Slashdot Mirror
Trump's Executive Order Eliminates Privacy Act Protections For Foreigners (whitehouse.gov)
Long-time Slashdot reader Kernel Kurtz writes
: January 28 is supposed to be Data Privacy Day, so it seems fitting in an alternative sort of way that U.S. President Trump just signed an executive order that eliminates Privacy Act protections for foreigners. As a non-American, I find it curious that the person who says he wants to bring jobs to America is simply confirming the post-Snowden belief that America is not a safe place to do business.
The Privacy Act has been in place since 1974. But now section 14 of Trump's "Enhancing Public Safety" executive order directs federal agencies to "ensure that their privacy policies exclude persons who are not United States citizens or lawful permanent residents from the protections of the Privacy Act regarding personally identifiable information" to the extent consistent with applicable law.
The Privacy Act has been in place since 1974. But now section 14 of Trump's "Enhancing Public Safety" executive order directs federal agencies to "ensure that their privacy policies exclude persons who are not United States citizens or lawful permanent residents from the protections of the Privacy Act regarding personally identifiable information" to the extent consistent with applicable law.
Donald Trump's bigoted and idiotic executive orders are blocking legal visitors at airports, and spreading chaos at tech companies.
Seriously - when someone manages to escape a civil war and work his way into the tech industry - we shouldn't send him or his family back at the airport when he's traveling or living here on a valid visa.
These are our friends and colleagues. If we don't speak up for them, we have no honor.
CA pays your bills, bitch. We hand over much more money than we receive from the feds. I hope we do succeed and pull the useless fucking bigoted morons in the middle of our country from our overflowing teats.
And what do you suppose the odds of you being a victim of a terrorist attack? Seriously here. Stop and think for a minute. Are you making a rational assessment? In general terms, the biggest causes of death in America are heart disease and cancer, with accidental deaths being choking, automobile accidents and falls. Terrorist attacks are so far down the list that you might as well start worrying about lightning strikes taking you down. That's why you're a retard, because you're unable to assess risk with anything approaching rationality, are easily stirred up, and really are the most delicate of little snowflakes.
Seek out a psychiatrist, and in the meantime, take a fucking statistics course.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
What happens if he doesn't adhere to the above? I get the feeling we're about to find out.
It's already become clear that the White House explicitly overrode a DHS determination that contended the ban didn't apply to Green Card holders and other valid, vetted residents. The ACLU is reporting that some officials are not abiding by a number of stay order issued at courts in at least three locations.
As a legal instrument, at least one scholar sees these particular orders as so incredibly flawed that they won't stand up to a sustained legal attack by the ACLU, CAIR and others.
Most worrying though are the reports circulating that the drafting process bypassed the normal interdepartmental and legal review stages, and that DHS was only briefed on the content of the Executive Orders as they were being signed. This doesn't sound like an administration that's particularly worried about adhering to the letter of the law, or bringing a lot of people into the conversation. Not sure how that will stand up over time. Politics is often petty and vengeful, and the White House is already leaking like a sieve. It might be that their incompetence is what does them in. It may be that their unwillingness to share power will do it.
My personal feeling is that neither one will stop them. I think people severely underestimate the lengths that this administration will go to to see this through. When Donald Trump promised the people of America that he would never back down, that he would do everything to advance the cause... I think he was speaking literally. When Steve Bannon says that we're at war with Islam, I think he believes it fervently. When Flynn and others portray their work as an existential fight, I think they're sincere in that.
Left-leaning people and other opponents have mobilised quickly, but they're expecting the administration to react the way they would react. They think that public shaming, legal action and political activism will drive Donald Trump's administration back. I fear they're wrong. They will be seen as traitors and subversives, and they'll be treated accordingly, through formal and informal means. They don't realise that their resistance will ultimately have to be physical. They should be reading up on their Thoreau right about now....
Crumb's Corollary: Never bring a knife to a bun fight.
let him unilaterally decide whatever he wants.
Me thinks he learned this whole executive order thing from the previous holder of the office...
As far as number of executive orders is concerned, Obama's record was far below average.
If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
You forgot the words "bigoted", "misogynist", and "Hitler".
Laugh it up, but Trump just ordered a weekly publication of crimes committed by illegal immigrants. Hitler did the same back in the 40's. Google up "The Criminal Jew".
Neither place is broken down, but people in the EU certainly shouldn't throw stones from glass houses. The EU has for several years now been putting MANY self-described fascists into its parliament, and very recently, participating in it in an official manner:
http://www.euractiv.com/sectio...
As for Trump, I'm not sure what to make of him. I think his actions are boneheaded because they're going to create international retaliation against US IT firms, thus likely harming the domestic tech sector (Trump seems to like mercantilism as well, which will have a similar impact in other industries) however we can at least definitively say that Trump isn't a fascist, and anybody who says otherwise is either using hyperbole or has no idea what fascism is actually about. The most obvious difference is Trump still favors the individual (and individual liberties) whereas fascism is founded on the premise of a single national identity and almost no individual identity.
Key phrase.
When the Cato Institute is calling you out on racist policies you know you're up shit creek.
Umm, no.
There are a lot of things we should fix in America first before we try to help everyone else.
And how does allowing talented immigrants in not "fix" America? If we always did what Trump is doing, we'd be way behind the rest of the world technologically. Einstein was a refugee and so was Wernher von Braun (though he was a refugee for a much different reason.)
Speak of Wernher von Braun; he got to skip the gallows because of his knowledge, and if we didn't keep him we would have lost the space race for sure -- something to keep in mind if we're going to kick out immigrants from potentially hostile foreign nations, as that could cost us our next space race.
Don't be dense. Of course visas and permits can be revoked; the entire issue here is that it happened without any justifiable reason. "Hey, it can happen" is a poor argument.
Yup, terrorists in 9/11 weren't from any countries on Trump's list.
If it weren't for German immigrant scientists (many undocumented, some Nazis) in the US during WWII, you'd be writing that in Japanese
Um, no. Japan was losing anyhow.
There are a lot of things we should fix in America first before we try to help everyone else.
Give me your tired, your poor,
your huddled masses yearning to breathe free,
the wretched refuse of your teeming shore.
Send these, the homeless, tempest-tost to me.
I lift my lamp beside the golden door!
The key part of this is "yearning to breath free"
People who move to a place to then try and impose the rules of the places they moved from are not the type of people who are wanted.
That's the state budget you dummy. Californians contribute more to federal revenue in proportion to what they get back than all but a handful of other (blue) states. That's why it's fair to say that CA subsidizes red states. Whether or not that's a good argument for secession is another story.
But the Privacy Shield agreement between the E.U. and the U.S. demands similar protections as spelled out in the Privacy Act for E.U. citizens. And if the U.S. don't comply, the E.U. is forced by a court decision to forbid any processing of E.U. citizen data in the U.S., which means that Google, Facebook. Amazon and Microsoft are in a ton of shit.
When that was written, there was no welfare state - so people came to contribute to the country, not to leech off of it.
Open immigration or generous welfare: pick one.
From the SMH Key phrase.
When the Cato Institute is calling you out on racist policies you know you're up shit creek.
The real irony here is that Trump and his alt-right claque are banning travellers from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen and justifying it by citing 911 but the countries that the 911 terrorists came from are not on the list, especially Saudi Arabia and the UEA and keep in mind these are the same countries whose citizens are covertly funding ISIS. On top of that Trump set up a series of shell companies to handle a hotel deal in Saudi Arabia and he did it after his bid for president: http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-... at the same time as he was lambasting Clinton for taking donations from the Saudis.
My favourite parts:
"They [Saudis] buy apartments from me, ... They spend $40 million, $50 million. Am I supposed to dislike them? I like them very much.”
"I would want to protect Saudi Arabia, ... But Saudi Arabia is going to have to help us economically. They were making, before the oil went down ... they were making $1 billion a day.”
So rich countries that can make tribute payments to the Trump regime and whose citizens are financially benefitting Trumps companies are not destined for 'the list' even though these countries are financing terrorist organisations that attack and kill US citizens but others including some that are actually fighting ISIS in Syria make the list. I suppose Trump supporters have a hard time spelling 'hypocrisy'.
Your analogy is off by orders of a magnitude. Quit trying to justify irrational fear.
Here are some actual numbers:
In 2016 'islamic' terrorists were responsible for 0.3% of the all the murders in the US.
Over the last 15 years they were responsible for 123 out of 240,000+ murders or just 0.051%.
In 2015 more people were killed by toddlers than were killed by 'islamic' terrorists.
On average, toddlers kill 2x more americans than 'islamic' extremists do.
Specifically targeting a group - whether because of race, creed, sexual orientation or citizenship - and saying "No rights for you!" is contrary to the basic concepts of America.
What if a group of people come in who'll start denying rights to people already living there ? Check out the no-go areas in Malmö where immigrants are now calling for Sharia law and have moral police patrolling the streets and harassing women who dare to walk around in jeans.
Obama signed less executive orders than Bush Jr, Clinton or Reagan. You can see the counts here. Of course, I don't expect Trumptards living in Alternative Fact Land to pay attention to reality.
The Washington Post has an article showing the list of Muslim countries whose people are banned from entering the U.S. The common trait is they have no Trump business ties. Welcome to Fascism in the old sense of the word.
That's technically true but still dishonest reporting by the Washington Post.
The claim "Trump's immigration moratorium is targeted at majority-Muslim countries" -- this claim is 21% accurate [i.e. basically false].
The claim "Trump's moratorium is targeted at Iran, plus those countries with civil unrest and poor-functioning central government" -- this claim is 98% accurate (only exception is Afghanistan)
The claim "Trump's moratorium is targeted at majority-Muslim countries save for those where he has business interests" -- this claim is 38% accurate (major exceptions include Pakistan, Bangladesh, Algeria, Morocco, Uzbekistan, Niger, Malaysa).
There are the news reports that Trump's 90-day immigration moratorium is aimed at majority-Muslim countries excepting those where he has/had business interests. And also calling it a "Muslim ban". But those narratives don't fit the facts. Here's the list of majority-Muslim countries in descending order of population, plus those with severe civil unrest, and those subject to the moratorium. I'm measuring accuracy by country count. I should really come up with a more sophisticated measure of accuracy, but can't be bothered...
Indonesia [trump business interests]
Pakistan
Nigeria [not majority-muslim, has civil unrest but well-functioning government]
Bangladesh
Mexico [not majority-muslim, but has civil unrest due to drug war but otherwise well-functioning government]
Iran [30day ban]
Turkey [trump business interests]
Egypt [trump business interests]
Algeria
Sudan [30day ban, civil unrest]
Morocco
Iraq [30day ban, severe civil unrest]
Afghanistan [severe civil unrest]
Uzbekistan
Saudi Arabia [trump business interests]
Yemen [30day ban, civil unrest]
Syria [30day ban, severe civil unrest]
Niger
Malaysia
Mali
Senegal
Burkina Faso
Tunisia
Somalia [30day ban, civil unrest]
Kazakhstan
Azerbaijan [trump business interests]
Guinea
Chad
Tajikistan
Jordan
Libya [30day ban, civil unrest]
Kyrgyzstan
Turkmenistan
Mauritania
Siera Leone
United Arab Emirates [trump business interest]
Kuwait
Oman
Lebanon
Gambia
Kosovo
Qatar [trump business interests]
Bahrain
Comoros
Western Sahara
Maldives
Mayotte
Cocos (Keeling) Islands
Note: I'm not a Trump supporter. I've written to my representative and senators to add my voice against him, and I marched with my family last Saturday. On the other hand, I think the media have been FAILING us liberals by giving incomplete or misleading journalism -- articles that are designed to inflame our passions and attract our clicks, but without having the solid factual basis needed for us to engage with our republican friends.