What the government knows when you fly
Sep 30th, 2006, 09:57 PM
#1
Original Poster
What the government knows when you fly
Interesting article at http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/5390074.stm on what info the U.S. government is requiring on airline passengers. Includes much more than I had thought - whether you order a veggie meal, for instance. The BBC site also has another piece on the breakdown of negotiations over the data transfer by European airlines, although they say they don't expect missing the deadline for agreement to affect flights.
Oct 1st, 2006, 12:56 PM
#5
Original Poster
So, in order to fly (the only reasonable way of crossing the Atlantic or Pacific) you have no problem with the government insisting on knowing who you're traveling with, whether you're renting a car, whether you prefer aisle to window, your email address, your frequent flyer miles.... I'm glad at least the Europeans still have some appreciation for privacy.
Oct 1st, 2006, 01:55 PM
#7
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 19,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
< your email address >
I suppose an e-mail address of "deathtothe [email protected]" might rouse suspicion in the TSA
I suppose an e-mail address of "deathtothe [email protected]" might rouse suspicion in the TSA
Oct 1st, 2006, 02:33 PM
#8
Join Date: Apr 2004
Posts: 5,950
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I could care less if the government knows who I'm travelling with. Do you object to all the CCTV cameras all over London? They ask where I'm staying when I go there & I tell them.
The US government has my SS number, knows how much I earn, how much I have in the bank, just as other governments know the same about their citizens. Why would I care if they know what meal I order or my email address?
The US government has my SS number, knows how much I earn, how much I have in the bank, just as other governments know the same about their citizens. Why would I care if they know what meal I order or my email address?
Oct 1st, 2006, 06:46 PM
#11
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The question is, do you have any reason to believe that collecting all that information actually does anything to make anyone safer? That's presumably the reason for it, and (at least for the moment) we still have the right to ask that question.
Oct 2nd, 2006, 12:55 AM
#13
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,145
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Meant to add:
When are we going to get our definitive, point-to-point bag matching system, which we were promised (and have been paying for with every ticket purchased) since Pan Am 103 -- and still don't have?
THAT might actually help make me safer. This stuff? Not impossible, but unlikely, IMHO.
Whew. Had to get that off my chest. Carry on.
When are we going to get our definitive, point-to-point bag matching system, which we were promised (and have been paying for with every ticket purchased) since Pan Am 103 -- and still don't have?
THAT might actually help make me safer. This stuff? Not impossible, but unlikely, IMHO.
Whew. Had to get that off my chest. Carry on.
Oct 2nd, 2006, 05:34 AM
#14
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting logic here. If I understand this correctly, Worktowander is not a terrorist who blow up planes, therefore there are no terrorists who will blow up planes. There's really no need for any security.
Seriously, there should be a choice. I thought the US Governemnt was testing some programs to let frequent traveler submit to a one-time detailed background check, who would subsequently bypass all other secondary screenings. Don't know what's the status of it.
I think that's pretty fair. A traveler should have a choice - either you submit more info, or you go through more checks and screenings at the airport.
Seriously, there should be a choice. I thought the US Governemnt was testing some programs to let frequent traveler submit to a one-time detailed background check, who would subsequently bypass all other secondary screenings. Don't know what's the status of it.
I think that's pretty fair. A traveler should have a choice - either you submit more info, or you go through more checks and screenings at the airport.
Oct 2nd, 2006, 08:36 AM
#15
Join Date: Apr 2005
Posts: 290
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The administration is insisting that we pay for our security by surrending privacy and liberty. All I ask for is some assurance that I'm getting value for money, since I consider the price rather high.
The administration will answer this request only by saying "Yes, we need it-- and we need more. We have many good reasons for needing it, but those reasons must necessarily be kept in the strictest of secrecy. Your obligation as a citizen is to have complete and unquestioning trust in us, and to have complete faith that we're using the information we demand only to protect you and the Homeland from terrorists and liberals who who hate freedom, liberty, and democracy. If we believe you need to know more than that, we'll tell you; but only when we decide it's appropriate and no more than what we decide is necessary. Questioning us, disagreeing with us, or otherwise showing any lack of faith and unity aids the enemy and is both disloyal and unpatriotic. So trust us completely, unhesitatingly obey the orders of anyone who wears a uniform or has an official administration title, and you can have complete confidence that you're making vital contribution to protecting the freedom, liberty, and democracy that America holds dear. God bless America!"
The administration will answer this request only by saying "Yes, we need it-- and we need more. We have many good reasons for needing it, but those reasons must necessarily be kept in the strictest of secrecy. Your obligation as a citizen is to have complete and unquestioning trust in us, and to have complete faith that we're using the information we demand only to protect you and the Homeland from terrorists and liberals who who hate freedom, liberty, and democracy. If we believe you need to know more than that, we'll tell you; but only when we decide it's appropriate and no more than what we decide is necessary. Questioning us, disagreeing with us, or otherwise showing any lack of faith and unity aids the enemy and is both disloyal and unpatriotic. So trust us completely, unhesitatingly obey the orders of anyone who wears a uniform or has an official administration title, and you can have complete confidence that you're making vital contribution to protecting the freedom, liberty, and democracy that America holds dear. God bless America!"
Oct 2nd, 2006, 10:16 AM
#17
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 19,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
< I thought the US Governemnt was testing some programs to let frequent traveler submit to a one-time detailed background check, who would subsequently bypass all other secondary screenings. >
And how many of the 9/11 hijackers would have passed such checks?
Or are you saying that anyone who passes such a test wouldn't become a terrorist?
And how many of the 9/11 hijackers would have passed such checks?
Or are you saying that anyone who passes such a test wouldn't become a terrorist?
Oct 2nd, 2006, 10:26 AM
#18
Join Date: Feb 2004
Posts: 23,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, alanRow, what's your solution, really, since there are terrorist who have blown up our planes or hijacked in our history?
I just don't understand some of the posts here. Seems like people don't want extra security checks, they cry about not bringing water or duty-free onboard, they don't want to be padded down, they don't want to take off their shoes... YET they also don't want government to have more information.
So, I wish some of you'd just tell me. Say you're head of TSA, or head of Homeland Security, or you're the President or the Pope. How do you protect our planes while satisfying all those complains?
I just don't understand some of the posts here. Seems like people don't want extra security checks, they cry about not bringing water or duty-free onboard, they don't want to be padded down, they don't want to take off their shoes... YET they also don't want government to have more information.
So, I wish some of you'd just tell me. Say you're head of TSA, or head of Homeland Security, or you're the President or the Pope. How do you protect our planes while satisfying all those complains?
Oct 2nd, 2006, 10:39 AM
#20
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 19,881
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Most of the "security" suggestions to date have more to do with looking as if you are doing something rather than doing something.
Suggesting something that a determined 3 year old could think their way round isn't helping & in many cases (let's search all the Arab looking folk) all it's done is increase resentment & give the terrorists proof that the US "hates" Muslims.
Face it you are p*ssed off because I threw your own pathetic argument back at you.
Suggesting something that a determined 3 year old could think their way round isn't helping & in many cases (let's search all the Arab looking folk) all it's done is increase resentment & give the terrorists proof that the US "hates" Muslims.
Face it you are p*ssed off because I threw your own pathetic argument back at you.
