However, that one seems like it is one that could be answered without risking national security, helping terrorists/people who want to sneak in illegally/other naughty people get away with something because of a security breach.
I completely agree about not being able to answer a question that wouldn't protect the border. But I thought that one was pretty generic...
Y'all don't have much imagination.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a2ac9/a2ac989b26574413c21d19203ddefc63ac506a80" alt="Smiley :)"
Here's a scenario:
Interested Citizen: Is our travel history electronically registered or is it only based on stamps?
ECO: I really shouldn't tell you, but it's not electronically registered. The only way we can tell how long you've been in the UK in the past, or where else you've been, is to look at the stamps and do maths.
Later, Interested Citizen - who happens to be a member of UK-Yankee - posts "I met an ECO, and it turns out they don't track our travel history."
Hopeful Immigrant, who just returned to the USA after spending the full 6 months of their UK visitor visa with their partner in the UK, reads about how the UK isn't tracking travel histories, immediately throws their US passport away, tells the US government it was lost, gets a brand new one with no stamps in it, and then buys a ticket back to the UK.
That's just off the top of my head. I'm sure given a few hours I could come up with more sinister plots. Even if I can't, if the word spread that they don't check travel histories electronically, I bet the Daily Mail could come up with some.
That's probably why she didn't answer the question.
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/a2ac9/a2ac989b26574413c21d19203ddefc63ac506a80" alt="Smiley :)"