Daily Archives: June 20, 2003

Jessica Lynch and Spin

This entry was posted in Iraq on by

Emma unexpectedly links to this Nicholas Kristoff NYT column (which will be pay to read in a week) and rightly tells us:

What’s amazing is that his story, if true, would be a thousand times better than the original one.

You can go to her place to read why she thinks this. She then goes on to say:

Instead, they played up to the imbecile jingoism of the hard right. Even Kristof seems to be getting tired of it, although he cannot bring himself, yet, to call it lying:

and the paragraph she quotes from Kristol does support this interpretation. I like, though, the way Kristoff put it earlier in his article:

Ms. Lynch is still a hero in my book, and it was unnecessary for officials to try to turn her into a Hollywood caricature. As a citizen, I deeply resent my government trying to spin me like a Ping-Pong ball.

He is still not quite calling it lying but what else can it be?

Europrotections

This entry was posted in Uncategorized on by

On Tuesday I complained about pending Eurostrictions. Today I’d like to give the EU some credit. Not a lot, but some. In the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights are a couple of articles that might make our Total Terrorist Information Act folks cringe

Article 7
Respect for private and family life

Everyone has the right to respect for his or her private and family life, home and communications.

Article 8
Protection of personal data

1. Everyone has the right to the protection of personal data concerning him or her.

2. Such data must be processed fairly for specified purposes and on the basis of the consent of the person concerned or some other legitimate basis laid down by law. Everyone has the right of access to data which has been collected concerning him or her, and the right to have it rectified.

3.Compliance with these rules shall be subject to control by an independent authority.

This looks pretty good. I give the EU credit for this.

How fragile such protections are, though, when modified with words like “or some other legitimate basis laid down by law.” This phrase contradicts the idea that Article 8.1 is a fundamental right and allows for its abrogration.

Thus we find Statewatch saying that the EU folks, maybe the above referenced independent authority, are “highly critical’ of arrangements being made to give private information to the US. A reading of the report itself suggests they have already buckled under and that it is a matter of how much data for how long not a flat out no.

Yea, they are critical but they are not adamant and when it comes to fundamental rights you must be adament.
Via Bespacific