Slashdot Mirror


US–EU Flight Talks Collapse

fantomas writes, "The BBC is reporting that the current US-EU talks over data collected from people flying to the USA collapsed last night. US Customs and Border Protection is insisting on access to the airlines' records and 34 pieces of data to be collected from each passenger. This data has been gathered since 2004, but only as a temporary measure. The European Court of Justice threw out the temporary agreement and set a deadline of Sept. 30 to arrive at a new one. Airlines that refuse to hand over information to US authorities may be fined up to $6,000 per passenger, and the passengers themselves held up in immigration for hours. Good for the EU on protecting the privacy of their citizens? Or are they hindering the War on Terror?" An EU official said that the EU wanted to give away less data, while the US wanted more.

29 of 457 comments (clear)

  1. Crap by Scarblac · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Crap, I'm flying to Costa Rica from the EU this Thursday, the plane will make a stop in Miami. I hope the customs checks aren't going to be more insane than they've already been recently.

    That said, the US can't really complain too loudly if EU carriers stop giving them all the info they want now - it's clearly against EU privacy laws, and apparently at least one EU carrier (Air Italy) has never given all the info and wasn't prevented from landing, so it would be hypocritical to refuse landing rights immediately.

    --
    I believe posters are recognized by their sig. So I made one.
  2. In Soviet Russia... by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Papers please.

  3. The war on terror is a farce by daVinci1980 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    It's every bit as nonsensical as the war on drugs.

    Neither of them are supply-side problems, and attacking the supply side is utterly ludicrous, and just reduces our civil liberties. You know, those things that make America a great place?

    If we really wanted to stop terrorism, we'd work on solving the problem from a social position. You have to understand why people hate you so much in order to fix the problem.

    The war on terror isn't about being effective, it's about making people feel like we're doing something. Well, we're doing something alright, we're eroding our liberties until the terrorists have won.

    --
    I currently have no clever signature witicism to add here.
    1. Re:The war on terror is a farce by partisanX · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The war on terror isn't about being effective, it's about making people feel like we're doing something

      I disagree. It's about keeping enough people scared long enough to completely change what it means to be "free" in America. The government wants these changes and keeping us scared is the only way they can get them. Anyone can say tinfoil hat or whatever, but the evidence is so overwhelming that the powers that be want this, that I simply can not understand how anyone could not see it.

      You listen to all the people backing the freedom stealing actions taken in the name of WOT and they are almost all cowards in that all their best arguments are nothing more than appeals to give up what were once cherished american rights and freedoms in the name of easing their fears. Then they have the nerve to play like they're the brave ones.

      The fact that these cowards call themselves "patriots" and back actions taken to the point where it is now the EU and not the US complaining about too much information being collected about individuals speaks volumes about what continues to be wrong with the cowards thinking.

      --
      "Our morality is good, theirs is repressive."- Partisanship Rule #3
    2. Re:The war on terror is a farce by Jeremiah+Cornelius · · Score: 4, Informative

      "No, the terrorists have won when our troops stop killing their countrymen"

      I know it's not your position - but it is the position of many in the Mediaverse.
      What you are describing is "collective punishment" - a war crime.

      --
      "Flyin' in just a sweet place,
      Never been known to fail..."
    3. Re:The war on terror is a farce by Moofie · · Score: 5, Insightful

      "Those who buy into the extreme version of Islam will not stop until the world converts to their expectations."

      Uh huh. Check out the apocalyptic Christians who are visiting the White House regularly. I am way, way more scared of those wackos. They're better funded.

      --
      Why yes, I AM a rocket scientist!
    4. Re:The war on terror is a farce by kraut · · Score: 5, Insightful

      > 1) There is no way to "solve" the drug problem on the demand side of things. The substances are fucking addictive. Even after rehab people struggle every day to stay away from the stuff, and if it's availible (supply) many can't. I'm talking about real drugs (crack, meth, herion) not marijuana and ecstasy mind you.
      There's an easy way to solve the drug problem on the demand side: Make them available legally in controlled circumstances. Not sure about crack and meth, but heroin is medically safe to take as long as a) it's not mixed with crap b) you know the dose you're taking - which is why it's used as a painkiller in hospitals. Yes, it is addictive, but it is quite safe to take, and - unlike e.g. alcohol - doesn't even cause birth defects. Giving legal access takes out a huge chunk of the profits of organised crime, and allows junkies to become productive members of society again. Idealistic claptrap, I hear you say? No, pilot studies in CH and NL show that it works.

      > 2) There is no way to "solve" the terrorist problem on the home front either.
      Agreed.

      > These are people that for the most part are religiously motivated.
      Disagree, to a large extent the anger is political rather than what we'd call religious in the west. Admittedly the boundaries blur.

      > Ever tried arguing with someone about religion?
      Fun, innit? ;)

      > Those who buy into the extreme version of Islam will not stop until the world converts to their expectations. If the U.S. was to become a muslim nation, they would simply direct their actions towards the next target because their whole philosophy hinges on there being someone to blame and fight.
      Whoa. They do, quite fairly, have quite a bit to blame the west for. The installation of Shah in Iran (overthrowing a democracy, btw). Propping up the Saudi Kingdom plus associated other mini-monarchs. Supporting Saddam Hussein all the way (cheerfully ignoring the genocide he's on trial for, or the war he started against Iran, or his use of poisan gas in that war, or ...) right until he invaded Kuweit.
      You can see why People might take some convincing that now we're actually serious about that whole democracy and human rights stuff. Guantanamo does't help.
      Just to point out that there's more to this than merely "evil islam wanting to conquer the world". Oh dear, that's probably earned me a fatwah now ;)

      --
      no taxation without representation!
  4. Except for the UK by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 5, Informative

    This is all fine, unless you're in the UK, in which case the government has conveniently made an arrangement for airlines to give the US all the information they want legally, circumventing the EU law on a technicality. It's good to know that Tony is independent of George's dog-handler these days, isn't it?

    --
    If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  5. For fuck's sake! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Guys, I'm not saying the EU is perfect, but can you people in the USA please SMARTEN THE FUCK UP and kick out the junta now controlling your government? Yeah, "you" stepped in to europe and saved our asses from the Nazis. But that was OVER HALF A CENTURY AGO now. Things have changed.

    Maybe we will be able to return the favour, if things get too bad over there, but I wouldn't count on it. Anyway, you didn't step in in europe until the situation had already degenerated into bloody war, and I suspect if we even tried to step in militarily before that point, all we'd do is make you fight the wrong enemy - i.e. us!

    Well, I guess this particular move doesn't matter to me much, because until there's "regime change" in the USA, there's no way in hell I'm going there again anyway!

    Land of the "free"? Don't make me laugh.

  6. Realllllly by Mad+Martigan · · Score: 4, Informative
    An EU official said that the EU wanted to give away less data, while the US wanted more.

    That doesn't sound right at all!

    More seriously, here's some of the data they're talking about (from the article)

    Passenger profile

    The Passenger Name Record (PNR) data that has been transferred up to now, falls into 34 overlapping fields, some of which contain very little information, for example the passenger's name, while others contain a lot, including the passenger's name (again), date of birth, sex, citizenship and so on.

    Some of this information is collected when the ticket is booked, some of it at check-in, and some is information about the passenger's travelling history, which can be gleaned from the reservation database. Not all the fields will necessarily be filled in.

    The data can be broken down into the following categories

            * Information about the passenger: name; address; date of birth; passport number; citizenship; sex; country of residence; US visa number (plus date and place issued); address while in the US; telephone numbers; e-mail address; frequent flyer miles flown; address on frequent flyer account; the passenger's history of not showing up for flights

            * Information about the booking of the ticket: date of reservation; date of intended travel; date ticket was issued; travel agency; travel agent; billing address; how the ticket was paid for (including credit card number); the ticket number; which organisation issued the ticket; whether the passenger bought the ticket at the airport just before the flight; whether the passenger has a definite booking or is on a waiting list; pricing information; a locator number on the computer reservation system; history of changes to the booking

            * Information about the flight itself: seat number; seat information (eg aisle or window); bag tag numbers; one-way or return flight; special requests, such as requests for special meals, for a wheelchair, or help for an unaccompanied minor

            * Information about the passenger's itinerary: other flights ticketed separately, or data on accommodation, car rental, rail reservations or tours.

            * Information about other people: the group the passenger is travelling with; the person who booked the ticket

    The CBP system has been built in such a way that some "sensitive" information is filtered out.

    Protected data

    According to the undertakings on data protection provided by the US, this 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 the individual".

    This means that Halal or Kosher meal preferences will not show up, while requests for a vegetarian meal will.


    I also found this passage interesting:

    Airlines have been threatened with fines of $6,000 per passenger or withdrawal of landing rights if they fly to the US without supplying the data, which American officials use to try to identify potential terrorists.

    But the airlines could face prosecution under national data protection laws in EU member states if they do hand over the information.


    I'm not exactly a friend of the airlines, but it seems like they're screwed either way.
    1. Re:Realllllly by Anonymous+Brave+Guy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not exactly a friend of the airlines, but it seems like they're screwed either way.

      Only if they continue to fly to the US.

      Look at the mass disruption and consequent political fall-out recently caused in the UK just by inconveniencing passengers with over-zealous security checks. Those lasted a few weeks before the policy was softened back to almost its original level, and the government is now being sued, or likely to be sued imminently, left, right and centre. On this experience, I imagine the US administration would cave in about three seconds if every major European airline refused go fly there until their information-hording policy was backed down to more reasonable levels. The damage to the US, for which the administration will inevitably be held responsible by the electorate, would be far greater than the damage to most airline companies.

      --
      If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
  7. Re:In Soviet Russia... too true... by Mydron · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I'm not sure if this was meant as a joke or not, in either case, it raises an important issue.

    If you ever have an opportunity to talk with someone who lived in a soviet country, I highly recommend asking them what tool of oppression featured most highly in their day-to-day lives.

    So far, from the opinions I have gathered, being required to show ID and other papers arbitrarily demanded by authorities ranks pretty highly. It is an infringement of privacy and limits your ability to conduct your own business without being scrutinized by your neighbors (or worse your local constabulary).

    Every time I have to show my drivers license at the airport I have a chuckle at the inane pointlessness of it. But in truth I should be pissed off. Why does the flight attendant need to know who I am? What difference does it make who I am? They're certainly not protecting me from terrorists because the last batch of terrorists all had perfectly legitimate ID which they used! It is an information grab by Big Brother, plain and simple.

  8. Re:Email address? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    This is to keep normal citizens under control and intimidated, not to fight terrorists. And maybe to dissuade those evil freedom-preaching EU nationals from visiting the USA and spreading their ever so cancerous "be skeptical of authority figures" memes.

    The only really major terrorists in the world right now are the USA's three letter agencies (yeah, the WTC attacks were impressive-looking and very big-media-friendly (see recent Hollywood self-pitying wank-fest of a film.). But more people are killed in traffic accidents in a month. Where's the War on Dangerous Driving, eh?). Most other terrorists are _somebody's_ freedom fighters, for fuck's sake, the only "people" that the USA's terrorists seem to be fighting for the freedom of are those artificial legal entities called "corporations" that are apparently considered people in the USA.

  9. What things make America great? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Neither of them are supply-side problems, and attacking the supply side is utterly ludicrous, and just reduces our civil liberties. You know, those things that make America a great place?

    Pardon? Have you that little background of our nation's history? "Civil rights" is hardly something that America has gotten right.

    Take slavery, for instance. The first 80 to 100 or so years of American history were about completely denying certain racial groups any significant rights in large portions of the nation. Even after the Civil War started to change the status quo, things took many decades to improve. It wasn't until the 1950s and 1960s, nearly 200 years after the founding of America, that such groups started to get the rights they deserved from the very onset.

    Women weren't in much better of a situation. They weren't allowed to vote from the early 1800s until 1920. South Carolina didn't ratify the 19th Amendment until 1969!

    Of course, we can't forget the Japanese-American internment camps run by the US during WWII. I'll let you do your own research on those camps, since the whole subject is far too massive to describe adequately here.

    Today we still see much antagonism directed towards homosexuals.

    What we're seeing now just follows with the trends we have witnessed over all of America's history. A lot of people brag about how great their civil liberties are, but a quick analysis of the situation shows that what they say just isn't the case. Again and again over the entire history of the US, various groups have had their civil liberties stripped or not even granted.

    Sure, America is far better than many nations. But it's very naive to think that America's history with respect to civil liberties is special in any way. More often than not we find that other nations offered various civil liberties far before America did, and often in a manner that was far more inclusive.

  10. Too much Coffee Man - If have not done anything... by CharonX · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you have not done anything wrong you have nothing to worry about
    Ok you convinced me, I won't fly to the USA. I don't see any reason why a goverment should be allowed snoop in my private life "just to make sure I'm not a terrorist". Do they think terrorists are dumb enough to say "No, please only one way tickets and I don't need a method of leaving the airport. And please only a light meal, I don't want to blow myself up with a full stomach. But first I'll clear out my account and donate everything to a well-know extremist organistion." *sigh*

    --
    +++ MELON MELON MELON +++ Out of Cheese Error +++ redo from start +++
  11. America, you are so f'd up by Potor · · Score: 5, Insightful
    So, if you order a halal meal, it won't be reported. but if you eat a vegitarian meal, it will.

    my point is not that halal meals should be indicated to the americans (pretty f'n far from that, actually). my point is simply that america would profile muslims, but this particular item (food choice) only allows them to profile 16 year old girls and rastas (please accept my hyperbole). outside of a mad powergrab, what is the point of this?

    i cannot begin to imagine the thought process that lead to this filtering.

    once again, a great example of regulations that will have no positive effect on terrorism, which can only cause great discomfort for the majority, and further weaken any notions of individual liberty.

    and before any of you go on about how an airplane (or shopping mall, or street corner, or toilet, or your front lawn, etc.) is not private space, let me simply point out that at least without the collection of this data, my being there is not the grounds for the wet dream of some analyst. but now it is, thanks to the greatest democracy the world has ever known.

    1. Re:America, you are so f'd up by gothamboy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Gee, since an Moslem terrorist would know this too and since if they are on a suicide mission or other mission, they are probably going to skip the wonderful airline food and they will know not to order a special meal. Once again, another pointless Bush administration loss of liberty to ZERO affect on the war on terror.

  12. Glad to see the EU standing up for its laws by jay2003 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The EU has data protection laws and should stick to them. The US shouldn't be able bully the rest of the world to ignoring its laws. If this shuts down transatlantic travel, so be it. EU should go a WTO tribunal and demand compensation over the any US fines or loss of revenue to its airlines. The Bush administration has given the finger to international standards and international law and will continue to do so until the other nations of world stand up for themselves

  13. You won't have problems giving your data to Russia by gorbachev · · Score: 5, Interesting

    "When you fly into a country that is under threat of suicidal hijackers and other evildoers"

    So you won't object too much then when the Russian officials demand all your data then? You do know that they've had a bit of a terrorist problem there for quite some time, right?

    Or China. See, they claim the same thing. Falun Gong, all those Tibetan monks and any other organization fighting to topple the Communists. All terrorists. And that's why the Chinese Government needs to know the addresses of all the Taiwanese people you've ever been in contact with. Funny how the ones living in China keep dissappearing right after you flew in...

    I have a better solution.

    In Soviet US you belong to the Government.

    --
    In Soviet Russia, I ruled you
  14. Look up "Police State". by khasim · · Score: 5, Interesting
    So far, from the opinions I have gathered, being required to show ID and other papers arbitrarily demanded by authorities ranks pretty highly.

    It is the transfer of power from the citizen (government of the People, by the People, for the People) to the Police.

    In a Free society, the police are restricted in the exercise of their authority to defined circumstances. The traffic cop can pull you over if you're in your car.

    When the police can stop you and demand identification at any time, you have lost your Freedom. The police now have control over you.

    Who do you think the police will be stopping more often?
    a. Fat, ugly, old women
    b. Attractive young women

    Think about your answer to that. Then think about if your wife, sister, daughter was cute and young and whether you'd want her in that situation.
  15. an end to the insanity of frivolous datacollection by lorg · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Good, finally we have started to stand up to the insanity of frivolous data collection. There are just to many unknown factors here. How long is the data stored (probably forever), who will have access to it once it reaches US Shores (TIA?), what will they do with it, how will it be processed and cross referenced. A near endless line of question could really follow here.

    How come it appears to be a very one sided transfer of data, after all we don't get the same information about americans travelling to Europe as we are expected to send over, do we?. Which is odd since we have had way more terrorist attacks on european soil then have ever taken place in the USA.

    Since this is all carried out in the cause of preventing terrorism I do wonder if this will really stop any terrorist? Doubtful, if anything they have just given them a list of things to stay clear off if you want to slide under the digital radar. I'll eat porkchops or fish, buy a return ticket (even thou there will be no return), i'll pay via creditcard and generally provide the system with non suspicious information.

    But if it stopped just one terrorist wouldn't it be worth it? When the violation of millions is justified for a single success I don't wanna play no more. I haven't been to America since pre 9-11 and quite frankly I don't feel any great urgency to return either, not for biz or pleasure.

    If the EU can just stand firm and hold its ground I think we'll be the winner here, after all we'll loose far less economically then the USA will when others realise the same.

    We won't miss privacy until its gone and then its to late cause it's just to easy to take away but very hard (if not impossible) to reclaim.

  16. Re:Freedom by laughingcoyote · · Score: 4, Insightful

    How about a rational one? Terrorists are not an army-they are an international organized crime syndicate. Those have been, and would be, handled perfectly well through good intelligence and police work. Just like always.

    Oh, and (mod away!) I don't particularly care that they blew up the WTC's. 3000 people? Look at the annual death toll from cancer, heart disease, diabetes, or auto accidents sometime. Where would all that money really be better spent?

    Finally, not everyone who hates the Republicans loves the Democrats. We'd not have political parties at all if I had my way.

    --
    To fight the war on terror, stop being afraid.
  17. Stopping Terror -- A New Perspective on Freedom by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 5, Interesting
    It's about keeping enough people scared long enough to completely change what it means to be "free" in America.

    Just as creepy as 1984 seems, get a load of this.

    When one maniac can wipe out a city of twenty million with a microbe developed in his basement, a new approach to law enforcement becomes necessary. Every citizen of the world must be placed under surveillance. That means sky-cams at every intersection, computer-mediated analysis of every phone call, e-mail, and snail-mail, and a purely electronic economy in which every transaction is recorded and data-mined for suspicious activity.

    We are close to achieving this goal. Some would say that human liberty has been compromised, but the reality is just the opposite. As surveillance expands, people become free from danger, free to walk alone at night, free to work in a safe place, and free to buy any legal product or service without the threat of fraud. One day every man and woman will quietly earn credits, purchase items for quiet homes on quiet streets, have cook-outs with neighbors and strangers alike, and sleep with doors and windows wide open. If that isn't the tranquil dream of every free civilization throughout history, what is?

    -- Anna Navarre, Agent, UNATCO

    I played this game as a teenager. It was cool then. It's still cool now. ...but it's getting fucking scarier all the time.
  18. Re:In Soviet Russia... too true... by radtea · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So far, from the opinions I have gathered, being required to show ID and other papers arbitrarily demanded by authorities ranks pretty highly.

    This is why the flap about illegal immigration in the U.S. is so insidious. The only way to "secure the border" is to require all people on U.S. soil to carry ID all the time. Otherwise the border becomes a single point of failure, and once you're in you can get away with anything because in a free country everything that is not forbidden is permitted.

    In the old Soviet Union everything that was not permited was forbidden, leaving people in a situation where they had to ask permission to do almost anything. I worked with a Soviet Georgian in the early '90's whom at first didn't understand that there was no form you had to fill out to make a long distance phone call. In the Soviet lab he'd worked in previously the procedure for making a long distance call was to file for permission, specifying who you were going to call and why, and then you were allowed access to the phone when (if) permission was granted.

    This kind of routine intervention and restriction of citizen's lives is the eyes of some the only way to keep the country "safe". But others might ask: is life so dear, or peace so sweet, as to be bought at the price of chains and slavery?.

    --
    Blasphemy is a human right. Blasphemophobia kills.
  19. Re:It's spelt "muslim", not "moslem". by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    Since several of the languages commonly used by Muslims, like Arabic, typically indicate consonants rather than vowels, and since there are several dialects and accents used by speakers of some of the most commonly spoken languages in the Muslim world, when transcribing directly to English, choices between English o and u, a and e, and other similar pairs are rarely set in stone. Similarly, many of the consonants are transcribed in different ways: kh, k, and qa and qu are all commonly used for both the Arabic letters qaf and kaf. That's why (in English) one sees a variety of spellings of proper names of people and items particular to Islam, such as the Koran (or Qur'an).

    So, one may find a Muslim writing (in English) "Muslim", "Moslem", "Musulman" (from the Turkish, Farsi, Urdu, and Hindi), "Musliman" (from the Bosnian) , and so forth.

    "grammar nazi"

    This is a point of orthography, not grammar.

  20. Pshaw by snarkth · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The "War on Terror" is mythological propganda. The real war is religious fundamentalists vs. religious fundamentalists. *snarky*

  21. Re:Look up "FUD". by GrumblyStuff · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Oh?

    You're walking down the street, just heading to the nearest Quik-E Mart. A cop car rolls by, turns around, and pulls up next to you. They ask you to stop. If you got your hands in your pockets, you can be sure they'll want you to pull 'em out slowly. Afterall, people have been shot pulling out wallets.

    They ask who are you and what are you doing here. It's just a regular street. Sure, there's a few crummy neighbors around here but it's not like there's drive-bys every other day. Oh, you'll do as they say in a calm and orderly fashion. It could be cold and rainy or you were in a hurry. It doesn't matter. They got questions and they'll get answers. I mean, you're not a criminal, are you?

  22. Privacy in US by mldqj · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I went to San Francisco from Beijing to attend an academic conference this June. I was travelling with only a backpack, which somehow made me a suspecious target. At the SFO airport an officer demanded to check my backpack. I was carrying a digital camera. Without asking for my permission, and even before I realized what he wanted to do, he already browsed through tens of the photos stored in the camera. I was shocked. Although there was nothing really private there, that was simply unacceptable.

    A few days after I went back to China. A very good friend wanted to buy a new DC, so she played with my camera for a while. She politely asked me if it was okay for her to look at the pictures before switching to playback mode.

    So much for "respecting other people's privacy" in US.

  23. Re:Dominate. Intimidate. Control. by xtracto · · Score: 4, Interesting
    A very interesting piece about security on airports can be found here

    Hey, that was a great read. Are you from the USA? if you are, then accept my pitty. Really, if all of what is written there is true then there is no doubt that you have already lost your "war on terror".

    Really, when this kind of things happen:

    On March 21, 2003, Cleveland Hopkins International Airport was placed under a 40-minute lockdown, prohibiting all passenger entries or exits and all plane departures. TSA agents hit the alarm when they spotted a little toy gun on a child's belt buckle in a carry-on bag.
    The TSA confiscated the child's belt buckle. Spokesman
    Rick DeChant announced, "Had Mom or Dad helped this kid pack, this [airport lockdown] could have been avoided."


    Or this:

      On March 8, 2003, a terminal at the Hartford, Connecticut, airport was evacuated after a screener was caught taking a late afternoon nap by an X-ray machine.


    or this:

    After the flight landed, the marshals nailed another terrorist suspect: a physician and retired U.S. Army major named Robert Rajcoomar. He was handcuffed and taken into custody because, as TSA spokesman David Steigman later explained it, he "had been observing too closely."


    They are clear signals that people in your country are completely terrorized. You have been terrorized by your own goverment. As other people already wrote, I avoid at all costs to pass have anything to do with USA. I travel from UK to Mexico quite often. The first time I went to UK was with KLM. I do not have an USA Visa and really I am not eager to get it. Next christmas I will flight to Mexico, I was looking at the prices and it is quite cheap to flight UK - Mexico via Chicago, but there is no way I will go trough all the hassle of getting a Visa to let the USA government get my profile.

    Just as a side comment. Long ago, I believe it was between 1990 and 1995, an aunt went to USA for whatever reason, when was returning, they stopped her before boarding her plain because my grandmother, who had traveled to USA 10 years ago or something, appeared as if she had never left the USA. They were trying to make my aunt say were was my grandmother "hiding" in the USA. After several hours of questions I believe they let her go.

    It turns out (after some famility talk) that when my grandmother flew to USA, she forgot to hand a paper she had to give to in the USA to mark her leave.

    One of the things I learnt from that is the amount of information they DO have about you and me. I mean, we (our familiy) is in no way notable. We are middle class Mexicans. My grandmother was also a typical Juana Seis-Pack, nothing fancy. We were surprised to know how did they know my aunt was related to my grandmother (they did know before they started asking her).

    It is because of that among lots of things that I dont want to put a foot in USA. If you see my comments I really have said harsh things against your government, and I am sure that if I put a foot in USA they will get me thinking I am some kind of terrorist for whatever reason and you know what? I wont give them that joy.

    --
    Ubuntu is an African word meaning 'I can't configure Debian'