DHS Requiring Data On Religion & Sex Lives Of EU Citizens Entering Country

[DeSwiss]

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
The 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.'

more: http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_news/story/0%2C%2C2132099%2C00.html

*** - The EU tomorrow, whose next? US?

[tularetom]

1. We finally weakened the dollar enough to make Europeans want to

come here and spend some dough, so we turn around and pry into where they stick their weenies?

Are these assholes deliberately trying to fuck things up? Gotta be 'cuz nobody could be that friggin stupid.

[DeSwiss]

5. Weenie = WMD???

That would be one hell of a case of the clap!

[tom_paine]

2. That's what happens when Free Citizens travel to Totalitarian Tyrannies

I would recommend to our European friends to stay home in their Free Nations, rather than venture into The New Soviet Union, which is Imperial Amerika.

And if you should be foolish enough to enter a totalkitarian nation like this one, don't be surprised when the petty officials want data about whether you like missionary position or doggy style.

[DeSwiss]

6. Given the RightWingnut nature of these retards at DHS....

...I'd go with the Missionary Position. At least on paper.

[Swamp Rat]

3. UK folks should answer all the questions exactly the same.

1. I am a conservative.

2. I do not believe or engage in sex outside the sanctity of marriage.

3. George W. Bush is my hero.

4. Support the troops.

5. May I go shopping now?

[DeSwiss]

7. You may shop!

{in the voice of the soup Nazi} BUT NO SEX TOYS FOR YOU!!! :D

[Adsos Letter]

13. !!!

:spray:

[LeftishBrit]

21. LOL!

There would be about three people in the entire UK who would answer (3) honestly in the desired direction, and one of them is Envoy in the Middle East at the moment.

Does your government actually want to destroy the tourism business in America?

[DeSwiss]

26. Does your government actually want to destroy the tourism business in America?

No my friend from the other side of the pond. We Americans are ingenious when it comes to adverts. We'll simply re-package our travel marketing as a tour of the ruins of a once great democracy. Well, for those who truthfully answer all the DHS questions, that is.... :sarcasm:

[ProgressiveEconomist]

22. Is there verification of visa app data? Does a lie lead to future exclusion from the US?

A visa application could be like a prospective juror survey: intrusive questions, possible serious penalties for answers found to be untrue.

[Adsos Letter]

4. Man...

...all I can do is shake my head...we entered into our Revolutionary War, in part, because we felt that the Natural Rights of Englishmen were being attacked by the King and his ministers...

We are fast becoming all and more than we feared then.

[DeSwiss]

8. Its the "condemned to repeat it" thing, I'd say.... n/t

[Adsos Letter]

10. I agree...when you combine woeful ignorance of History with...

...disengagement from the political process (for myriad reasons) you get, in our case...this... .

[aint_no_life_nowhere]

9. Trade Union membership?

Are union members now considered a suspect class of individuals?

[Solon]

11. Of course, Union members have ALWAYS been suspect individuals in this country...

Hell, there were times when it was damned near a death penalty offense to be one, not that there ever was a trial. If you are too much for the working man in this country, you are suspect.

[DeSwiss]

12. Well, union members have always....

....been suspect to the RePukes. Because they've always been organized.

And IMO, that's because union people generally know much what a load of bullshit sounds like much quicker than the average American. I mean they've been fighting with Repuke bosses up close and personal for a lot longer....

[petronius]

14. Who is collecting this info?

From the repeated use of the phrase "made available to DHS" it sounds as though it is European agencies who have already collected this sensitive stuff, and now DHS wants to look at it too...

[DeSwiss]

15. According to the article....

...it represents changes in the travel policies that the US government is requiring of the European Union member-states to comply with.

They're... upset? I suppose is the word I'm looking for, but the source is the Guardian and then there's that British reserve when speaking. So they might really be pissed and I just can't tell from the article's wording.

Its suppose to go into effect at the end of this month...

[petronius]

16. Right, but they're rather vague on where the data is coming from in the first place

The tone of the article is 'big bad nosy DHS,' but it sounds as if these datasets already exist and DHS now wants access to them. It doesn't seem as though European passengers are going to be handed an obnoxious questionaire when they enter U.S. airports.

It sounds very intrusive, but it also sounds as if the EU can choose not sign this agreement - which seems sort of likely now that one hand of the EU has noticed what the other hand is doing...

(Of course, I'd prefer that DHS had not made this proposal at all; the level of spying by our government is light-years beyond any reasonable bounds.)

[DeSwiss]

19. That's how I see it too....

...some of the EU members are livid that they hadn't heard anything about this until they were almost ready to sign the agreement with a deadline of the end of this month. No, I don't think they'll sign it either, further alienating the US from the rest of the civilized world. Such that it is.

Personally, it does remind me of Watergate. Liddy and his henchmen. John Dean. Haldeman and the Saturday Night Massacre at the DoJ. There was an air of expectation that something momentous was about to happen that would challenge us, and force us to decide who we really are. It did. It feels like that to me now.

The question is, what have we become that we allow a criminal such as Bush/Cheney to darken the doors at the WH, instead of a cell? But the weirdest part for me? I can't forget thinking that it was Eisenhower that warned us this would happen. But we didn't listen. And we should have, because he knew of whom he was talking. This is where it starts....

[AndyTiedye]

17. Why Is There Such Data to Be Collected?

One might reasonably ask where the "information about the religious beliefs, political opinions and even the sex life of Britons travelling to the United States"
is being gotten from. Certainly such information should not be given to the DHS, but why is it being collected in the first place, and by whom?

[DeSwiss]

20. The type and range of data suggests....

....that intelligence and law enforcement agencies would provide much, and/or gather it. Given they have the capabilities and because the range of data must come a variety of sources. "It includes "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." And the new agreement will also allow access to detailed "passenger information, credit card details, and home addresses." And the US would be free to add other information to these records they obtain."

Then it gets worse. From the article: "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."

And it goes on: "....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, and 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." (Halliburton?)

And these are our allies. This is how we repay them for sending their soldiers to die in Iraq and Afghanistan along with our own. If we don't impeach these bastards now, I'm afraid of what'll be left come January 2009. We could be fighting three wars instead of two....

[AndyTiedye]

23. Seems Like the EU's Wonderful Privacy Laws Are Already Being Violated

Giving the data to DHS would certainly compound the violation though.

[DeSwiss]

25. Which is precisely what the article mentioned...

...and that EU ministers as well as European civil liberties groups opposed the agreement because it is a violation of their privacy laws.

When this is over, and if we still have a Congress, we should adopt their privacy laws in place of ours....

[AndyTiedye]

27. The Article DOESN'T Say How The Data Was Obtained in the First Place

Agreed that such data should not be shared,
and that the USA needs much better privacy laws, like what the EU has.

My question is how was such data obtained in the first place,
and didn't the obtaining of the data violate those privacy laws?

They could not share data on people's sex lives unless they were already collecting it somehow.

[entanglement]

18. That is insane - WTF

:wtf:

[Hubert Flottz]

24. "WHERE ARE YOUR PAPERS SWINE!"

Why would anyone want to come here, behind the Con Curtain?