US government demands air travellers' personal data
Feb 26th 2003, 12:54 am
#46
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
Marie Lewis wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> In article , Emilia
> writes
>>Marie Lewis wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>> There it is then. I shall certainly never go back to the USA while
>>> this is in force.
>>With all due respect, you are starting to sound like all those who
>>have been cancelling trips to Europe.
> Not at all: it is not fear that would prevent my returning. It is
> unwarrantable interference in my freedom. I shall happily fly, even
> if there is a war, to France and other European countries.
>
> And before anyone starts on "we should accept everything the US
> government cares to impose so that we can be safe" why doesn't any
> other country require open suitcases and such details of our lives?
> Have US airports no efficient x-ray machines?
I'm not convinced. You jump all over both those who merely ask for the
reassurance of others on whether to travel or not and those who suggest
to boycott. So it seems to me a bit more than that what you say.
I completely understand your point about the new actions and policies of
the US government. However you are saying "I can boycott the US because
I don't like the policies of the US government but you can't boycott
France because you don't like the policies of the French government".
The US has always recieved these details so it is not new. What is new is
that they want it before you come and they want the airline to obtain it
for them.
And "they" can ask for your suitcase to be unlocked doesn't mean they are
going to get it. I know of noone who has left their suitcase open
because of the news article we all read here. And I for one have never
locked my suitcase. I can never find that stupid little key.
Anyway, the US is not the only government with stupid policies or press
releases.
news:[email protected]:
> In article , Emilia
> writes
>>Marie Lewis wrote in
>>news:[email protected]:
>>> There it is then. I shall certainly never go back to the USA while
>>> this is in force.
>>With all due respect, you are starting to sound like all those who
>>have been cancelling trips to Europe.
> Not at all: it is not fear that would prevent my returning. It is
> unwarrantable interference in my freedom. I shall happily fly, even
> if there is a war, to France and other European countries.
>
> And before anyone starts on "we should accept everything the US
> government cares to impose so that we can be safe" why doesn't any
> other country require open suitcases and such details of our lives?
> Have US airports no efficient x-ray machines?
I'm not convinced. You jump all over both those who merely ask for the
reassurance of others on whether to travel or not and those who suggest
to boycott. So it seems to me a bit more than that what you say.
I completely understand your point about the new actions and policies of
the US government. However you are saying "I can boycott the US because
I don't like the policies of the US government but you can't boycott
France because you don't like the policies of the French government".
The US has always recieved these details so it is not new. What is new is
that they want it before you come and they want the airline to obtain it
for them.
And "they" can ask for your suitcase to be unlocked doesn't mean they are
going to get it. I know of noone who has left their suitcase open
because of the news article we all read here. And I for one have never
locked my suitcase. I can never find that stupid little key.
Anyway, the US is not the only government with stupid policies or press
releases.
Feb 26th 2003, 12:55 am
#47
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
"Gregory Morrow" wrote in
news:R_%[email protected]:
>
> Emilia wrote:
>
>
>> Marie Lewis wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>> > There it is then. I shall certainly never go back to the USA while
>> > this is in force.
>> With all due respect, you are starting to sound like all those who
>> have been cancelling trips to Europe.
>
> Marie is infamous on rec.travel.europe for being a rabid "America
> Hater".....
Interestingly I "know" her on a different group and she is nothing of the
kind, hence my confusion.
news:R_%[email protected]:
>
> Emilia wrote:
>
>
>> Marie Lewis wrote in
>> news:[email protected]:
>> > There it is then. I shall certainly never go back to the USA while
>> > this is in force.
>> With all due respect, you are starting to sound like all those who
>> have been cancelling trips to Europe.
>
> Marie is infamous on rec.travel.europe for being a rabid "America
> Hater".....
Interestingly I "know" her on a different group and she is nothing of the
kind, hence my confusion.
Feb 26th 2003, 12:58 am
#48
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
If there's one thing that really bothers me is that anybody who disagrees
with US foreign policy, or says anything whatsoever that doesn't heap praise
on the US government, is labelled as anti-american.
The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US expects
all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before the United
Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the American government's
views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to
represent all countries not just one.
"Gregory Morrow" wrote in message
news:R_%[email protected]...
> Emilia wrote:
> > Marie Lewis wrote in
> > news:[email protected]:
> >
> > > There it is then. I shall certainly never go back to the USA while
this
> > > is in force.
> >
> > With all due respect, you are starting to sound like all those who have
> > been cancelling trips to Europe.
> Marie is infamous on rec.travel.europe for being a rabid "America
> Hater".....
> --
> Best
> Greg
with US foreign policy, or says anything whatsoever that doesn't heap praise
on the US government, is labelled as anti-american.
The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US expects
all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before the United
Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the American government's
views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to
represent all countries not just one.
"Gregory Morrow" wrote in message
news:R_%[email protected]...
> Emilia wrote:
> > Marie Lewis wrote in
> > news:[email protected]:
> >
> > > There it is then. I shall certainly never go back to the USA while
this
> > > is in force.
> >
> > With all due respect, you are starting to sound like all those who have
> > been cancelling trips to Europe.
> Marie is infamous on rec.travel.europe for being a rabid "America
> Hater".....
> --
> Best
> Greg
Feb 26th 2003, 4:05 am
#49
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
In article , Emilia
writes
>I completely understand your point about the new actions and policies of
>the US government. However you are saying "I can boycott the US because
>I don't like the policies of the US government but you can't boycott
>France because you don't like the policies of the French government".
Not at all. You may boycott whomsoever you wish.
--
Marie Lewis
writes
>I completely understand your point about the new actions and policies of
>the US government. However you are saying "I can boycott the US because
>I don't like the policies of the US government but you can't boycott
>France because you don't like the policies of the French government".
Not at all. You may boycott whomsoever you wish.
--
Marie Lewis
Feb 26th 2003, 4:07 am
#50
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
In article , ellie
writes
>When I used to travel frequently Boston->London->Dublin back in the
>late 80's and early 90's, my suitcase and handbag were often opened and
>inspected at Heathrow.
Indeed, but in your presence. What we are talking about here is
trusting baggage handlers not to steal anything.
As this is not possible. British travel insurers are extremely unlikely
to insure that luggage. that is my reason. Simple.
I would have no objection to having my luggage searched in front of me.
None at all.
--
Marie Lewis
writes
>When I used to travel frequently Boston->London->Dublin back in the
>late 80's and early 90's, my suitcase and handbag were often opened and
>inspected at Heathrow.
Indeed, but in your presence. What we are talking about here is
trusting baggage handlers not to steal anything.
As this is not possible. British travel insurers are extremely unlikely
to insure that luggage. that is my reason. Simple.
I would have no objection to having my luggage searched in front of me.
None at all.
--
Marie Lewis
Feb 26th 2003, 4:07 am
#51
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
In article , Emilia
writes
>"Gregory Morrow" wrote in
>news:R_%[email protected]:
>> Marie is infamous on rec.travel.europe for being a rabid "America
>> Hater".....
>Interestingly I "know" her on a different group and she is nothing of the
>kind, hence my confusion.
I am certainly not an America-hater. We usually spend at least a month
there every year, visiting friends and relations and we love it.
I am, however, a "present-American-government-hater."
--
Marie Lewis
writes
>"Gregory Morrow" wrote in
>news:R_%[email protected]:
>> Marie is infamous on rec.travel.europe for being a rabid "America
>> Hater".....
>Interestingly I "know" her on a different group and she is nothing of the
>kind, hence my confusion.
I am certainly not an America-hater. We usually spend at least a month
there every year, visiting friends and relations and we love it.
I am, however, a "present-American-government-hater."
--
Marie Lewis
Feb 26th 2003, 7:38 am
#52
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
ellie wrote:
> When I used to travel frequently Boston->London->Dublin back in the late
> 80's and early 90's, my suitcase and handbag were often opened and
> inspected at Heathrow.
I've been to a fair number of airports, and without a doubt the London ones
stand out as having the most hostile and intrusive immigration and customs
people. It's the only place I've seen them reduce people to tears on a
regular basis, and the only place I've had to sit for half an hour while
customs officers read through andf discussed all the personal letters I was
carrying (having accumulated a fair number at Poste Restante along a 6-month
trip) from my girlfriend, parents, and others.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
> When I used to travel frequently Boston->London->Dublin back in the late
> 80's and early 90's, my suitcase and handbag were often opened and
> inspected at Heathrow.
I've been to a fair number of airports, and without a doubt the London ones
stand out as having the most hostile and intrusive immigration and customs
people. It's the only place I've seen them reduce people to tears on a
regular basis, and the only place I've had to sit for half an hour while
customs officers read through andf discussed all the personal letters I was
carrying (having accumulated a fair number at Poste Restante along a 6-month
trip) from my girlfriend, parents, and others.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
Feb 26th 2003, 7:41 am
#53
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
Tony wrote:
> The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US expects
> all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before the United
> Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the American government's
> views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to
> represent all countries not just one.
More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government, then it
is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's judgment is wrong and
the Bush administration is invariably correct.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
> The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US expects
> all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before the United
> Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the American government's
> views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to
> represent all countries not just one.
More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government, then it
is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's judgment is wrong and
the Bush administration is invariably correct.
miguel
--
Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
Feb 26th 2003, 7:52 am
#54
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
le Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:41:59 GMT, dans l'article , Miguel Cruz a dit ...
>> The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US
>> expects all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before
>> the United Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the
>> American government's views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile".
>> The UN is there to represent all countries not just one.
> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government, then
> it is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's judgment is
> wrong and the Bush administration is invariably correct.
*sigh*
Why aren't there more people like you and Evelyn in the US, Miguel ..? :-(
--
Desmond Coughlan
desmond @ zeouane.org
http: // www . zeouane . org
>> The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US
>> expects all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before
>> the United Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the
>> American government's views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile".
>> The UN is there to represent all countries not just one.
> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government, then
> it is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's judgment is
> wrong and the Bush administration is invariably correct.
*sigh*
Why aren't there more people like you and Evelyn in the US, Miguel ..? :-(
--
Desmond Coughlan
desmond @ zeouane.org
http: // www . zeouane . org
Feb 26th 2003, 8:06 am
#55
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
Desmond Coughlan wrote in
news:[email protected]:
> le Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:41:59 GMT, dans l'article
> , Miguel Cruz
> a dit ...
>
>>> The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US
>>> expects all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts
>>> before the United Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question
>>> the American government's views are labelled as "unfriendly" or
>>> "hostile". The UN is there to represent all countries not just one.
>
>> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government,
>> then it is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's
>> judgment is wrong and the Bush administration is invariably correct.
>
> *sigh*
>
> Why aren't there more people like you and Evelyn in the US, Miguel ..?
> :-(
>
Because they left?
news:[email protected]:
> le Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:41:59 GMT, dans l'article
> , Miguel Cruz
> a dit ...
>
>>> The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US
>>> expects all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts
>>> before the United Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question
>>> the American government's views are labelled as "unfriendly" or
>>> "hostile". The UN is there to represent all countries not just one.
>
>> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government,
>> then it is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's
>> judgment is wrong and the Bush administration is invariably correct.
>
> *sigh*
>
> Why aren't there more people like you and Evelyn in the US, Miguel ..?
> :-(
>
Because they left?
Feb 26th 2003, 8:08 am
#56
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
In article ,
[email protected] (Miguel Cruz) wrote:
> Tony wrote:
> > The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US expects
> > all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before the United
> > Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the American government's
> > views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to
> > represent all countries not just one.
>
> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government, then it
> is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's judgment is wrong and
> the Bush administration is invariably correct.
In this specific case, 1441 is written to avoid that.
Specifically, how can France now circulate a memorandum that calls for a
piece by piece disarmament of Iraq when they previously signed 1441 that
calls for the butcher to disarm HIMSELF and only to be verified by the
UN.
The chief UN inspector has consistently said that Iraq has yet to
fundamentally accept disarmament.
Is the "serious consequence' in 1441 yet another UN resolution ?
jay
Wed, Feb 26, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
> miguel
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
[email protected] (Miguel Cruz) wrote:
> Tony wrote:
> > The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US expects
> > all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before the United
> > Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the American government's
> > views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to
> > represent all countries not just one.
>
> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government, then it
> is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's judgment is wrong and
> the Bush administration is invariably correct.
In this specific case, 1441 is written to avoid that.
Specifically, how can France now circulate a memorandum that calls for a
piece by piece disarmament of Iraq when they previously signed 1441 that
calls for the butcher to disarm HIMSELF and only to be verified by the
UN.
The chief UN inspector has consistently said that Iraq has yet to
fundamentally accept disarmament.
Is the "serious consequence' in 1441 yet another UN resolution ?
jay
Wed, Feb 26, 2003
mailto:[email protected]
>
> miguel
--
Legend insists that as he finished his abject...
Galileo muttered under his breath: "Nevertheless, it does move."
Feb 26th 2003, 8:28 am
#57
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
On 26 Feb 2003 22:06:45 +0100, Emilia wrote:
>Because they left?
We (spouse and I) got a shock last week. We've been saying to each
other since, oh, around November 2000, that if things got too bad we
could always move to Vancouver. We're about to retire and it turns out
that Americans can't do that in Canada (at least without qualifying as
an "investor.")
So, I guess we have to stick around and vote twice each next election.
;-).
>Because they left?
We (spouse and I) got a shock last week. We've been saying to each
other since, oh, around November 2000, that if things got too bad we
could always move to Vancouver. We're about to retire and it turns out
that Americans can't do that in Canada (at least without qualifying as
an "investor.")
So, I guess we have to stick around and vote twice each next election.
;-).
Feb 26th 2003, 9:17 am
#58
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
"Miguel Cruz" wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Tony wrote:
> > The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US
expects
> > all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before the
United
> > Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the American
government's
> > views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to
> > represent all countries not just one.
> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government, then it
> is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's judgment is wrong
and
> the Bush administration is invariably correct.
> miguel
> --
> Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
I wonder where these false conclusions came from. Very few, if any, said
any of the above. Are you guys going to keep making stuff up?
news:[email protected]...
> Tony wrote:
> > The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US
expects
> > all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts before the
United
> > Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question the American
government's
> > views are labelled as "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to
> > represent all countries not just one.
> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government, then it
> is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's judgment is wrong
and
> the Bush administration is invariably correct.
> miguel
> --
> Hit The Road! Photos and tales from around the world: http://travel.u.nu
I wonder where these false conclusions came from. Very few, if any, said
any of the above. Are you guys going to keep making stuff up?
Feb 26th 2003, 11:34 am
#59
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
Emilia wrote:
> Desmond Coughlan wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>
>>le Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:41:59 GMT, dans l'article
>>, Miguel Cruz
>> a dit ...
>>>>The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US
>>>>expects all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts
>>>>before the United Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question
>>>>the American government's views are labelled as "unfriendly" or
>>>>"hostile". The UN is there to represent all countries not just one.
>>>More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government,
>>>then it is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's
>>>judgment is wrong and the Bush administration is invariably correct.
>>*sigh*
>>Why aren't there more people like you and Evelyn in the US, Miguel ..?
>> :-(
>
>
> Because they left?
There are still some here. A million of us (according to the news)tied
up all the phone lines to the Senate and the White House today with an
anti-war call-in campaign.
> Desmond Coughlan wrote in
> news:[email protected]:
>
>
>>le Wed, 26 Feb 2003 20:41:59 GMT, dans l'article
>>, Miguel Cruz
>> a dit ...
>>>>The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the US
>>>>expects all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US puts
>>>>before the United Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to question
>>>>the American government's views are labelled as "unfriendly" or
>>>>"hostile". The UN is there to represent all countries not just one.
>>>More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government,
>>>then it is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's
>>>judgment is wrong and the Bush administration is invariably correct.
>>*sigh*
>>Why aren't there more people like you and Evelyn in the US, Miguel ..?
>> :-(
>
>
> Because they left?
There are still some here. A million of us (according to the news)tied
up all the phone lines to the Senate and the White House today with an
anti-war call-in campaign.
Feb 26th 2003, 11:53 am
#60
Guest
Posts: n/a
Re: US government demands air travellers' personal data
Go Fig wrote:
> In article ,
> [email protected] (Miguel Cruz) wrote:
>
>> Tony wrote:
>> > The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the
>> > US expects all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US
>> > puts before the United Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to
>> > question the American government's views are labelled as
>> > "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to represent all
>> > countries not just one.
>>
>> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government,
>> then it is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's
>> judgment is wrong and the Bush administration is invariably
>> correct.
>
> In this specific case, 1441 is written to avoid that.
>
> Specifically, how can France now circulate a memorandum that calls
> for a piece by piece disarmament of Iraq when they previously
> signed 1441 that calls for the butcher to disarm HIMSELF and only
> to be verified by the UN.
>
> The chief UN inspector has consistently said that Iraq has yet to
> fundamentally accept disarmament.
No fair, you cheated, you actually read the document.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Feb25.html
--
rk
> In article ,
> [email protected] (Miguel Cruz) wrote:
>
>> Tony wrote:
>> > The current anti-french sentiment stems from the fact that the
>> > US expects all countries to rubber-stamp any resolution the US
>> > puts before the United Nations. Any nation that has the nerve to
>> > question the American government's views are labelled as
>> > "unfriendly" or "hostile". The UN is there to represent all
>> > countries not just one.
>>
>> More importantly, if the UN fails to agree with the US government,
>> then it is "useless". Because, as we all know, everyone else's
>> judgment is wrong and the Bush administration is invariably
>> correct.
>
> In this specific case, 1441 is written to avoid that.
>
> Specifically, how can France now circulate a memorandum that calls
> for a piece by piece disarmament of Iraq when they previously
> signed 1441 that calls for the butcher to disarm HIMSELF and only
> to be verified by the UN.
>
> The chief UN inspector has consistently said that Iraq has yet to
> fundamentally accept disarmament.
No fair, you cheated, you actually read the document.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2003Feb25.html
--
rk
