Beta
×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

EU Committee Says No To Bank Data Sharing

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the over-here-we-still-have-privacy dept.

Privacy 160

krupert writes to let us know that the civil liberties committee of the European Parliament has voted to revoke the data-sharing arrangement by which US intelligence agencies have access to EU banking data via the SWIFT system. The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled, which it will be next week if the full European Parliament votes in line with the committee's recommendation. US intelligence agencies clandestinely tapped the SWIFT interbank clearing data from just after 9/11 until 2006, when the secret arrangement was made public. After that, Belgium-based SWIFT pulled their servers from the US and set up shop in Brussels, and the US had to negotiate with the EU to keep tapping the data.

cancel ×

160 comments

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

Who let US out of the playground again? (5, Insightful)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047402)

This is a great thing. US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing. The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data anyone?!)

Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (5, Interesting)

rvw (755107) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047518)

This is a great thing. US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing. The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data anyone?!)

I totally agree. This is another reason that we cannot trust the US anymore. Their only interest is their own interest, and everything else they do and say is hypocrisy. They sold out on all of their values. And I mean the US government, including the whole political system, but not all people living there. US business is a very bad factor in the world as well (think of banks), but the US state makes this possible.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047580)

There's a pubic hair on my keyboard. What the fuck?? I "mow the lawn" so it's not mine. Gross.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048128)

But what about the "backyard" ? Have you considered that option ?

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047614)

We in the US stopped trusting our government fifty years ago. I'm surprised it's taken Europe this long to realize that COINTELPRO wasn't an isolated incident.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (3, Informative)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047904)

I have a funny conspiracy theory for you: :)

You may know that in Islamic countries, banks have to follow special rules of morale. The stuff that did happen in the US, is highly illegal in e.g. UAE.
So the theories goes like this:
The banking crisis did not really affect Islamic banks.
Which means that the whole banking crisis was the biggest and most successful terrorist attack by Islamic “leaders” yet.
And it was teamwork with China, who sold you crap that you don’t need, so you buy it with lend money that you don’t have... and is also coming from China.

Now all we have to find out, is how Islamic banks control China. ;))

P.S.: Protip: If you took this seriously: *whoooosh* ;)

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (0, Troll)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047914)

LOL. I have an automatic replacer for bullshit words like “file sharing”.
Guess what it replaced “consfile sharing theory” with:

I have a funny consfile sharing theory for you: :)

Damn. I have to get into consfile sharing business!

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048078)

And your mad script fails you again.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (2, Funny)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048112)

@ http://developers.slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=1535624&cid=31011546 [slashdot.org]

(Ex 5-year professional PHP developer here, who actually managed to write properly designed software in it, and therefore knows extremely well what PHP is and can’t do.)

and now

LOL. I have an automatic replacer for bullshit words like “file sharing”.
Guess what it replaced “consfile sharing theory” with:

I have a funny consfile sharing theory for you: :)

Damn. I have to get into consfile sharing business!

I know what they say about most PHP programmers.. but you're making it too easy for them!

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

Dragonslicer (991472) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049274)

You made the clbuttic mistake.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

V!NCENT (1105021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048248)

While you are trying to be funny, you are actually quite correct and if you haven't written that joke sentence your post would be extremely interesting.

My protip: ofcource it is not a conspiracy or a planned islamic attack, but it is kinda like it is....

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31049738)

actually, it was an attack on the stability of america by JEWISH run banks. their fear of islamic style banking and fear of it catching onin the US is one of the reasons the ZOG has kept us in conflict with the Islamic world for so long.

just look at the CEOs and boards of directors of the banks and media companies, compare that to the fact that JEWS make up only about 2.2% of the US population and you will see that something evil is going on.

posted A/C because saying anything about these parasites invariably leads to reprisals and harassment.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (3, Insightful)

YesIAmAScript (886271) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047942)

I totally agree. This is another reason that we cannot trust the US anymore. Their only interest is their own interest, and everything else they do and say is hypocrisy. They sold out on all of their values. And I mean the US government, including the whole political system, but not all people living there. US business is a very bad factor in the world as well (think of banks), but the US state makes this possible.

Everyone puts their own interests first. The EU is likely reject this treaty because doing so is in their own interests.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (2, Interesting)

V!NCENT (1105021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048278)

One of the points of pro-EU was that together one stands stronger and that they have did so now makes me like the EU a lot more because it shows that its interest is in the people and not in corruption (partialy, yet or both).

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

dryeo (100693) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049578)

Some are smart enough to realize that it is in their self-interest to look after the interests of their friends and neighbors.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (2, Insightful)

FiloEleven (602040) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047978)

As a US citizen living under this government, I agree fully. It has taken on a life of its own that is miles away from serving the will of the people as it was intended to.

I'm glad that the EU is taking steps to bind the beast. Those of us living in this country need to start large-scale protests over all the bullshit that's been dumped on us citizens and increasingly the rest of the world, and we need to get the rest of the populace to retake the mantle of The Public and the responsibility that it entails. American Imperialism is doomed to fail as all other empires have failed, but the sooner this course of action is halted the less painful it's going to be for everyone.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

V!NCENT (1105021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048316)

In order for getting a number of people to reach critical mass for a protest, or a multitude of protests, one must first make sure that rich education reaches the critical mass first. That's going to be a hell of a job... And by education I do not mean a bunch of YouTube videos that scream "You see?!?!"...

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

V!NCENT (1105021) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048324)

PS: And by protest I meant succesful/meaningful protest

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (4, Interesting)

beh (4759) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048006)

I like the fact 'the US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is cancelled'.

At the Munich security conference today they stated that this data is important and it already helped stopping attacks...

EU politicians would like some evidence of this... ...since the 'US cooperation' so far has never led to them actually give any indication of this.

Strange kind of cooperation...

I'm kind of siding with EU politicians who say that this has already opened the door to some degree of industrial espionage, when the US can trace what kind of money flows exist between various companies.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

VitaminB52 (550802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048348)

Nothing new under the sun. Remember when an American corporation build a email system for the EU politicians? Somewhere in the '80ies IIRC. Email was said to be read by NSA officials before the intended recipient read the email. Next round of trade negotations between EU and USA were a disaster for the EU. This lesson has cost us billions.

Not Terrorism, but collecting Tax people (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048514)

Terrorism is not the target (I am sure, but they are small fry in the big picture of things), taxes are the target. As long as the terrorist file their FBAR reports with the U.S. Treasury department and pay their taxes on time they will be left alone. This is about the Obama administrations new crack down on Americans bank accounts oversees and stopping retiring Americans form moving their assets in to new countries with lower taxes.

With access to the SWIFT information, they don't need to know about the final destination. If an American Citizen sends $100,000 oversees and they do not report it, the fines are $250,000 and up just for not filing and FBAR (accidents and intent are not longer covered). That does not even begin to scrape the surface of other U.S. tax collection efforts that are going on all over the World.

       

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

Caesar Tjalbo (1010523) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048034)

Timeline: SWIFT moved it servers to Switzerland. November 30, 2009: European justice and interior ministers agree to have the US access to SWIFT data. December 1, 2009: Lisbon Treaty comes in effect, giving the European Parliament a large say in the matter, when it was already known there was likely a (small) majority against the agreement with the US.

Now you complain about not being able to trust the US?

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

Dachannien (617929) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048226)

And I mean the US government, including the whole political system, but not all people living there.

What? You probably shouldn't trust us regular folks. We eat babies over here, you know!

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (4, Insightful)

poena.dare (306891) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048334)

This US citizen agrees whole-heartedly.

"The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled..."

One would think that if combating terrorism was truly a US priority, the administration would continue to share terrorist intelligence regardless of what the EU does and instead threaten to withhold chicken wings, or iPhones, or Big Macs, or something else NOT security related.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048964)

The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled,

Apparently, if this is true, the US prefers to decrease its own security in this case so it's not all about its own interest after all... ;)

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (4, Interesting)

hairyfeet (841228) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049318)

It is a damned shame how we won the cold war only to become that which we fought against. Might as well change the meme now. Oh well I'll start "In Soviet Amerika bank shares YOU!"

Seriously though as an American I'd like to say I'm sorry. This really wasn't the country so many of my relatives bled and shed blood for across many a battlefield. Sadly there isn't much we can do since the media conglomerates now own more than 75% of all mainstream news sources and BOTH parties (for those non USA we only have two parties. The others aren't allowed airtime and have NO chance of winning) are all for more big government, more spying, and less freedom for all.The only real difference anymore between D and R is that the Ds kiss the booty of big media, and the Rs love to blow defense contractors, and that's about it.

So sorry world, we are pretty much circling the drain ATM. Hey it was fun while it lasted, and thanks for all the oil.

Whatever (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047520)

Shut the fuck up, you stupid muppet. For someone living in the UK, you sure seem to love Micro$oft a whole lot.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047572)

We're seeing this play out in the same way as many other things, where European governments fight for citizen privacy while the US government fights for government monitoring of everything that anyone ever does.

I wonder who will win this time.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (3, Insightful)

lordholm (649770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047648)

The European governments already approved the deal in the Council. It is the the Union itself that is fighting to protect the citizens in this case.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (2, Insightful)

icebraining (1313345) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047952)

Thankfully the Lisbon Treaty serves for something, even if it has downsides. It also gave the Pirate Party its second seat [torrentfreak.com] .

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

patro (104336) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047598)

This is a great thing. US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing.

Or at least if they want this data then obviously they must share all US banking data with us in the spirit of cooperation.

One sided data sharing is out of the question.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

Hurricane78 (562437) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047882)

I recommend moving to Switzerland. As long as you can limit the alcohol drinking... ;)
They are not in the EU, it’s warmer, the food is better, the scenery is beautiful, they have a great air force, and nobody is going to put the country under pressure, that has all his money, anyway. ^^
Plus, you get a (partially?) direct democracy with referenda. Which is the most valuable of all properties.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (4, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048028)

I recommend moving to Switzerland. As long as you can limit the alcohol drinking... ;)
They are not in the EU, it’s warmer, the food is better, the scenery is beautiful, they have a great air force, and nobody is going to put the country under pressure, that has all his money, anyway. ^^
Plus, you get a (partially?) direct democracy with referenda. Which is the most valuable of all properties.

Yeah, I hear it's a great place to live if you're a white, christian, non-slavic person of northern european descent with a lot of money.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (2, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31049626)

Yeah, I hear it's a great place to live if you're a white, christian, non-slavic person of northern european descent with a lot of money.

So, it's a kind of a European reservation for a minority, then?

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

digitig (1056110) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048798)

it’s warmer

Than where? Greece? Southern Spain? Don't think so.

the food is better

If you can live on a diet of cheese and chocolate. Would you happen to be American?

the scenery is beautiful

I'll give you that one.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (3, Funny)

rve (4436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049902)

the scenery is beautiful

I'll give you that one.

There aren't a lot of places where you can even see the scenery, with all these fucking claustrophobia inducing mountains blocking the view

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048084)

This is a great thing. US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing. The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data anyone?!)

Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.

The thing that amazes me is that the EU denies because of privacy concerns and then the US tries to negotiate (sometimes called 'blackmail') the deal by withholding intelligence on terrorism!

And so the issue is quite clear. Give up your privacy else the US will not try to help prevent terrorism despite the US's declaration of a war on terror and its facade of integrity to 'do its best' in that effort.

I am sincerely bothered that a nation so 'right' about terrorism and its purposes of fighting terrorism, would not do everything possible to prevent it, and would deliberately NOT fight terrorism for petty political purposes.

And the US wonders why people around the world hate them... It's scary that the rest of the world sees the difference between the words and the actions but the democratic voters of the US are largely unaware. I guess this is partially due to the fact that American Politics are so bipartisan that the focus of questions is on the party and not of the sum of the whole. Thus they have news that relates to how one candidate might be wrong, or another might be corrupt, but none that truly reflects upon or questions the actions of the nation as a whole.

It isn't a conspiracy theory to say that major media in the US is in cooperation with its corporations and lobbies to make more money; the connections are clear and publicly available. It isn't any stretch of imagination to think that a corporate news source that is directly connected to other forms of business would skew its facts and present information that in ways that would benefit its business. Such wide-scope congolmerate-corporations are complete enemies to truth and competition; the extended shame of it being that the GOP, the party whose members vote to retain small government and market competition continually elects leaders/lawmakers that do not do so and bend over quite easily to corporations.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048218)

Not that I disagree that this is a good thing, but your facts fail:

The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data

The accessing of information was done with full consent and cooperation of SWIFT.

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (1)

sa1lnr (669048) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049254)

"Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization."

Haha, no chance.

Considering the level of expenses that an MEP gets, you'll never be rid of UK politicians. ;)

Re:Who let US out of the playground again? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31049538)

"Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization."

I'm certain that you must be pulling the collective leg of the Slashdot reading audience with this one. You simply must be.

The EU would be an intelligent organisation without the inclusion of the UK? That's particularly entertaining considering that their prime candidate for EU leadership was Tony Blair. Tony Blair, a fine example of poor leadership if ever there was one, and one of the few British Prime Ministers that could muster almost Thatcher levels of utter incompetence.

And even he declined their offer.

As a British citizen, I'm well aware that the British Gov't has its foolish moments, and those tend to be the rule rather than the exception, but I'd also say that considering their choice of leaders the EU appears incompetent enough all by its lonesome, it really doesn't need Britain's aid to be even more so.

So truly, it is to laugh.

End of Technology Euphoria (4, Insightful)

CyborgWarrior (633205) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047438)

I think we are finally beginning to see some of the endings to the technology euphoria that have developed over the past 20 years. As technology and the internet improved and people discovered all of these extra amazing ways to make different processes more efficient, it's becoming more and more obvious that certain processes simply should not be efficient. This includes government ability to collect data as well as corporate ability to do the same. When it's harder to do, it's fine because it doesn't have as strong of an effect and the mere difficult limits its use. The easier it gets the more often it will be abused or over-used because it's possible.

Essentially, just because we can build this network, doesn't mean we should. I'm giving a big nod of the head to the EU over this one.

Technophoria vindicated. (2, Interesting)

tjstork (137384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047554)

I think we are finally beginning to see some of the endings to the technology euphoria that have developed over the past 20 year.

Frankly, I think the political and other events of the last decade have vndicated technophoria completely. Our democracy, in the United States, is stronger than it has ever been in our lifetimes. This is a golden age for the people to have a voice and it should be held up in history as such.

We are living through the best of times, and the choices we have before us, about increasing spying and all the other police state crap, serve only to make those choices worse, not better.

I mean, right now, I can get online and ask, or rather, argue, with anyone who either shares my beliefs or disagrees with them. I can take the whole pulse of the whole nation directly from the communities anywhere, without having to have a middle man of media telling me, honestly, what I want to hear, so they can sell newspapers. Sure, there are times when this polarizes, but I think as people get older, as I have, you learn to keep your own blood pressure down and then come to appreciate all the people, regardless of affilitation, and can, at times, glimpse pieces of the world in its most honest glory, for what it is.

It's excellent.

60 years ago, the US government was able to marshall the building of an entire atomic bomb in secret. Could the USA do that today? Could we build something like that today, in secret? I don't think so. The most sinister abuse of our present war, the pictures from Abu Ghraib, went round the internet, all over the place, as did documents leaked and what not. There's just so many things that we can share, and we can know, that we didn't know before. Breakthroughs in communications technologies have always lead to conflicts and wars - the invention of the printing press sparked a number of wars in Europe and the USA, and arguably lead to the reign of terror in France, the American civil war and US Spanish American war, but, the internet is a different sort of animal, and maybe, we can live through or learn to cope with the polarization, and, see the promise of all of this stuff.

Maybe humanity as a whole, is not so bad after all.

Maybe, we as a people, are a bit less evil than we or the critics among us, judge ourselves to be.

Maybe, just maybe, the human race will do just fine.

I wouldn't trade the internet and computers for anything else, for even a second.

The hope is worth the angst.

Re:Technophoria vindicated. (3, Insightful)

russotto (537200) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047740)

Frankly, I think the political and other events of the last decade have vndicated technophoria completely. Our democracy, in the United States, is stronger than it has ever been in our lifetimes. This is a golden age for the people to have a voice and it should be held up in history as such.

Everyone has a voice, but nobody is heard. Our democracy amounts to the tiniest share of a choice between two similar groups of people who end up doing similar things. More and more laws are passed, resulting in an ever-narrowing box within which we have "freedom". Golden? I think not; gold does not tarnish.

Re:Technophoria vindicated. (1)

Undead Waffle (1447615) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048888)

We are free to vote for whomever we want. There are still other parties on the ballot. The fact that the people in this country refuse to vote for anyone that isn't part of one of the 2 major parties is ultimately their own fault.

It also doesn't help that we really don't get any good candidates running, regardless of party. Come up with your own theories of why this might be.

Re:Technophoria vindicated. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31049616)

We are free to vote for whomever we want. There are still other parties on the ballot. The fact that the people in this country refuse to vote for anyone that isn't part of one of the 2 major parties is ultimately their own fault.

It also doesn't help that we really don't get any good candidates running, regardless of party. Come up with your own theories of why this might be.

I can tell you're not very realistic. Good luck with that.

your cynicism plays into the hands of the powerful (1)

tjstork (137384) | more than 4 years ago | (#31050060)

I can tell you're not very realistic. Good luck with that.

Your cynicism is what gives the powerful their power. Ultimately, you've decided that you aren't a big fan of the system, but, its not so bad that you would actually get off of your rear and do something about it. Fortunately, on all political stripes, left or right, there have been people in the USA that have done exactly that.

Re:Technophoria vindicated. (4, Insightful)

VitaminB52 (550802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048536)

Our democracy, in the United States, is stronger than it has ever been in our lifetimes.

I'm sorry to say you're wrong. Democracy is about one (wo)man one vote, not about one lobbyist one vote, or one corporation one vote.
The US of A recently crossed the thin line between democracy and democrazy, read the NY Times article: http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/02/02/corporation-says-it-will-run-for-congress/ [nytimes.com]

Re:End of Technology Euphoria (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047940)

Maybe we should stop automatically treating new technology as different or exempt re. (privacy, patents, IP) law.

Just apply the rules that grew over centuries and make adjustments in the same spirit and only after a good case was made.

Re:End of Technology Euphoria (1)

rve (4436) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048086)

Essentially, just because we can build this network, doesn't mean we should. I'm giving a big nod of the head to the EU over this one.

You misunderstand. This has nothing to do with fighting terrorism or protecting privacy, but everything to do with tax evasion. As long as the US has official, legal access to European banking data, it's a lot less safe for American tax evaders to use Europe based banks to keep their unreported money.

The US will obviously still have access to all this data via unofficial channels, for use in counter terrorism, but I doubt that illegally obtained data could be used in court to prosecute a tax evader.

Much better that this data... (1, Insightful)

John Hasler (414242) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047472)

...only be available to European governments.

Re:Much better that this data... (4, Informative)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047558)

Well... Yes, frankly.

We have stronger data protection and personal privacy laws in the EU than those in the US seem to have, and just as important, people here seem to be generally more aware of the need for data protection and privacy after a string of high profile screw-ups. Both governments and businesses do get slapped down from time to time for trying to go too far.

The balance is still too far in favour of the data miners, and I think as time passes and the consequences become more apparent we will see popular opinion sway further toward protecting privacy. But even today, it's paradise here compared to the US, where even if there are legal safeguards, the executive and intelligence agencies are demonstrably willing to ignore them and then invoke special privilege crap to cover themselves after the fact.

Bottom line: Why the hell should EU-level bureaucrats kissing US ass give away sensitive data to the US when our laws would normally prohibit such action? Answer: because the unelected guys pushed it through literally within their final hours with that authority, knowing that as soon as the Lisbon Treaty took effect and elected MEPs started to get more power they wouldn't get away with it. The MEPs are now doing their job and fixing this problem.

Re:Much better that this data... (2, Interesting)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047792)

Sorry to bust your (probably British) bubble but there was nothing unelected about the guys that tried to sell us out.

They were all appointed by democratically elected governments.
So whoever has issues with the action taken should go to their own national representative.

Or do you want to have an election for every clown in office?

Re:Much better that this data... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048132)

The European Commission (y'know, the people with the actual power in the EU) are not elected.

Re:Much better that this data... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048340)

But the members of the UK government are elected....oh wait, nevermind.

Re:Much better that this data... (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048430)

Indeed, just as most if not all members of European governments (the prominent exception is the UK) are not elected on a personal basis.

Most European democracies elect a parliament and the parliament appoints a government which does not (at all) have to be made up out of members of the elected parliament.

So the way the European Council is made up is entirely democratic, these guys have to answer to their national parliaments and since the Lisbon Treaty also to the MEP's.

Re:Much better that this data... (1)

JAlexoi (1085785) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049460)

And yet there are countries in the EU that in spite of people wanting more partnership like relations with US, bow down to every whim of the US of A. The biggest one is obviously Poland. Beating out UK, where there is a little bit of resistance left.

Elect every clown in office? Not such a bad idea. (1)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049524)

Sorry to bust your (probably British) bubble but there was nothing unelected about the guys that tried to sell us out.

They were all appointed by democratically elected governments.

Appointed, not elected, yes.

Democratically elected governments? Not here in the UK, that's for sure.

  • Labour received the support of only 22% of the population at the last general election. That corresponds to only 1/3 or so of those who actually voted; about twice as many people voted against them as for them.
  • Labour lost the popular vote in England outright. The Conservatives actually won that one.
  • Labour dropped Blair and held a coronation for Brown, which is explicitly and exactly what the voters were told repeatedly and unambiguously that they were not voting for if they voted Labour.

In short, the Brown administration has no popular mandate, not even if you accept the premise that electing individual MPs to the legislature and then determining who forms the executive by which party has the most MPs is a democratic system. The only way Brown's administration has any legitimacy is if you accept the black-and-white premise that a party in our system is entitled to do whatever it likes once elected, even if that directly contradicts what it told the voters before the election that it would do. Reconciling that with any claim of representative democracy is a pretty tough sell.

Or do you want to have an election for every clown in office?

If you mean everyone who has legislative powers, or who leads an organisation that has any statutory authority and/or spends a significant amount of taxpayers' money, then I really don't have much problem with that idea.

No, we could not continue to run our current form of government effectively under such a system, and yes, a lot of consolidation and centralisation of authority with directly elected (and therefore personally accountable) people would be required. I really don't have much problem with that idea, either.

Almost everything that has gone wrong with our government at any level in recent years could have been prevented if there were a direct feedback loop between those making the rules/spending the money and those they supposedly represent. Note, for example, the sharp contrast between the actions of the guys you claim were elected, and the actions of those who are in fact directly accountable to the people they are supposed to represent.

Re:Much better that this data... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31049200)

Not the British: Have you tried driving around London and noticing all the recording cameras? And the incessant demands for acceptable electronic ID to handle money, use the subway, or open an account? I haven't seen the like since East Germany before the fall of the Berlin Wall.

Re:Much better that this data... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049584)

The thing is, even with the bad areas here, at least we tend to tell our government and police/security services to shove it when they step over the line, and things usually get toned down to more reasonable levels once the initial hype behind the latest draconian measure has died down. See, for example, the way that ID cards have almost completely dropped off the political radar lately, recent public concern over the virtual strip searches being rolled out at airports, the actions of people in recording and circulating video of police abuses at peaceful demonstrations and the general concern over offensive tactics like kettling, and yes, the backlash that is building over the amount of CCTV we have now that its general lack of fitness for purpose and the frequency of abuse are becoming more widely understood.

Sadly, these things operate on political timescales measured in years, and it usually takes similar lengths of time to understand and fix the problems. Injustices do happen in between, and we do as a society put up with more crap than I would like for longer than I would prefer. But at least we still seem to have a healthy degree of scepticism both within significant chunks of the general population and within both the directly elected parts of our government and our judiciary.

Now, here's the kicker: even with all of these delays and the ever-present threats to basic rights, we still do better than the US, where it appears that any pretense of the federal government following even constitutional rules to protect the privacy and personal data of citizens is just a punchline (and God help anyone who isn't a US citizen and wants to have their basic rights respected, because the US legal system certainly won't).

Some of your other claims are simply untrue: you don't need electronic ID for any of the things you mentioned. You do need some basic ID to open financial accounts these days, as a basic precaution against money laundering, but the requirements are reasonable given the nature of financial accounts, and not onerous for the person doing the opening.

Sudden outbreak of common sense (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047482)

Sudden outbreak of common sense

withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!! (2)

viraltus (1102365) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047500)

Isn't the US the one that got attack the 9/11 or I got it wrong? Is it the US then the one interested in a withhold information war? Does not sound like a smart threat unless the plans US to ban every flight coming from Europe... Those kind of threats shows politicians have little class and less brain.

Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!! (1)

sopssa (1498795) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047576)

It's one of those things politicians will pull out as a card against other politicians so they couldn't say anything against it. "So you do not want to fight against terrorism then?" "So you aren't interested to protect our children?"

Works good against US politicians, but at least we still have EU politicians who see it's a totally irrelevant issue and not a reason to drop all privacy laws.

Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!! (2, Funny)

Jesus_666 (702802) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048788)

The problem is, this doesn't just work against politicians. It also works against countries. The USA claim to have informations about terrorists, which they are unwilling to share with the Eurpean Union unless we hand over the data. Let's see what kind of headlines we can come up with based on that.

Generic newspapers:
USA Hold Free World at Gunpoint, Demand Bank Data for Continued Safety
USA Withholding Terrorism Data Until Demands are Met

Big, reputable papers:
America's Deadly Game - how Uncle Sam trades our safety for his convenience
Give Freely or Die - how Washington uses terrorists as leverage against our privacy
From the Land of the Free to the land of the spies - a timeline

Sensationalist rags:
ARE THE USA PART OF THE AXIS OF EVIL?
HOW AMERICA IS PROTECTING THE TERRORISTS
OBAMA BIN LADEN WANTS TO MESS WITH YOUR BANK ACCOUNT
CAN THE USA SUPPORT TERRORISTS? "YES, WE CAN!"


Yes, there's some horrible spin in there but I can really imagine seeing those headlines. It's really easy to spin this to make the USA look really bad and in a sense it's not even that wrong a viewpoint: The USA, who keep going on about how terrorism is the biggest problem of our generation, willingly keep terrorism-relevant information from others. Either they have been lying about how dangerous the terrorists are or their conduct is seriously unethical. Of course anyone with a bone to pick will have a ball going on from there.

Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!! (0, Troll)

kubitus (927806) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047670)

who was responsible for the steering of the two planes is not yet out

A senior NATO Air-commander claims that a special 747 equipped to remote control airplanes was in the airspace over NY at that time.

We here on the eastern rim of the big pond think that the US fed Osama and the Taliban as long as it served their wish to get the Russians out of Afghanistan.The US has a history of making allies with whoever is helping them at the moment, without any thought of the day after.

The US declared a borderless world - dropped Visa applications and has now re-invented them with the data-transfers of every passenger.

I recently visited China. Their Immigration Officers make you think you come into a civilized country.

I have been also to the US. Their Immigration Officers make you think came from the Gestapo or the SSD

Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!! (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047832)

Thank God you're real life observations in China are better than your following of loony conspiracy theories.

And please stop speaking about "We here" when you are spreading such nonsense.

Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048062)

Seek help.

We know damn well who piloted those planes. To sit around and concoct these wild-eyed 9/11 conspiracy theories does nothing but great disservice to the deceased and their families. Quite frankly, it's pretty damn sick.

Conspiracy theories as thought games are one thing, but to run around proclaiming, "we still don't know who did it, guys!!", is just flat out wrong.

Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!! (4, Insightful)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047732)

Yeah right, 9/11 is the only successful terrorist attack ever.
In the mean time don't be a moron, Europe has just as much to gain by effective anti terrorist intelligence as the rest of the civilised world.

But there was nothing civilised or intelligent about the SWIFT treaty as it stood, it was utterly one-sided.

We cannot avoid having learned from the stupidities in international politics the Bush-era has bestowed on the world, there were no safeguards what-so-ever the data was going to be used for purpose.

When the US government can make a case sharing of European banking data is going to help all sides in our joint fight against violent and criminal zealots of any description I'm sure they could win the support of Europe.

Because the UN includes some rather nasty members I won't go so far as to suggest a UN institute should do the intelligence but an international body is the only reliable way to handle such sensitive data.

We all remember what happened when a European delegation was in China to sign off on an important Airbus contract and a US company could out of the blue undercut the price.

Banking information is sensitive!

As much to gain!!!!?? WTF2!!! (1)

viraltus (1102365) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048520)

Europe has as much to gain as the US!!?? You gotta be fucking kidding me. Last time someone tried to blow up an airplane was not in Europe (despite the guy flew first here with the bomb and he didn't try) but in the US, and every single attack from terrorist in Europe or US has been preceded by US international policy, and you call me moron? get a mirror if you look for one.

Threating Europe with a withhold of cooperation in terrorism is dumb stupid, it is like if Haiti would threat the US with a withhold of cooperation in humanitarian matters.

To be honest, I do not even fully believe this piece of news, because you gotta be out of your mind to threat a whole continent in such a way if they don't give you private data of their citizens.

Re:As much to gain!!!!?? WTF2!!! (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049432)

Yo boy, terrorists haven't and don't only go for planes.
When you're on the receiving end of an attack it doesn't matter much what triggered the terrorist, be it US policies or the guy's wife that ran off.

Better start watching more than American Idol :)

Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31049316)

US "terrorist intelligence" has also demonstrated itself to be politically driven doggerel, such as the "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq" and the "terrorists" held in Guantanamo Bay, some of whom have already been murdered under torture in secret interrogation installations. (http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368). Such "intelligence" causes far more death and destruction than it prevents: from decades of experience with the PLO, the IRA, Basque insurgents, Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan under the Russions, they know _exactly_ what happens when you replace law and courts with "stopping terrorism".

It's about time! (2, Insightful)

synoniem (512936) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047552)

Not that I trust my government but at least they are my government. It's obvious that the EU does not really care about data from European citizens going to the US but our international firms do. And further it's quite simple: not one bankrecord from the US went to Europe while all bankrecords from Europe went to the US. And that has to get even now.

Sorry, that is completely wrong (4, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047560)

At the moment, only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot. The real ballot is on Thursday next week. Up to then, the US American administration (including the US ambassador to the EU and Hillary Clinton) put pressure (including various legal and illegal threats) on the Members of the European Parliament to change their mind. They were already successful insofar that the ballot was moved from Wednesday to Thursday. And as I consider the European politicians as corrupt and ready to betray the basic rights of the European people in order to gain more control over them, I guess the Americans will be successful in getting their SWIFT treaty exactly as they want it.

Re:Sorry, that is completely wrong (4, Interesting)

lordholm (649770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047624)

I think you undervalue the fury from the parliament on the fact that the Council snuck the deal through the day before Lisbon went into effect (had it been done the day after, the EP would have had the right to add their amendments to the deal). Lots of MEPs are really really pissed at the Council for this and they really want to flex their muscles against the Council (which I think is a good thing since the EP is accountable to the citizens).

Re:Sorry, that is completely wrong (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047706)

You are right, but isn't it really bad that being offended is the reason to vote against it and not audacity of the American demand to get highly personal data of European people en masse without control, without protection, without rights?

Re:Sorry, that is completely wrong (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047974)

It is sad that revenge is part of the equation.

But it did help put the issue on the agenda with MEP's that would otherwise have paid little interest.

Now lets hope they get a taste and look further, for example at the demands re. passenger data on flights to the US.

Re:Sorry, that is completely wrong (2, Insightful)

countertrolling (1585477) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048156)

...which I think is a good thing since the EP is accountable to the citizens

Only if the citizens hold them accountable. And it's long past time to hold the citizens accountable for the politicians they elect.

Re:Sorry, that is completely wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047766)

At the moment, only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot. The real ballot is on Thursday next week. Up to then, the US American administration (including the US ambassador to the EU and Hillary Clinton) put pressure (including various legal and illegal threats) on the Members of the European Parliament to change their mind. They were already successful insofar that the ballot was moved from Wednesday to Thursday. And as I consider the European politicians as corrupt and ready to betray the basic rights of the European people in order to gain more control over them, I guess the Americans will be successful in getting their SWIFT treaty exactly as they want it.

Umm, there's no such thing as an "illegal threat" in international relations.

Welcome to reality.

It sucks.

Wake up an realize it.

Re:Sorry, that is completely wrong (4, Insightful)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047842)

Member states are bound by EU law. They cannot legally enter into bilateral agreements instead. In any case a divide et impera won't happen, it is too complicated. Diplomates are bound by a code of conduct. Proliferation of financial data is espionage, for officials without a legal base treason. SWIFT is a private company.

The procedure is wrongly depicted: "At the moment, only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot. The real ballot is on Thursday next week." The responsible committee and the rapporteur discuss it and then submit their report to plenary for adoption. Their report says "sorry, we cannot accept the agreement."

The European Parliament is pissed for another reason: The Council concluded the agreement one day before the entering into force of Lisbon. The Council adoption was an affront on Parliament competences.

US administration directly lobbying the European Parliament members contravenes the diplomatic protocol.

reasonable request, but... (3, Insightful)

lordholm (649770) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047588)

It is reasonable that individual requests for banking data in the EU can be done by the US, but as should always be the case, this should go through proper channels, which means a court decision with human beings taking decisions. Secondly, if a person is investigated and not found to be involved in anything, he should be notified and given compensation. Further, if the US should be given access to EU banking data, then the US should grant the EU authorities access to US data (hah... that will never happen...). From a procedural point of view, this was one of the few real fuckups by the Swedish presidency of the Union. The deal was approved by the Council the day before the Lisbon treaty went into effect. This meant that the Parliament could not have anything to say in the contents (which they would have had if it had been passed the day after). Now, the Parliament cannot amend it, but they can reject it which I think the Council did not think of, now they get what they deserve :) And for all those who dislike Lisbon, can you tell me what is the problem with parliamentary influence over the additional areas given in the treaty?

I miss two or three things: (1)

kubitus (927806) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047596)

I miss the apologies of the US for stealing data from a foreign, but friendly country!

I miss the clear statement that such data sharing is mandatory bidirectional!1

And I would like to have the same transparency about US state Delaware's mailbox-companies financial transactions!

Trade ya some lives for a bank account. (3, Interesting)

Stumbles (602007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047658)

So lets see if I grasp this correctly. The US is willing to hold hostage certain bits of terrorist information over banking data. Hm.

that banking data *IS* terrorist information (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048054)

The US is not talking about withholding "so-and-so is planning to blow up such-and-such on this date" information, only intelligence information that has no more ability to identify a terrorists identify, location or plans than the banking data does. Which is to say, you need to already have 3-4 (or 10-15) other 3-4 bits of information to put together with what's been withheld (whether its banking data from the EU or who-talked-to-who data from the US) in order to figure out who is a terrorist or where they're operating.

The data being exchanged (and which would stop being exchanged if all the governments' threats go through as promised) are not asymmetric in quality, despite your choice to of words that are as disingenuous as any chosen by the RIAA.

(and, no, I don't think the EU should continue giving the US any more banking data than they were before 9/11)

Re:that banking data *IS* terrorist information (1)

Stumbles (602007) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048726)

You are the one being disingenuous attempting to associate the RIAA with what I said.

Not quite (5, Informative)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047660)

--- Problem ---

  • The current agreement is unacceptable for Europeans and would be interim anyway
  • The US embassador to the European Union, William Kennard blackmailed members of the European Parliament and the leaders of the groups. He has to abstain from interference into the inner affairs of the EU and violated the rules of diplomatic conduct. His black mail attempt was foolish because it is impossible for member states to enter bilateral agreements with the US and that would be an unbearable and illegal act of illoyality. His bluff: 'I am unsure whether Washington agencies would again decide to address this issue at EU level'
  • The European Commission thought they could ignore the European Parliament as the competent body. Currently a new Commission is put into office.
  • SWIFT data is toxic and European financial institutions are very sensitive about this. The use of the SWIFT data for anti-terrorism purposes is fishy.
  • Europeans get nothing in return for the transmission of their sensitive data

--- Process ---

Agreement between the EU and the USA on
the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the
European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist
Finance Tracking Program, Rapporteur: Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert (A7-0013/2010)

  ---- Scenarios and options ----

  • Restore the honour of the US diplomatic corps by a dismissal of the offender Kennard
  • Interinstitutional deal and adoption (Clinton)
  • Rejection by the European Parliament plenary and renewed referral.
  • Even stronger resolution by the European Parliament than what the Committee proposed, given the latest incidents.

A rejection is currently likely. See the debate and voting timetable at Seance en direct [europa.eu] .

  ---- Documents ----

Re:Not quite (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047774)

Thanks for the excellent summary.

Missing component:

*IF* (very big IF) data is supplied to the US, 100% identical data needs to come back. Ditto for flight and travel information. Symmetry is very much needed before any kind of trust can be restored. It is always a one-way circus, and it's time this stops. Collaboration? No problem, but not when one of the parties thinks so low of the other party that they have the nerve to try bullying them.

There has been far too much of that, and it isn't needed. The US has plenty to offer without lowering itself to such tactics, even though they became standard modus operandi under the last government, and the rot so introduced will take a couple more years to get rid of.

This is one of the opportunities to think again in terms of diplomacy instead of blackmail and arm twisting - and an agreement willingly entered into needs less effort to be kept.

Re:Not quite (1)

Elektroschock (659467) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047850)

The reason why it is foolish of the US to make much fuzz: There are other, similar transatlantic agreements ahead such as PNR.

At least the US negotiates (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047678)

Because we all know that the French, British, Russians, Chinese, Cubans, Iranians, Israelis, and maybe even the Venezualans all ask before cracking European databases containing private data....

Yes, that's a pretty good list of the countries other than the US that conduct global intelligence gathering.

What, you think those countries DON'T do that?

Re:At least the US negotiates (1)

KDR_11k (778916) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047836)

Cracking is slightly different from being handed it on a silver platter, cracking can be intercepted by counter-intelligence.

Re:At least the US negotiates (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31049964)

HAHA you seriously think Cuba has an international spy ring and is a threat of any sort...

Is it a two-way thing? (2, Interesting)

Peachy (21944) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047838)

I wonder whether the Federal Reserve + CHIPS systems, through which similar transfers are cleared in the US, share pertinent data with EU governments?

Re:Is it a two-way thing? (1)

Teun (17872) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048002)

Don't you worry :)

The news about the SWIFT treaty included bits about it being completely one-way.

This is a big reason to not do IT in the US (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31047856)

The United States Government claims all in the name of security, but in doing so, steals everyone elses information whenever possible. They call their justification "The Patriot Act", which allows them to steal all information on any computer in the US. Now its true that in the US, they are not allowed to divulge information about Americans. Foreign nationals, and information about people in other countries don't get any kind of consideration in this manner. The short answer is: all others are ripe for the picking! Banking information, health records, scientific, technical, any other kind of information is stealable by the US government, and since they aren't stealing from Americans, they haven't broken any laws! The rule goes like this: 1. The US gov't. can steal information from Amercians, if the Americans complain, then they are not being patriotic, 2. stealing information from foreigners is ok since they aren't Americans. 3. whenever possible, apply the rule "Might Makes Right". If they argue with you, show them the business end of a shotgun. If they pull out a bigger gun, keep pulling out bigger guns of your own, till you have to start pulling out devices with radiation symbols painted on them. At that point, negotiations may be possible. 4. Apply American laws to foreign nationals whenever possible. Ignore foreign laws even in foreign countries. Cite this line "It doesn't apply to me, I'm an American". 5. Remember at all times: God put Americans in a special place. Foreigners don't count, so moral codes don't apply to them. You can even behave as a Psychopath in their countries, and when in doubt, apply rules 1-4.
Sincerely,
Government of the United States of America
Department of Homeland Security, CIA, NSA, DOD, etc.

Tyrants (2, Insightful)

paxcoder (1222556) | more than 4 years ago | (#31047990)

"The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is cancelled" - US threatening Europe. Now, someone's crazy here. And it's not Europe (see also: software patents).

Familiar tactics (5, Insightful)

Erikderzweite (1146485) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048008)

So, the US government has terrorist intelligence in its power, demands access to European bank data and threatens to cut off the cooperation on terrorist intelligence (which may result in death of many people*) if its demands are not meat.
This is a well-known tactics used by several smaller organizations and groups around the globe. Can't recall the name of a prominent one though... Al-Qsomething...

* I don't believe that US' intelligence is useful (e.g. WMD), nor do I believe in terrorism fear-mongering, nor do I want to give up my rights for this -- free society has a price which I am ready to accept.

What are we the Mafia now? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048074)

Withholding terrorism help if they cancel the program? I can just see some government negotiator saying "You know, it would be a shame if something was to... happen."

Summary (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#31048260)

USA wants their unintelligence agencies to have acces to the EU banking information over SWIFT for a period of nine months (if it is so important for fighting terrorism, why don't they want a permanent deal?).

They do not give ANYTHING in return (our agencies don't have acces to their banking data).

They don't give any guarantees about how and when the data will be accesed.

They don't give any guarantees that the information won't be transmitted to 3rd partys, nor do they give guarantees about privacy.

You will only hear three words from any european: go f*** yourselves.

Minor hickup (0)

lorg (578246) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048598)

I seriously wonder if this is going to be more then a minor hickup at worst even if it goes thru. Can't they just get one of the "friendly" EU members to make them a copy as the info comes across the wire and pipe it over to them. Shouldn't be rocket science. I'm sure one of them nice countries that lent the CIA a few prison blocks to store them undesirable terrorists for "harsh questioning" etc wouldn't mind offering this service to.

They don't share US data with EU members. Question remains; is that something we really want? I'm not exactlly in fear of some US born or based terrorists coming over to Europe to end life as we know it. Seems fairly unlikely. Even if they where coming I'm not sure swapping banking data would stop them or really help track them down. So it seems to me that US banking transaction data would be a fairly useless request or demand. If we should trade for it, atleast trade it for something useful.

So it's not like they are not going to get their hands on it in the end if they really want to. This just seems like politico theater at its finest, each blaming the other and pretending to be the stand up guys.

so it's like this, (1)

Adult film producer (866485) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048608)

"Give us the banking data or innocent people in your european union may die in terrorist attacks."

Fuck... I'm glad we have this global war on terror. I feel safer already. Who's to say that the euros will not reciprocate?

Fat lot of good their own intelligence did them (1)

mimiru (1130095) | more than 4 years ago | (#31048934)

The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled

Like US intelligence means something. Fat lot of good their own intelligence did them.

remember the Marshall Plan... (3, Insightful)

anechoic (129368) | more than 4 years ago | (#31049262)

...which was merely a way for the US to quickly expand its markets into a war torn Europe while busting unions to keep labor cheap and subverting at all costs to keep capitalism expanding - not only did the US make money on WWII but it made even more by 'rebuilding' Europe and installing our corporations and military everywhere it could

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>