Slashdot Mirror
US–EU Flight Talks Collapse
fantomas writes, "The BBC is reporting that the current US-EU talks over data collected from people flying to the USA collapsed last night. US Customs and Border Protection is insisting on access to the airlines' records and 34 pieces of data to be collected from each passenger. This data has been gathered since 2004, but only as a temporary measure. The European Court of Justice threw out the temporary agreement and set a deadline of Sept. 30 to arrive at a new one. Airlines that refuse to hand over information to US authorities may be fined up to $6,000 per passenger, and the passengers themselves held up in immigration for hours. Good for the EU on protecting the privacy of their citizens? Or are they hindering the War on Terror?" An EU official said that the EU wanted to give away less data, while the US wanted more.
Crap, I'm flying to Costa Rica from the EU this Thursday, the plane will make a stop in Miami. I hope the customs checks aren't going to be more insane than they've already been recently.
That said, the US can't really complain too loudly if EU carriers stop giving them all the info they want now - it's clearly against EU privacy laws, and apparently at least one EU carrier (Air Italy) has never given all the info and wasn't prevented from landing, so it would be hypocritical to refuse landing rights immediately.
I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
Papers please.
It's every bit as nonsensical as the war on drugs.
Neither of them are supply-side problems, and attacking the supply side is utterly ludicrous, and just reduces our civil liberties. You know, those things that make America a great place?
If we really wanted to stop terrorism, we'd work on solving the problem from a social position. You have to understand why people hate you so much in order to fix the problem.
The war on terror isn't about being effective, it's about making people feel like we're doing something. Well, we're doing something alright, we're eroding our liberties until the terrorists have won.
I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
This is all fine, unless you're in the UK, in which case the government has conveniently made an arrangement for airlines to give the US all the information they want legally, circumventing the EU law on a technicality. It's good to know that Tony is independent of George's dog-handler these days, isn't it?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
What on earth do they need our email addresses for?! I fail to see how this is relevant security information, especially considering how easy it is to set up a new email alias, and how easy it is to fake an email.
Don't you just hate it when people reply to your signature?
Being as commerical airliners will always have an appeal to terrorists.
I wouldn't have guessed this from the rest of the summary. Thanks for pointing it out!
- RG>
Hey pal, this isn't a pleasantforest, so don't waste my time with pleasantries!
They left out the most important one..
[arnold]
"Who is your daddy, and what does he do?"
[/arnold]
Guys, I'm not saying the EU is perfect, but can you people in the USA please SMARTEN THE FUCK UP and kick out the junta now controlling your government? Yeah, "you" stepped in to europe and saved our asses from the Nazis. But that was OVER HALF A CENTURY AGO now. Things have changed.
Maybe we will be able to return the favour, if things get too bad over there, but I wouldn't count on it. Anyway, you didn't step in in europe until the situation had already degenerated into bloody war, and I suspect if we even tried to step in militarily before that point, all we'd do is make you fight the wrong enemy - i.e. us!
Well, I guess this particular move doesn't matter to me much, because until there's "regime change" in the USA, there's no way in hell I'm going there again anyway!
Land of the "free"? Don't make me laugh.
How is flight data affect my rights online?!!
In any event, I'm with the US on this one. When you fly into a country that is under threat of suicidal hijackers and other evildoers, the US should know all about the people coming in. It isn't a right to be anonymous when you enter any other country.
If you don't want to jump through some hoops and wait a couple of hours before you are allowed to enter the country that protects the whole world from those evil terrorists, it's obvious the terrorists have won.
That doesn't sound right at all!
More seriously, here's some of the data they're talking about (from the article)
I also found this passage interesting:
I'm not exactly a friend of the airlines, but it seems like they're screwed either way.
... turning to the 3-D map, we see an unmistakable con
While I appreciate our President's trying to protect us from terrorists, as I believe he really is, I like my freedoms more. Freedom isn't free.
The government can't save you.
The only thing worse than them collecting the creditcard numbers is if they loose them.
Sig Cig what is difference
I'm not sure if this was meant as a joke or not, in either case, it raises an important issue.
If you ever have an opportunity to talk with someone who lived in a soviet country, I highly recommend asking them what tool of oppression featured most highly in their day-to-day lives.
So far, from the opinions I have gathered, being required to show ID and other papers arbitrarily demanded by authorities ranks pretty highly. It is an infringement of privacy and limits your ability to conduct your own business without being scrutinized by your neighbors (or worse your local constabulary).
Every time I have to show my drivers license at the airport I have a chuckle at the inane pointlessness of it. But in truth I should be pissed off. Why does the flight attendant need to know who I am? What difference does it make who I am? They're certainly not protecting me from terrorists because the last batch of terrorists all had perfectly legitimate ID which they used! It is an information grab by Big Brother, plain and simple.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
This whole terrorism line of bullshit was fabricated as an excuse to turn the US into a corporate neofascist police state, while keeping the sheeple preoccupied with terror propaganda. At this point, I presume the manufactured military disaster in Iraq is just a training exercise for what the US goverment intends to do domestically - to the American people - and is also a way for the corporate occupational government to excise patriots from the ranks of the military without drawing suspicion (just send them on an endless series of pointless, defacto suicide missions, until the inevitable occurs).
Julia, Are You Awake
Read it
"Orwell was writing about the reality of 1948, with the layers of appearance peeled-off. The shallower chisel-marks of his own time were cast into sharper bas-relief by supposing an arc that played 36 years into his future.
And here we are. Here we have been."
"Flyin' in just a sweet place,
Never been known to fail..."
Neither of them are supply-side problems, and attacking the supply side is utterly ludicrous, and just reduces our civil liberties. You know, those things that make America a great place?
Pardon? Have you that little background of our nation's history? "Civil rights" is hardly something that America has gotten right.
Take slavery, for instance. The first 80 to 100 or so years of American history were about completely denying certain racial groups any significant rights in large portions of the nation. Even after the Civil War started to change the status quo, things took many decades to improve. It wasn't until the 1950s and 1960s, nearly 200 years after the founding of America, that such groups started to get the rights they deserved from the very onset.
Women weren't in much better of a situation. They weren't allowed to vote from the early 1800s until 1920. South Carolina didn't ratify the 19th Amendment until 1969!
Of course, we can't forget the Japanese-American internment camps run by the US during WWII. I'll let you do your own research on those camps, since the whole subject is far too massive to describe adequately here.
Today we still see much antagonism directed towards homosexuals.
What we're seeing now just follows with the trends we have witnessed over all of America's history. A lot of people brag about how great their civil liberties are, but a quick analysis of the situation shows that what they say just isn't the case. Again and again over the entire history of the US, various groups have had their civil liberties stripped or not even granted.
Sure, America is far better than many nations. But it's very naive to think that America's history with respect to civil liberties is special in any way. More often than not we find that other nations offered various civil liberties far before America did, and often in a manner that was far more inclusive.
If you have not done anything wrong you have nothing to worry about
Ok you convinced me, I won't fly to the USA. I don't see any reason why a goverment should be allowed snoop in my private life "just to make sure I'm not a terrorist". Do they think terrorists are dumb enough to say "No, please only one way tickets and I don't need a method of leaving the airport. And please only a light meal, I don't want to blow myself up with a full stomach. But first I'll clear out my account and donate everything to a well-know extremist organistion." *sigh*
+++ MELON MELON MELON +++ Out of Cheese Error +++ redo from start +++
my point is not that halal meals should be indicated to the americans (pretty f'n far from that, actually). my point is simply that america would profile muslims, but this particular item (food choice) only allows them to profile 16 year old girls and rastas (please accept my hyperbole). outside of a mad powergrab, what is the point of this?
i cannot begin to imagine the thought process that lead to this filtering.
once again, a great example of regulations that will have no positive effect on terrorism, which can only cause great discomfort for the majority, and further weaken any notions of individual liberty.
and before any of you go on about how an airplane (or shopping mall, or street corner, or toilet, or your front lawn, etc.) is not private space, let me simply point out that at least without the collection of this data, my being there is not the grounds for the wet dream of some analyst. but now it is, thanks to the greatest democracy the world has ever known.
The EU has data protection laws and should stick to them. The US shouldn't be able bully the rest of the world to ignoring its laws. If this shuts down transatlantic travel, so be it. EU should go a WTO tribunal and demand compensation over the any US fines or loss of revenue to its airlines. The Bush administration has given the finger to international standards and international law and will continue to do so until the other nations of world stand up for themselves
"When you fly into a country that is under threat of suicidal hijackers and other evildoers"
So you won't object too much then when the Russian officials demand all your data then? You do know that they've had a bit of a terrorist problem there for quite some time, right?
Or China. See, they claim the same thing. Falun Gong, all those Tibetan monks and any other organization fighting to topple the Communists. All terrorists. And that's why the Chinese Government needs to know the addresses of all the Taiwanese people you've ever been in contact with. Funny how the ones living in China keep dissappearing right after you flew in...
I have a better solution.
In Soviet US you belong to the Government.
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
Ok you convinced me, I won't fly to the USA. I don't see any reason why a goverment should be allowed snoop in my private life "just to make sure I'm not a terrorist". Are you sure EU governments do not surreptitiously collect data on passengers anyway? The EU has a longer history, going back to the 1970s, of placing gendarmes or carabinieri with automatic rifles at airports. The NSA's best customers are European intelligence agencies who purchase the data to snoop on their own citizens. The US makes the mistake of being too open about their intelligence operations. Do they think terrorists are dumb enough to say "No, please only one way tickets and I don't need a method of leaving the airport. And please only a light meal, I don't want to blow myself up with a full stomach. But first I'll clear out my account and donate everything to a well-know extremist organistion." As a matter of fact, most terrorists in Europe are extreme amateurs -- 18-year-old losers with fantasies of becoming a mujahedeen. They boast to the whole world that they will carry something out, and get arrested at the stage of trying to buy weapons.
I bet you ten dollars that, even if the terrorists did what you said, they still wouldn't be stopped in time.
It's not the war on terror, it's the war on 'terra. As in, we are at war with every individual on earth, especially their delicious freedoms.
EU should go a WTO tribunal and demand compensation over the any US fines or loss of revenue to its airlines. The Bush administration has given the finger to international standards and international law and will continue to do so until the other nations of world stand up for themselves
And what makes you think that the current administration would give a damn about what the WTO says? Considering how the Bush administration has flaunted its allies, the UN and international law time after time over the past six years, agreeing to the compensation you propose seems like the very last thing that would ever happen. Since they'll just ignore any WTO rulings that aren't in their favor, it's a rather lousy way for Europe to stand up to them.
I mean the EU wants more privacy and the Americans want what?
Just because a few pedophile neocons in Florida want to know what underpants our children are wearing, does that mean all Americans want that?
Europe should stand behind our American cousins, just not the loonies in the Whitehouse who no longer represent them.
Combine this witch hunt with the new terror bill, which gives America the right to detain any "alien" (of course not americans, otherwise this bill would have never lasted for longer than 10 seconds) "suspects" indefinitely without access to civilian courts, and I'm getting a bit scared.
This is starting to get crazy.
How about EU collecting the same data from US passengers?
Symmetricality should should be a precondition for such a measure.
And please only a light meal, I don't want to blow myself up with a full stomach
On second thought, I'd like a 10-course meal, with a wafer-thin-mint at the end.
Have a nice day, and remember, Big Brother is just doing it because He loves you!
XXOXXXO, George Orwell's Spinning Corpse
When in London, visit my favourite pub, the Newman Arms!
Are you sure EU governments do not surreptitiously collect data on passengers anyway? The EU has a longer history, going back to the 1970s, of placing gendarmes or carabinieri with automatic rifles at airports. The NSA's best customers are European intelligence agencies who purchase the data to snoop on their own citizens.
They hardly have to purchase it from others - for years, French intelligence routinely bugged first-class seats on Air France, to record the conversations of traveling (foreign) executives for purposes of economic espionage, and followed up the interesting conversations by breaking into hotel rooms to get a look at the target's business papers. But somehow it's completely morally wrong to hand over a seat number to les Américains. Right.
ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
Don't people who travel abroad have to fill out all those "customs forms" on the airplane anyway? It asked me for a lot more than my gender, birthday, and address. Are Europeans upset at having to answer as many questions as other nonwhite travellers to the USA?
Is it me or anyone else see the US turning into a freedomless, controlled society under the excuse of terrorism?l ity-Americas/dp/B00008AOW1/sr=8-1/qid=1159740557/r ef=sr_1_1/104-5810932-4490360?ie=UTF8&s=dvd
By the way, historically the US has been the principal sponsor of state supported terrorism see:
http://www.amazon.com/Noam-Chomsky-Distorted-Mora
Time to move somewhere in the EU.
It is the transfer of power from the citizen (government of the People, by the People, for the People) to the Police.
In a Free society, the police are restricted in the exercise of their authority to defined circumstances. The traffic cop can pull you over if you're in your car.
When the police can stop you and demand identification at any time, you have lost your Freedom. The police now have control over you.
Who do you think the police will be stopping more often?
a. Fat, ugly, old women
b. Attractive young women
Think about your answer to that. Then think about if your wife, sister, daughter was cute and young and whether you'd want her in that situation.
I live in a popular tourist destination in America and one thing I've learned is that most of my counrtymen are complete morons. Wait. That's an insult to morons. People ask me, and I'm not making this up, "Do you'all take American money?" Or say assinine things like "You'all speak really good English!" No shit, asshole. This is the USA!
Now, imagine these knuckle-dragging mouth-breathers scared out of their puny, defective little minds and you have some idea of the average American. Too scared and stupid to think straight.
Makes me want to vomit.
Boobies never hurt anyone. - Sherry Glaser.
Yes kiddies there is a monster under your bed, but if you vote for me.... The White House know that nothing is more likely to vote Republican than a paranoid. Keeping the fear alive is a highly effective way of keeping the voters in line. The effectiveness of the measures taken is less important than having them being visible and reenforcing the fear.
Engineering is the art of compromise.
Didn't you ever hear the expression, "Two wrongs do not make a right"?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Every time I have to show my drivers license at the airport I have a chuckle at the inane pointlessness of it.
Forget terrorism - how about credit card fraud? With E-tickets and Internet bookings, getting a "free" flight has never been easier for crooks.
Wow, good thing they dont do this to people crossing the US\Mexico border or my porch would have never gotten built.
It's just a goddamned piece of paper! So shut up!
Call it the new "security tax."
In related news, demand for Paris-US traffic via London and Toronto just went through the roof.
Knowledge is how to play a game, intelligence is how to win, wisdom is knowing what game to play.
Good, finally we have started to stand up to the insanity of frivolous data collection. There are just to many unknown factors here. How long is the data stored (probably forever), who will have access to it once it reaches US Shores (TIA?), what will they do with it, how will it be processed and cross referenced. A near endless line of question could really follow here.
How come it appears to be a very one sided transfer of data, after all we don't get the same information about americans travelling to Europe as we are expected to send over, do we?. Which is odd since we have had way more terrorist attacks on european soil then have ever taken place in the USA.
Since this is all carried out in the cause of preventing terrorism I do wonder if this will really stop any terrorist? Doubtful, if anything they have just given them a list of things to stay clear off if you want to slide under the digital radar. I'll eat porkchops or fish, buy a return ticket (even thou there will be no return), i'll pay via creditcard and generally provide the system with non suspicious information.
But if it stopped just one terrorist wouldn't it be worth it? When the violation of millions is justified for a single success I don't wanna play no more. I haven't been to America since pre 9-11 and quite frankly I don't feel any great urgency to return either, not for biz or pleasure.
If the EU can just stand firm and hold its ground I think we'll be the winner here, after all we'll loose far less economically then the USA will when others realise the same.
We won't miss privacy until its gone and then its to late cause it's just to easy to take away but very hard (if not impossible) to reclaim.
Because, obviously, France is the only country in Europe, right?
This would show that the UK government holds their citizen's information in high regard (hahahaha, yeah right) and at the same time indicate a desire for "compliance" with their US masters' wishes, and simultaneously earn the UK a spot of cash.
Next problem please.
"The question of whether machines can think is no more interesting than [] whether submarines can swim" - Dijkstra
I've seen pot be a disaster for some people. But most of the time, for most of the people, drug problems are self-limiting. I've worked in the computer biz for long enough to see "work hard play hard" types that use hard drugs to party and get up the next morning for solid work. Eventually, for most people, the party doesn't last forever. We need balance. We need sleep. We can't go crank speed for too long. We get older. We find balance. We stop on our own. Herion, cocaine, nicotine, even pot can be addictive. All these drugs can also be cast aside by most people when they really see they are not working for them. For most people NO drugs are hard drugs and most self-limit. For some people, ANYTHING can become a train wreck. I don't see ANY drugs as bad, X and pot have terrible outcomes from some individuals, but they should be legal. Behaviour and outcome should direct where the state gets involved with the individuals who use drugs. The molecules themselves have little to do with outcomes. I suspect you may be just as wrong about the muslim religion. I don't know enough about it, but I can say that from my personal and close group experience that there are no "good or bad" drug molecules or "hard of soft" drugs. Only individual outcomes with the majority being benign.
I'm sure they would gladly give up data for U.S. passengers. Does the EU want it? No.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
A very interesting piece about security on airports can be found here
i on.billofrights.html and I wonder which ones still are working amendments.
So when are the people stand up and make some more tea in Boston? Or do you believe that the second amendment was just so you go squirrel hunting?
Looking at http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitut
1. Sort of
2. Sort of
3. Yes
4. Nope
5. Nope
6. Sorry, no
7. Not sure
8. No
9. Not sure
10. Well, they say "or", so I would say yes on a technicality.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
Hi, my name is Drew, and I'm an American. With all this unAmerican actions happening inside my once free country, I am interested in living and working elsewhere.
I have 10 years of experience as a UNIX sysadmin, some contributory authership cred, and I do some other neat webby things on the side. I can prolly relearn German most easily, but will be happy to learn almost any other language as needed.
I'm looking to earn a modest living in or near a City, without the threat of anal probes, or arbitrary incarceration. Oh, and I want a flying car. Please reply privately to my account listed here on Slashdot.
Zhrodague.net - I do projects and stuff too.
The more data we have on immigrants the better. If you dont want to give it up, stay home, we'll try not to lose any sleep over it.
I've heard time and again about ubiquitous cameras in Britain... I don't know about the rest of Europe, but if they act in any similar manner, then any praise for their protection of their citizens' privacy rights in this seems pretty silly to me. Perhaps I'm wrong?
Good for the EU on protecting the privacy of their citizens? Or are they hindering the War on Terror?
Yes, as a US citizen, it is sad to me that my government doesn't care about the right to privacy for citizens any longer. For non-citizens, the country being visited SHOULD have more information about you. When I visit Europe, your governments should have more information about me.
Yes, the lack of information about all of us, DOES hinder tracking and finding everyone traveling, including terrorist. If terrorists and their money can cross international boundaries unimcumbered, we will loose the generational fight against anyone who wants us dead. we can't reason with them - they want us dead. It is sad, but simple. Two choices exist: a) prevent them from killing us or b) kill all of them and their families and educate their children completely so this part of history is only from a non-radical Muslim point of view. It will take at least 40 years. Sad.
BushCo have already pardoned themselves. Or tried to anyway.
What he can't kill, he has sex on. Trent.
Either you trust the government or you don't visit that country.
France, Israel, Nigeria, North Korea, Iceland... it does not matter. Trust or do not trust, but never whine about it.
Depending upon where you are going: land in Canada or Mexico, rent a car, and DRIVE across the damn border with your rather ordinary passport, which, up until recently, had all the information considered sufficient for a proper identity check.
Just as creepy as 1984 seems, get a load of this.
I played this game as a teenager. It was cool then. It's still cool now.
So far, from the opinions I have gathered, being required to show ID and other papers arbitrarily demanded by authorities ranks pretty highly.
This is why the flap about illegal immigration in the U.S. is so insidious. The only way to "secure the border" is to require all people on U.S. soil to carry ID all the time. Otherwise the border becomes a single point of failure, and once you're in you can get away with anything because in a free country everything that is not forbidden is permitted.
In the old Soviet Union everything that was not permited was forbidden, leaving people in a situation where they had to ask permission to do almost anything. I worked with a Soviet Georgian in the early '90's whom at first didn't understand that there was no form you had to fill out to make a long distance phone call. In the Soviet lab he'd worked in previously the procedure for making a long distance call was to file for permission, specifying who you were going to call and why, and then you were allowed access to the phone when (if) permission was granted.
This kind of routine intervention and restriction of citizen's lives is the eyes of some the only way to keep the country "safe". But others might ask: is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be bought at the price of chains and slavery?.
Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
it is moslem in most european countries.
You could have just stopped there.
I wouldn't worry about your Russian stamp. Vlad P. is a totalitarian analog to Gw, and the only Euro leader suitable to be considered proper as a Bush ManDate (sorry UK, Poodles don't count, so no good ol TonyBoy). Even Angela M., who may upon furhter analysis actually qualify generally as a ManDate, seemed repulsed at the idea of becoming GW's.
Rush Limbaugh is a perfect real world example of an oxycontinmoron
One more reason not to visit the US of A.
One more reason not to hold a conference in the US of A.
Because looking at the big big big big picture it seems to me that we're watching the birth of the third world war. I'm referring also to the recent bill about detainees treatments which in fact gives dictatorial powers to the US president while showing a middle finger to the Geneva Conventions.
Were talking about tourists and business travellers not immigrants. If they were coming to live in the US sure - but going on a holiday? Europeans flying to the US are not that big on emigrating to the US. We usually have far better lives back home than the US can offer (income/benefits/democracy).
Since several of the languages commonly used by Muslims, like Arabic, typically indicate consonants rather than vowels, and since there are several dialects and accents used by speakers of some of the most commonly spoken languages in the Muslim world, when transcribing directly to English, choices between English o and u, a and e, and other similar pairs are rarely set in stone. Similarly, many of the consonants are transcribed in different ways: kh, k, and qa and qu are all commonly used for both the Arabic letters qaf and kaf. That's why (in English) one sees a variety of spellings of proper names of people and items particular to Islam, such as the Koran (or Qur'an).
So, one may find a Muslim writing (in English) "Muslim", "Moslem", "Musulman" (from the Turkish, Farsi, Urdu, and Hindi), "Musliman" (from the Bosnian) , and so forth.
"grammar nazi"
This is a point of orthography, not grammar.
I find http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message/2006_04.htm and http://www.dansimmons.com/news/message/2006_05.htm good fodder for starting discussions too.
As a soverign nation, the United States can dictate the terms by which it can or will allow people into the country. I am not even sure why a EU court would be involved. The airlines in the EU don't have the collect the information however, they also don't have to fly people into the US and the US certainly does not have to let anybody in that they don't want to let in.
The EU court is outside of its jurisdiction as much as they might think otherwise.
It makes the /. crowd feel better about hating America more and gives them their good feeling that Europe sticking it to us. You will notice it modded up more and more around here lately the last month or two; weird mood changes around here every month.
I went to the US the other week. After a 14 hour flight from Australia the nice border patrol man took my passport, asked me some standard questions then had me look into a webcam and put my index fingers on a scanner one at a time. Of course, I could have refused, at which point I would have been promptly placed on a plane back to Australia. That's pretty much all the rights you have at someone else's border: to go home.
How we know is more important than what we know.
Didn't you ever hear the expression, "Two wrongs do not make a right"?
I have. I've also heard of the concept of "rank hypocrisy". Ask yourself which is really the greater wrong. 1) Openly asking another nation to provide information to you in such a manner as to make everyone aware of what you're seeking, which allows those who object to opt out by not traveling to the US, or; 2) going out and gathering who-the-fuck-knows-what via covert electronic surveillance, or, in some cases, via simple B&E with a Minox, doing all this in such a manner that the people whose information you're gathering don't even realize that their privacy has been invaded and their personal effects handled by the sweaty palms of La Sûreté. You tell me which is worse, and then advise the Euros that they abandoned any claim to the moral high ground about two decades ago.
ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
According to Muslims, it's "Muslim". But if we're going to start ignoring what people call themselves and just arbitrarily allocate names and spellings, I vote we alter the spelling of America just slightly to "CrazyMilitaryManiacLedSheepFarm".
I know, I know, Australian's will complain that they actually have dibbs on the sheep farm thing, but in Australia, sheep only outnumber the population. In America, sheep *are* the population.
I hate printers.
25 states, and 1000's of muncipalities have laws on the books requiring you to prove your identity to the cops even if your merely walking down the sidewalk.
The "War on Terror" is mythological propganda. The real war is religious fundamentalists vs. religious fundamentalists. *snarky*
Indeed the USSR would have defeated Germany, but it's quite unclear that Europe west of Germany wouldn't have become a series of Soviet protectorates.
Also, there was this vast war in the Pacific that was decided by the US. Several European countries help, and of course a great deal of assistance was provided by Australia and New Zealand, but the US was the primary power to defeat Japan.
> it is moslem in most european countries.
Aye, just not in the English-speaking ones....
no taxation without representation!
It's a shame that, so many times, politics make people or businesses play piggie in the middle.
The two legal systems have a stand off, and in the process airlines, which were previously
able to do business without fear of fines, now risk $6000 per passenger fines.
Now, I imagine that this would be a hollow threat, as the airline industry would have
a powerful enough lobby to make sure the correct phone calls are made. However, so many
other industries would be hung out to dry in a situation like this.
The thing is, what is going to be the net gain for the US, besides gathering lots of
data about other people.
From the perspective out an outsider, I have seen the US go from being flavour of the
month (in the early 90's) to being somewhere people are fairly indifferent to, to a place
some people are openly dispising.
In my next incarnation, I hope to come back as a code monkey.
"1) There is no way to "solve" the drug problem on the demand side of things."
"2) There is no way to "solve" the terrorist problem on the home front either. "
I suppose the operative word is "solved". Solved as in doing away with completely? Or solved as in problem is managable? The former will not be done away with because human nature is a rather stable thing. The latter is also possible, however a large majority lack the will to do what's needed to bring both problems under control. One should also make note that while you drew an artificial line with "demand side" and "home front". I do not. You solve problems by tackling all aspects, not just what's in your backyard.
>The EU has a longer history, going back to the 1970s, of placing gendarmes or carabinieri with automatic rifles at airports.
That's because we were way ahead of you guys onthe terrorism thing... face it, by the time you got in on it it was like so uncool in Europe.
> The US makes the mistake of being too open about their intelligence operations.
No, they're just open abut the ones that they want you to know about, so you don't worry about the other ones...
> As a matter of fact, most terrorists in Europe are extreme amateurs -- 18-year-old losers with fantasies of becoming a mujahedeen.
Suicide bombing, in general, is not a profession that naturally encourages experience.
> They boast to the whole world that they will carry something out, and get arrested at the stage of trying to buy weapons.
I'd rather have stupid terrorists than smart ones. The last time we had smart ones (from 70s left, or the basques, or the IRA) they kept eluding capture for decades). And of course they don't get arrested for buying weapons in the US since they probably have a cupboard full of them. But you try and get a ton of fertilizer for your US garden, and you'll make some interesting acquaintances.
no taxation without representation!
... or listening in to data traffic and telephone calls for "national security reasons" and coincidentally handing over details of Airbus conversations to Boeing?
> Euros that they abandoned any claim to the moral high ground about two decades ago.
I rather doubt that any government has much right to claim that. Maybe Luxembourg, or Iceland.
no taxation without representation!
At issue is not just the amount of detail (the "34" pieces of data), but also who gets access to the data, for what purpose, and for how long this data is kept. So far, the US authorities are stonewalling, "that's none of your business." The US wants to keep the data in perpetuity, and to distribute it to whoever they want, for any purpose, within and beyond the US.
IMHO, other counties should just begin to reciprocate, and to require the same data from airlines entering their contries from the United States. Anyone remember how Brazil began fingerprinting american tourists? Then let's see how long that will last!
In the end, it may be a futile effort anyway. Who says that the matter of PNR needs to be regulated? All it takes is for the airlines to add some fine print to the "privacy policy" informing passengers that, by entering into a transportation contract, they agree to have all their data delivered to the authorities. After all, the airline doesn't care much, it only wants to sell seats and doesn't care about your privacy, as long as you still desire to fly.
Umm... I didn't actually see a single line from the Koran there. A don't suppose a claim like "It's in the Koran" should be backed up by a quote or two? That's kinda like me saying it's in Bush's doctrine to pillage other countries. Oh wait...
I hate printers.
Fucking orthography nazis.
Here's the thing. If I have a few grams of a strong alkali metal, and ask the stewardess for a glass of water, that plane isn't staying in the air long. Since something deep inside my soul tells me most dogs aren't trained to sniff alkali metals, I have a feeling that could be a very bad thing.
What's my point? Since it's impossible to protect against even a significant number of ways that a person who wants to die can destroy an aircraft, isn't it better to just scale back to rational, sensible security measures, and give people back their freedom to travel as they please, forced to deal with the fact that with freedom comes the possiblity of death?
I don't fly anymore. The thought of being treated like a prison inmate just isn't appealing. I'd rather die from a rubidium bomb than life treated like a terrorist suspect for the grand offense of wanting to fly from one unspectacular city to another.
It's been a long time.
Too bad I envision this talk not to be happening with Latin American countries...
-Plane seating position
-email address
So terrorists will try to sit closer to the pilot? Or to the bathroom at the other end of the plane? Will everybody's email account get pwned, or will they try to figure out your political inclinations from your (presumed to be real)nickname?
Just a couple of examples to show the futility of this. The most important info is your previous flight data which is on your passport. No need for the fuss.
I have lived in Soviet Union and can't say it's true.
I have NEVER carried my paper unless I was going to travel by air or conducted business with bank or goverment agency. You didn't need your paper otherwise. Militia (police) didn't stop you at random. You didn't need paper to travel by train, tickets didn't have a names on it. All this shit about carry your identification started at beginning of 90th, when SU sease to exist.
So right now in USA we have more restricted movement then in Soviet Union, except "locked" ("closed") cities, that ytou have to have special pass to go in, unless you lived there. (you didn't need a permission to leave city though). Otherwise... I missed easiness of travel inside Soviet Union.
You see people you work with that can deal with them, whatever. How many homeless people or criminals in jail do you associate with who can't deal with the addiction? Now, how many more of the latter do you think there are in this country? Get real dude.
But hey. That's what you get when you confuse symptoms with problems.
You know, there is a difference between trolling and pointing out the flaws in your reasoning. Just saying.
Holy crap. It is called "transliteration." Many places use different character sets than English does, so spellings and phonics of the same words may not be interpeted the same. Why complain about it?
Anyway, you are both wrong. My religion is called moosm. I worship cows. Moo! We're having a big fire sacrifice tonight. Lots of cow pieces are thrown in a fire pit. Everyone is invited except the trolls. Where I come from, it is called a Bar B Que. ;-)
When you can join a plausible need (border enforcement) with an unnecessary, implausible and/or unpopular one (national identification card), you've got what's called a cover story. In the 1970's, this was called crypto-fascism. Joining a popular cause to an unpopular one in a way thats difficult or impossible to separate:
I mean, verifiable ID is not a bad idea, I'm not against it. It's just that, where this is already being done (New York State for instance), its being handled by contractors, and, as far as I can tell there are no limits on what they can do with your data. Are they keeping track of everywhere you're scanned? Will this information be admissible in court? Enough questions to fly a few jumbo jets through.
O lord, bless this thy holy hand grenade, that with it thou mayest blow thine enemies to tiny bits, in thy mercy.
But can air travel security get back to the way it was in 2000, when it was fun to fly and I didn't feel like I was going through an old Soviet country or third world dictatorship?
We are Americans damnit, everyone knows most of these silly rules do not make us safer, all those confiscated bottles out of people's shaving kits are not carted away by a bomb squad, they are dumped in the trash. If anyone on the security squads believed this stuff was dangerous they would be careful of how they dispose of what they confiscate, they aren't because everyone knows what they are confiscating is NOT dangerous.
There is no feeling quite like walking onto a plane with my backpack full of camera gear, a few days clothes and a shaving kit, stowing my pack under the seat in front of me, flying, getting off the plane and walking out of the airport into a new city with money in my wallet and everything I need for a week on my shoulder. This is part of what technology can do for people who are inclined to travel this way, a better use than collecting data on people who fly, and creating false threats to justify employing last weeks burger flippers as "security" and telling people they can't take toothpaste and shampoo on a plane. My apologies for any spelling errors, I am tired, as can be seen by my unorganized rant.
How do you know the copper doesn't like to stop fat women so he can make fun of them?
I have to agree with Infernal Device, it is your neibors you have to worry about. In the place I used to live, the majority were of one religion. They'd call the police if you didn't have the "right" look or you weren't wearing clothes which conformed to what most of them wear or just if they thought you might not belong to their church.
Hardly a freedom loving people if they don't respect other's freedom. They even manged to close down all the dance clubs and such, so the only place for people to socialize was their church.
I rather doubt that any government has much right to claim that. Maybe Luxembourg, or Iceland.
Indeed. Nations act in their own interests, in all things. I merely suggest that there is no principled stand on either side here - if there is, it's only because one side has decided that principles are more profitable than the lack thereof this week, which says nothing about last week. Or next week.
ABSURDITY, n.: A statement or belief manifestly inconsistent with one's own opinion.
Examples/references please. In fact, most terrorists in Europe are white, most of them nationalists and/or christians, who's got years of experience in planning and carrying out operations (IRA and splinter groups and ETA etc.). As a result several EU governments have decades of experience is what works and what doesn't work against terrorists. Apart from groups that are still a potential threat, such as IRA splinter groups and ETA, we've had a long list of other terror groups, such as the Rote Armee Fraktion in Germany etc. (that was successfully crushed).
Of the muslim terrorists in Europe, most have been older, and of the ones who have been taken before successfully carrying out their plits most have been taken after major intelligence operations, rather than after having boasted to the whole world about anything.
Terrorist: Yes/No?
No wonder things are so fucked up. All this innuendo and inference. Just ask the damn question. Here's an example: "Do you believe in killing people for the glory of your God?" If the answer is, "yes", that person goes in the terrorist category, and we put "Yes" in the Terrorist data field.
<napoleon>Well, Duh.</napoleon>
Chances are they want to know if the ticket is really yours. =) Just a guess!
"Or are they hindering the War on Terror?"
Europe is far closer to the terrorists than the US, I'm sure they are going to do whatever they can to protect themselves. The US has oceans thousands of miles wide on either side to protect it, a terrorist could walk to European country.
I went to San Francisco from Beijing to attend an academic conference this June. I was travelling with only a backpack, which somehow made me a suspecious target. At the SFO airport an officer demanded to check my backpack. I was carrying a digital camera. Without asking for my permission, and even before I realized what he wanted to do, he already browsed through tens of the photos stored in the camera. I was shocked. Although there was nothing really private there, that was simply unacceptable.
A few days after I went back to China. A very good friend wanted to buy a new DC, so she played with my camera for a while. She politely asked me if it was okay for her to look at the pictures before switching to playback mode.
So much for "respecting other people's privacy" in US.
A very interesting piece about security on airports can be found here
I have not seen it mentioned anywhere, but, in the 30-35 years we've had airport security, worldwide, I can't think of a single incident where a terrorist was prevented from getting onto an airplane thanks to airport security. (I should think we would have heard about it, law enforcement would have talked about it breathlessly.)
It leads me to the conclusion that if a terrorist gets to the airport, it's already too late. You can only hope they fail; otherwise, catch them before they get to the airport.
(I believe that bombs have been sniffed out of luggage, and, giving credit, it's possible that a terrorist was de-armed but flew normally otherwise.)
But why should it matter? You don't need to show indentification to get on the train, take a bus or drive across state lines, why should you need to show ID to fly from 1 city to another? International maybe a different story but domestically it shouldn't be necessary to show id.
Yes, I believe the bill did arrive.
I think this is more about paranoia and the desire of, in some cases, rather ignorant (but well meaning?) people to show who is the boss.
Pushing innocent people around does not phase a terrorist. I doubt a layman threatening a lawyer with a law suit has much of an effect on the lawyer either. I'm sure some measures are effective and will serve to protect the public. However the question is with regard to the measures that are clearly not effective and serve only to harm innocent bystanders.
Every time I have come from overseas, through an airport here in Canada, I feel like I am treated like a cow. Frankly I find it an insult. Frankly for international traffic between Canada and the USA I feel an open boarder is appropriate. How is it that 300+ million Americans can travel within the USA without this bullshit and 30+ million Canadians can travel within Canada without this bullshit, yet if a Canadian happens to visit the USA we are threatened by our boarder guards? And it happens on BOTH sides? The answer is very simple. This has almost NOTHING to do with security. Its all about collecting taxes... customes taxes.
Canadian customs officials are far more interested in asserting their authority over Canadians than they are over Americans. I'm sure Americans will say the same thing.
-------------
The desire to control and assert "authority" reminds me of many years ago when I did programming in a small company of about 40 employees. We had 3 departments who used the computer. There was a terribly under-employed operator who felt it was his job to guard the printer. Well - he didn't call it that... he called it distributing the printouts. To put this into context... the company owned one (1) 300 line per minute printer and ran a mini computer with some terminals hooked up and did a daily backup. Who here would think this would require a staff of three (3) people? A systems programmer and two (2) operators? Anyone? Lord - what a joke!
Any well managed company would have fired the bloke and told the systems programmer to do the backups... because there was NO NEED for a systems programmer... Besides the guy didn't know how to program, and there was no systems programming required anyways. He was a glorified and over paid systems administrator and not a very good one at that... but I digress.
Our computer operator guarded the printer. Programmers had to routinely wait for hours for him to get off his ass and put a printout in the tray. User's had to wait also, but not as long. Once the printout was retrived from the tray we could confer with the user's if necessary and user's could confer with us. But we all had to wait while this guy took his sweet time. And of course for "security" reasons, programmers were not allowed to touch the printer. Programmers could write the code that ran all of the company's business interests... but we couldn't touch the printer.
I did take over the administration of that mess. I got rid of the systems programmer and the operators and promoted the secretary and she did a fine job. Programers got their own printouts and were more than happy to put user's printouts in the proper bin! Wow! over $100,000 per year in salvaged salaries and no complaints after that.
Just like the under-employed systems programmer and the two subordinate operators, customs officials will also strive to create a justification for their jobs. But does it really stand up to scrutiny?
-----------
Analogy to the boarder guards? Once you are in the USA you can travel without being treated like a cow. Once Americans are in Canada they can travel without being treated like a cow. But from one stockyard to the other... we get treated like cows.
The thing is that if we try to gain select country priviledges with regard to boarder travel then we get accused of things that boarder on racizm. This simply leads to a police state. Frankly I do not think a "war on TERROR" justifies our authorities terrorizing innocent travelers to the extent that they do. Very little of what they have done in the past can be justified and its getting worse.
USA is hungry for power and control, the EU is playing for power reasons while protecting the rights of people not to be type cast at the same time
But if it stopped just one terrorist wouldn't it be worth it? When the violation of millions is justified for a single success I don't wanna play no more. I haven't been to America since pre 9-11 and quite frankly I don't feel any great urgency to return either, not for biz or pleasure.
Hey, you think you got it bad, I live here, and I don't have citizenship over there anywhere; I'd love to go to the EU somewhere and be a developer (hot shit C++ and Java + good communication skills), but I have no idea where to start. Where can an interested tech guy find decent opportunities in the EU?
"We returned the General to El Salvador, or maybe Guatemala, it's difficult to tell from 10,000 feet"
I'll quote him for the karma.. :-D
a dis169357.html
If Tyranny and Oppression come to this land, it will be in the guise of fighting a foreign enemy.
James Madison
I believe there are more instances of the abridgement of freedom of the people by gradual and silent encroachments by those in power than by violent and sudden usurpations.
James Madison
It is a universal truth that the loss of liberty at home is to be charged to the provisions against danger, real or pretended, from abroad.
James Madison
http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/j/jamesm
Good for the EU on protecting the privacy of their citizens? Or are they hindering the War on Terror?
There's a difference? I thought the whole point of the "War on Terror" was to introduce a fascist surveilance state. Jews aren't kosher as the black sheep anymore, so we're taking arabs this time, but it really doesn't matter because the real war is fought at home.
Assorted stuff I do sometimes: Lemuria.org
It is an information grab by Big Brother, plain and simple.
Yes. I transitted through a US airport recently. I was not going to or from a US destination. It was the same flight number before and after the transit stop and I didn even know we were stopping there until the day before the flight.
I assumed we (the passengers) would be put in a transit lounge and board our on-going flight when ready. No. What happened was we had to collect our luggage, exit customs, visit the airport carpark for a few minutes, check in, go through all the security checks again and then continue on. Hours of crap.
All passengers were finger printed and photographed.
Fuck the USA. I'm never going near there again.
I think you should focus on the preferred and likely method for illegal immigrants to enter the US. Its not by airplane from Europe, its walking across the border from Mexico/Canada. Like I said in my previous post its not very likely that you will find illegal immigrants flying from Europe - because they will not be allowed to board the plane without valid visas or citizenship.
A person with a valid visa going to the US is probably screened already for both terrorism connections and immigration status. A European citizen is unlikely to emigrate illegally this way - and could fly in on a tourist visa no questions asked anyway. You do know most Europeans dont need visas to go to the US?
So maybe for other parts of the world it would make more sense to screen for illegal immigrants - but thats not really what the data exchange is meant to solve. It is for security and fighting terrorism. We have had terrorism in Europe since the 50s, and we know how to handle it. We have successfully eliminated and solved several conflicts without taking away basic human rights and laws meant to protect the population. So do not acuse Europe of not doing enough - we just find it is better to fight terrorism without giving up our rights!
I find Americans are very protective and patriotic about not giving away any of your constitutional rights in other contexts - but you fully expect Europeans to simply let go of ours? No, thank you. Even if it would stop all and any attacks!
I dont think the US should be allowed any more information than absolutely necessary because I simply dont trust your government to keep it safe and not abuse it. I appreciate having better protection and regulation here in Europe - and believe you should fight to improve yours instead! Then again we might also have use for more information on people going here - especially from Muslim countries.
For example:
- They collect info on if you have a return-fligth or only one-way. So, you make sure to book a return-fligth.
- They want to know your email-adress, so you make sure to use an average-looking one never associated with anything fishy.
- They specifically want to know if the ticket was paid for in cash. So you don't do that.
- They want to know if you have a history of booking and then not-showing for fligths. So you make sure not to have such a history. (and if you do, you establish a new fake identity that doesn't.)
The list is longer, infact the list is 31 points long. But literally 25 or so of the 31 datas are easy to manipulate by the determined flyer, and it's a near *certanity* that exactly that will be done. This means that even *if* profiling based on these data could bring something (which I doubt) it now *certainly* doesn't bring anything, since any data you do get on a terrorist is virtually guaranteed to be manipulated.Profiling works sorta, some of the time. It does however *NOT* work when used against an extremely small, but extremely determined group of people who:
Given that the Bush administration is already trying to sieze the right to ISP data, it's only one small step to isolate those particular comments you made on a forum somewhere (like here) to your e-mail address and then to flash an alert at the security check when you pass through the border control.
Security Guy: "Excuse me sir, could you follow me, we have some questions we need to ask you"
Security Guy: "Can you confirm that this is your e-mail address?
You: "Errr Yes"
Security Guy: "And on dd/mm/yyyy, you registered with the slashdot internet forum using the nickname xxxxxx"
You: "Errr Yes"
Security Guy: "...and on dd/mm/yyyy, you made this anti-American/anti-establishement/anti-whatever comment"
You: "Errr, mmmm...yes but...you have to understand the context of the comment...can I get a lawyer"
Security Guy: "Hey Hank! We got another one here, take him out back to the Gitmo bus will you. I wanna get through the next 100 before I sign off tonight"
Worried about what they might do with this data, I would be!
> Or China. See, they claim the same thing.
Actually they don't. I have been to China. All they asked from me for the visa was a photo and name and address and length of stay. I didn't even get a visa stamp in my passport.
Well - I know we're all geeks around here. But perhaps it's still worth
mentioning that the quote is from the game "Deus Ex", released in the
year 2000?
"Additionally, European privacy authorities want the US to give legally binding guarantees regarding the protection of the data concerned, instead of the existing non-binding undertakings."
What I've heard, this is a big question but only mentioned in a few sentences in the article. EU doesn't today know who in the end might get to see and use the data.
logic != flamebait.
how big a %age of voting age Americans actually voted ?
MP3 Search Engine
That reminds me. Did you get the bill we sent you for the war supplies that kept your country afloat while we "johnny come latelys" got our act together?.
Clueless idiot. Yes, in fact Europe did get the fucking bill, and continues to pay various war debts and reparations to this day to the USA, as it happens. EVEN SO, America manages to have a debt so huge that the rest of the world should stop kidding itself and realise that the americans are _never_ going to pay back _their_ astronomical debts.
...on the visa card (green one) they pretty much ask you just that.
But the best one is...
"Do you intend to partake in any illegal or immoral activities while in the United States? (y/n)"
What counts as immoral anyway? And where's the "hopefully" option?
throw new NoSignatureException();
"Fuck the USA. I'm never going near there again."
Succintly put.
I had been thinking about a visit to the US this summers. Then I looked up the visa requirements.
I passed...
Those look like the US has no need for international tourism. First time I went there they even asked me if I was an HIV carrier (along with sexual orientation and such. And this was in 1997...).
My money isn't needed there, I go where the burocracy at least pretends to be happy for me wasting my time and money on their turf.
btw it was _WAY_ easier to get a Russian visa.
I suggest we return the "favour" like the Brasilians did: they separated all US citizens on airports and demanded a lot of forms to be filled in and fingerprints taken. Some that protested too loud were sent back to where they came from. This method seemed to help reduce stupid US demands, so the EU should consider it. After all, it wouldn't be the first American CIA operatives that kidnapped people on EU soil. Better register those potential threats to national security thouroughly.
Over here it's kiss my ass. What the hell is wrong with mohammedan anyway.
*sigh*
That's the sound of a clue flying right over your head.
In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
Since the 9/11 terrorists lived in the US I think it's only sensible that such information is reciprocated, after all, it would otherwise put the EU as a whole at risk by allowing entry from a country that harbours terrorists (after all, ignorance is no excuse, isn't it?)..
:-).
:-)
In order to combat this fallout of the War on Privacy, sorry, Terror, the EU should demand immediate access to passenger information for US planes flying into the EU. That also deals with the whole rendition issue.
The EU should just ask for the usual: flight details, name, address, DOB, credit and criminal history (would be a fun one if Bush came to the UK again), height, eye colour, VDMs (visually distinguishing marks), face geometry, iris scans, fingerprints of all 10 fingers and toes (as a backup in case of excessive nail biting), ear shape, nostril diameters, body odour strenght with and without deodorant (as deo's taken off passengers pre-flight), foot shape (needs TSA support as they will have no sense of smell left by now), present hair colour, a blood test, stool sample, a fair assessment of dress sense and a compulsory rubber finger probe by as many thick fingered ex wrestlers as the EU can get hold of.
If such data is not provided it will have to be provided on arrival. Refusing to provide will result in passengers being returned to point of origin in a leaky rubber dinghy routed via shark infested waters (one way or the other that will eventually deal with the initial volume problem).
Naturally that data needs to be provided again on departure as it may have changed (lost fingers, false eyes, you know what foreign countries are like
Oh, and let's not forget the paperwork with that fantastic piece of research: "have you ever been a member of a terrorist organisation (Y/N)?" (yes, I know there are legal reasons for it but it's still rediculous). I'm sure we can add a good amount of dull questions to it, but it may cost a few forests just to get it all printed.
So there. Any other problem you need solving?
= Ch =
Insert
Am I the only one who's embarassed that OUR country is running around asking everyone else to give people less privacy? I miss being the good guy.
Surely that would make your religion mooism, or moosmism? ;-)
Everything in moderation, including moderation itself
OMG ! There is a paper telling my name and address ! I'm being repressed ! Come and see the violence in the system !
Why are you all so quick to blame the U.S. when all this frustration is clearly the fault of the Muslims, most notably the Muslim extremists?! If they hadn't done what they did to the U.S., and continue to terrorize people all over the world we would not have this discussion in the first place. You people are blaming the symptom (the U.S.) not the real source of the disease (Muslim Extremist). Once we stop blaming the easy mark like the U.S. and taking world measures to hand to rid us of this scourge and refuse to bow down and be controlled through terror by these extremists we will have all this go away. It takes intelligent and brave people to step to the plate and openly agree to unite against the real evil in this world....Muslim Extremists!
Reality is for people that can't handle drugs. So do your part, just say no to reality!
The true meaning of all these 'security' is to scare people away from flying. If ordinary people flying, then, people who fly must be terrorist. It also make their target less effective too, because the kill ratio is way off.
The current administration still has not done enough to damage the aviation industry. I think they should charge 100% ticket price for airport tax, detain people a min of 12 hours, and strip search passengers the min that the passenger walk inside the door.
isn't this exactly what terrorists are aiming for, by definition, spreading terror? Except I'm not scared of terrorists but of my own government. The US and other western governments are Al Qaida's workhorses. The terrorists have almost reached their ultimate goal, complete disruption of western society. The effects of 9/11 are way beyond the wildest dreams Bin Laden ever had. Or perhaps he did expect this to happen? Kudos, you clever old bastard!
assignment != equality != identity
In the old Soviet Union everything that was not permited was forbidden, leaving people in a situation where they had to ask permission to do almost anything.
Conversely, in the US, people don't know what rights they have, and can't assume they have any. You see, until a court makings a post-facto ruling, even the judges don't know what the laws are, let alone if they've been broken. With regards to IP law, the lawyers on Slashdot formally and publicly admitted to that fact.
How is a state of legal limbo somehow better than a firm statement saying that "this is always legal; go ahead and do this, and you definately won't end up in jail". I'd prefer this to the US, where it's "Do whatever you like. You might end up in jail, though. No one really knows what's legal and what isn't; not even the judges or the lawyers..."
No, the way to stop terrorism against the United States is to ignore them. Stop showing what they do on TV. That won't stop poeple trying to kill other people, but it'll sure slow down people killing RANDOM other people to get headlines. A terorist is someone who'll do anything to get change through fear.
Islamic militants (you can argue that they're NOT following Islam) will still be an issue -- but they won't be global terrorists. They do regional terror, against, for instance Israel, because they'll know that word of mouth works, there, but they won't have any impact on the United States.
How about a law which requires a statement of what percentage of Americans are killed by terrorists each year on any report of a terrorist activity? "You're X times more likely to be killed skiing than by a terrorist." at the end of each broadcast.
Again, that wouldn't stop Islamic murders. But the rate of random violence would go down, and we could act rationally against these guys, since we wouldn't be afraid all the time.
I probably will have to visit the US again sometime. I sincerely hope that the Visa Waiver scheme says in place; coming from Ireland it's been the one thing not turning the air travel thing into a complete nightmare. Especially as we have pre-clearance at our local simple and friendly small airport at Shannon - even if the US immigration people are a tad intimidating, it's reassuring being in a familiar place on home ground. Dublin airport is a nightmare though because it is overcrowded - so security takes an age. Shannon is nice and relaxed always - very soothing for air travel. If you are travelling to somewhere in Europe requiring a change when coming from the US, and there are flights from Shannon to your local destination (there often aren't of course!), I *highly* recommend it rather than somewhere like Heathrow for changing plane.
-- *~()____) This message will self-destruct in 5 seconds...
Is the same data being collected on passengers flying to the EU from the US?
Try big corp's, as HP, IBM, Accenture, Oracle, Sun... send then your CV with motivation letter stating you'd like to work in their foreign subsidiaries. You'll probably have to relocate at your own expense and also earn local wage equivalent (depends of your destination).
Or "moomin-ism". Oh, wait - no trolls invited. Oh crap.
Would you like to request a coroner?
So, for example, if you're my next door neighbor, and I rape my children -- then you can beat your children and pat yourself on the back for treating them so well in comparison.
I find your logic extremely flawed. It also smacks of a herd mentality (judging your actions by the actions of those around you.) How about just doing what is right, regardless of what everone else is doing? Is that so hard?
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
The sheep reference always amuses me. I'm not saying that it isn't fitting in any particular application, but it's just that EVERYBODY refers to the "other group" as sheep. The right wing fundmanetalists over here think that the liberals are "sheep" that just follow whatever party line is fed to them by the democrats (or "democraps" as they are usually referred to). The Liberals say the same thing about the fundamentalists (I'm Libertarian and fit in neither group ;)).
:S.).
I think what both sides fail to grasp (as well as others from the outside) is that most of these people are not "sheep" - it's just that they do truly subscribe to something that is so different from what you do that one concludes that they must be coersed into believing it.
My personal views to make this country get along:
Fundamentalists back the hell off of free speech. Don't try to censor stuff that people say or broadcast (I had one idiot, who argued up and down for "2nd Ammendmant Rights", held steadfast that "Will and Grace" should be forcably removed from the air for homesexual content. When confronted with 1st Ammendment issues he responded "The right to free speech shouldn't apply to public airwaves."
Liberals, drop the gun issue like a rock. People like their guns, the vast majority do no wrong with them, and you're not going to take them away without a mini-civil war in this country. You'll cause far more violence trying to take them away than you would have ever prevented.
I think if we could concede these two issues the country as a whole could pull together and focus on the real problems.
"People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
I do think there are many who know what "right" is (and are correct about it), and have known since way before Hammurabi's Code, and have continued to know since way after.
They, apparantly, and unfortunately, do not encompass the majority of the human species. And then there are apologists like you who try to legitimize the actions of those who don't understand what is right and wrong.
I am absolutely sure there are plenty of people who thought slavery was wrong -- way before slavery was abolished in *any* country. But hey, if everyone's doing it, I guess it's okay.
And no, I wouldn't beat my children, and I also would likely try to avoid immunizing my child to the extent that it is legally possible. I also would not circumsize him, but more importantly: I am not going to have children, ever.
So some idiot parents lobotomized their kids. You use this as a defense for your position?!?!! They are simply in the category of people who can't tell right from wrong, and obey the herd and prevailing attitudes (as you would probably say "current definition of what right or wrong is") of others. They were wrong. They are the equivalent of the parent today who thinks videogames make their child bad. Those idiots today are following the same herd of people who proclaim what is right and wrong, based on their [often evangelical!] peer groups. And many parents realize videogames are no threat, and let their kids play them, even though this may be considered "wrong" by some "current definition".
Fortunately, a lot of people can think for themselves. A lot can't. And you're making excuses for them. Sorry, but I take umbrage with that.
-Clio
Karma: Bad (mostly from not giving a fuck)
Blog: http://clintjcl.wordpress.com
Well, "moosmism" is too close to mooseism-- worshiping moose meat. It was mooism for a while until we dropped the "i"-- quite a bit easier to pronounce in the Moo language that way. The cows were having real trouble. ;-)
Not sure when you lived there but I am looking at my Train tickets (August 2006), Moscow/St.Petersburg and: (edited after preview, I guess Cyrillic characters aren't supported on slashdot ); they have the transliteration of my name. Upon boarding the train at Leningradsky Station, they compared the name on my passport to my visa, (Roman to Roman/Cyrillic) and then compared the name on my visa to the name on my tickets. (Roman/Cyrillic to Cyrillic). Only my Metro tickets don't have my name on them. My bus tickets to get to Pavlovsk had my name on them as well and I once again had to show my passport for id.
Damned right! I'm surprised the fucking limeys haven't volunteered to provide, in addition to the 30-some-odd pieces of information demanded, the video and audio for the past 30 days that they've captured from all the cameras and mics they've peppered their country with. Thank you, Tony "fulfillment of Stalin's wettest dreams" Blair.
Funny that the captcha for this posting is "grabbing".
Because it is a transliteration from Arabic, meaning that you write it as you hear it (because you can't do a direct translation from Arabic characteres to Western ones).
Some people in English speaking places heard it as "moslem" and other as "muslim".
This happens also with Russian, Chinese and many other languages.
To complicate matters further a transliteration from English passes to othere languages and then it is pronounced differently there (muslim and moslem sound completely different in Spanish for example).
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
> Indeed. Nations act in their own interests, in all things.
If only. A nation's leaders act in their own interests, in all things. Well, most.
Just that we have to be careful to distinguish the actions of the government from the will of the people.
no taxation without representation!
> yes, I know there are legal reasons for it but it's still rediculous
;-)
Like what? I thought it was a "oh we aren't doing this to turn this into a surveillance state, but to find the evil 'terrorists'" rhethorical question even though they know its a lie
in reality ? or according to the rigged machines and corrupt elections officials ?
I'm residing in the EU and I 'happily' inform you that the EU sucks as bad as the US does, in same cases it sucks less, in some cases its worse. It varies on EU country and depends where your interests lie though. See my post here for some views on that: http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198569&cid =16311539 includes details on certain laws US is currently implementing, or recently has, which have existed here for a while.
n lnew/buitenland/netherlands/default.asp
;) also see http://yro.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=198569&cid =16269667
I must also say, if you love your country, it may be better to fight for the rights of your fellowmen than to flee, but that is ofcourse your decision.
Here's some info on working in the Netherlands
http://www.cwinet.nl/nl/about_cwi.asp
https://www.werk.nl/extern/extern.html?Link=werk.
Easiest way as other person who replied to you said is to get a corporation to "sponsor" you. They'll also help you with your Visa then. There's various IT job sites usually they are (also) in English or the job application at least is. Use your search engine. Netherlands is small, and just one of the many EU countries. Germany also has a huge IT sector, where the big multinationals are well-represented, and there's big IT corporations which started there (SAP, for example). But, there's also many IT corporations in other countries, and if you decide to go to UK you certainly don't have to learn a new language, merely a few words, dialect and accent