Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United States EU Government Privacy

EU Parliament Supports Suspending US Data Sharing 153

Posted by Soulskill from the taking-their-toys-and-going-home dept.
New submitter egladil writes "As seen previously here on Slashdot, the European Parliament was to vote on 'whether existing data sharing agreements between the two continents should be suspended, following allegations that U.S. intelligence spied on E.U. citizens.' With the votes now having been cast, the result is 483 in favor of the resolution and 98 against, while 65 abstained. The resolution in question in part called for the U.S. 'to suspend and review any laws and surveillance programs that "violate the fundamental right of E.U. citizens to privacy and data protection," as well as Europe's "sovereignty and jurisdiction."' It also decided that the E.U. should investigate the surveillance of E.U. citizens, and finally gave backing to the European Commision in case they should decide to suspend the data sharing deals currently in place with the U.S., such as the Passenger Name Record and Terrorist Finance Tracking Program agreements. The question now is whether the E.U. commision will go through with suspending these deals or not."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

EU Parliament Supports Suspending US Data Sharing More

EU Parliament Supports Suspending US Data Sharing

Comments Filter:
  • Well, it doesn't seem like much, but it's more than the american people have done in response.

    Or maybe it's not MORE, but it's certainly more visible.

    • Re: (Score:1)

      by Anonymous Coward

      http://www.restorethefourth.net/

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        http://www.restorethefourth.net/

        Wow. Someone registered a domain, made an image on photoshop ... I wasn't even aware of it until you posted it. I think that proves my point (hey, representative sample of ONE is okay according to fox news standards).

    • Re:... More effort than ... ? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Jade_Wayfarer ( 1741180 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @09:48AM (#44194123)
      Right, even if that doesn't look truly sincere and likely will have no long-lasting consequences for anybody it is still something. Maybe it's one of the positive sides of having this many parties in EU - if "bigger fish" would try to ignore this issue, smaller parties will get more support on the next elections, so everybody has to do something (or, at least, pretend to do something good enough). Pirate Party is surely going to rally their supporters over this issue.
    • As a European I'm not sure what to think of this. I was more shocked about the fact that so many people thought that an organisation like the NSA was able to do their work by reading public blogs and newspapers, than I was about the actual PRISM news. Now it's just waiting for the next big terrorist attack which able to amass funds because of the EU no longer data sharing.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Anonymous Coward

        if moving money for criminals was actually hard then I doubt usa would be having such a mexican gang problem...

        the question is - why can't we get american raw banking data? note that you could always request specific data and law enforcement co-operation. but in fundamental it's kinda stupid if the fbi has more access to banking data of poland than what german cops have, don't you think?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by 1s44c ( 552956 )

        As a European I'm not sure what to think of this. I was more shocked about the fact that so many people thought that an organisation like the NSA was able to do their work by reading public blogs and newspapers, than I was about the actual PRISM news.
        Now it's just waiting for the next big terrorist attack which able to amass funds because of the EU no longer data sharing.

        Nonsense. To be a successful terrorist you don't need a big pile of money, you just need to be willing to die for your cause. How much does it cost to make nailbombs? Or shoot people? Less than a lot of people spend every day, that's how much.

        • Nonsense. To be a successful terrorist you don't need a big pile of money, you just need to be willing to die for your cause.

          Only if your definition of "successful" doesn't include "alive", which it does for most non-psychopaths and non-religious.

          If you want to be both successful and a terrorist ... that probably does take a little more cash, because you need to be able to stand-off from your targets, recruit psychopaths, get away, etc.

          How much does it cost to make nailbombs? Or shoot people? Less than a

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by GNious ( 953874 )

          Nonsense. To be a successful terrorist you don't need a big pile of money, you just need to be willing to die for your cause. How much does it cost to make nailbombs? Or shoot people? Less than a lot of people spend every day, that's how much.

          Is a LOT easier to hire a fanatic, if you can promise him (usually male, not always) a pile of money for the family afterwards.

          • Is a LOT easier to hire a fanatic, if you can promise him (usually male, not always) a pile of money for the family afterwards.

            You can promise him anything you want -- afterwards he'll be dead and can't really do anything to ensure to stick to your promises. Or are we talking about principled fanatic terrorists here?

      • This is going to slow the NSA collecting information down just how much? All they have to do is spy on a few more EU offices. EU offices don't seem to be taking the thing very seriously anyway if they were acting do "surprised" about it.

      • Oh, no! The terrorist bogeyman will get us!

        I think I've heard about enough of that nonsense.

    • Re:... More effort than ... ? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by erroneus ( 253617 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @09:53AM (#44194177) Homepage

      This wasn't "the EU people" it was their legislative body. The US legislative bodies are complicit with what has been going on. While one side feigns outrage at the other party's activities, it can be demonstrated that both parties participated willingly in what's been going on. When Republicans ruled, the Democrats pretended to be outraged and even to "do away" with the constitutionlly illegal activites. But once in charge, the Democrats didn't do away with the illegal activities (and I just say CRIMES for brevity?) and then intensified them.

      So to say the "EU people" did more than the "US people" is a bit misleading. But to say that the EU government is more responsive to the need to support their own laws would be extremely accurate to point out and a well deserved shaming.

      • So to say the "EU people" did more than the "US people" is a bit misleading.

        The "EU people" are doing the same thing the "US people" are doing: they are both outraged at the NSA.

        However, who the "EU people" should be outraged at is their own governments that keep spying on them and don't protect them from the NSA.

        • Re:... More effort than ... ? (Score:4, Insightful)

          by Nerdfest ( 867930 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @10:31AM (#44194467)

          If the deals violated the fundamental rights of EU citizens, people should probably be asking how they were made in the first place as well. Something is obviously broken.

          • As I was saying: Europeans should complain about and to their own governments, because that's where the source of the problem is.

        • US people (in general) are NOT outraged at the NSA. I have seen no sign that they are. In instituting the program our elected officials made the judgment that most people would rather have a small, or hoped-for, increase in security rather than retain their privacy, and so far it appears they were right.

          • 2/3 of Americans want a congressional investigation, and a slight majority oppose having Snowden charged.

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/the-fix/wp/2013/06/19/poll-public-wants-congressional-hearings-on-nsa-surveillance/ [washingtonpost.com]

            Americans are largely split on the issue of whether they support the spy program, except for Democrats who simply can't bring themselves to criticize their Blessed Leader in any way.

            Several US civil liberties organizations have already filed suit against the program. Anything like that h

            • You cannot file suit agains these because they are SECRET. A suit has to have DEFINATE act toons and personnel. Some lines on a PowerPoint won't cut it.

              The NSA and CIA are not "police" and they were chartered outside the Constitution way back in the 50's and 60's when FREEDOM was at its peak! to prove damage, a citizen would have to have a CRIMINAL TRIAL EFFECTED by this illegally obtained information. You only have rights against the government USING illegally obtained information in courts. As these are

            • But "outrage" is something else - it is something that rises to the level of being a voting issue. Voters may not like the program, but they are not outraged, and our elected officials (especially the President) are not humiliated and discredited like they will be if there is a big terrorist attack like 9/11. So they are choosing the safest path... the "safest" from Benghazi-style retroactive finger-pointing, that is.

              Anyways, I do find the reversal of values in the poll you linked to be fascinating, par

        • I have to say, I'm pretty appalled at the degree of hypocrisy Obama has shown on this issue. OK, I'm not a US citizen, so I don't get to vote there, but there was a time when he showed a certain amount of promise as a leader with some moral backbone. However, I can't say I'm very surprised. Obama is (or was) also a successful lawyer, which puts him in an unscrupulous bracket of humanity.

          I hope he's planning on returning that Nobel Peace Prize.

      • As an EU citizen, I'm outraged by it. And my duly elected representatives are representing my outrage correctly and doing something about it.

        What are your duly elected representatives doing for you right now? And if the answer is not a satisfactory one, what are you doing about it?

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by jodido ( 1052890 )
        The EU parliament is no more interested in protecting the rights of EU residents than the US congress is. They're just being anti-American. If they were serious, they'd stop information sharing with France.

    • It's a nice act, but isn't it a little on the hypocritical side considering France has just been exposed as having an equally egregious citizen-spying program in place [guardian.co.uk]? I'm glad the EU-legislation is doing something, but it sounds like they need to now pass a resolution condemning the program going on inside their own borders. Everyone should be outraged at PRISM, but everyone should also be outraged that France was condemning the United States for running a program they themselves were secretly running as

      • It is metadata they collect. It was already wellknown that everybody collects metadata and analyses it to match certain patterns. We even have laws in the EU that require all member states to pass laws to ensure all carriers collect and store metadata. It was never a secret and wasn't revealed by the recent leaks. This article seems to be some planted nonsense.

    • Yeah, the EUs mock outrage at something they already knew about is a fantastic response.

  • Something tells me, that U.S. might have more information about E.U. citizens and stuff, than E.U. governments have.

    • Re:They should buy the data from U.S. instead (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Vanderhoth ( 1582661 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @09:52AM (#44194165)
      I think that's kind of part of the problem here. The U.S. is far more, and far too, aggressive in collecting data. The E.U., being a collection of countries that have historically spied on each other to very large extents and are now friendly, frowns on that sort of thing. So although I'm sure the E.U. is still doing spying on each other and just putting up this front to cover their tracks. The U.S. got caught because they were greedy for data and careless with it, now they have to pay the piper.

      That'll be 50 cents please.

      • The E.U., being a collection of countries that have historically spied on each other to very large extents and are now friendly, frowns on that sort of thing.

        That's why the British are tapping all EU communications coming through their country, and the French have just been revealed to do the same? And the reason we haven't heard about the Germans doing the same is because German government employees are good little obedient Germans who wouldn't dream of leaking anything, and because the German press genera

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by matfud ( 464184 )

          The brits do it because they can as the majority of high speed transatlantic links land in the UK. Some go direct to France, Germany, Spain etc. but most hit the UK first. And they have always been nosey buggers.

          http://www.submarinecablemap.com/ [submarinecablemap.com]

      • Countries spying on each other is very different than what happened here. Countries were trying to uncover each other's trade and military secrets, to gauge one another's strengths and weaknesses - typically for use in international relations ranging from trade agreements to warfare. And I wouldn't be surprised if the various EU countries are still spying on one another big time.

        Snooping on the private lives of ordinary citizens was rarely if ever part of the equation.

        I don't have too much problems with the

      • The U.S. got caught because they were greedy for data and careless with it, now they have to pay the piper.

        The US wasn't "caught." Edward Snowden took a job with an NSA contractor with the intent of stealing and leaking classified NSA documents.

        A number of EU countries are doing the same things the NSA is doing.

        • Edward Snowden took a job with an NSA contractor with the intent of stealing and leaking classified NSA documents.

          Do you have proof to back up that claim or just conjecture?

          The fact is an "intelligence" organization collected data and "allowed" someone like Edward Snowden to obtain the data. You can debated "allowed" by accident or on purpose with yourself I really don't care and feel it's irreverent. The information wasn't leaked secretly to another organization or government, Snowden made it public. So my point "The U.S. got caught because they were greedy for data and careless with it" still stands.

          • Do you have proof to back up that claim or just conjecture?

            Why yes, yes I do.

            Snowden to newspaper: I took contractor job to gather evidence [cnn.com]

            The U.S. got caught because they were greedy for data and careless with it" still stands.

            That is nonsense. The NSA wasn't careless or "greedy," any organization can be betrayed by a spy. Snowden took the job with the intent of stealing secret information. He has made only part of it public. The question remains - what will he do with the rest? Sell it to the highest bidder? Use it to exchange for a new life in another country?

            EU countries are very active in the spy business, and some of them have global reach

    • Re:They should buy the data from U.S. instead (Score:4, Informative)

      by gl4ss ( 559668 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @10:05AM (#44194259) Homepage Journal

      Something tells me, that U.S. might have more information about E.U. citizens and stuff, than E.U. governments have.

      Essentially that's the gist of the issue. The data sharing goes against the principles of data collection we have in EU, since Americans can't apparently be expected to keep the data out of extra eyes(because as statements by politicians go, they can do anything with it even without warrants or with secret warrants) it would be best to suspend such sharing.

      it has potentially many economical impacts if USA has all the data and thinks it is just ok for them to use it for economical advantage and not limit to weeding out "terrorists"(and with the meaning of "terrorist" diluting every day...). basically - and in practice - usa has a map of all the contractual business ties within EU(and even worse is contracting analyzing data to pretty random best buddy outside firms too). add to that if the chinese are really waging a cyyyber war and NSA is so careless with their data then chinese probably have snapshots of the data too.

      • Re: (Score:1)

        by Anonymous Coward

        It would have been much less of an issue if the data didn't trickle down from NSA to corporate interests.

      • I don't know of any case of corporate espionage in which US government agencies were involved. If you do, please provide some examples.

        In contrast, France and other European governments have clearly engaged in corporate espionage against US companies and shared that information with their private sectors (search the news).

        • Boeing and Airbus. (Score:3, Insightful)

          by Anonymous Coward

          US Gov gave military intelligence collected data to Boeing on the contract negotiations that Airbus were at that time winning.

          Airbus were dropped.

          • Re:Boeing and Airbus. (Score:4, Insightful)

            by cold fjord ( 826450 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @02:39PM (#44196887)

            Do you have a citation on that? I did a little looking, but found some unexpected things instead.

            Exclusive: Airbus Dreamliner Dossier Revealed [nbcnews.com]

            In a stunning and candid critique of its chief competitor, Airbus has crafted a comprehensive competitive analysis that touches on nearly every aspect of the troubled 787 programme gleaned from Boeing proprietary data and an embedded network of sources from inside the Dreamliner's global supply chain.

            Competitive intelligence is a standard practice in the aerospace industry, but the information revealed in the Airbus analysis reveals a scope and specificity of the data collected.

            The document includes what appear to be seven slides labelled BOEING PROPRIETARY with a format style used in Boeing presentations, including two that appear to have been photocopied, raising questions about the methods and sources the European consortium utilizes to collect its data.

            Airbus claims the presentation, as well as its competitive intelligence gathering methods, fully comply with all laws. Though when approached about how the information was gathered, Airbus declined to address it specifically, suggesting that a lot of data labelled BOEING PROPRIETARY is freely available online. Airbus added that not all documents labelled BOEING PROPRIETARY are in fact proprietary. A spokesman emphasized that Airbus closely watches the market to draw its own conclusions, as do its competitors.

            A search engine query for "Boeing Proprietary PPT" did not yield the slides in question.

            Boeing Called A Target Of French Spy Effort [nwsource.com]

            The Boeing Co. was among the targets of a French government plan for a massive spying effort to learn U.S. technological secrets and trade strategies, according to classified documents.

            The plan targeted 49 high-tech companies, 24 financial institutions and six U.S. government agencies with important roles in international trade, the French documents show.

            The plan focused on research breakthroughs and marketing strategies of leading-edge U.S. aerospace and defense contractors that compete directly with French firms.

            The French also sought advance knowledge of the bargaining positions of American negotiators in trade talks involving France. The 21-page assignment sheet, prepared by the French equivalent of the Central Intelligence Agency, is considered authentic by senior U.S. experts.

            Why We Spy on Our Allies [cryptome.org]

            That's right, my continental friends, we have spied on you because you bribe. Your companies' products are often more costly, less technically advanced or both, than your American competitors'. As a result you bribe a lot. So complicit are your governments that in several European countries bribes still are tax-deductible.

            When we have caught you at it, you might be interested, we haven't said a word to the U.S. companies in the competition. Instead we go to the government you're bribing and tell its officials that we don't take kindly to such corruption. They often respond by giving the most meritorious bid (sometimes American, sometimes not) all or part of the contract. This upsets you, and sometimes creates recriminations between your bribers and the other country's bribees, and this occasionally becomes a public scandal. ...

            Why do you bribe? It's not because your companies are inherently more corrupt. Nor is it because you are inherently less talented at technology. It is because your economic patron saint is still Jean Baptiste Colbert, whereas ours is Adam Smith. In spite of a few recent reforms, your governments largely still dominate your economies, so you have much greater difficulty than we in innovating, encouragin

  • Oh noes, a RESOLUTION!!!! (Score:4, Insightful)

    by TWiTfan ( 2887093 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @09:46AM (#44194111)

    I'm sure the NSA is quaking in its boots.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Digicaf ( 48857 )

      1. It's less about "data" and more about changing attitudes towards the US and our policies.
      2. They may not be quaking, but I guarantee they won't be happy if any regulations along these lines get passed. The last thing they want is more red tape, delays, and crow eating.

  • As long as they share the data about the muzzies then all will be fine

  • Its just Theatre (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    They are just doing this to keep the people calm... the sharing will continue. Trusting politicians that lied once is like expecting a hungry lion that bit you once... not to bite you again.

  • And they found out how? What of the messenger? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by ElBeano ( 570883 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @09:51AM (#44194155)
    I'll believe it's more than theater when they provide a home for Snowden.
    • Comment removed based on user account deletion

    • IMHO: If Snowden can help the EU even the slightest bit to determine the extent of US surveillance on EU citizens and institutions, than the value of that info far exceeds the cost of putting him through some sort of witness protection program.

      So if EU politicians really care about their own (ehm... citizens' ;-) privacy, that's exactly what they should do. For the sole reason of fact finding, with the EU's public benefit in mind. Giving the US the finger is just icing on the cake.

      I'm not so optimistic

    • And that won't happen, for legal reasons.

      Snowden is a wanted criminal in the US. He is not, by legal definition, a political refugee who faces persecution at home for his ideas.

      The only reason a European country might provide him refuge, is if he would face the death penalty upon return to the US.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by gl4ss ( 559668 )

        And that won't happen, for legal reasons.

        Snowden is a wanted criminal in the US. He is not, by legal definition, a political refugee who faces persecution at home for his ideas.

        The only reason a European country might provide him refuge, is if he would face the death penalty upon return to the US.

        He isn't? his actions could be quite easily argued to be both political and illegal in USA. this is what makes most people who are granted political asylum refugees.
        Suppose Mandela had sought refugee in Paris for his illegal actions in South-Africa to escape prison in South-Africa.

        Heck, plenty of South-Africans sought refugee abroad for _CRIMES_ in their homeland. Some of those crimes were as simple as distributing political leaflets.. they were not returned home to go rot in prison. There's even guys who w

        • Snowden was not distributing political leaflets; he broke a pledge of secrecy, and the contract with his employer. That are non-political crimes.

          He most certainly did it for political reasons, the laws he broke though were not political laws. He is not prosecuted for his political ideas. That his motives were political doesn't make the law he broke political - just like someone killing a politician for not agreeing with that politician is a murderer, not a political prisoner, and won't be able to get politi

        • Snowden admitted what he is doing. There is no question about it.

          Snowden would get a fair trail. The outcome isn't predetermined, but reasonably predictable since he has admitted what he is doing, which is a serious crime.

          For the crimes that Snowden has admitted, the only place where you would expect him to be offered refuge would be enemy nations. Although there are many Europeans that hate the US, and its system of free enterprise, it would be quite exceptional for a European government to offer Snowde

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by matfud ( 464184 )

      As far as I can tell EU countries can not offer asylum as they have agreed to extradition treaties with the US. And unlike the US they do not break their treaty obligations at the drop of a hat.
      But mostly they don't want to get involved at the level of a single person. They will at trade negotiations of course.

      Britain is still trying to figure out what to do with JA and he is wanted on criminal offences in the EEC not just breaching the US equivalent of the "Official Secrets Act"

  • Any hope that rests with the European Commission (Score:4, Informative)

    by Kjella ( 173770 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @09:56AM (#44194195) Homepage

    is slim and none. It'd hardly be the first time the Parliament has voted for the right thing but the EC has said "well, we won't do that".

  • They authorized the European Commission? (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I guess that's the end of that. The European Commission has a track record of giving a flying shit about voters and the parliament. It is just interested in keeping the money flowing and won't do anything that would create a hiccup with that.

    Without getting ordered by the parliament at least three times in a row, they won't touch any of the agreements in question.

  • why hypocrites (Score:5, Insightful)

    by anonieuweling ( 536832 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @10:12AM (#44194289)
    Why was sharing all that data with the USA OK in the `war on terror`?
    Why suddenly, when the EU leaders and G20 are spied upon, as it occurs, is this sharing suspended?
    Why was it OK to violate privacy of EU citizens because of US demands?
    Why doesn't it occur in full yet that the USA are a totalitarian state and that they want to put their views onto the rest of the world?
    Why doesn't the EU show willingness to harbour Snowden, Assange and Manning as a gesture of humanitarian nature?
    Why doesn't anyone understand that it won't help the USA at all if they incarcerate Manning, Assange and Snowden? The leaking will continue, just with more caution.

    • You act as if no European government has also been revealed to have done the same thing the NSA has.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by amiga3D ( 567632 )

      Here we go again with the over reactions. I love how someone eavesdropping on people is equated with totalitarian rule. Get a sense of proportion will you. Wrong it may be but it's not quite to the point where they're rounding up people for the gas chambers. Leave off with the overblown hysteria please.

    • * Why was sharing all that data with the USA OK in the `war on terror`?
      * Why was it OK to violate privacy of EU citizens because of US demands?

      Because those in power in the EU weren't penalized by those decisions.

      * Why suddenly, when the EU leaders and G20 are spied upon, as it occurs, is this sharing suspended?
      * Why doesn't the EU show willingness to harbour Snowden, Assange and Manning as a gesture of humanitarian nature?

      Because those in power in the EU would be penalized by those decisions.

      * Why doesn't it occur in full yet that the USA are a totalitarian state and that they want to put their views onto the rest of the world?

      Because the USA isn't trying to take over Europe, just the Middle East. The USA actually more-or-less thinks it owns the EU already.

      * Why doesn't anyone understand that it won't help the USA at all if they incarcerate Manning, Assange and Snowden? The leaking will continue, just with more caution.

      The totalitarian elements of the US government want any potential leakers to know that embarrassing them carries a penalty of torture and execution. They need to enforce that each time it happens, or the threat goes away, and more leakers

    • Apparently, you have no idea what "totalitarian state" actually means. But lets play your game. This means that all the ECHELON countries, plus France, are totalitarian as well since they're playing the same game.

  • A system put in place to spy on terrorists will only be legal to spy on the people it was supposed to protect.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by Mitreya ( 579078 )

      A system put in place to spy on terrorists will only be legal to spy on the people it was supposed to protect.

      This was never about spying on terrorists, "terrorists" are just an excuse

      I can tell, because apparently the 50 (100? 1000?) terrorists plots it disrupted are all too classified to talk about. If they haven't publicized at least a few (yes, some may be actually classified, but not 100%), that means they got NOTHING. They collect the data but whatever they use/plan to use for, isn't about terrorism.

  • FTA:

    MEPs also voted to reject a number of amendments that specifically called for the suspension in Trans-Atlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) discussions.

    Oh well. I was hoping some good would come of this and they'd at least suspend "free trade" talks.

    • Europe's economy is in desperate need of this. Much more so that the US economy.

      It would have been a totally stupid move to delay it.

  • Misunderstanding... (Score:3)

    by BlueTak ( 1218450 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @10:54AM (#44194693)
    As I read previous comments, I, as a French, have a strange feeling of misunderstanding... What american people have to do with this ? Nothing. American government and intelligence agencies have all to do with it. We, europeans, know this perfectly. The american people is the first to be spied on. And so are the others.. Maybe, they could work this out together, couldn't they ?
  • What a load of bullshit. Nobody is going to suspend a goddamned thing.

    The US has been watching Europe and vice-versa...the only people that have been ignorant of any of these dealings are the public. Governments create one set of rules for the public and a whole 'nother set of secret rules for Governments...the leaks have only pointed out what most of us have already known. Nobody is going to "suspend" anything, they'll just restrict who has access to it until they can get their secrets under contro

  • The European Parliament: (Score:3)

    by Hartree ( 191324 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @11:32AM (#44194993)

    And especially the French representatives were shocked, SHOCKED, that the US is conducting spying operations against allies.

    http://www.nytimes.com/1991/09/14/news/14iht-spy_.html [nytimes.com]

    Why, it's almost as unbelievable as if Israel was conducting spying operations against the US.

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

    To put this in perspective, note that the resolution that was passed is a non-binding one. "Twiddle, diddle and resolve"

  • "a resolution that would back the Commission should it wish to suspend data sharing agreements with the U.S."

    Meaning: nothing is going to change.

  • How to make the U.S. spy harder (Score:3)

    by SuperKendall ( 25149 ) on Friday July 05, 2013 @11:50AM (#44195161)

    Problem: U.S. is spying on you.

    Solution: Take away the one channel of data they did not have to spy for, thereby increasing the need for the U.S. to implement new spying...

    Profit:??

  • According to this article [guardian.co.uk], Britain and Sweden have vetoed EU plans to launch two working groups to look into the 'espionage debacle'.

    • Britain and Sweden demonstrating, yet again, what good poodles they are for the Military Industrial Complex, specifically the NSA division and associated partners Booz Allen et all...

      The talks, due to begin in Washington on Monday, will now be restricted to issues of data privacy and the NSA's Prism programme following a tense 24 hours of negotiations in Brussels between national EU ambassadors. Britain, supported only by Sweden, vetoed plans to launch two "working groups" on the espionage debacle with the Americans.

  • So they've voted against sharing data from the EU's citizens only when its exposed that the US wanted the same level of detail on the government(s) supposedly protecting the interests of those citizens? It might matter if the NSA/CIA wasn't already able to get most if not all of this data from their 'unofficial' channels, but I am afraid that train has left the station.

  • I really don't see the point. What needs to happen is for the politicizations that knew and supported/allowed it to be publicly exposed and punished/shammed in some way that will follow them forever.

  • Notice that the EU makes no mention of their member states spying against US citizens. So while it's morally and fundamentally wrong for the US to spy on Europeans, it is the patriotic duty of European nations to not just regularly spy on but to steal from US citizens for the sake of their national interests.
  • Comment removed based on user account deletion

Slashdot Top Deals

Math is like love -- a simple idea but it can get complicated. -- R. Drabek

Close