US To Get EU Private Citizen Data 290
An anonymous reader writes "In a case of 'all your data are belong to us,' the US government is close to coming to an agreement with the EU that allows it to get private citizen data on EU citizens to 'look for suspicious activity.' So, now we know what step three is: set up a security agency in the US to resell otherwise unavailable data."
EU requests private US citizen data (Score:5, Insightful)
And at least 3 days in advance (Score:3, Interesting)
We should go out of our way (from an EU perspective) to make the EU just as attractive to travelers from the US as the US is to travelers from the EU.
Seriously though, when are we the people going to say enough is enough. We do not need any more surveilance and invasions of our privacy. If we keep on this path then the so called war on terror will be lost not by the efforts of terrorists but by our own governments. Perhaps moving to Zimbabwe is not such a bad idea after all.
Re:And at least 3 days in advance (Score:5, Insightful)
We should go out of our way (from an EU perspective) to make the EU just as attractive to travelers from the US as the US is to travelers from the EU.
While I really understand the feeling, I totally disagree with it, as it is the wrong thing to do. Fingerprinting and photographing people at the border is wrong. It should not be done. It doesn't stop terrorists, it may make it a bit less convenient for them to do their thing, but that inconvenience is limited to the crossing of borders. When a would-be terrorist has crossed the border, it's kinda too late already. Fingerprinting is no deterrent after the border has been crossed. It's just stupid to believe otherwise.
There are great systems in place to keep unwanted persons out of the country: normal police work, and exchange of information on criminals between governments. Osama bin Laden would not have much of a chance to enter the USA, unless he manages to get a very well done fake passport.
The EU gives a great example on how it can be done. Traveling within the EU, crossing state borders, is often so easy you don't notice it. If you miss the sign next to the road, that is. There is often not more than that to crossing a national border. And for foreigners entering the EU as visitor, that is generally also easy.
But does that make the EU borders more transparent than US borders? I truly doubt it. People from some nationalities have to apply for visa before entering - that of course includes a more thorough screening. And then of course there exists a black-list of unwanted individuals, those people trying to cross the border will likely be arrested and/or sent back.
And all this does not make the EU more susceptible to terrorism by foreigners - on the contrary. Most if not all serious attacks in the EU were all done by nationals or residents, the greatest threat comes from the inside as always.
Re:And at least 3 days in advance (Score:4, Insightful)
While your right in that Fingerprinting people when they enter a country doesn't necessarily stop terrorism, it does go a long way to finding those responsible and possible stopping future acts.
If we had records and proof of all the countries the 9/11 hijackers visited and were able to discern who they traveled with before the events on 9/11, it would have lead a clear trail to other conspirators and perhaps information pertaining to future planned events. I know it is a bit like treating people guilty until proven innocent but that is being done without an accusation of wrong doing so there isn't an immediate harm to a person. Something as basic as knowing who is entering and leaving a country is a right of sovereignty which might actually surpass any or most rights to privacy. That is at least how the supreme court reconciles the searches at the border with the 4th and other constitutional amendments. OF course the constitution would be useless if we didn't have sovereignty, it restricts our government, not others.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lol.. "I don't agree" != "troll". Let me translate that, Not agreeing with something doesn't make it a troll.
If you disagree with the premise, then state it. Labeling it troll only causes me to respond like this which will have others view the the comment for perspective. Then on meta moderation, the troll mod will likely be removed which means you done no damage. Use your brain people, Words are far more powerful then arbitrary moderations.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I understand why you feel the way you do, but I disagree. The Us vs. Them is not Europeans vs. US citizens, it is both sets of citizens against both sets of authorities. Two natural allies (the citizens of both countries) selling each other out to their respective governments is a sad thing. Best thing to do is keep the US as the extremist in as many areas such as this as possible. Don't give them the benefit of justifying it further.
they don't have to (Score:2)
European governments keep more detailed information about people who are in EU countries, so they need to get less information when you enter.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
So when is the EU finally going to request fingerprints and private data from US travelers?
Why would they want it? So the US wants to horde lots of personal data that serves no other purpose other than to violate basic human rights, why should any one else want to be as stupid? It will waste money keeping and attempting to process this data to no worthwhile end except the jobs that it will create for the friends of those that pass these stupid laws.
It makes us all feel warm and fuzzy at night, knowing tha
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Because if they didn't, it was going to become a situation where passengers and planes couldn't land in the US or even fly through US airspace unless the information was taken and passed on. A visiter from the EU would have to take a flight to a country that does the fingerprinting and then fly into the US. Evidently, there is or was enough people in the EU who saw this as a problem and the rules were changed. For people not going to or through the US, this doesn't effect them so their opinions sort of matt
I mean, let's be honest with each other. (Score:3, Interesting)
Eastern Europe, Asia, Western Europe, Africa, would ALL be better off had the USSA (as you so lovingly put it) had left all your affairs alone 1900 to 1970, right?
While some places may of been worse if the US didn't do anything in other places people have suffered gravely because of the US. For instance President Ford and Henry Kissinger [gwu.edu] gave the green light to Indonesia's Suharto to invade East Timer, and supported the invasion with firearms despite a congressional ban. About 200,000 East Timorese were m
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
But lately, so does the Eurotrash thumbing their nose at the people that actually fought for THEIR freedom and got them their rights to actually have the rights to talk shit to their own and our government.
No Europeans fought for their freedom? Which is it, Charles de Gaulle [wikipedia.org] wasn't European or didn't fight for freedom. The Swing Kids [wikipedia.org] weren't Germans and didn't fight the NAZIs? And there was no Warsaw Uprising [warsawuprising.com].
Falcon
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
So when is the EU finally going to request fingerprints and private data from US travelers?
When it wants to get bombed.
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:5, Insightful)
Great, so EU politicians living a thousand miles away who don't even speak your language can make decisions like this data sharing, and you have no say in it whatsoever. The way the EU is acting recently, it's becoming less like a democratic organisation, and more like a giant, unaccountable fascist beaurocracy.
The reaction to the Irish vote just sums it up: the people have rejected it, but they're going through with it anyway, because they're in charge and 'they know best'. Most of the arrogant politicans in favour of the constitution haven't even fucking read it. In fact the document is purposefully long and complicated so no-one can understand what it's actually about.
Personally I don't see why the EU can't just be a trade zone, and fuck off all this federal superstate crap. Thank god we're not in the Euro, the last thing we need is these jokers running our economy.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I don't know about this 'Irish vote' of which you speak, but politicians overriding what the people want happens everywhere. We are seeing a surge of such behaviour here in California, at both state and local levels. I think the problem is that once an elected gov't gets just so entrenched, it becomes immune to everything outside of its own power. Electing a different official, even one who starts out honest, is at best a temporary fix and far too small to influence the whole. The powers that be will make s
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:4, Insightful)
Personally I don't see why the EU can't just be a trade zone
I suggest you read some history, count the number of wars in europe BEFORE and AFTER the foundation of the EU (the European Coal and Steel Community, 1951). The rest is 'filler'.
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:4, Insightful)
Why not count the number of wars in Europe BEFORE and AFTER the introduction of color TV?
Or the number of wars in Europe BEFORE and AFTER the assassination of JFK?
Or the number of wars in Europe BEFORE and AFTER the Berlin Wall was built?
Were you actually trying to indicate some sort of proof with your statement?
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:4, Informative)
The masses are too apathetic to do anything
Actually, when the masses have actually been asked in a referendum, they have generally rejected the various EU constitution/superstate treaties. It's just that this time around with the Lisbon treaty, only one government has so far had the courage to go to its people and ask (well, actually their constitution required it). Despite widespread criticism, other leaders have ratified the treaty againt popular opinion. The masses aren't apathetic, they just aren't being given the choice, in one of the most flagrant violations of democracy in recent history.
And for the avoidance of doubt, we don't get to elect the people with real power in the EU framework, who are apparently behind this particular affront to privacy, either.
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:5, Insightful)
Politicians are people too. If ordinary people cannot understand what a treaty or constitution is designed to do, there is something wrong with either the people or the document.
When you vote for someone, you should be voting for someone competent (heh, wonder how often that actually happens), but how do you have the slightest chance of determining their competence and how they will respond to an issue like a treaty if you are completely incapable of understanding the impact of said treaty?
If it's really that complex, the politicians need to break down what it's going to do so that the general public understands it. Note, this would be in a perfect world. More likely is that they'll lie and say what people want to hear in order to get votes...
When you vote for people, and "trust" that they will do the right or competent thing, without understanding the issues yourself, things will go wrong, corrupt politicians will be elected, and the public will get exactly the government they deserve.
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:5, Insightful)
Politicians are people too. If ordinary people cannot understand what a treaty or constitution is designed to do, there is something wrong with either the people or the document.
The problem is that this so called "constitution", now renamed "treaty" is more or less a sum of all the inter state treaties that have been agreed upon since the 1950s. And it's now something like 300 pages long and an absolute mess despite some apparent attempts at organising the whole thing.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with a constitution (which is merely the topmost law), or a treaty, it's *all* the treaties at once. No wonder nobody could read it. Only people who have made a career of studying European laws and agreements can navigate through it.
I have the published version commented by the designed committee of the original version (the one that failed to pass the first time, supposedly pretty much the same as the current one) and I have to say that the comments didn't help much.
A proper constitution would be a good start in making the eurofolks feel they're part of the same thing though. I'd vote for a properly written one.
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is with the document itself. It should be a real constitution, like the US and many other countries have. A document that delimits Europe's influence over its member states and its people, and clearly states what they can and cannot do, and how they do it. It does not have to be more than a few pages in very simple language that anyone can understand. Then we'll have something meaningful to vote on... and I think it'd good and right that we actually get to vote on it, too.
Re:EU requests private US citizen data (Score:4, Insightful)
on behalf of Europe (Score:5, Insightful)
fuck you America
signed, Europe
Re:on behalf of Europe (Score:4, Insightful)
fuck you America
signed, America
Re:on behalf of Europe (Score:5, Insightful)
To shorten things:
Fuck you, America
signed, world
Re:on behalf of Europe (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:on behalf of Europe (Score:5, Insightful)
What? (Score:3, Insightful)
We don't want to put anything on their shoulders.
We do want to remove something though.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Oh, smashing, groovy, yay democracy!
Re:on behalf of Europe (Score:4, Informative)
Actually, they're the only EU body that is democratically elected [wikipedia.org]! If you refused to vote in the 2004 EP elections, that's another matter; next year you'll have a chance to remedy that [wikipedia.org].
(And of course the Lisbon treaty was supposed to give the EP more power, which would have increased democracy in the EU. Too bad.)
Sig reply (Score:4, Interesting)
Here's a reply to your signature:
All Americans suck because all European politicians are just as bad as their American counterparts.
Fuck the EU politicians.
Signed, a citizen of Denmark.
Interesting anecdote: "Junibevægelsen mod EU" (the june movement against EU, a quite small political party) did arrange a weekend trip to Bruxelles a good year ago, where we got to meet with a politician's advisor gave a talk about the market price of corn and agricultural subsidies, and a journalist who spoke (among other things) about telephony and roaming charges (the politicians wanted to offload their phone bill on the citizens; self-serving bastards). And of course some time off to goof off and eat dutch fries (you know, with fish and mayonnaise).
Here's the punchline: what I learned from that trip is that although it is indeed possible to travel to Belgium, and if you prepare in advance you may be able to get the attention of a politician, citizens of pretty much anything other than Belgium have to spend a large amount of time doing so, plus they have to take off a sizable portion of their work week to meet the politicians when they're actually there. In short, regular citizens don't have any real access to a political body that governs non-trivial parts of their lives.
They're supposed to say "yes." (Score:2)
American leaders, EU leaders... all serving at the mandate of vast numbers of people utterly petrified at the thought of ethnic stereotypes lurking around every corner, waiting to launch unspeakable horrors.
The majority has spoken. Congratulations.
Re: (Score:2)
Yeah, we could have voted differently.
The US ain't the only country where the "I voted for Kodos" meme applies. It's not like calling any other party to the helm would have changed a thing.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Hey, it's your leaders that are agreeing to this shit. Put the blame on their shoulders ... they could have said "no".
If you had any idea as to how the EU Officials get into office you wouldnt have posted that half ass comment.
Most European citizens do not even get to vote for country officials or representatives. Most EU Officials or governing body positions are appointed positions, from either voted politicians , or other appointed politicians.
In some EU Countries citizens are not even allowed to vote on most EU policies and laws.
LIAR! (Score:4, Funny)
That's a lie, I read it in the paper. Ireland may have said no, but we can't know for sure that's what they REALLY meant. Obviously we need a new vote to see what people really think, and if it turns out to be a no again we should try again. For the sake of democracy. Until we get a yes. Then we can stop with the votes because then the people have decided! Long live our democracies!
Re: (Score:2)
Fabulous (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Fabulous (Score:5, Insightful)
The terrorists have won.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Ach, please don't say 'terrorist' like it's labels a group of people with a common cause.
The terrorist moniker is a dumming down.
Re: (Score:2)
I wouldn't say that. The "terrorists" don't really get much out of this (whoever they are) - this is just going to create more identity theft problems for our European neighbors.
It's stupid, yes, and it's invariably going to create a whole host of headaches, and I have no idea why any EU official would possibly think this is a good thing... but this is typical government nonsense, not terrorism.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It's one of those "we gotta do something" things.
Voters demand actions from their leaders when things go wrong. They can't just sit there and say "Ok. We can't do anything. Let's grab popcorn and watch the world come to an end". Even if that's the only thing to do. They wouldn't get reelected if they did. The media would rip them apart.
So they do something. It doesn't solve the problem, actually, it pisses off a lot of people, but it appeases the masses who don't think but just demand action. They got actio
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
and I have no idea why any EU official would possibly think this is a good thing..
deals. its all about closed-door deals. you scratch my back and I'll tattle on your neighbor.
follow the money, as they say. or the motivation. its about 'making an offer you can't refuse. I honestly do believe that. when the US comes knocking, you CANNOT say no. and that's a goddamn SCARY thought, albeit a true one.
why do you think the riaa/mpaa have so much international power? they're a US entity, afterall. but when
To put it simply; (Score:5, Insightful)
I don't fear my Islamic neighbour, but I do fear what the government is doing to me.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Fabulous (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Fabulous (Score:5, Informative)
Just what I would have wanted my unelected EMPs to do on my behalf.
The EMP's, who are actually directly elected, have nothing to do with this agreement (and if you'd read the article, you'd see they are more critical of it than anyone else).
It's being negotiated by the Commission with a mandate of the EU Council of Ministers (who will later still have to, and probably will, approve it). The EU Council of Ministers consists of the ministers from all national governments (different ministers depending on the subject being discussed). You know, those ministers who always approve unpopular measures when they're in the Council and then later at home blame the EU for having to implement those same measures in national law.
Re: (Score:2)
And that's what bothers me about this practice to no end.
First, they issue the EU guideline (read: something you have to make a law in your country), then they come and say they're so awefully sorry that they have to implement that, but the EU forces them.
Who the fuck made that guideline in the first place?
If there is anyone to blame for the EU to have a bad name and getting people irate over its "senseless" guidelines, it's the member countries ruling parties that abuse the EU as a scapegoat for unpopular
Re:Fabulous (Score:4, Insightful)
The EU Council of Ministers consists of the ministers from all national governments (different ministers depending on the subject being discussed). You know, those ministers who always approve unpopular measures when they're in the Council and then later at home blame the EU for having to implement those same measures in national law.
It's a real shame that Slashdot mods can't go over +5, because this needs to be modded up to +500 and every person living in the EU needs to understand exactly how this undemocratic process is working.
The worst thing about the EU Constitution (erm, I mean Lisbon Treaty)? It enshrines this abuse. The worst thing about friend-of-Holywood Charlie McCreevy [europa.eu]? NO ONE can directly threaten to vote him out.
Rich.
Gah! (Score:5, Insightful)
The right standard for decisions about handing private data over to the US should be; will the President and the members of congress submit to having the same data about them printed in European papers?
Re: (Score:2)
No, but they'll happily give your governments our private citizen data. You'll have to pay more for it, though, since there's more of us.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Registration required? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re:Registration required? (Score:5, Informative)
Some bugmenot accounts [bugmenot.com]
How bad is this? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:How bad is this? (Score:4, Funny)
Re: (Score:2)
Don't worry.
We can quickly destroy the evidence (and the forum servers, and you too, you traitorous alien of America) with our unmanned drones and shredders. No hassles for you!
--The White House
Re: (Score:2)
I doubt it.
Now, if you have a name like some suspect, or look like some other suspect, or if they need a scapegoat, that's another thing. If they can get the profiles in advance, it's much easier to pick the appropriate scapegoats, and they can even be waiting for them on arrival. Nothing personal, but the government needs to be looking like it's doing something.
Of course, you'd know if you were guilty of being an reasonable scapegoat, right?
I said goodbye to the US last time I was there. The country's just
Re: (Score:2)
is this going to get me hassle: YES .. :) (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, and you'll be less likely to criticize the government the next time, which I suspect is the chief purpose of such legislation. You see, without the ever present specter of communism to protect up from, the US needed something else to scare us with. Step forward Al-Qaeda and the IslamoFascist bogyman.
"A watched population is a compliant one", Adam Suttler
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The difference is that the spectre of Communism generally aided us in preserving our freedoms (at least once we got past the McCarthy scare), by providing a well-defined example of what we DON'T want to be like.
The current nebulous "terrorism" bogeyman is not sufficiently defined to use as a bad example. Apparently this means we need to make our own bad example, so we know exactly what to look for should such a bogeyman actually appear.
Re: (Score:2)
Meh. You could be saying all sorts of good things about the US and they'd hassle you. If the list of random evil people's names doesn't get you, the poor, uneducated morons on a power trip that run airport security will (imagine Heathrow, only worse). That's just the nature of travelling to (and within?) the USA these days, and likely will remain so until some future president declares victory on terror and gets around to the next big issue (like, say, fixing their economy).
Reciprocity (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
They generally seem to [wired.com] not like it [cato.org]. But ten to one if someone consistently delivered this kind of retribution against privacy-violating politicians, they'd find themselves in jail, because that's one of those things they'll make sure is written into the law: they can do it, but you can't. Since we're all "working together to end terrorism" now, anybody actively opposing such good-willed spying will be classified as a terrorist and silenced in one way or another.
By Odin's beard, I sure am cynical today.
Re: (Score:2)
In Austria, someone already does it [platterwatch.at].
Though they have to find a new target now, he's no longer the Interior Minister. At least they can surrender their spot when they get fed up with being under constant surveillance.
Am I understanding this correctly? (Score:2)
"So, now we know what step three is: setup a security agency in US to resell otherwise unavailable data."
Did the editors just allow the entire thread to be trolled?
So this means ... (Score:2, Funny)
This could be made into a great cartoon, no wait ...
-------------
The Jewish Dilemma - Free Pork
Sweet (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
However, this apparent effort my the American government to rule increasingly larger parts of the words his really disheartening"
The point of recent actions isn't to rule an increasingly larger part of the world. If that was the agenda, they've accomplished the exact opposite in terms of global influence.
In fact if that is really your concern, you should be grinning like a maniac at how much LESS influence the US has since the clinton or bush sr eras.
There's concerns to be had, but i do not consider this to be one of them at this time. They can influence europe less than before, even less so for russia or india, and even less if not
Reciprocity (Score:4, Insightful)
A quote from the MEP that was responsible for the proposal:
I may have to flee to China to keep some of my individual rights. Lovely.
Re:Reciprocity (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Reciprocity (Score:4, Informative)
Did you miss this bit of that page?
"Own initiative reports are drafted by individual MEPs and are not proposals for EU laws."
Inaccurate summary (Score:5, Interesting)
Re: (Score:2)
You say that as though you doubt the inevitability of it. My bet is that they're already doing this in a clandestine way and are seeking to retroactively legitimize i
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It seems obvious to me that our news services are compromised .
It seems obvious to me that our news services are merged and owned by a select ruling class.
there, FTFY.
if you read it in the news, its likely more for ENTERTAINMENT (or control) purposes than actual information dissemination.
Re:Inaccurate summary (Score:5, Informative)
I RTFA.
I did.
The Times does not say that the EU is going to hand over private information to US authorities.
Actually,
"The United States and the European Union are nearing completion of an agreement allowing law enforcement and security agencies to obtain private information â" like credit card transactions, travel histories and Internet browsing habits â" about people on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean."
to me, means exactly that.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
As I understand it, that is one point they still have to agree on:
"The negotiators are trying to agree on minimum standards to protect privacy rights, such as limiting access to the information to âoeauthorized individuals with an identified purposeâ for looking at it. If a governmentâ(TM)s policies are âoeeffectiveâ in meeting all standards, any transfer of personal data to that government would be presumed lawful."
But that is just a technical point they have to discuss. The main p
Re: (Score:2)
Read further down and you will see this "agreement" is discussing privacy safeguards and standards that would make it lawful for the EU to transfer information to the US. This is why the article is titled "US and Europe Near Accord on Privacy", not EU to transfer private information to the US.
Does anyone expect anything other than the EU capitulating to American demands?
I only ask because I can't see that America will ever agree to abide by European Union privacy standards.
The ultimate question is can the EU (legally or politically) sign away their citizens rights to privacy through a treaty?
accurate summary .. (Score:2)
My understanding of it is: that the US is going to monitor all activity on it's residents and will hand such information over to the US, without warrant or evidence of criminal or 'terrorist' activity. And we can't even sue you guys if you lose the data. Given the lack of controls over governmental abuse in your country, shouldn't we be monitoring you. And just because you guys want to turn this place into the
What's next (Score:4, Insightful)
>> So, now we know what step three is: setup a security agency in US to resell otherwise unavailable data.
No, step three is that they setup a security agency in Europe so they kidnap these suspicious looking people and put them on flights to Syria (or wherever) for torture.
As a EU citizen... (Score:4, Interesting)
I would like to know which country isn't planning to go down that route so I can sell all my stuff and move out of the way.
Having worked as a contractor for other European Institutions, I know absolutely nothing gets in the way of the Commission once it decided something. After all, it's not like they have to be re-elected or anything.
as a UK resident .. (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
I'm a resident of the United Kingdom and a loyal subject of her Mag, don't need anyone monitoring me for subversive activity.
so, you never leave home and avoid ALL the closed circuit TV cameras that the UK is so good at?
if anything, people in the UK are far far worse off then anything the US can and will do. when I get depressed about how bad things are in the US, at least I can say I don't live in the UK - aka, the nanny state!
your society has crashed and the cameras are just insult added to injury. our
Re: (Score:2)
Said the citizen after passing roughly 300 CCTVs on his way to the interview booth.
Re: (Score:2)
I would like to know which country isn't planning to go down that route so I can sell all my stuff and move out of the way.
dream on. power is addictive. which government does NOT enjoy power?
the terrorists have ruined us, truly. what a shame. I'm old enough to remember when privacy EXISTED. pity my future kids won't have a shred of info (other than what they read in history books) about what true individual dignity and privacy is all about.
horse has left the barn, never to return. RIP.
Re:As a EU citizen... (Score:4, Insightful)
Re-elected? They don't even have to be elected. It's one of the most disgraceful and anti-democratic constructs in the EU.
This is merely outsourcing (Score:2)
Find some other country/organisation that has an interest in the outcome and let them do it for you.
Strictly speaking, the phrase for this is "having an axe to grind[1]", although the meaning of this phrase is frequently mutated into ranting on about something.
[1] Having an axe to grind: a task you want performed, but don't fancy doing yourself. Persuade, deceive or con some other person into doing it for you.
Re: (Score:2)
[1] Having an axe to grind: a task you want performed, but don't fancy doing yourself. Persuade, deceive or con some other person into doing it for you.
If you meant this ironically (and my irony-o-meter is off) then you can stop reading now. Otherwise, I think you have the definition incorrect.
From: http://www.phrases.org.uk/meanings/174000.html [phrases.org.uk]
"Have a dispute to take up with someone or, to have an ulterior motive/ to have private ends to serve."
Ha-ha (Score:3, Funny)
I think I speak for all US-EU dual citizens when I say that this is awesome. Because now I probably only have to pay to be spied on by *one* of my governments. Hellooooo tax rebate!
I used to teach a course (Score:4, Interesting)
in electronic mail (back at DEC in the 80's and early 90's). I regularly traveled to the UK and europe to teach my 1week course there. the same course was given in the US every 6 weeks or so.
one thing that I learned when I was attending the 'train the trainer' for this course was that euro privacy standards are (well, USED TO BE) very strict. in the course, we used to talk about PMF (personnel master files) and how LITTLE could be shared even in the same company (DEC) but between different countries. email for things like 'all-in-1 mail' (wow, anyone remember that?) used to depend on having access to personnel info (more or less) and yet we taught that very little could be shared between countries, mostly just the first and last name and country they were in and that's about it!
my my, how things have changed.
does this mean .. (Score:2)
Will the USA please go back to isolationism (Score:5, Interesting)
As a Eurpoean (who used to believe in the "American Dream"), I'm thoroughly sick of the way the US behaves, and I'm disgusted that none of our leaders have the nerve to tell the regime to get lost. The EU should cease all co-operation with the USA until the USA starts behaving like a free country. Guantanamo alone is such a blot that the EU should have imposed trade sanctions over it (like we did to apartheid South-Africa).
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
.
There was a fine sketch on 'Not the Nine O'Clock News' many years ago, which in this context sums it up: Rowan Atkinson was talking at the Tory Party Conference about Asian immigration, and the punchline was -
I like curry, but we've got the recipie now, OK?
Substitute Oreos for curry in the above, and you've got my feelings on US impositions on our culture.
Re: (Score:2)
In an equal trade, americans would be losing just as much (instead of absolutely nothing) and be willing to fight it as well. That would certainly be helpful.
Re: (Score:2)
You should be more pissed at the EU than the US. I mean your own folks are selling you out.