TOKYO MASTER BANNER

MINISTRY OF TOKYO
US-ANGLO CAPITALISMEU-NATO IMPERIALISM
Illegitimate Transfer of Inalienable European Rights via Convention(s) & Supranational Bodies
Establishment of Sovereignty-Usurping Supranational Body Dictatorships
Enduring Program of DEMOGRAPHICS WAR on Europeans
Enduring Program of PSYCHOLOGICAL WAR on Europeans
Enduring Program of European Displacement, Dismemberment, Dispossession, & Dissolution
No wars or conditions abroad (& no domestic or global economic pretexts) justify government policy facilitating the invasion of ancestral European homelands, the rape of European women, the destruction of European societies, & the genocide of Europeans.
U.S. RULING OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR TO SALVAGE HEGEMONY
[LINK | Article]

*U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR* | U.S. Empire's Casino Unsustainable | Destabilised U.S. Monetary & Financial System | U.S. Defaults Twice A Year | Causes for Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Remain | Financial Pyramids Composed of Derivatives & National Debt Are Growing | *U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR* | U.S. Empire's Casino Unsustainable | Destabilised U.S. Monetary & Financial System | U.S. Defaults Twice A Year | Causes for Global Financial Crisis of 2008 Remain | Financial Pyramids Composed of Derivatives & National Debt Are Growing | *U.S. OLIGARCHY WAGES HYBRID WAR*

Who's preaching world democracy, democracy, democracy? —Who wants to make free people free?
[info from Craig Murray video appearance, follows]  US-Anglo Alliance DELIBERATELY STOKING ANTI-RUSSIAN FEELING & RAMPING UP TENSION BETWEEN EASTERN EUROPE & RUSSIA.  British military/government feeding media PROPAGANDA.  Media choosing to PUBLISH government PROPAGANDA.  US naval aggression against Russia:  Baltic Sea — US naval aggression against China:  South China Sea.  Continued NATO pressure on Russia:  US missile systems moving into Eastern Europe.     [info from John Pilger interview follows]  War Hawk:  Hillary Clinton — embodiment of seamless aggressive American imperialist post-WWII system.  USA in frenzy of preparation for a conflict.  Greatest US-led build-up of forces since WWII gathered in Eastern Europe and in Baltic states.  US expansion & military preparation HAS NOT BEEN REPORTED IN THE WEST.  Since US paid for & controlled US coup, UKRAINE has become an American preserve and CIA Theme Park, on Russia's borderland, through which Germans invaded in the 1940s, costing 27 million Russian lives.  Imagine equivalent occurring on US borders in Canada or Mexico.  US military preparations against RUSSIA and against CHINA have NOT been reported by MEDIA.  US has sent guided missile ships to diputed zone in South China Sea.  DANGER OF US PRE-EMPTIVE NUCLEAR STRIKES.  China is on HIGH NUCLEAR ALERT.  US spy plane intercepted by Chinese fighter jets.  Public is primed to accept so-called 'aggressive' moves by China, when these are in fact defensive moves:  US 400 major bases encircling China; Okinawa has 32 American military installations; Japan has 130 American military bases in all.  WARNING PENTAGON MILITARY THINKING DOMINATES WASHINGTON. ⟴  
Showing posts with label PNR. Show all posts
Showing posts with label PNR. Show all posts

March 28, 2016

Invasive USA Access to European Travel & Associated Data Also Involves Policing




Invasive USA Access to European Travel & Associated Data Also Involves Policing






Passenger Name Record (PNR)
-- computer database of travel reservation
-- contains itinerary for passenger (or groups of passengers travelling together)



United States–European Union

-- Agreement on Passenger Name Records
-- further agreement between USA & European union
-- signed Dec 14, 2011
-- provides USA with information associated with air travel of Europeans
-- data includes hotel bookings, car rental, train trips, transfers etc
-- as well as credit card information, passport info & much more
-- via access to Passenger Name Records (PNR) databases of Europeans


-- subject to:  European Data Protection Law
-- PNR transfer to take place to only countries with comparable data laws, according to:
    -- Organisation for Economic Co-operation & Development (OECD_
        1980 Privacy Guidelines
    -- 1995 European Union Directive on data protection

  •   law enforcement supposedly permitted to access data only on set individual basis 
-- standards defined by following organisations:

    International Air Transport Association (ITA)
    -- trade association of world's airlines
    -- helps formulate industry standards
    -- HQ Montreal, Canada
    -- executive offices:  Geneva, Switzerland

    Airlines for America (A4A)
    -- formerly:  formerly known as Air Transport Association of America (ATA)
    -- oldest & largest USA airline trade association
    -- members & affiliates transport over 90% of US passenger & cargo traffic
    -- based Washington DC
    -- only org that represents main US airlines re lobbying Congress
   
    Standards defined by AIRIMP
    ie - ATA/IATA Reservations Interline Mesage Procedures - Passenger ('AIRIMP')
Upon passenger booking travel
-- travel agent / travel site will create PNR
-- or, if made directly with airline, PNR created in database of airline CRS
-- CRS = Computer Reservations System (where PNR database is hosted)
-- CRS is an automated computer reserviation system (there's several systems/providers of these)
-- the PNR referred to as 'Master PNR', re the passenger & relevant itenerary

PNRs originally introduced for air travel
-- airlines systems can now be used for booking:
    -- hotels
    -- car rental
    -- airport transfers
    -- train trip
s

-- 2004 - US govt first obtains PNR of Europeans
-- via '2004 Passenger Name Record Data Transfer' agreement with EU
-- data usage supposedly limited to:

  •      terrorism and related crimes
  •      other serious crimes & interl organised crime
  •      flight from warrants or custody

     *agreement required Eurpean PNR to be supplied to USA

-- agreement INVALIDATED by:  European Court of Justice (30 May 2006)
-- reason:  lack of legal authority

-- 2007new controversial PNR agreement between US  EU
-- yet:  George W Bush - gave US Dept Homeland Security & others exemption from 1974 Privacy act

2008, Feb:  USA had signed in February 2008 a memorandum of understanding (MOU)
-- with Czech Republic
-- purpose:  exchange of visa waiver scheme
-- did so without consent of Brussels
-- USA also approached other European countries for MOU
-- tensions b/w Washington & Brussels
-- reason:  LESSER data protection laws in USA
-- furthermore:  foreigners to not benefit from US Privacy Act of 1974
-- US 'Safe Harbour Arrangement' lacks data protection
2008, Nov:  new agreement re new agreement


CRITICISM
-- reductions of privacy rights

Legal Service of the European Commission
x2 academics

[source, above:  Wikipedia]
____________________________________________________
-------/\/\/

EU-US PNR agreement found incompatible with human rights


29 Jun 2011

In a note sent on 16 May 2011 to the Director-General of DG Home Affairs,
the Legal Service of the European Commission warns that the draft EU-US
agreement on the exchange of PNR data is not compatible with fundamental
rights.

The EC’s lawyers found several areas of concern related to the planned
agreement. Significant issues are the proportionality of the agreement which
covers minor crimes as well, its extension to US border security “which is
not linked to the purpose of preventing terrorism or serious crime”, a far
too long (15 years) data retention period for the data collected for the
agreement purpose, the lack of judicial redress for the data subjects, the
lack of “guarantee of independent oversight”.

After having reviewed the present draft, the Legal Service draws the
attention over the fact that its earlier comments had not been considered in
drafting the present variant of the agreement: “all (these) comments were
already transmitted to your services in the course of the negotiations.”

The Legal Service concludes that “despite certain presentational
improvements, the draft agreement does not constitute a sufficiently
substantial improvement of the agreement currently applied on a provisional
basis, the conclusion of which was refused on data protection grounds by the
European Parliament.” Moreover, the use of the PNR data for US
border security is considered a step back from the point of view of data
protection. The conclusion therefore related to the agreement is that “the
Legal Service does not consider the agreement in its present form as
compatible with fundamental rights.”

Hopefully this opinion may weigh in the decision of the European Parliament
which, according to the Lisbon Treaty, has the power to refuse it.
“This Agreement does not meet EU data protection standards of
proportionality or purpose limitation, nor does it provide judicial redress
to data subjects or any guarantee of independent oversight” says Tony
Bunyan, Statewatch Director who believes that it’s high time EU takes
a firmer stand in the matter. “Secret Minutes of EU-US meetings since 2001
show that they have always been a one-way channel with the US setting the agenda by making demands on the EU. When the EU does make rare requests like
on data protection, because US law only offers protection and redress to US
citizens, they are bluntly told that the US is not going to change its data
protection system”.

MEP Jan Philipp Albrecht, member of the European parliament’s civil
liberties committee, believes that by pushing forward this agreement, EU is
acting against its own legal advice. “The commission cannot simply continue
to stick its fingers in its ears, and it is high time that it dropped its
obsession with PNR. This means going back to the drawing board and
renegotiating the draft agreements with the US, Australia and Canada on
passenger record retention, ensuring these agreements are in line with EU
data protection law. It also means dropping the proposed legislation on the
retention of passenger data within the EU.”

As regards the EU PNR proposal, this has been slammed also by the European
Union Agency for Fundamental Rights (FRA). The Agency has issued an opinion
on the Proposal for a Directive on the use of PNR data, identifying a series
of issues regarding the compliance of the proposal with the Charter of
Fundamental Rights of the European Union.

FRA is concerned by the risk of direct discrimination related to PNR data
transmitted by air carriers, which may include sensitive or special data.
“It would therefore be useful to introduce a prohibition on the transmission
of such data by air carriers.”

Regarding the limitation of fundamental rights covered by the proposal, FRA
is concerned by the vagueness of several formulations and believes the
explanatory memorandum of the proposal “does not sufficiently substantiate
the necessity of the limitation for all crimes covered,” and that “the
necessity and proportionality of the PNR system would need to be
demonstrated.”

For the compliance with the right to protection of personal data, FRA
suggests the control should be provided by fully independent supervisory
authorities that “can take action on their own initiative to protect
proactively and effectively the interests of data subjects and have
sufficient resources to do so in practice.”

https://edri.org/edrigramnumber9-13us-eu-pnr-breaches-human-rights/

EDRi
-- association of civil and human rights organisations from across Europe
-- We defend rights and freedoms in the digital environment



---------------------- ----------------------



COMMENT
 
What was supposed to monitor travellers to supposedly prevent terrorism in USA, has become a massive policing and invasion of privacy operation, that appears to have created something of one-sided world police arrangement, where the US is the cop and the EU meekly gives over European citizens' data to the Americans, who have inadequate data protection laws per se and Americans who deny Europeans the poor protections they offer their own citizens.  Americans with an exceedingly poor attitude to accommodating the legal requirements of the Europeans.  Americans who can do what they like with data that they've most likely bullied the European cretins into giving them.
Why would anybody enter into agreements with those that are so arrogant they refuse to consider adapting their laws to provide like privacy protections for foreigners, let alone those that do not reciprocate when it comes to data sharing?
The EU needs to get a backbone.

Canada and Australia are also party to the EU PNR agreement.  But I'm not sure why.  

Is the EU such a hive of terrorism that the Australians and Canadians have had to jump on the US data demanding bandwagon?

European Union (EU)-Australia Passenger Name Record (PNR) Agreement.

The PNR Agreement will allow for information about travellers flying into Australia on airlines using EU-based IT service providers to be disclosed to Australian Customs officials.

The ability to access this key information on airline passengers is a vital border security tool for Australia.  It will assist in the fight against terrorism and serious crimes. 

http://foreignminister.gov.au/releases/2008/fa-s080701.html

It looks like Europe is Terrorist Central.  Gee, wonder why?

Not sure if any of the points raised by the Legal Service of the European Union Commission were remedied in the final draft.  Doubt it.

I think the issue of the moment is that this is a one-sided contract, where the European Union leaves European citizens wide open to violation of their privacy as well as their basic rights.   But, meanwhile, the US is not subject to the same terms & is not providing the European Union like access to American data.

So the same Americans who make sure they cannot be prosecuted by the International Criminal Court (ICC) for criminal acts of war they have performed (and intent to continue to perform), are the very same party that demands to violate European privacy and rights and, it appears, also to insist on engaging in law enforcement pertaining to Europeans.

It's creepy thinking how extensive US interference and reach across the globe is.
It's a world-wide corporate dictatorship, headed by USA.

The travel data sharing was first obtained by the Americans from the Europeans in 2004.

So this probably explains the 'disappearance' of Assange's equipment:

"... likely unlawful seizure of property belonging to me and to WikiLeaks while it was under the control of the airport authorities of Arlanda (Stockholm) or Tegel (Berlin) on 27 September 2010, inter alia three encrypted laptops containing privileged journalistic and legal materials  including evidence of a war crime; and this affidavit sets forth facts that form the basis of my belief that the aforementioned  property was the subject of an unlawful search and seizure and that the monitoring of my activities in Germany was also illegal." [1]

"The suspected seizure or theft occurred at a time of intense attempts by the US to stop WikiLeaks' publications of 2010." [1]

  • airline carrier refused to cooperate with Assange [2] 
  • Assange Swedish lawyer request to prosecutor's office regarding seizure or theft received no reply [2]


[1] Affidavit
[2] https://justice4assange.com/Prosecution.html