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.

16 of 457 comments (clear)

  1. In Soviet Russia... by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Papers please.

  2. The war on terror is a farce by daVinci1980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
    1. Re:The war on terror is a farce by partisanX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The war on terror isn't about being effective, it's about making people feel like we're doing something

      I disagree. It's about keeping enough people scared long enough to completely change what it means to be "free" in America. The government wants these changes and keeping us scared is the only way they can get them. Anyone can say tinfoil hat or whatever, but the evidence is so overwhelming that the powers that be want this, that I simply can not understand how anyone could not see it.

      You listen to all the people backing the freedom stealing actions taken in the name of WOT and they are almost all cowards in that all their best arguments are nothing more than appeals to give up what were once cherished american rights and freedoms in the name of easing their fears. Then they have the nerve to play like they're the brave ones.

      The fact that these cowards call themselves "patriots" and back actions taken to the point where it is now the EU and not the US complaining about too much information being collected about individuals speaks volumes about what continues to be wrong with the cowards thinking.

      --
      "Our morality is good, theirs is repressive."- Partisanship Rule #3
    2. Re:The war on terror is a farce by Moofie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Those who buy into the extreme version of Islam will not stop until the world converts to their expectations."

      Uh huh. Check out the apocalyptic Christians who are visiting the White House regularly. I am way, way more scared of those wackos. They're better funded.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    3. Re:The war on terror is a farce by kraut · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > 1) There is no way to "solve" the drug problem on the demand side of things. The substances are fucking addictive. Even after rehab people struggle every day to stay away from the stuff, and if it's availible (supply) many can't. I'm talking about real drugs (crack, meth, herion) not marijuana and ecstasy mind you.
      There's an easy way to solve the drug problem on the demand side: Make them available legally in controlled circumstances. Not sure about crack and meth, but heroin is medically safe to take as long as a) it's not mixed with crap b) you know the dose you're taking - which is why it's used as a painkiller in hospitals. Yes, it is addictive, but it is quite safe to take, and - unlike e.g. alcohol - doesn't even cause birth defects. Giving legal access takes out a huge chunk of the profits of organised crime, and allows junkies to become productive members of society again. Idealistic claptrap, I hear you say? No, pilot studies in CH and NL show that it works.

      > 2) There is no way to "solve" the terrorist problem on the home front either.
      Agreed.

      > These are people that for the most part are religiously motivated.
      Disagree, to a large extent the anger is political rather than what we'd call religious in the west. Admittedly the boundaries blur.

      > Ever tried arguing with someone about religion?
      Fun, innit? ;)

      > Those who buy into the extreme version of Islam will not stop until the world converts to their expectations. If the U.S. was to become a muslim nation, they would simply direct their actions towards the next target because their whole philosophy hinges on there being someone to blame and fight.
      Whoa. They do, quite fairly, have quite a bit to blame the west for. The installation of Shah in Iran (overthrowing a democracy, btw). Propping up the Saudi Kingdom plus associated other mini-monarchs. Supporting Saddam Hussein all the way (cheerfully ignoring the genocide he's on trial for, or the war he started against Iran, or his use of poisan gas in that war, or ...) right until he invaded Kuweit.
      You can see why People might take some convincing that now we're actually serious about that whole democracy and human rights stuff. Guantanamo does't help.
      Just to point out that there's more to this than merely "evil islam wanting to conquer the world". Oh dear, that's probably earned me a fatwah now ;)

      --
      no taxation without representation!
  3. Except for the UK by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Informative

    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.
  4. Re:In Soviet Russia... too true... by Mydron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  5. America, you are so f'd up by Potor · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So, if you order a halal meal, it won't be reported. but if you eat a vegitarian meal, it will.

    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.

  6. Glad to see the EU standing up for its laws by jay2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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

  7. You won't have problems giving your data to Russia by gorbachev · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "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
  8. Look up "Police State". by khasim · · Score: 5, Interesting
    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 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.
  9. an end to the insanity of frivolous datacollection by lorg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.

  10. Stopping Terror -- A New Perspective on Freedom by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's about keeping enough people scared long enough to completely change what it means to be "free" in America.

    Just as creepy as 1984 seems, get a load of this.

    When one maniac can wipe out a city of twenty million with a microbe developed in his basement, a new approach to law enforcement becomes necessary. Every citizen of the world must be placed under surveillance. That means sky-cams at every intersection, computer-mediated analysis of every phone call, e-mail, and snail-mail, and a purely electronic economy in which every transaction is recorded and data-mined for suspicious activity.

    We are close to achieving this goal. Some would say that human liberty has been compromised, but the reality is just the opposite. As surveillance expands, people become free from danger, free to walk alone at night, free to work in a safe place, and free to buy any legal product or service without the threat of fraud. One day every man and woman will quietly earn credits, purchase items for quiet homes on quiet streets, have cook-outs with neighbors and strangers alike, and sleep with doors and windows wide open. If that isn't the tranquil dream of every free civilization throughout history, what is?

    -- Anna Navarre, Agent, UNATCO

    I played this game as a teenager. It was cool then. It's still cool now. ...but it's getting fucking scarier all the time.
  11. Re:In Soviet Russia... too true... by radtea · · Score: 5, Insightful

    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.
  12. Pshaw by snarkth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The "War on Terror" is mythological propganda. The real war is religious fundamentalists vs. religious fundamentalists. *snarky*

  13. Privacy in US by mldqj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    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.