Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Perhaps the tinfoil hat people are right...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Perhaps the tinfoil hat people are right...

    Looks like I won't be going to the USA anytime soon.

    From here.

    Alarm at US right to highly personal data

    Religion and sex life among passenger details to be passed on to officials

    Jamie Doward, home affairs editor
    Sunday July 22, 2007
    Observer

    Highly sensitive information about the religious beliefs, political opinions and even the sex life of Britons travelling to the United States is to be made available to US authorities when the European Commission agrees to a new system of checking passengers.

    The EC is in the final stages of agreeing a new Passenger Name Record system with the US which will allow American officials to access detailed biographical information about passengers entering international airports.

    The information sharing system with the US Department of Homeland Security, which updates the previous three-year-old system, is designed to tackle terrorism but civil liberty groups warn it will have serious consequences for European passengers. And it has emerged that both the European parliament and the European data protection supervisor are alarmed at the plan.

    In a strongly worded document drawn up in response to the plan that will affect the 4 million-plus Britons who travel to the US every year, the EU parliament said it 'notes with concern that sensitive data (ie personal data revealing racial or ethnic origin, political opinions, religious or philosophical beliefs, trade union membership, and data concerning the health or sex life of individuals) will be made available to the DHS and that these data may be used by the DHS in exceptional cases'.

    Under the new agreement, which goes live at the end of this month, the US will be able to hold the records of European passengers for 15 years compared with the current three year limit. The EU parliament said it was concerned the data would lead to 'a significant risk of massive profiling and data mining, which is incompatible with basic European principles and is a practice still under discussion in the US congress.'

    Peter Hustinx, the European Data Protection Supervisor, has written to the EC expressing his 'grave concern' at the plan, which he describes as 'without legal precedent' and one that puts 'European data protection rights at risk'.

    Hustinx warns: 'Data on EU citizens will be readily accessible to a broad range of US agencies and there is no limitation to what US authorities are allowed to do with the data.'

    He expresses concern about 'the absence of a robust legal mechanism that enables EU citizens to challenge misuse of their personal information'.

    Hustinx concludes: 'I have serious doubts whether the outcome of these negotiations will be fully compatible with European fundamental rights, which both the Council and the Commission have stated are non negotiable.'

    The new agreement will see US authorities gain access to detailed passenger information, from credit card details to home addresses and even what sort of food may have been ordered before a flight. In addition, US authorities will be free to add other information they have obtained about a passenger, leading to concerns about how the information will be shared.

    It has emerged that neither Hustinx nor the European parliament were aware of the final draft of the plan.

    'If you are going to have this kind of agreement it should involve parliament and the data protection supervisor,' said Tony Bunyan of Statewatch, the civil liberties organisation that campaigns against excessive surveillance.

    He warned that under the new system the data will be shared with numerous US agencies. 'The data protection supervisor and the European parliament are angry that they were not consulted,' Bunyan said. 'But they are also angry with a number of elements of the plan such as giving the US the absolute right to pass the data on to third parties.'

    Simon Davies, director of Privacy International, another group that campaigns against state surveillance, said the new agreement gave huge powers to the US authorities. 'We have no guarantee about how this data will be used,' Davies said.

    A spokeswoman for the Information Commissioner's Office in England and Wales said it would be discussing the matter with European counterparts shortly. 'We are working with the European Data Protection Supervisor and our other EU data protection colleagues to come to a joint opinion on the level of data protection set out in the final agreement,' the spokeswoman said.
    What business of the US national security agency is how often I screw my wife?

    On the other hand, I'm sure I could bore a customs officer to death if they asked me about my philosophical beliefs.

    Officer: "Excuse me sir, what are your philosophical beliefs?"

    Agathon: "I am a strong believer in Quine's repudiation of the Analytic/Synthetic distinction, and Wittgenstein's normative analysis of linguistic performance. Metaphysically speaking, I am a strong Platonic realist, with sympathy for Aristotle's categorical analysis of being..."

    Attractive female officer: "Sir, what are your sexual proclivities?"

    Agathon: "I have a thing for women in uniform, and I am prepared to prove this to the United States Government by bending you over this table and giving you the time of your life."

    This is some serious Orwellian ****.
    Only feebs vote.

  • #2
    I thought you were American?

    Comment


    • #3
      Aggie, to give the info to the US they have to already have it. You're looking in the wrong place for the problem.

      Comment


      • #4
        He's a kiwi-canuck. or some variety of that combination.

        If US customs wants to read though the details of my sex life, they'd better have the time and officers to spare.
        Exult in your existence, because that very process has blundered unwittingly on its own negation. Only a small, local negation, to be sure: only one species, and only a minority of that species; but there lies hope. [...] Stand tall, Bipedal Ape. The shark may outswim you, the cheetah outrun you, the swift outfly you, the capuchin outclimb you, the elephant outpower you, the redwood outlast you. But you have the biggest gifts of all: the gift of understanding the ruthlessly cruel process that gave us all existence [and the] gift of revulsion against its implications.
        -Richard Dawkins

        Comment


        • #5
          Alternative

          US govt official "we're trying to determine if this guy belongs on a special watch list when he comes over. Abu Omar, was he involved in the Finsbury Park Mosque?

          UK official "We know, but we can't tell you"

          "Does he support groups sympathetic to Al Qaeeda?"

          "We know, but we can't tell you"

          "Does he subscribe to the philosophy and beliefs of Sayed Qutb?"

          "We know, but we can't tell you"

          "He was born in Pakistan, is he Pashtun, a Punjabi, etc, etc"

          "We know, but we can't tell you"
          "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by Kuciwalker
            Aggie, to give the info to the US they have to already have it. You're looking in the wrong place for the problem.
            Not really.

            I dislike the fact that the government of the place I live would keep a file on me that I cannot see.

            I further dislike that they would share this information with some other government. Some of this is no doubt census information, and who knows whether it might include private medical records.

            I also dislike the idea that I should have to answer personal questions like that merely to enter a country. It is absolutely none of their business whether I am a foot fetishist or S&M freak (I'm neither). It's also none of their business who I voted for.

            I have no problem with US immigration taking my fingerprint or scanning my retina, because, as was explained to me, it is used to tie me to the passport I was using, to stop someone else using it if it were stolen. Some of this other stuff is out of order.
            Only feebs vote.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by lord of the mark
              Alternative

              US govt official "we're trying to determine if this guy belongs on a special watch list when he comes over. Abu Omar, was he involved in the Finsbury Park Mosque?

              UK official "We know, but we can't tell you"

              "Does he support groups sympathetic to Al Qaeeda?"

              "We know, but we can't tell you"

              "Does he subscribe to the philosophy and beliefs of Sayed Qutb?"

              "We know, but we can't tell you"

              "He was born in Pakistan, is he Pashtun, a Punjabi, etc, etc"

              "We know, but we can't tell you"
              rubbish
              Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind- bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.
              Douglas Adams (Influential author)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by lord of the mark
                Alternative

                US govt official "we're trying to determine if this guy belongs on a special watch list when he comes over. Abu Omar, was he involved in the Finsbury Park Mosque?

                UK official "We know, but we can't tell you"

                "Does he support groups sympathetic to Al Qaeeda?"

                "We know, but we can't tell you"

                "Does he subscribe to the philosophy and beliefs of Sayed Qutb?"

                "We know, but we can't tell you"

                "He was born in Pakistan, is he Pashtun, a Punjabi, etc, etc"

                "We know, but we can't tell you"
                If he's on a terror watch list in the UK, then that is fine. But this seems to be everyone. No one is saying that agencies cannot share information about people suspected of crimes. However, sharing information about absolutely everyone is a privacy violation.

                On the other hand, if someone is merely gay, the US customs have no right to know that. It's none of their business. Similarly if I was a Muslim.
                Only feebs vote.

                Comment


                • #9
                  I also dislike the idea that I should have to answer personal questions like that merely to enter a country.
                  If you don't like the questions, don't come here.

                  This is why I don't vacation in North Korea
                  "The DPRK is still in a state of war with the U.S. It's called a black out." - Che explaining why orbital nightime pictures of NK show few lights. Seriously.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    wtg comparing America to a member of the Axis of Evil.
                    Click here if you're having trouble sleeping.
                    "We confess our little faults to persuade people that we have no large ones." - François de La Rochefoucauld

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Re: Perhaps the tinfoil hat people are right...

                      Originally posted by Agathon
                      Looks like I won't be going to the USA anytime soon.
                      I make no bones about my moral support for [terrorist] organizations. - chegitz guevara
                      For those who aspire to live in a high cost, high tax, big government place, our nation and the world offers plenty of options. Vermont, Canada and Venezuela all offer you the opportunity to live in the socialist, big government paradise you long for. –Senator Rubio

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by Agathon


                        If he's on a terror watch list in the UK, then that is fine. But this seems to be everyone. No one is saying that agencies cannot share information about people suspected of crimes. However, sharing information about absolutely everyone is a privacy violation.

                        On the other hand, if someone is merely gay, the US customs have no right to know that. It's none of their business. Similarly if I was a Muslim.
                        But again, if said individual wasnt being watched by the UK govt, whether or not on a formal list, how would the UK govt have the info to transfer?

                        IIUC, for ex, that they monitored who had anything to do with the Finsbury Park Mosque. I doubt every such person was on a formal watch list. So if Abu ben Jihadi asks for a visa to the US, can the US ask the UK if hes known to Scotland Yard to have entered Finsbury Park Mosque?
                        "A person cannot approach the divine by reaching beyond the human. To become human, is what this individual person, has been created for.” Martin Buber

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Patroklos


                          If you don't like the questions, don't come here.
                          Here's hoping the system works as planned.

                          edit - Crap didn't see Dino's post.
                          "Just puttin on the foil" - Jeff Hanson

                          “In a democracy, I realize you don’t need to talk to the top leader to know how the country feels. When I go to a dictatorship, I only have to talk to one person and that’s the dictator, because he speaks for all the people.” - Jimmy Carter

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by lord of the mark
                            But again, if said individual wasnt being watched by the UK govt, whether or not on a formal list, how would the UK govt have the info to transfer?
                            IIUC, he doesn't like that aspect either.
                            “I give you a new commandment, that you love one another. Just as I have loved you, you also should love one another. By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you have love for one another.”
                            - John 13:34-35 (NRSV)

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Patroklos

                              If you don't like the questions, don't come here.
                              I don't other than in transit to somewhere else. Turns out that if I want to go home, I sometimes have to go through US customs.

                              I have no desire to live in, or visit the US. It's not my kind of place.
                              Only feebs vote.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X