Need to log travel plans before leaving UK
Discussion
angryS3owner said:
Can I say something that's probably not going to go down well, since when did terrorism become so scary... we never needed this stuff when the IRA were successfully killing a lot of people on a much more regular basis so what changed other than the government wanting to 'control' the population?
Terrorism only really became 'scary' when it gave the gorvernment an excuse to slowly remove all our civil liberties. I'll tell you right now, it's not the terrorists that scare me....The weird thing is, since the killings in Northern Ireland this week, lots of people have said (rightly) that it's important not to overreact and undermine all that has been achieved. Why is this not applied to Islamic terrorists who, at least in the UK, have actually done less damage than the IRA has done over the years.
Karl said:
paranha said:
So the airlines will log passport and Credit Card details and pass on to the govt.So any fine can be debited anytime the trustworthy govt wishes, and the info can be hacked by all the slime on the net.A well thoughtout govt scam as usual.
So the details will probably be stored in at least two places, probably triplicate, with the booking agency, the airline and Government.What with UK.gov being such leaders in data security we'll have nothing to worry about...
Criminals with access to that data will have everything they could possibly want. Passport, DOB, address, credit card details. They wont steel your ID, they'll become you!
It's a snip at £1.5bn though. Do we even have that in the coffers?
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1569414/90-...
Can someone explain how this will stop terrorists? "We'll not travel to London Osama, they'll fine us if we lie about our intentions"!
Edited by Engineer1 on Saturday 14th March 17:16
Sheets Tabuer said:
if you have nothing to hide......
Seriously though, I would rather live in a free country and take my chances with terrorists than a police state
As would most people who actually think with their minds and not the Daily Mail / Sun / Mirror / BBC*Seriously though, I would rather live in a free country and take my chances with terrorists than a police state
* Delete as applicable
Sheets Tabuer said:
if you have nothing to hide......
Seriously though, I would rather live in a free country and take my chances with terrorists than a police state
Seriously though, I would rather live in a free country and take my chances with terrorists than a police state
Thing is you aren't even really taking a chance, your odds of being involved in a terrorist attack are so small as to be almost irrelevant. Quite why this government thinks it needs to push terrorism out over and over again is beyond me.
It's either the pursuit of total control, or total incompetence.
-
Stuart
An old article, but still relevant.
Bruce_Schneier said:
I'd like everyone to take a deep breath and listen for a minute.
The point of terrorism is to cause terror, sometimes to further a political goal and sometimes out of sheer hatred. The people terrorists kill are not the targets; they are collateral damage. And blowing up planes, trains, markets or buses is not the goal; those are just tactics. The real targets of terrorism are the rest of us: the billions of us who are not killed but are terrorized because of the killing. The real point of terrorism is not the act itself, but our reaction to the act.
And we're doing exactly what the terrorists want.
We're all a little jumpy after the recent arrest of 23 terror suspects in Great Britain. The men were reportedly plotting a liquid-explosive attack on airplanes, and both the press and politicians have been trumpeting the story ever since.
In truth, it's doubtful that their plan would have succeeded; chemists have been debunking the idea since it became public. Certainly the suspects were a long way off from trying: None had bought airline tickets, and some didn't even have passports.
Regardless of the threat, from the would-be bombers' perspective, the explosives and planes were merely tactics. Their goal was to cause terror, and in that they've succeeded.
Imagine for a moment what would have happened if they had blown up 10 planes. There would be canceled flights, chaos at airports, bans on carry-on luggage, world leaders talking tough new security measures, political posturing and all sorts of false alarms as jittery people panicked. To a lesser degree, that's basically what's happening right now.
Our politicians help the terrorists every time they use fear as a campaign tactic. The press helps every time it writes scare stories about the plot and the threat. And if we're terrified, and we share that fear, we help. All of these actions intensify and repeat the terrorists' actions, and increase the effects of their terror.
(I am not saying that the politicians and press are terrorists, or that they share any of the blame for terrorist attacks. I'm not that stupid. But the subject of terrorism is more complex than it appears, and understanding its various causes and effects are vital for understanding how to best deal with it.)
The implausible plots and false alarms actually hurt us in two ways. Not only do they increase the level of fear, but they also waste time and resources that could be better spent fighting the real threats and increasing actual security. I'll bet the terrorists are laughing at us.
Another thought experiment: Imagine for a moment that the British government arrested the 23 suspects without fanfare. Imagine that the TSA and its European counterparts didn't engage in pointless airline-security measures like banning liquids. And imagine that the press didn't write about it endlessly, and that the politicians didn't use the event to remind us all how scared we should be. If we'd reacted that way, then the terrorists would have truly failed.
It's time we calm down and fight terror with antiterror. This does not mean that we simply roll over and accept terrorism. There are things our government can and should do to fight terrorism, most of them involving intelligence and investigation -- and not focusing on specific plots.
But our job is to remain steadfast in the face of terror, to refuse to be terrorized. Our job is to not panic every time two Muslims stand together checking their watches. There are approximately 1 billion Muslims in the world, a large percentage of them not Arab, and about 320 million Arabs in the Middle East, the overwhelming majority of them not terrorists. Our job is to think critically and rationally, and to ignore the cacophony of other interests trying to use terrorism to advance political careers or increase a television show's viewership.
The surest defense against terrorism is to refuse to be terrorized. Our job is to recognize that terrorism is just one of the risks we face, and not a particularly common one at that. And our job is to fight those politicians who use fear as an excuse to take away our liberties and promote security theater that wastes money and doesn't make us any safer.
The point of terrorism is to cause terror, sometimes to further a political goal and sometimes out of sheer hatred. The people terrorists kill are not the targets; they are collateral damage. And blowing up planes, trains, markets or buses is not the goal; those are just tactics. The real targets of terrorism are the rest of us: the billions of us who are not killed but are terrorized because of the killing. The real point of terrorism is not the act itself, but our reaction to the act.
And we're doing exactly what the terrorists want.
We're all a little jumpy after the recent arrest of 23 terror suspects in Great Britain. The men were reportedly plotting a liquid-explosive attack on airplanes, and both the press and politicians have been trumpeting the story ever since.
In truth, it's doubtful that their plan would have succeeded; chemists have been debunking the idea since it became public. Certainly the suspects were a long way off from trying: None had bought airline tickets, and some didn't even have passports.
Regardless of the threat, from the would-be bombers' perspective, the explosives and planes were merely tactics. Their goal was to cause terror, and in that they've succeeded.
Imagine for a moment what would have happened if they had blown up 10 planes. There would be canceled flights, chaos at airports, bans on carry-on luggage, world leaders talking tough new security measures, political posturing and all sorts of false alarms as jittery people panicked. To a lesser degree, that's basically what's happening right now.
Our politicians help the terrorists every time they use fear as a campaign tactic. The press helps every time it writes scare stories about the plot and the threat. And if we're terrified, and we share that fear, we help. All of these actions intensify and repeat the terrorists' actions, and increase the effects of their terror.
(I am not saying that the politicians and press are terrorists, or that they share any of the blame for terrorist attacks. I'm not that stupid. But the subject of terrorism is more complex than it appears, and understanding its various causes and effects are vital for understanding how to best deal with it.)
The implausible plots and false alarms actually hurt us in two ways. Not only do they increase the level of fear, but they also waste time and resources that could be better spent fighting the real threats and increasing actual security. I'll bet the terrorists are laughing at us.
Another thought experiment: Imagine for a moment that the British government arrested the 23 suspects without fanfare. Imagine that the TSA and its European counterparts didn't engage in pointless airline-security measures like banning liquids. And imagine that the press didn't write about it endlessly, and that the politicians didn't use the event to remind us all how scared we should be. If we'd reacted that way, then the terrorists would have truly failed.
It's time we calm down and fight terror with antiterror. This does not mean that we simply roll over and accept terrorism. There are things our government can and should do to fight terrorism, most of them involving intelligence and investigation -- and not focusing on specific plots.
But our job is to remain steadfast in the face of terror, to refuse to be terrorized. Our job is to not panic every time two Muslims stand together checking their watches. There are approximately 1 billion Muslims in the world, a large percentage of them not Arab, and about 320 million Arabs in the Middle East, the overwhelming majority of them not terrorists. Our job is to think critically and rationally, and to ignore the cacophony of other interests trying to use terrorism to advance political careers or increase a television show's viewership.
The surest defense against terrorism is to refuse to be terrorized. Our job is to recognize that terrorism is just one of the risks we face, and not a particularly common one at that. And our job is to fight those politicians who use fear as an excuse to take away our liberties and promote security theater that wastes money and doesn't make us any safer.
We've become a nation of sheep. HMG do what they like, and we meekly obey. We can't be arsed to vote, and think that complaining on the internet or a government sponsored petition is going to achieve something.
Application of the law has become mechanised, from a fine for a late tax return, to the arresting of a heckler as a terrorist, to controlling and taxing your movements.
Sooner or later, it will end in tears.
Application of the law has become mechanised, from a fine for a late tax return, to the arresting of a heckler as a terrorist, to controlling and taxing your movements.
Sooner or later, it will end in tears.
The annoying thing is, I can sort of imagine it. You're Prime Minister, it's taken you 30 years and no end of backstabbing and shennanigans to get there, you get into office, outline some good earnest proposals for improving public services, reducing waste and improving the economy, and it's all shot to pieces by the press, the public, the opposition and those in your own party who want your job.
Then you find this bottomless well of support. The mythical enemy who must be crushed at all costs. You take some "tough action" and the civil liberties people get annoyed, making you even more popular with the Daily Mail. The opinion polls turn around, the party is behind you, even the opposition give their support to your hard line policies.
Soon enough you're flying around the world having high level meetings, and getting late night phone calls from MI6. The mundane problems of failing public services, rising unemployment and government debt are all forgotten as you crusade against the invisible enemy, and quoting Churchill.
It's really a no brainer for the ambitious politician. There just aren't enough clever people to vote against you, so long as you bang the drum loud enough.
Or am I just cynical?
Then you find this bottomless well of support. The mythical enemy who must be crushed at all costs. You take some "tough action" and the civil liberties people get annoyed, making you even more popular with the Daily Mail. The opinion polls turn around, the party is behind you, even the opposition give their support to your hard line policies.
Soon enough you're flying around the world having high level meetings, and getting late night phone calls from MI6. The mundane problems of failing public services, rising unemployment and government debt are all forgotten as you crusade against the invisible enemy, and quoting Churchill.
It's really a no brainer for the ambitious politician. There just aren't enough clever people to vote against you, so long as you bang the drum loud enough.
Or am I just cynical?
As I pointed out on a Ryanair thread the other week (and nobody gave a feck), it's already happening.
Try and book a flight UK to Europe.
You HAVE to include your document details: document serial number, D.O.B, place of issue, nationality, expiry and start date.
Just one detail incorrect and you don't fly.
s
Try and book a flight UK to Europe.
You HAVE to include your document details: document serial number, D.O.B, place of issue, nationality, expiry and start date.
Just one detail incorrect and you don't fly.
sAJS- said:
The weird thing is, since the killings in Northern Ireland this week, lots of people have said (rightly) that it's important not to overreact and undermine all that has been achieved. Why is this not applied to Islamic terrorists who, at least in the UK, have actually done less damage than the IRA has done over the years.
Not weird at all....Next weekend I will getting off a ferry with no travel plans whatsoever, like we often do - how would that work?
What is to stop me giving my cousin's name and address in Switzerland, going to Belgium instead and then coming home from there? How are they going to know where I have been?
I think Gordon Clown has not got a clue how to get us out of the mess he has got us into and wants to be voted out..................and making good progress I would say.
What is to stop me giving my cousin's name and address in Switzerland, going to Belgium instead and then coming home from there? How are they going to know where I have been?
I think Gordon Clown has not got a clue how to get us out of the mess he has got us into and wants to be voted out..................and making good progress I would say.
Its a good job you lot are moaning, it worked wonders with ID cards 
http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/press-2008-08-01.as...
http://www.ips.gov.uk/identity/press-2008-08-01.as...
"Ferry firms and Eurostar - who, unlike airlines, do not gather such detailed passenger information - have also raised concerns about the impact on passengers and warned the plans may not even be legal under EU law.
Any legals know to what they're refering?
Would it be similar to the fingerprint thing they tried in LHR T5?
Any legals know to what they're refering?
Would it be similar to the fingerprint thing they tried in LHR T5?
AJS- said:
The annoying thing is, I can sort of imagine it. You're Prime Minister, it's taken you 30 years and no end of backstabbing and shennanigans to get there, you get into office, outline some good earnest proposals for improving public services, reducing waste and improving the economy, and it's all shot to pieces by the press, the public, the opposition and those in your own party who want your job.
Then you find this bottomless well of support. The mythical enemy who must be crushed at all costs. You take some "tough action" and the civil liberties people get annoyed, making you even more popular with the Daily Mail. The opinion polls turn around, the party is behind you, even the opposition give their support to your hard line policies.
Soon enough you're flying around the world having high level meetings, and getting late night phone calls from MI6. The mundane problems of failing public services, rising unemployment and government debt are all forgotten as you crusade against the invisible enemy, and quoting Churchill.
It's really a no brainer for the ambitious politician. There just aren't enough clever people to vote against you, so long as you bang the drum loud enough.
Or am I just cynical?
Mail? Telegraph? Its the Sun what won it!Then you find this bottomless well of support. The mythical enemy who must be crushed at all costs. You take some "tough action" and the civil liberties people get annoyed, making you even more popular with the Daily Mail. The opinion polls turn around, the party is behind you, even the opposition give their support to your hard line policies.
Soon enough you're flying around the world having high level meetings, and getting late night phone calls from MI6. The mundane problems of failing public services, rising unemployment and government debt are all forgotten as you crusade against the invisible enemy, and quoting Churchill.
It's really a no brainer for the ambitious politician. There just aren't enough clever people to vote against you, so long as you bang the drum loud enough.
Or am I just cynical?
Being an incompetent loser doesn't exactly help our Gord much, either.
blueyes said:
"Ferry firms and Eurostar - who, unlike airlines, do not gather such detailed passenger information - have also raised concerns about the impact on passengers and warned the plans may not even be legal under EU law.
Any legals know to what they're refering?
Would it be similar to the fingerprint thing they tried in LHR T5?
Not a legal, but suspect they are referring to Human Rights laws regarding privacy and the EU law regarding free, unmolested travel throughout Europe.Any legals know to what they're refering?
Would it be similar to the fingerprint thing they tried in LHR T5?
No idea whether what they are saying is legitimate though.
Would prob need to go to ECHR to find out.
Gassing Station | Holidays & Travel | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff