Slashdot Mirror
EU Wants Air Passenger Data Collected
An anonymous reader sends news of the EU following in the footsteps of the US in that they are contemplating requiring all 27 member states to collect data on airline passengers and to retain it for up to 13 years. No centralized database would be created; instead states would be encouraged to store and to share their own data as needed. All states would have to pass enabling laws before the measure could come into effect. The rules would not apply to flights entirely within the EU. The proposal is part of an anti-terrorism package that also includes tighter laws to control hate speech and bomb-making instructions.
Damnit! Now we EUers can't feel smug anymore and belittle our less free friends in the US ;-))
...at least they'll never be able to take away from us the fact we never elected George Bush.
;)
Well, at least unless there's a major change in international politics sometime soon I hope not
[Sarcasm mode on]
Heck, let's just cut to the chase and have an international law that everything and anything has to be logged and stored for all eternity. That should save a few decades of protesting against dumb legislature that will eventually get in through the back door anyway.
Presumably if storage capacity where unlimited we'd be seeing calls to log the position of every atom in the world!
[Sarcasm mode off]
OK! Let'em choke on all that data! There's no way that they could keep it all straight - and that's assuming there's no errors!
The genie is out of the bottle, let's give them what they want to the 666 power!
I prefer Flambe as apposed flamebait.
How exactly does one define 'hate speech', and separate it from freedom of speech (one man's free speech is another's hate speech), and how exactly does one separate home chemistry sets from bomb making equipment, and mere discussions on bombs and explosives (they're not exactly secrets) from people who are actually going to use them?
I'm also not sure how collecting data on all passengers will help them with the small minority they want to track.
I seriously think the Soviets covertly won the Cold War after the end was declared every time I hear crap like this. What's next? Are we all going to celebrate the October Revolution and call each other "Comrade" while the Secret Police read our mail and make people disappear?
The game.
Shit that doesn't work here.
ACK
I have lived in both Europe and in the US for years. I think that the American's idea of "freedom of speech" is dysfunctional. Most people have no idea what constitutes protected or unprotected speech. They think they can say just whatever the hell they want, whenever they want, in whatever forum they want (and in the case of political speech with as many dollars as they want). In reality speech in the US isn't like that, rather it is as legislated as it is Europe, albeit with different nuances.
In answer to your question: They have laws made by parliaments in Europe which define protected or forbidden speech. Just like in America they have laws made by Congress which define protected or forbidden speech. It's just that in response to horrors of WWII, several European countries have enacted 'Don't make the same mistake twice' laws. Which forbid denial of the events or glorification of perpetrators in public events.
I think you will find that the US has civil laws which can be used just as effectively end hate speech.
Nothing in the world is more dangerous than sincere ignorance and conscientious stupidity.
This is just another of the knee jerk reactions that we have seen during the last 6 years. Politicians make a show of "competence" in order to protect the safety of the people. Classic "cover your ass" reaction.
And you are right. The amount of people killed by terror in EU is minimal compared to traffic accidents, workplace accidents, domestic violence, pollution related deaths etc. But we are used to the above, but *terror* is new and unpredictable, hence it *seems* more scary.
Sadly, the governments (and mainstream media) are helping the terrorists, by fueling the fear for terror, by constantly talking about it and making senseless measures against it.
----
An annoyed European
The US might not have a law to limit free speech, but in reality it seems the free speech of journalists is more limited than in europe. If you use a law to limit it, or just use patriot acts, or even lawless operations by government agencies, doesnt matter much. How you limit free speech is irrelevant, but don't think there is no limiting going on in the US.
See the index of the Annual Worldwide Press Freedom Index by Reporters Without Borders for example:
http://www.rsf.org/article.php3?id_article=24025/
PjotrP
the point is that having a law one way or another, doesn't necessarily mean that the actual practice and reality is so.
I'm no expert about how free speech works in practice in the US, but I refer to an index of the freedom of press. As I'm no expert I can't judge the index, but the way the index is compiled seems fair enough.
about the US they said:
"There were slightly fewer press freedom violations in the United States [than last year] (48th) and blogger Josh Wolf was freed after 224 days in prison. But the detention of Al-Jazeera's Sudanese cameraman, Sami Al-Haj, since 13 June 2002 at the military base of Guantanamo and the murder of Chauncey Bailey in Oakland in August mean the United States is still unable to join the lead group."
anyway, just screaming "Our laws are better!" just doesn't say much about the actual state of freedom of speech in a country. I bet there are dictatorships that have even nicer looking laws about freedom of speech.
PjotrP