सभी
← Back to Squawk list
Senators Request Privacy Protection for GA
In an effort to protect the privacy of general aviation pilots across the country, 26 Senators wrote Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood today opposing a recent proposal by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) to eliminate current privacy protections for general aviation aircraft and pilots. (www.airportbusiness.com) और अधिक...President Obama is in favor of this Aug.2nd release of information, as he claims it has to do with "transparency in government." However, private citizens are not in the government. Maybe we should all track the whereabouts of Congress ... how would they feel about that?
INCREMENTALISM. . . . .
A mollified, deluded Public; helots carefully allowed to remain in their..
'Comfort' zones. Ostrichism. " It can't happen here. "
Smile.
Take your medication of choice. But shun Tobacco,and Alcohol; Bad.
Firearms; BAD. Stick with big Pharma. GOOOD! "Diversity" "Sensitivity" goood. Rehabilitation; goood. Real men, Cry. goood; beautiful.
Turn yourself in early, and you won't be punished. Confess."Hate"speech; punishable.
Google "The Frankfurt School".
Cheers,lads. And, lassies.
A mollified, deluded Public; helots carefully allowed to remain in their..
'Comfort' zones. Ostrichism. " It can't happen here. "
Smile.
Take your medication of choice. But shun Tobacco,and Alcohol; Bad.
Firearms; BAD. Stick with big Pharma. GOOOD! "Diversity" "Sensitivity" goood. Rehabilitation; goood. Real men, Cry. goood; beautiful.
Turn yourself in early, and you won't be punished. Confess."Hate"speech; punishable.
Google "The Frankfurt School".
Cheers,lads. And, lassies.
Airlines are not excluded from this blockage. If an aircraft or company is involved with 'for hire' transfer of passengers, no matter the number, then they should also comply with the same regulations or policies as the big guys --this could be one or five hundred paying passengers. The FAA clearly expresses this distinction by the levels of licenses for pilots. The same holds true for maritime regulations.
I don't imagine that those specializing in corporate espionage have been utterly stumped because tail numbers have been blocked, and if I recall blocking was introduced not too long after shareholders of several companies kicked up a fuss about the company Gulfstreams weekending at Martha's Vineyard etc too many times. And how many of the blocked aircraft have tail numbers and/or color schemes characteristic of their owners? What's next, a new law making it illegal to look at them because their movements are supposed to be a secret?
The point in this whole arguement is not whether anyone "needs" to have the activity of ther aircraft blocked or not, it's whether they have the RIGHT to DECIDE to have it blocked or not. All the rest is irrelevant. The gonvernment has now decided that no, you don't have that right based on some silly precept about the use of federal ATC facilities and services. At the same time, they MANDATE that you use these facilities if you are within given distances of airports or above certain altitudes, including the use of transponders. Therefore there is no possibility of privacy for those who use those facilities. Nobody is advocating anonymity from the government. We all abide by the rules of the air, just like we abide by the rules of the road (more or less). Yet we have the RIGHT to have information about our travel on public highways to not be distributed to anybody who wants it for any reason or no reason. The same right should apply to the use of airspace. As an enthusiast, I LIKE to know when the Pepsi G-V is stopping by, or when Michelin's Falcons are coming and going, because I like to photograph aircarft. But do I have a RIGHT to this information? - No I do not!