Jump to content
Unexplained Mysteries uses cookies. By using the site you consent to our use of cookies as per our Cookie Policy.
Close X
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -
UM-Bot

UFO dossier covered up using EU legislation

22 posts in this topic

Recommended Posts

 
The Russian Hare

Does not seem to make sense to me. Maybe someone just like rules.

Quote

"Occurrence information can only be used for the purpose of maintaining or improving aviation safety, and the release of occurrence information to the general public or the media, including in response to Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests, is not permitted," the law states.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14

Occurrence information includes things other than UFOs and the reason there is a rule like this is because if you want your aircrew to report things so you can improve safety then you must protect them from public curiosity, humiliation and/or lawsuits.   A pilot is NOT going to report something in the sky if he or she knows that some UFO believer will be publishing their name in a bookr knowcking n their door and harassing their family.  A great example of what these believers can do is the harassment Bart Sibrel inflicted upon Buzz Aldrin.

  • Like 6

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
keithisco

Data protection laws would demand that no identifying characteristics (Such as Flight No., Time of Flight, Name/s of Pilot or Co-Pilot, or departure and arrival airport) are released without the express permission of those making the report. By the time such details are redacted you wouldnt get much information anyway. There is no smoking gun here

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Lilly
35 minutes ago, Merc14 said:

..  A great example of what these believers can do is the harassment Bart Sibrel inflicted upon Buzz Aldrin.

Yeah, but you have to admit the sock in the jaw that Buzz gave to Bart was utterly 'priceless'.

  • Like 4

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
BeastieRunner
46 minutes ago, keithisco said:

Data protection laws would demand that no identifying characteristics (Such as Flight No., Time of Flight, Name/s of Pilot or Co-Pilot, or departure and arrival airport) are released without the express permission of those making the report. By the time such details are redacted you wouldnt get much information anyway. There is no smoking gun here

A little logic goes a long way.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
15 minutes ago, Lilly said:

Yeah, but you have to admit the sock in the jaw that Buzz gave to Bart was utterly 'priceless'.

Love watching that and the subsequent lawsuit was dismissed outright by the judge so Sibrel didn't even get a day in court.  No one deserved a punch in the jaw more than Sibrel

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
paperdyer

Since the UK pulled out of the EU, how can they hide behind an EU rule?

If the pilot and the airline  info is redacted, it wouldn't be that easy to find out the pilot's name would it?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
47 minutes ago, paperdyer said:

Since the UK pulled out of the EU, how can they hide behind an EU rule?

If the pilot and the airline  info is redacted, it wouldn't be that easy to find out the pilot's name would it?

They haven't pulled out of the EU yet, they are still a member.    Also, if the information was given with an understanding it would be protected information they can hardly go back on that now just because they may leave the EU.  Lastly, if an aircrew member wants to go public with a sighting I know of no rules limiting them from doing so yet few ever do and there must be a reason for that, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The Russian Hare

Is privacy the concern if personal information is always redacted as the article says?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
2 hours ago, The Russian Hare said:

Is privacy the concern if personal information is always redacted as the article says?

Give someone the time altitude, position and heading and they can use software to find the aircraft that was there and form there the aircrew's name.   Like I said, if the aircrew want top go public there is no law preventing them from doing so, the fact that they rarely do speaks volumes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
godnodog
On 7/6/2017 at 8:06 PM, paperdyer said:

Since the UK pulled out of the EU, how can they hide behind an EU rule?

If the pilot and the airline  info is redacted, it wouldn't be that easy to find out the pilot's name would it?

When did the UK leave the EU? Cause last time I checked they´re still part of it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kartikg

if the data is made public, it might hurt the profits of airlines at least in the short term . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kartikg

if the data is made public, it might hurt the profits of airlines at least in the short term . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
5 hours ago, kartikg said:

if the data is made public, it might hurt the profits of airlines at least in the short term . 

I have to ask, who would choose not to fly because some airline pilot saw a UFO?  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
On 25/08/2017 at 1:14 PM, Merc14 said:

I have to ask, who would choose not to fly because some airline pilot saw a UFO?  

Given the huge number of bona fide abduction cases proved each year I'm in awe of your confidence.

No way I'd risk it, odds must be 25% or greater surely?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Merc14
1 hour ago, I'mConvinced said:

Given the huge number of bona fide abduction cases proved each year I'm in awe of your confidence.

No way I'd risk it, odds must be 25% or greater surely?

:D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Ozymandias

Aw jeez, not another coverup! I tell ya, I'm so glad these sleuths expose all this stuff 'cos we're all just sleepwalking through what's really going on. :sleepy:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kartikg
On Friday, August 25, 2017 at 5:44 PM, Merc14 said:

I have to ask, who would choose not to fly because some airline pilot saw a UFO?  

Not if just one or two incidents, but if a bunch of documents are released suddenly the confidence in that airline will drop with different people for different reasons  . average people and investors would think that there are incompetent or tired pilots who are seeing things  and the other bunch of people who will scare others  the stock price would dip for a few days . 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
On 9/1/2017 at 9:35 PM, I'mConvinced said:

Given the huge number of bona fide abduction cases proved each year I'm in awe of your confidence.

No way I'd risk it, odds must be 25% or greater surely?

"Bona fide abduction cases" ? 

"Proved" ? 

Hmmm.... perhaps not ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'mConvinced
2 hours ago, RoofGardener said:

"Bona fide abduction cases" ? 

"Proved" ? 

Hmmm.... perhaps not ? 

Sarcasm sometimes doesn't translate I guess. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
RoofGardener
Just now, I'mConvinced said:

Sarcasm sometimes doesn't translate I guess. 

 

Sorry.. sorry.. I posted prior to having my first cup of tea of the morning ! :D 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.