Slashdot Mirror
EU About To Grant US Unlimited Access To Banking Data
An anonymous reader points out a blog post reporting that on Monday The EU Council is set to give US intelligence services full access to SWIFT banking data, despite a unanimous call by the European Parliament not to do so. "The move of SWIFT the data server to Switzerland would be an excellent opportunity to stop the nearly unlimited access of US authorities on EU bank transactions. But EU justice and interior ministers are apparently keen [on agreeing to] a deal as soon as possible, on 30 November. Why 30 November? Because one day later, on 1 December 2009, the EU’s Lisbon Treaty will be in force and would allow the European Parliament to play a major role in the negotiations of the deal with the US. A deal one day before will be a slap in the face to democracy in the EU. ... [W]hile the US will be able to access EU banking data, no access to US banking data by EU [authorities] is being foreseen."
Wired money to Turkey? Terrorist.
Unexplainable transfers of cash into your account from $MUSLIM_STATE? Terrorist operative.
Bought floor tile from a man with the same surname as a well-known Taliban leader? Suspected terrorist.
etc.
I mean, I'm all for national security and sharing information but what is so lacking about the EU's ability to make and investigate the above claims?
My work here is dung.
... does the 30th of November sound like a great day to pull pranks like false fire-alarms and what-not to interfere with the deal? For once I my life I would condone civil disobedience, and for once it might even have an impact.
She: Hey, are you a traitor? Me: No, I'm atheist.
So US tax cheats get caught at the expense of EU privacy? F***ing s**t deal if you live in the EU. My transactions have got cock all to do with you.
And Americans wonder why everybody hates them.
Is it worth catching corporate criminals at the cost of civil privacy?
Also, there are lots of ways around Taxation laws, legally, that require NO money off-shore. Using Charity receipts, holding companies, and company expenses, you can essentially cut your profits down so you don't get taxed as much while everything you want to purchase is owned by various companies (which you own but not directly).
It's kind of like you run company A, and Company B owns your car, Company C owns your house, Company D buys food, etc etc, and while the paper trail exists, theres nothing illegal about it. Shaw Communications (Cable company here in Canada) has mastered this technique. Yeah, the CEO is driving his Porsche around Calgary, but on paper he makes under 30k a year.
They'll give access to all inter-bank transactions. The whole issue started with the revelation that US intelligence had access to SWIFT data through SWIFT's US data center. SWIFT then shifted its operation to its other data centers and will cease channeling EU transaction data through the US data center by the end of the year. So the loss of access for the US spies is the SWIFT data, but the treaty will give them access to all inter-bank transactions, even those which are not processed by SWIFT. This is a classic rebound technique: The EU cannot spy on its own citizens like that, but they do get information back from US spies.
Who's to blame? The US, for shamelessly exploiting the people they often call their friends? The EU council, for betraying their people? Why choose...
If this goes through on Monday, there will be calls to punish the EU Council for treason, but of course nothing will come of it.
Well with the new shell ui I'd side with KDE too.
As a US citizen, I say "WTF Europe -- are you insane?!"
I believe in the right of every country to protect their sovereignty, and this sound like a gigantic ceding of that sovereignty, and as egregious as the formation and delegation of power to the EU. The absolute best way to avoid tyranny on a massive scale is to ensure the distribution of power to the greatest extent possible. That's why I believe in states' rights, and why I believe Europe is being a bunch of asshats right now. I'm as patriotic as they come, but I understand the capability of anyone -- Americans as much as anyone else -- to become drunk with power. In the same spirit, I applaud that no American financial data will be given to Europe. At least they got it half right.
"I know that every word that man just said is true, because it's EXACTLY what I wanted to hear." -- Space Ghost
Why should we HAVE to worry about The Authorities overseeing our each and every transaction, as if we're all criminals until proven otherwise??
As someone here put it, "If I've done nothing wrong, WHY ARE YOU WATCHING ME??"
~REZ~ #43301. Who'd fake being me anyway?
Theres none good sides on it. Or why do you think US wont open their banking data back to EU?
It's just another case of USA forcing their laws, ideas and politics to other countries. Only taking, and not giving back. Fuck yeah!
You may want to look into who provides a lot of the equipment, personnel and funding for U.N. and NATO peacekeeping forces. I think the US/EU relationship is pretty symbiotic. While the banking data probably won't be given to the EU, 'not giving back' is untrue.
I've looked into it. From Wikipedia: "About 4.5% of the troops and civilian police deployed in UN peacekeeping missions come from the European Union and less than one percent from the United States (USA)." The ten biggest troop contributors by country are 8 developing countries, France and Italy. Regarding UN troop funding - the reluctance and tardiness of the US to pay its UN contributions is legendary, and they are currently $1.3bn in arrears.
As to NATO troop contributions -- the US is making a lot of noise that the Europeans are not supporting their War of Terror "peacekeeping" missions in Iraq and Afghanistan enough; but they knew that they didn't have most EU countries' support when they set up to invade Iraq in the first place...
+5, Brutal Fact Correction Smackdown. Rock on, dude.
Because it's not about doing wrong : it's about using fear as a means to control people.
Slipping shoelaces ?
Americans are nice. Generally very open, sociable people who will be happy to strike up a conversation with you if they notice you're from a country they've been to or some such. The United States of America (and, by extension, the people making up the American government) is a sociopathic asshole of a country that constantly betrays the principle it was founded on and follows international law only when it feels like it (and tries to get the law amended so it can do whatever it wants).
Huge difference. I'd be happy to come over to the place where the Americans live and spend some time there - if only that place didn't happen to be America.
USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
I'm American and I've traveled overseas quite a bit. I didn't run into a lot of hate.
I'm a euro and I spend a lot of time in the US. While staying there can be absolutely delightful on a superficial level (good food, wild nature, lots of space, polite yet informal people, clean cities), I've learned to keep my mouth shut, and just zone out whenever a discussion takes place. When asked for my opinion, I've learned to answer only in variations on 'dunno', 'uhm' and 'you're right'. When people ask where I'm from, I'll make up a word that may sound like a real place to avoid everything I do, say or think reflecting on an entire country. Anything short of blind devotion to all things American, and in fact disagreeing with an American may be taken as anti-American, ungrateful and arrogant and a reason to put you right back in your place. I don't encounter 'hate' much, but a lot of contempt. The sudden darkening of people's moods when the realization hits them 'wait a minute, this euro thinks he's an equal'.
Anyway, it can be avoided by playing the quiet type, sticking to superficial and / or work related subjects and let them blame your apparent lack of an opinion or ego on the years of communism in your native Molvania.
True again, but that didn't change the perceived necessity of invading those countries (*). In fact, many European nations probably objected simply because they had figured out that the US was going to invade no matter what, so opposing the invasions let them gain political points domestically, avoid paying, and still get what they wanted. The reason things worked out that way was because Bush was a moron.
(*) I think both invasions were a mistake, but the people supporting them genuninely thought it was necessary at the time.
I think you'll find the reasons that the majority of Europeans (not European nations) were against those wars was because: (A) They were illegal under international law and (B) The ensuing wars would result in the deaths of hundreds of thousands, if not millions of innocent civilians who never did anything to us - amongst others. Any 'nation' or government who represented the views of their citizens were in fact just doing their job properly. There were notable examples of governments giving the finger to their electorate, such as the British government of the war criminal Tony B-Liar, but as a whole, the bigger part of the population of Europe was against the unnecessary murder of millions of civilians.
To date it hasn't been shown that any of the warmongers who started these illegal wars felt they were 'necessary' for any reason. They may have said they felt it, but these are proven liars, so the balance of probability lies with the idea that their claimed feelings over the matter were merely another lie, and that's even before you consider that mere 'feelings' about how you act do not usurp the law.
To deny this obvious state of affairs is shamefully naive and the reason these b*stards keep getting away with their crimes. I mean, COME ON PEOPLE!!!