Dutch Court Says Government Can Receive Bulk Data from NSA

jfruh (300774) writes Dutch law makes it illegal for the Dutch intelligence services to conduct mass data interception programs. But, according to a court in the Hague, it's perfectly all right for the Dutch government to request that data from the U.S.'s National Security Agency, and doing so doesn't violate any treaties or international law.

Comments

Rampant Corruption

[Anonymous Coward]

Politicians and diapers must be changed often, and for the same reason. -- Mark Twain

Just wow.

[gstoddart]

I love how pretty much every country has come to the same conclusion: We can bypass our own laws if we have someone else do it for us.

They've all decided, well, we can't spy on our own people, but if the Americans do it for us it's all good.

Essentially reciprocity means that any laws which are intended to protect you will be bypassed as people get other actors to do it for them.

So, it's illegal for the Dutch to spy on their own people, probably illegal when the US spies on the Dutch, but since they've already for the information, why not?

Pathetic. Free societies aren't maintained by using loopholes to get around laws intended to control how your citizens get spied on.

What horsehit.

When governments are getting the take from the blanket surveillance the Americans (and really, the rest of the world), they have very little incentive to actually stop the surveillance in the first place.

Some days it seems like the US has more or less subverted the privacy and rights of everyone on the planet, and every other government is deciding the information sharing is too valuable to recognize they're just lying to us and doing it anyway.

At this point, I don't believe any elected official, or member of any of these state security entities deserves any privacy rights at all. Because they've all decided we don't.

The dystopian future is alive and well, and getting worse every day.

Re:Just wow.

[cardpuncher]

In 2004, the Court of Appeal in England ruled that it was OK to admit evidence obtained under torture into English trials, provided that the torture had been carried out elsewhere. David Blunkett, the Home Secretary at the time said:

"We unreservedly condemn the use of torture and have worked hard with our international partners to eradicate this practice. However, it would be irresponsible not to take appropriate account of any information which could help protect national security and public safety"

The Appeal Court ruling was finally overturned by the House of Lords the following year.

However, given the enthusiasm of the original judges and the Home Secretary of the time and the ever increasing use of the "because terrorism" excuse, I'm not sure that there would be similar hope of justice prevailing in the future. It's not just privacy on the line.

Bright side

[Anonymous Coward]

I love how pretty much every country has come to the same conclusion: We can bypass our own laws if we have someone else do it for us.

Well, if the US government charges a hefty fee for this - say a percentage of a country's GDP - we could be an exporter of Big Brother services.

Just think, based on the economic principle of Comparative Advantage, we, the US of A, can spy on the rest of the World (think how much money the Chinese would pay us to watch their citizens!) while they pay us percentages of their GDPs.

Think about it, we could sit on our asses in leisure while they all bust their asses growing our food, making our clothes, etc ... and if they step out of line, well, we KNOW where they live!

Re:Bright side

[gstoddart]

Yeah. You just keep telling yourself that your government would never do anything like this, that it's just an American thing.

Oh, you misunderstand me.

My government is part of the 5 eyes, and is guilty of this exact same kind of reciprocal arrangement.

I think it's all pathetic. But I also think it's being largely driven by the US, because since 9/11 it has become increasingly the case where the US will do anything for their own security. And I have great fears that they're the ones creating the global surveillance state.

But, make no mistake about it, I believe all governments participating in this are undermining rights and freedoms, including my own. The rest of the world hasn't consented to this, it's being done to us by secret treaties, and bypassing our own courts.

The problem is FAR too many people are saying "well, it's OK, as long as they're doing it for our security".

Sooner or later, with this level of widespread surveillance, we'll all be fucked. Because secret agencies will know every damned thing about you, and sooner or later, my worst tin-foil hat fears will come to be normal.

I don't think America is the only one doing this. But I do lay the blame squarely at the feet of the US for feeling it's their right to spy on every goddamned person on the planet.

When did the security of the US trump the rights of everyone else? Who the hell agreed to that?

Papers please, comrade. If you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear.

Re:Yep.

[pahles]

Coming from somebody who lives in a country that started wars for no reason but monetary gain...