are working for their publisher in Europe?

  • http://www.gamasutra.com/features/20030425/rose_01 .shtml [gamasutra.com]
    (you may need a Gamasutra account, but its worth it).

  • The Reporters Without Borders press release makes a big deal about how they were strip searched, put in a cell, etc. Guess what? That's standard procedure for anyone without the right visa to enter the country. I'm actually a bit more disturbed that the visa policy wasn't strictly inforced lending to more confusion.

    So when you read an article about this incident, it really boils down to this quote I found by Alison Wood: "I also hope that E3 organisers, the Interactive Digital Software Association, take st

  • oops.

Slashdot Top Deals

It is easier to write an incorrect program than understand a correct one.

Close