×

Announcing: Slashdot Deals - Explore geek apps, games, gadgets and more. (what is this?)

Thank you!

We are sorry to see you leave - Beta is different and we value the time you took to try it out. Before you decide to go, please take a look at some value-adds for Beta and learn more about it. Thank you for reading Slashdot, and for making the site better!

Dutch Court Says Government Can Receive Bulk Data from NSA

Unknown Lamer posted about 4 months ago | from the convenient-loophole dept.

Privacy 109

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.

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

Yep. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522069)

Sounds about right.

Re:Yep. (-1, Flamebait)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 4 months ago | (#47522229)

Keep in mind that this was the same country that was notorious for Nazi collaboration. Their WWII statue should probably feature a Dutchman pointing to a house.

Re:Yep. (4, Insightful)

pahles (701275) | about 4 months ago | (#47522303)

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

Re:Yep. (1)

kilfarsnar (561956) | about 4 months ago | (#47522387)

Don't forget power and hegemony!

Re:Yep. (1, Insightful)

Crashmarik (635988) | about 4 months ago | (#47522567)

Which country is this ?

The only one I can think of that hasn't started a war for monetary is Monaco, and that might just be ignorance on my part.

Godwin and wrong at the same time (3, Informative)

Crashmarik (635988) | about 4 months ago | (#47522355)

http://www.historylearningsite... [historylea...site.co.uk]

The dutch not only resisted the Nazis, they openly had strikes and did more to protect their Jewish citizens than virtually any other country in Europe.

Re:Godwin and wrong at the same time (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522403)

Bullshit. The Netherlands had the highest rate of Jewish deportation of any Nazi-occupied country in Europe. They fell all over themselves turning in Jews. All that "We resisted" shit is what the grandparents tell their grandkids so they won't have to admit the truth. And the truth is that 75% of Dutch Jews died in concentration camps, a way higher percentage than almost any other occupied country. The Dutch didn't hide their Jews, they handed them over as fast as they could.

Read up on it [wikipedia.org]

Maybe you should read the link you post? (3, Informative)

MRe_nl (306212) | about 4 months ago | (#47522461)

Shortly after it was established, the Nazi military regime began to persecute the Jews of the Netherlands. In 1940, there were no deportations and only small measures were taken against the Jews. In February 1941, the Nazis deported a small group of Dutch Jews to Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp. The Dutch reacted with the February strike, a nationwide protest against the deportations, unique in the history of Nazi-occupied Europe. Although the strike did not accomplish muchâ"its leaders were executedâ"it was an initial setback for Seyss-Inquart as he had planned to both deport the Jews and to win the Dutch over to the Nazi cause. Before the February strike, the Nazis had installed a Jewish Council: a board of Jews, headed by Professor David Cohen and Abraham Asscher, who served as an instrument for organising the identification and deportation of Jews more efficiently, while the Jews on the council were told and convinced they were helping the Jews. In May 1942, Jews were ordered to wear the Star of David badges. Around the same time the Catholic Church of the Netherlands publicly condemned the government's action in a letter read at all Sunday parish services. Thereafter, the Nazi government treated the Dutch more harshly: notable Socialists were imprisoned, and, later in the war, Catholic priests, including Titus Brandsma, were deported to concentration camps. Of the 140,000 Jews who had lived in the Netherlands before 1940, only 30,000 (21%) survived the war. But the real picture was even worse than this suggests. The Netherlands had the highest Jewish death toll of any western European country. Of the approximately 107,000 Jews deported to the camps, only 5000 survived; a survival rate of less than 5%. On top of that, included in that number were about 900 Jews still in Westerbork at war's end and not in the same extremis as those deported. This high death toll had a number of reasons. One was the excellent state of Dutch civil records: the Dutch state, before the war, had recorded substantial information on every Dutch national. This allowed the Nazi regime to determine easily who was Jewish (whether fully or partly of Jewish ancestry) simply by accessing the data. More to the point, the Dutch attitude of "going along to get along" with the Nazis made many Dutch workers more or less willing collaborators in the effort.

Another factor was the disbelief of both the Dutch public as a whole and the Dutch Jews themselves. Most could not believe that the Jews would be subjected to genocide and sent to death camps. This meant the Jews needed to hide in others' homes, but that was difficult especially in urban areas. It was also punishable by death. Despite the risks, many Dutch people helped Jews. One-third of the people who hid Jews did not survive the war.

Re:Maybe you should read the link you post? (1, Insightful)

Tokolosh (1256448) | about 4 months ago | (#47523705)

This high death toll had a number of reasons. One was the excellent state of Dutch civil records: the Dutch state, before the war, had recorded substantial information on every Dutch national. This allowed the Nazi regime to determine easily who was Jewish (whether fully or partly of Jewish ancestry) simply by accessing the data.

This is why I refuse to provide racial or ethnic information whenever I am asked. Also for my children.

As I've said before (0)

MRe_nl (306212) | about 4 months ago | (#47525827)

I don't mind my (local) government having some sort of file on me, (preferably no racial or ethnic information as you so rightly state) but I would rather have it on paper and in a wooden building, so if we're ever occupied or a dictatorship arises the files are relatively easy to destroy : ).

Re:Godwin and wrong at the same time (1, Insightful)

Crashmarik (635988) | about 4 months ago | (#47522479)

If you mean sacrificing your life to defend people

Shortly after it was established, the military regime began to persecute the Jews of the Netherlands. In 1940, there were no deportations and only small measures were taken against the Jews. In February 1941, the Nazis deported a small group of Dutch Jews to Mauthausen-Gusen concentration camp. The Dutch reacted with the February strike, a nationwide protest against the deportations, unique in the history of Nazi-occupied Europe. Although the strike did not accomplish much—its leaders were executed—it was an initial setback for Seyss-Inquart as he had planned to both deport the Jews and to win the Dutch over to the Nazi cause.

Another factor was the disbelief of both the Dutch public as a whole and the Dutch Jews themselves. Most could not believe that the Jews would be subjected to genocide and sent to death camps.[citation needed] This meant the Jews needed to hide in others' homes, but that was difficult especially in urban areas.[citation needed] It was also punishable by death. Despite the risks, many Dutch people helped Jews. One-third of the people who hid Jews did not survive the war.[citation needed]

BTW that was from your link, you might want to read up on it.

Re:Godwin and wrong at the same time (0, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47523285)

The most fucking ignorant post I've read on Slashdot in a very long time. Nice job.

Re:Godwin and wrong at the same time (0)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 4 months ago | (#47525283)

Some did and some did not. It is unfair to judge the individuals of a nation by the actions of other individuals. None of us know what we would do in the same situation. We all know what we would like to say we do but that is not the same thing.
Of the nations of Europe that had to live under the occupation Norway probably has the best record for resistance. Frankly the Germans didn't treat the Norwegians badly at all. They thought of them as fellow Nordics. They could have sat out the war with little grief but instead they tied down massive numbers of German troops. That being said sitting at your computer and making accusations is not helpful in the least.

Re:Godwin and wrong at the same time (0)

MRe_nl (306212) | about 4 months ago | (#47525749)

I've read a lot about WW II European resistance-movements from my grandfathers library. For pure efficiency I would personally put the Danish resistance in first place.
http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/9518712-hitler-s-savage-canary [goodreads.com]

Re:Godwin and wrong at the same time (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47526081)

7.50 guilders for each jew you sold out to the germans (AND you got to keep his belongings).
That could feed your starving family for a month, at least! It's the hunger that makes you do things, but in some cases it was because of collaborators. And because these stayed alive with that money, their descendants are plenty. It is still taboo to talk about that now, and our historybooks skip on that little detail.
Not that there were no helping people, mostly farmers, that helped out (jews did not get a foodstamp card). Now compare that to France, where there was a real resistance.

sources:
http://www.iisg.nl/hpw/calculate-nl.php
http://kampwesterbork.nl/jodenvervolging/onderduik/verraad/index.html
http://www.tweedewereldoorlog.nl/100voorwerpen/voorwerp/geroofd-bestek/

Re:Godwin and wrong at the same time (0)

Evtim (1022085) | about 4 months ago | (#47523711)

virtually any other country? Read on...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/B... [wikipedia.org]

During the Second World War, unlike some other allies of Nazi Germany and most German-occupied countries, apart from Denmark and Finland, Bulgaria managed to save its entire 48,000-strong Jewish population from deportation to concentration camps, with Dimitar Peshev, leaders of the Bulgarian Church, Tsar Boris, and ordinary citizens all playing a crucial role in preventing such deportations. The story of the Bulgarian Jews during the War has been told in "Beyond Hitler's Grasp: The Heroic Rescue of Bulgaria's Jews"[7] by Michael Bar-Zohar, an Israeli historian, politician and former Knesset member who was born in Bulgaria.

Re:Godwin and wrong at the same time (0)

Crashmarik (635988) | about 4 months ago | (#47524609)

virtually any other country? Read on...

/EMOTE FACEPALM

Somewhere on the internet there is another nit for you to pick maybe next time a little basic English will help

https://www.google.com/search?... [google.com]

virtually
vrCH(w)l/
adverb
adverb: virtually

        1. nearly; almost.
        "virtually all those arrested were accused"
        synonyms: effectively, in effect, all but, more or less, practically, almost, nearly, close to, verging on, just about, as good as, essentially, to all intents and purposes, roughly, approximately; More
        informal pretty much, pretty well;
        literary well-nigh, nigh on
        "the building is virtually empty"
        2. by means of virtual reality techniques.

The reason I used the word virtually was precisely because I didn't want to have a pointless argument about which country during WWII did the least to collaborate, or was the least sympathetic to the Nazis.

Rampant Corruption (5, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522095)

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

Re:Rampant Corruption (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522347)

The politicians are merely complicit in this duplicity. The career bureaucrats are the ones that learn these tricks and get the politicians to pass these kinds of loopholes they can drive a truck through.

Re:Rampant Corruption (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47526087)

The Dutch have about a dozen parties big enough to win seats, and a fair amount of political change between them. And as they don't use a district system, there are no safe seats. This didn't happen because of American-level political entrenchment.

There's still a sizable majority across parties in favor of such wiretapping, for pretty simple reasons: There is broad and active support for terrorism in the Dutch muslim community, in particular in favor of ISIS. In some towns, 1-2 in 10.000 people have already joined ISIS. If this happens on a national scale, the Dutch are looking at 2500 terrorists. It's likely a majority of them will return from Syria and Iraq, based on past behavior. Europe already has had a few terrorist attacks executed by former ISIS members. If the Dutch face 1000 returned terrorists, the same statistics suggest hundreds of bombings and shootings. And the only assumption there is that ratio's stay constant as more jihadi's head to the Middle East.

With such a clear risk, identifying who is joining ISIS, who is returning to continue to fight in Europe, and who is financing all these operations becomes a matter of life and death. Nothing to do with political corruption, then.

Just wow. (5, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47522103)

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. (2)

sribe (304414) | about 4 months ago | (#47522137)

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.

Well, after all, even the Americans have decided that ;-)

Re:Just wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522543)

I see what you did there.

Bright side (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522177)

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 (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522193)

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!

God Americans are self entitled assholes.

The reality is, if you expect us to give up our rights for your security ... well, then we don't give a fuck if a couple of you die here and there. That's your fucking problem.

Fuck America.

Re: Bright side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522223)

Woosh!

Re:Bright side (1)

NotDrWho (3543773) | about 4 months ago | (#47522259)

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

Re:Bright side (4, Insightful)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47522307)

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:Bright side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47523663)

But it's not really about U.S. security you know. 9/11 was a great catastrophe that gave a pretext for what we're seeing now. The tightening of the reins of hegemony.

Re:Bright side (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47522341)

Hmmm, because of the rendering, I thought you'd replied to me, but I see you were replying to an AC.

Still, my point stands.

Re:Bright side (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522805)

Someone's sarcasm detector is very broken. (It's your, by the way.)

Re:Just wow. (1)

x_t0ken_407 (2716535) | about 4 months ago | (#47522183)

Nonsense, you tin-foil-hat-wearer. Hey, didn't you know they just released a trailer for the Fifty Shade of Grey movie!!! Here, have some more bread and circuses!!

Re:Just wow. (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522213)

Says the guy whining from a basement posting to Slashdot. Quite the earth-shattering stuff.

Also, aren't you supposed to show us much of a "rebel" you are by quoting Thomas Jefferson's "tree of liberty" statement while you play armchair general?

Re:Just wow. (1)

x_t0ken_407 (2716535) | about 4 months ago | (#47522559)

Wat. I'm at work, I live in FL and thus don't have a basement, and I fail for feeding your shit. I'll humor you though, what exactly am I supposed to be rebelling against? You seem to know me so well..

Re:Just wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522637)

Since we are all just "sheeple" aren't you supposed to show you how much of a rebel you are instead? If not, simply shit the fuck up since you're doing nothing more important for the world than the people you mock.

Re:Just wow. (1)

x_t0ken_407 (2716535) | about 4 months ago | (#47522785)

You're all just "sheeple"? Wat. Where did you get that from? Stop projecting your insecurities on me, AC.

Re:Just wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47525801)

The implication was quite clear. But since you're a blowhard you'll just whine instead of doing anything of worth.

Re:Just wow. (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522343)

If they remember their own history about how their own census records in the Netherlands was used against Dutch citizens during the German occupation of WWII, then the Dutch should be very concerned about the retention of data on their families by any government, including their own. Nothing gathered is ever completely safe and it can all be used against them.

The mere existance of such records can be an invitation to disaster, no matter how seemingly innocent they appear. The Dutch no doubt proudly included their religious affiliation into their census and the Germans used the census data and IBM Hollerith machines to assist in rounding them up and sending them to death camps.

Even your purchases at the grocery store can get you deemed unclean and unfit to live by the right radical groups. That within the last year you have purchased all the necessary ingredients to produce X bombs, regardless of how you actually used the items. ETC

Re:Just wow. (2)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 4 months ago | (#47522735)

Absolutely right.

I would only add that, in addition to worrying about an evil foreign power getting hold of such records, we should also worry about evil local groups who might be in government some time in the future.

Which is why, in my opinion, these records should be subject to strict time limitations and expire sooner rather than later -- if we decide we need them at all for, you know, only slightly evil purposes.

Re:Just wow. (2)

ObsessiveMathsFreak (773371) | about 4 months ago | (#47522425)

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.

There's nothing surprising in this. Most countries hire consultants and advisors from the same international legal/accounting firms, who themselves have been trained in the same schools of thought, and often the same universities. The international ascendancy is mostly a mono-culture.

Re:Just wow. (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about 4 months ago | (#47522493)

It's a SIGINT network without borders. Welcome to the globalisation of national security.

Re:Just wow. (1)

erikkemperman (252014) | about 4 months ago | (#47522643)

I'm not sure why you are surprised -- wasn't the main reason for these intra-agency deals mainly to circumvent the restrictions to spying on ones own citizens?

That said, we in the Netherlands have an absolutely terrible record -- no pun intended -- of evesdropping and phonetapping and so on.

Re:Just wow. (4, Insightful)

cardpuncher (713057) | about 4 months ago | (#47522737)

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.

Re:Just wow. (1)

mspohr (589790) | about 4 months ago | (#47522949)

It took a few years longer but it does appear that we have finally reached the dystopia of George Orwell's 1984 with omnipresent surveillance, government manipulation, thought crimes, Newspeak, constant war (on terror), and an elite class in control.

Re:Just wow. (1)

Jim Sadler (3430529) | about 4 months ago | (#47522989)

The US has been accused of using Great Britain as a spy agency and having that information sent back to the US and most likely in a reciprocal arrangement. This may predate the current terror issues. What we are seeing is a military that can not fight against a non army type of violent aggression. Therefore intelligence becomes vital as a method of victory over terrorists. This is one of those issues without a good solution. Yes, the level of spying on people by government is dangerous. But failing to do that spying may be even more dangerous. Civilians are caught in the middle and have no access to information that we would need to make any kind of intelligent vote or utter much of an opinion. The US and most other nations have signed the UN bill of rights. If we attach penalties for violation of the UN bill of rights governments would be forced to hold a much higher standard of behavior. Oddly the terrorists are lucky that we are using covert means to fight them. The only other option might be to eliminate them which probably would mean nuclear responses on their cities. If pressed hard enough we have no other effective options than simply bombing them out of existence along with the many millions of innocents who would perish.

Re:Just wow. (1)

CrimsonAvenger (580665) | about 4 months ago | (#47523981)

If we attach penalties for violation of the UN bill of rights governments would be forced to hold a much higher standard of behavior.

I suggest you take a quick look at the UN Veto Powers. Then ask yourself: "how likely are ANY of these countries to want real penalties attached to the UN Bill of Rights?"

If your answer to the question above was "why, all five of them would give the UN Bill of Rights some teeth in a heartbeat, if only someone would suggest it to them", then go right ahead and do so.

Then report to your psychiatrist and tell him you need stronger meds....

Re:Just wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47523535)

every other government is deciding the information sharing is too valuable

Indeed, the NSA should price up the intelligence. Who knows, perhaps the US deficit will be secretly erased by this new economic activity. And if NSA can't do it themselves, they could implement a technology transfer program, NASA style, and harvest the benefits of collaborating with the industry behemoths. Profiteering at the expense of a US and European tax payers can't be bad, can it? Can it?

Re:Just wow. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47523813)

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.

It's inherent in any bureaucracy.

It's like the 166-page PDF from yesterday on how to put someone on the Terrist Watch List. I was actually relieved to see that there was relatively little in there that exploited the "relevant to any criminal investigation" loophole in the PATRIOT Act and similar legal interpretations; they really do seem to be only going after terrists. And yet, it would take only one redefinition - in policy, not law - at any time in the future, to make it happen. And by that time, nobody accustomed to working within the system would bat an eye. Arendt wrote about the banality of evil; there's no need for active malice, merely the application of rules without thinking of their broader implications.

We've grown so accustomed to thinking in terms of whether it's legal or not that we've forgotten to think about whther it's right or not. The doublethink is that when the law prohibits something, it's merely an obstacle to be worked around, and when the law prohibits something we hate, we accuse those who break the law of being immoral. Thus torture can be defined down to "enhanced interrogation," and the response to some kid being charged with terroristic threats for toilet-papering his school is "stop breaking the law, asshole!"

The irony is that we ended the rule out of law not through anarchy, but through blind obediance to the law.

Re:Just wow. (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 4 months ago | (#47525309)

And yet we all want the benefits that come from spying. Even the first arms limitation treaties where based on the ability to spy to verify that they were being followed.

We are B0rg! (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522107)

Stick a fork in it. It's done.

Qui bono (1)

itschy (992394) | about 4 months ago | (#47522115)

And this is why no government really battles the NSA spoofing their citizens!

Re:Qui bono (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522157)

Exactly. It's all just faux outrage to deflect attention from themselves while still being fed data privately by the NSA.

I wouldn't at all be surprised that the whole German government spat with the CIA guy was a publicity stunt that both governments thought up.

At least they're open about it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522127)

Now the citizens can demand that the law be changed. It'll be very difficult for the political class to say no: the law as interpreted by that court is effectively an end-run around constitutional protections.

Re:At least they're open about it. (0)

DickBreath (207180) | about 4 months ago | (#47522169)

They can be open about it because the citizens no longer have any recourse against them. Voting? Don't make me { laugh | cry }.

Re:At least they're open about it. (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47522237)

Voting? Don't make me { laugh | cry }.

"There are four boxes to be used in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury and ammo. Please use in that order."

So, what box are we up to now again?

Re:At least they're open about it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522409)

Honestly, here in America we're still stumbling around incompetently, the soap box step. We're literally still talking about whether all this government abuse is a good idea or not, and virtually nobody ever votes against it.

Every time I run into one of those ammo boxers, I wanna throttle 'em. Dude, can you at least show up at an election, first? No wait, at least put forth a candidate to run against it, first, and then we'll worry about whether or not you could get 1% of voters to participate in the election, instead of resignedly filling in the circle next to the R or D.

I think the problem is your very stated goal. Defense of liberty? Why would we want to defend liberty? Nobody values that. Talk to any Republicrat and you'll hear that liberty is the problem and increasing government power is the cure.

"Those other people aren't choosing to pay for my health care. And someone needs to do something about all these gay people getting married! No matter how people behave differently than I want them to, pointing at gun at their face is a good way to fix the problem."

Re:At least they're open about it. (1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47524013)

Every time I run into one of those ammo boxers, I wanna throttle 'em. Dude, can you at least show up at an election, first? No wait, at least put forth a candidate to run against it, first, and then we'll worry about whether or not you could get 1% of voters to participate in the election, instead of resignedly filling in the circle next to the R or D.

That's the reason I like the box analogy. It's a timeless reminder of what to do and what not to do.

Soap: Rant on the internet. Write your representative. Agitate for better policies. Hey NSA, here we are! Check these dubs!
Ballot: Vote in the fucking primaries if you don't like the fucktards the Republicrats and Demopublicans put up for election. Only 15-30% turnout means that if you could get 5% of the electorate to turn out for a third-party hijack of either mainstream party, you could actually do it. Then vote in the fucking midterms and if you won the primary, either elect your preferred candidate, and if you lost the primary, kick the incumbent out. I'm the first to say that this methodology hasn't worked out so well for governance when the Teahadists hijacked the Republican party 6 years ago, but it was a spectacular proof of concept that demonstrates what a few fanatical fucktards can do with access to a ballot box.
Jury: Vote to acquit. If you like the idea of jury nullification, tell your friends about it. Do not lie on the stand if you are asked about it during voir dire. If they can't empanel a jury for non-crimes, they can't hold a trial. (If they can still find 12 people who think that your non-crime might still be worthy of punishment, maybe you're wrong! Get your ass back to the soap box and the ballot box and make it legal. It's what governments do when they find laws they don't like! :-)
Ammo: Keep the goddamn ammo box closed. We've somehow managed to keep it closed since the 1860s, because the last time we opened it, it sucked balls for both sides. Civil war? Even if you've forgotten your American history, as events in Iraq and Ukraine and elsewhere demonstrate, civil war isn't civil at all. Fuck that noise

It's always appropriate to ask which box you're on. Marriage equality is now legal in almost every state. A few states even let you smoke a plant that makes you feel silly and do dumb shit, but they won't throw you in prison for it anymore. I hate the surveillance state as much as the next guy (sorry NSA!), but those are two significant expansions of freedomes I never thought I'd see in my lifetime, and both have happened in post-9/11 America. Marriage equality needed Soap, Ballot, and Jury boxes. Pot decriminalization appears to have only needed the Soap and Ballot boxes. That's fucking awesome.

Re:At least they're open about it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522175)

Why would the political class listen to the plebes? You still believe the lie that government is for the regular person and not the rich and powerful? How cute...

The only way any of this is going to stop as if the corporations and/or the super wealthy demand it.

Re:At least they're open about it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522207)

The political class listens because of the public furore related to the NSA leaks. Every politician is obligated to pay lip-service to the constitutional protections of privacy in the Netherlands, and to those in the EU.

It's a public disgrace not to, that's why.

(also, I find your knee-jerk cynicism only fitting for an american talking about matters in the Netherlands.)

Re:At least they're open about it. (0)

Desler (1608317) | about 4 months ago | (#47522269)

It's a public disgrace not to, that's why.

Wow so you are that naïve. Amazing.

(also, I find your knee-jerk cynicism only fitting for an american talking about matters in the Netherlands.)

Says the guy being ass fucked by his government and trying to pretend that they actually care about him. Stockholm syndrome must be nice. If they cared about listening to the regular person they wouldn't be doing what they're doing.

Re:At least they're open about it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522321)

>Wow so you are that naïve. Amazing.

Well, I can't argue with your expert name-calling. If you had a proper argument besides a basement-dweller's cynicism from never having even tried, I could. But you've not made one, so I can't.

Re:At least they're open about it. (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522271)

Meh... "So you think you can dance" is on the TV in twenty minutes. The public will have forgotten about this issue in 21 minutes.

Re:At least they're open about it. (2)

gerardrj (207690) | about 4 months ago | (#47522761)

Government can be accountable to the people. The wealthy have the means to promote their viewpoints loudly but the only viewpoints and opinions that matter are what goes on in the voting booths.
If the lazy Americans would stop re-electing 90%+ of the politicians they all state are doing a lousy job then perhaps we could get something productive done, like undoing a lot of the stupid that was enacted in the past 60 years. Party lines aren't the problem and people need to get over it and just vote the incumbents out.

If we start getting regular turn-over of elected officials then the back-room deals, the special interest groups, the lobbying all become less effective as they're starting from 0 every election cycle. The problems are caused by the old white men who've been in Congress or state legislatures for decades and the entrenched system of donations, perks and fringe benefits given to them by those with money. Will it be ideal? No. Will it be better? Probably.

Re:At least they're open about it. (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47523787)

If we start getting regular turn-over of elected officials then the back-room deals, the special interest groups, the lobbying all become less effective as they're starting from 0 every election cycle

Not really, the former elected people just become the new lobbyists. Or the former lobbyists become the new political appointees.

And the cycle continues.

What constitutional protections? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522413)

The Dutch constitution is full of "You have the right to $whatever EXCEPT WHERE YOU DO NOT".

Yes, really, it's full of "... exceptions by law excepted" in various wordings, making the constitution effectively subordinate to those excepting laws.

Not that this makes much difference in practice to how the US constitution gets treated, though it perhaps requires less supreme court opinions full of tortured logic. But reading it is certainly a bit disheartening.

Re:What constitutional protections? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522591)

Those of the EU.

And I'm personally quite happy that the right to private property doesn't extend to people.

Re:What constitutional protections? (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 4 months ago | (#47525873)

Exactly. Everyone is equal. Except of course for the Royal fucking family.
In Holland you can become everything you want, except for head of state -- that
is largely dependent on the hole you crawled out of.

ye olde loophole(e) (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522165)

This has been the standard loophole since World War 2. The same deal is in place with reciprocation between all nations that were concerned about soviet expansion. Most nations were forbidden from spying on their own citizens, so they asked neighboring nations to alert them about any of their citizens who became involved with suspicious foreign parties. The methods of observation varied some, but be aware that even without NSA violating their chartered limits, every US citizen and most "undocumented residents" are somewhere in the English and French bulk spying data.

What about a mutual spying arrangement? (1)

DickBreath (207180) | about 4 months ago | (#47522179)

If we pay you to spy on our citizens, because we're not allowed to do it ourselves, then will you pay us to spy on your citizens because you cannot do that yourself?

It's good for the global economy because money changes hands. (Nevermind that no actual goods or benefits to society are procduced.)

Everyone is happy. (Nevermind citizens in the global police state.)

Re:What about a mutual spying arrangement? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47523049)

I suspect this is actually being done right now.

Why do we bother? (3, Insightful)

meta-monkey (321000) | about 4 months ago | (#47522189)

Look, just install the telescreens in our homes already. Drop the charade, we all know where it's going. You know we're not going to do anything about it. Let's just cut to the chase and get it over with.

Re:Why do we bother? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522369)

Because it isn't voyeurism if they know they are being watched.

Re:Why do we bother? (1)

Sloppy (14984) | about 4 months ago | (#47522481)

Look, just install the telescreens in our homes already.

Be patient. We're still in the voluntary phase of that, right now. If enough people say no to the unauditable smartphones and smart TVs, we can eventually get to compulsory installation, but for right now, what's the hurry? People are doing it without even being told to.

Re:Why do we bother? (1)

x_t0ken_407 (2716535) | about 4 months ago | (#47522593)

This, but eventually we'll need to convince people that if you don't have a smartphone, ipad, smart TV or other such device, you MUST be a terrorist. I mean, why else would one live "off-grid"?

Re:Why do we bother? (1)

Sockatume (732728) | about 4 months ago | (#47522501)

I'm not saying that Kinect did this already, but I'm going to heavily imply it with the first clause of this sentence.

Re:Why do we bother? (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522581)

Lol, win.

Quid Pro Quo (1)

El Jynx (548908) | about 4 months ago | (#47522197)

And just what is our Dutch government giving back to the NSA? I'm pretty sure it's not fresh Dutch cabbages. The Dragnet is apparently global. How long until someone gets arrested just for blogging negatively about a politician? A banker? A NSA employee? This is an old, old cycle and marks the start of the end of an empire. Rome, Arabia and many others show this trend. Humans can and will conspire against each other in an ever growing bid for power until the masses once again have to overthrow the few. Only thing is, we can't win with pitchforks anymore, we need tanks and choppers. And they're decidedly harder to come by.

Name change (1)

ketomax (2859503) | about 4 months ago | (#47522297)

About time we start calling it the ISA.

Let's sell child porn to The Netherlands (2)

Sloppy (14984) | about 4 months ago | (#47522331)

Though we'll face some risks from our own governments, it's a relief to know at the Dutch government would have no problem with me selling kiddie porn (as long as it was made in America) to Dutch citizens. "No crime happened here, within our jurisdiction," they'd say.

In fact, the Dutch government should tolerate our new businesses even more than this NSA thing, since the victims (whereever their rights were violated) won't even be Dutch citizens. No Netherlander will have any reason to say their government let them down.

Re:Let's sell child porn to The Netherlands (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522537)

Not only the creation of but also the sale is criminalized in The Netherlands. So you'll have to sell that collection of child pornography of yours elsewhere, I'm afraid.

Re:Let's sell child porn to The Netherlands (1)

TomRC (231027) | about 4 months ago | (#47522583)

But it'll be perfectly OK if you do it for the Dutch government.

Re:Let's sell child porn to The Netherlands (1)

Sloppy (14984) | about 4 months ago | (#47523689)

..the sale is criminalized in The Netherlands.

My point is that the court's recent decision suggests the above is an outdated, quaint law which no longer reflects the society that The People wish to have, nor which reflects the new way of thinking about reponsibility and the relationship between demand and the victimizing acts which serve that demand.

Thus, I'm sure the Dutch people will soon be revising their kiddie porn laws. Huh? Whaddya mean, "no?" Why not? ;-)

Re:Let's sell child porn to The Netherlands (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47522649)

"No crime happened here, within our jurisdiction," they'd say.

Which would seem to invalidate pretty much any extradition treaty, wouldn't it?

If you can commit what would be a crime in another country, and there's no law against it, you can't be extradited.

Clearly, nobody could be extradited from the US to the Netherlands for this, so why should anybody ever be extradited to the US for anything? If the stuff America does is outside of everyone else's law, then obviously, anything you do from outside the US to the US is clearly legal, right?

Oh, wait, this only gets applied to governments when they skirt around their own laws, not to the rest of us.

Such bullshit.

Can't they just... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522473)

Can't they just get the same thing from China or Russia?

Seems a bit odd... (3, Funny)

TomRC (231027) | about 4 months ago | (#47522573)

So, it's legal for Americans to spy on the Dutch? Who knew!
Next it'll be found perfectly OK for the Dutch government to take kickbacks from American criminals that rob Dutch citizens.
Hurrah for the newly authorized power of crime laundering!

Re:Seems a bit odd... (1)

gstoddart (321705) | about 4 months ago | (#47522669)

So, it's legal for Americans to spy on the Dutch? Who knew!

If it's legal for the US to spy on Dutch citizens, then isn't it also legal for the Dutch citizens to spy on and hack into Americans?

Because, clearly, if it's legal for the US to do the same to external entities, the reverse must be true, right?

Re:Seems a bit odd... (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about 4 months ago | (#47523069)

Dutch citizens? I doubt it. BUT, Dutch government is probably ignored by the US government.

Re:Seems a bit odd... (1)

sumdumass (711423) | about 4 months ago | (#47527151)

Ignored is likely right.

I didn't see anything that made spying on either side legal, only that the dutch could acquire the information gathered from it legally. It's likely illegal in both places to do the spying but the government would ignore it as long as they had a benefit to gain.

There is a difference between something being legal and something not being prosecuted and ignored instead.

That was the point (-1)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47522815)

Jezus, that was the whole point of all these countries collecting data on each other, that such info could be used in spite of the laws of the countries involved. "I'm only the messenger" for surveillance

Re:That was the point (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about 4 months ago | (#47523093)

Which is really not all that bad.
I would rather NSA, who has no powers, spy on me, than FBI, or even worse, the local police.
Taking it further, I have less issues with say GCHQ spying on me. Why? Because not only do they not have any powers, but, they have no INTEREST in me, unless I am up to something that will be seriously detrimental to UK, or other western nations.

very important (1)

Mr 44 (180750) | about 4 months ago | (#47524869)

A lot of people miss this element - "spying" is very different from "legally admissible evidence in court by a police agency". I care a lot less about intelligence agencies, than police agencies.

And yes, that why the supposed collaboration with DEA is so bad, that is far worse than almost anything else that's come out in my mind.

Re:very important (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 4 months ago | (#47525903)

Believe me, spying is the umbrella term here.

This is why western nations knowingly allow ... (1)

WindBourne (631190) | about 4 months ago | (#47523053)

NSA to spy. Of course, I doubt that Germany KNEW that we were listening in on their gov officials, to which they absolutely should be mad. But, I suspect that NSA is still allowed to spy all over Europe. I would not be surprised though, if we have a few new treaties.

Re:This is why western nations knowingly allow ... (1)

LWATCDR (28044) | about 4 months ago | (#47525345)

" I doubt that Germany KNEW that we were listening in on their gov officials"
The US has anti spying agreements with the UK, Australia, New Zealand, and Canada. The German government knows that and the US does not have one with Germany.
Are they really that dumb?

So, two way outsourcing? (1)

hsthompson69 (1674722) | about 4 months ago | (#47523539)

We outsource our technology jobs to the rest of the world, and they outsource their surveillance state to us?

There's a vicious cycle here somewhere, but I can't quite put my finger on it...

It's illegal to sell opium you grew yourself... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47523655)

But it's perfectly ok to buy it from someone else to resell it.
Ok, got it.

word games... (0)

Anonymous Coward | about 4 months ago | (#47524035)

Which is exactly the point of five eyes as well as other such treaties. Any given agency may be limited on domestic spying, but they can share data freely with the others who are not.

Current Prime Minister in Holland (1)

Mister Liberty (769145) | about 4 months ago | (#47525843)

Is Mark Rutte, i.e. the potential 'requestor'.
Looking up his address now.
Will post here.

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?