Does this mean that the US will finally start giving the EU PNR for American passengers?
The European Parliament has approved a controversial new agreement allowing the EU to exchange airline passenger information with the US, it has announced. The EU said that the agreement (37-page/138KB PDF), which sets out the conditions under which passenger name record (PNR) data can be transferred, would provide "legal …
Does this mean that the US will finally start giving the EU PNR for American passengers?
It'll only be "fair" when all EU states receive lists, including all irrelevant personal details, of all US terrorists (i.e. everybody who happens to fly from or through the US) and are allowed to store and process these records as they feel fit. US terrorists / citizens should, of course, be allowed to apply to each individual state to ensure that their details are correct.
I could find no reference to the US supplying bulk PNR data to the EU. All that they commit to is providing analysed data on request.
So it seems to be particularly one-way and therefore a humilitating agreement for the EU (unless, of course, the EU governments see a specfic benefit in this arrangement).
The article says : The DHS is similarly "obliged" to share PNR data with EU law enforcement for the same purposes.
Normally I would say that this means full equivalency, every US passenger needs to fill in PNR information and this information is provided to EU law enforcement. Why is "obliged" in quotes though? Is it that the author trying to score a point that he/she thinks that this part of the deal will not really be respected??
If I can't get there in one of my private aircraft, I don't fly.
I don't do business with folks who assume I'm a criminal.
Oh yeah. Cock in arse.
Spartacus has got a lot to answer for.
Haha yes :o)
... over an outstandingly bad deal. Still a bad deal, so I'd hesitate to call it a net win. More like a small reduction in net loss. In other words, nothing to be proud of, dear privacy-squandering euro-clique. You're still acting like you're there for the "security needs" of the USoA instead of your own citizens.
Just how does the EU giving the renegade colonials all our travel details improve the privacy of EU citizens?
>"The agreement requires airline carriers flying from the EU into the US to share PNR data about all their passengers with the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for the purpose of the "prevention, detection, investigation and prosecution" of terrorism and certain 'transnational' crimes punishable by three or more years of imprisonment."
Three years? That's hardly into serious crime territory, which makes me wonder what sort of offenses they really intend to use it for. I bet within a year this information will be being used to seize people of interest to the RIAA, or political dissidents/whistleblowers. Note also the specification in article 4, para. 1 part (b) of the agreement:
>" A crime is considered as transnational in nature in particular if:
[ . . . ]
(v) It is committed in one country and the offender is in or intends to travel to
another country. "
That means any solely national crime falls into the scope of this definition if the perpetrator ever intends to travel abroad again in the rest of their life for any reason whatsoever, no matter how unrelated to the crime. In short, the US wants to impose its domestic laws extraterritorially on the rest of the world, as per bloody usual (see also MegaUpload case).
I also don't believe for one second that it'll actually be "made anonymous" after six months, or rather, I don't believe they won't give the original un-anonymised version to the NSA to keep forever. It's not like it hasn't just come out that the NSA and administration have been lying for years and they have in fact been indiscriminately tapping and recording *all* email in the US. (ref: http://www.democracynow.org/seo/2012/4/20/whistleblower_the_nsa_is_lying_us)
"That's hardly into serious crime territory, which makes me wonder what sort of offenses they really intend to use it for."
Anyone convicted ot littering will be sent to sit on the Group W bench.
You must be VERY old and with an impressive memory. Well done!
Canada does the same thing. They will deny you entry if you have DUI, even if there was no jail time .
"Anyone convicted ot littering will be sent to sit on the Group W bench."
Along with the 27 8 by 10 colour glossy phtographs with the circles and arrows and a paragraph on the back of each one? Heck I must be old too, and should train my memory to retain more important things.
Seriously worrying description of a piece of legislation though - the yanks get to hold my name,.address, phone number, email and credit card details? Just because I want to see some of the sights that have existed in their country for thousands of years before their regime emmigrated from Europe a few hundred years ago and committed unspeakble terrorist attrocities against the native people they found? And do what with my details? And hold them where? Under what encryption and security? And who has access to them? And when will they offshore the database and details to some third party country because it's cheaper?
I always thought EU data protection ministers were there to protect our data.....
"EU-US name-swap deal actually gives passengers MORE privacy" -- Bollocks
.. seeking to review and correct their information. I believe that when I see it, because it's not like anyone can do anything about it when ye olde US of A will be found in breach (which I expect as I'm a pessimist).
... because it's not like anyone can do anything about it when ye olde US of A will be found in breach (which I expect as I'm a realist).
Last time I looked only certain forms of ID were acceptable to check you PNR records stored by DHS, these included US Drivers License, US Passport, US Armed Forces ID, US Social Security Number, US <insert doc name>, etc.
See a pattern forming?
Yes, why isn't it a bilateral agreement?
AC...it's the only way to be sure.
According to the agreement the data will be 'masked' and it is clearly stated that 're-personalisation' is possible if necessary.
Common understanding is that 'make anonymous' is a one-way process, so Commissioner Malmström's words are wrong. Sloppy language, or deceit?
The US record of proactie anti-terroism is very sad.
Starting with World Trade Centre crashes, through Richard Reid (exploding shoes) and the Panys on Fire guy in Detroit. None were stopped by the less than wonderflul Home Land Security.
Look at the Pants on Fire guy. Was granted a visa ater an interview; Father then visits self-same embassy and tells them his son is a no-good terrorist.
Months after original visa issued Pants on Fire buys a ticket and air carrier verifies visa validity.
Pants on Fire flies to Europe, again his data is submtted through PNR and visa checks; he then undergoes a second pysical security chrck and is permitted to board.
Nothwithstanding the 7 hour flight the wondrous Homeland Security dozes at the wheel. Plane overflies Canada and just as it comes in to land at Detroit, his pants misfire.
No where did the pre-flight data stop this man, everything was discovered post landing.
BTW PNRs for passengers on Canada-boud flights are also given to the US as wel as Canada.
You can apply for your PNR filings with all your personal bumph including whether you ask for a religious meal by applying on-line to the Homeland goons.
The DHS is only interested in security that occurs in air conditioned air ports.
They don't chase crew details for vessels crossing the line, and the state of oregon (360+ miles of coast), had 1 part time state trooper patroling the coast road, you could literally land an infantry division, and they wouldn't know.
this all seems more like make work activity for job and budget justification, than secuirty thearter, where the assumption is the person proposing it is dumb enough to believe it improves security.
FTA: The agreement also provides "the right to administrative and judicial redress in accordance with US law" to EU citizens whose data is misused.
Except I expect US law to give *NO* legal recourse or redress to NON US citizens whose data is abused. Non US citizens get hardly any protections under US law. Note: IANAL. I don't even play one on TV.
AC wrote: "Non US citizens get hardly any protections under US law."
That's not correct. Federal law (which is what we're talking about here) extends graduated protections to non US citizens, according to their degree of connection to the USA.
So, at the bottom of the scale you've got somebody just visiting for a week in Disneyland. They get all the basic protections, like the right to a fair trial, protection against self-incrimination, etc.
At the other end of the scale are lawful permanent residents (people with green cards) who get pretty much everything except means tested welfare, voting in a federal election, jury service and (thanks to Bill Clinton) most federal employment. LPRs can even get Federal Firearms Licenses and (depending on their state of residence) concealed carry permits.
The flip side is, in the event of war, LPRs can get drafted, while the folks visiting Disneyland can't.
«However, Home Affairs Commissioner Cecilia Malmström said that the three European institutions had created an agreement that they could be "proud of".» Typical Cecilia Malmström, who, despite her «liberal» façade, never saw an agreement which sacrifices the liberties of the inhabitants of the European Union (or her native Sweden, for that matter) to the interests of US government agencies and the MPAA, RIAA, etc, etc (to the degree that there exists a distinction) of which she was not «proud». Alas, I find myself somewhat less than proud of the Sweden's European Commissioner, but given the vassal status of our government to its US master, what can one expect ?...
Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2017