The question is: Is it a legitimate issue or a sensationalized mole hill?
Given what I researched I am seeing more of a mole hill. Give it a few
days, odds are there will be clarification and this issue will blow over.

On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:42 PM, Nathan <> wrote:

> On Fri, Jan 27, 2017 at 7:39 PM, John <> wrote:
> > Im not sure you are reading section 14 correctly. It makes reference to
> > Privacy Act (Privacy Act of 1974) and the privacy policy of the federal
> > agencies involved in immigration enforcement and law enforcement
> agencies.
> > IE the government can freely share information between agencies with
> > regards to non-citizens. If you look at the Privacy Act, it lists twelve
> > cases where data is permitted to be disclosed by federal agencies, with
> the
> > new order it allows all governmental data to be shared between
> governmental
> > agencies. Again none of this pertains to the Civilian sector. The Privacy
> > Shield really has nothing to do with the root issue. United States
> > governmental agencies sharing information about non-citizens with each
> > other. In the context of the actual document it is referencing sharing
> data
> > about non-citizens who are not legal residents of the United States, who
> > are illegally in the country.
> There are plenty of news reports, available with a moment on Google, that
> discuss the possibility that this executive order prevents the Commerce
> department from fulfilling its enforcement role in the law that replaced
> the Safe Harbor data protection agreement between the EU and the U.S. This
> would invalidate the new agreement, jeopardizing the authorization of US
> companies to handle data on European residents.
> _______________________________________________
> Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
> wiki/Mailing_lists/Guidelines
> New messages to:
> Unsubscribe:,
> <>
Wikimedia-l mailing list, guidelines at:
New messages to:

Reply via email to