EU Set To Crack Down On Bitcoin and Anonymous Payments After Paris Attack (thestack.com) 275
An anonymous reader writes: Home affairs ministers from the European Union are set to gather in Brussels for crisis talks in the wake of the Paris attacks, and a crackdown on Bitcoin, pre-paid credit card and other forms of 'anonymous' online payments are on the agenda. From the article: "According to draft conclusions of the meeting, European interior and justice ministers will urge the European Commission (the EU executive arm) to propose measures to strengthen the controls of non-banking payment methods. These include electronic/anonymous payments, virtual currencies and the transfers of gold and precious metals by pre-paid cards."
Yeah... (Score:5, Insightful)
Just how many terrorists are using this again? Oh, right, that doesn't actually matter...
Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
Don't worry, cash will soon be phased out. For your convenience, of course
Re:Um... (Score:5, Insightful)
Cash is already phased out.
Take $12,000 out of your bank. Oh, that's right. You can't. They don't have that much. You have to call ahead.
Okay, you have your $12,000. Now drive through Tennessee with it. What's that? You got pulled over for "drugs" and all the cash was seized?
Re: (Score:3)
Cash is already phased out. Take $12,000 out of your bank. Oh, that's right. You can't. They don't have that much. You have to call ahead. ...
That may be true for law abiding citizens, but consider the drug trade. The people who grow opium in Afgahanistan or refine heroin in Columbia want to get paid from the cash sales to users in the U.S. and Europe. That mean a net outflow of funds from industrialized nations to third world countries to pay for the drugs. All international terrorists have to do is pay the suppliers in Afghanistan, Columbia etc. and have their agents collect cash from dealer networks inside the U.S. and Europe, maybe offering a
Re: (Score:2)
Frankly, though, it is convenient. Much more so than cash. I don't want to have to regularly go and get a bunch of new physical items to pay people with.
Re: (Score:2)
Wow...that sounds a bit lazy.
It takes me all of about 5 -10 min out of my way max to hit the ATM when I need more cash. I tend to take out a bit over $200 every 5 days or so....it takes no time at all.
I love cash, it keeps me honest when I see how much I'm physically spending....rather than with abstraction of money with CC's or the like.
Just like in th
Re: (Score:2)
There's been a move for some time to put RFIDs with UUIDs on them in all EU banknotes.
Re: (Score:2)
Why? They have machine readable serial numbers already.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:2)
...or you could just deprecate physical currency entirely which would not only save the government a lot of money, it would make it pretty hard for someone to rob you without leaving a fairly obvious trail.
Re: (Score:3)
- buying nuts from that odd lady on the farmer's market with the exotic nut tree
- giving money as a present to your daughter, son
- kid's paperoutes.
- buying sextoys to spice up the relationship.
- buying generic medicines accross borders because prices are actually affordable there.
- donating to the homeless and less privileged.
Not all things that are illegal should be.
Re: (Score:2)
- buying nuts from that odd lady on the farmer's market with the exotic nut tree
She might be in need of a card reader.
- giving money as a present to your daughter, son
Trivial, already done with reloadable cards
- kid's paperoutes.
Um, pay in advance like reasonable people do.
- buying sextoys to spice up the relationship.
The shop will be listed on your statement 'dry cleaning'. Or something innocuous, maybe a charity.
- buying generic medicines accross borders because prices are actually affordable there.
You're
Re: (Score:2)
And a "business bank account" and a computer and ...
I'm not sure if dictating what they should do is more helpful.
And as someone who has experienced first hand what ban
Re: Um... (Score:2)
She will never learn how to use the card reader.
You are no longer her customer, or she will learn. Farmers markets around here are rife with internet and Square users.
Reloadable cards have fees, I don't want some bank skimming money from my kids allowance.
I can find you a reloadable without fees.
You ever think about tipping the kid?
If the system doesn't allow what, the system is deficient. PS, my type as a paper carrier barely covered my bad debts.
It will still show up in the database as adult toys
What da
Re: (Score:3)
I suspect the politicians and bankers dream about doing that but realise that if they did it all at once they would piss off the general public too much.
So instead they play the long game. They do not issue larger banknotes to keep up with inflation (and in the case of the US they actually stopped issuing existing denominations). They put in place reporting requirements for large cash transactions which again they don't update to keep up with inflation.
Re:Um... (Score:4, Interesting)
Hmm...
So, could I use that same device (or a pirate copy) to figure out what's in a man's wallet? That would make it much easier to decide who to mug (do they still use that word?)....
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Which would attract the attention of other better organized thieves with three-letter names.
Re:Um... (Score:5, Informative)
> Because someone can point a very portable RFID reader at a pile of tagged notes and get all the serial numbers, number of notes of each type and total value of the notes in a few second
Not without raising the price of the bills quite a lot. Reading a few distinct RFID tags in a small box is one task, reading 100 distinct RFID's out of a stacked box of paper is still well beyond the limit of any RFID technology. And they can be magnetically obliterated trivially. (nd get all the serial numbers, number of notes of each type and total value of the notes in a few second)
Putting an RFID reader where a money sorter passes individual bills might be effective in reading the bills casually, but RFID tags are still fragile. They don't take bending or folding well, and a great deal of money gets folded a great deal in normal handling. RFID tags also remain expensive: Adding $0.25 to the cost of making each bill would upset the US or EU mints quite a lot.
Re: (Score:2)
Um, and what about cash?
You beat me to it - I was about to ask the same. Since 9/11, a new word got known by the US authorities - 'havala' - meaning cash only transactions of huge amounts. It is common in India when black money needs to be spread around, but it is a simple and favorite way for Jihadis to operate. They are more likely to use this rather than Bitcoin, Paypal or anything else.
Re: (Score:3)
Re: (Score:3)
Japan was a cash based society, but that's currently changing.
Things are switching over to payments via a cell phone, if you went to Japan in the past few years I'd be extremely shocked that you didn't see people paying via mobile rather than cash.
Re: (Score:2)
But if they are already under surveillance, using bitcoin or cash won't make much of a difference. What they are buying will/won't be known regardless of the payment system they use.
If anything, it's a lot easier to split the cash and get what they want. It's only the big ticket items where paying in cash would trigger alarms (like buying a safehouse) where that would be high risk
Whatever reason they claim, (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
This is my theory as well.
It really seems like every tragedy is now just a political tool like any other to push a particular agenda.
"We have been trying to find a way to get rid of this thing and this tragedy provides perfect political cover..."
No way these attacks are not a way to remove (Score:2)
rights and implement more population control laws. Every time this happens we need to lose some rights and freedoms.
How Would That Help? (Score:5, Interesting)
These include electronic/anonymous payments, virtual currencies and the transfers of gold and precious metals by pre-paid cards.
Two problems here. Electronic payments can transfer from anything to anything else, meaning two accounts both external to the EU; the EU's rules would never touch that transaction. The payment can then be introduced into the EU if someone wanted to (and honestly it would never need to). It's the old trick of "abstract until it's legal."
Second is that there's no point in only restricting cards that represent 'precious metals', since it represents a denomination that's indirectly backed by the metal. A card could just as conveniently represent the same value in base metals, or blue chip stocks, or frozen concentrated orange juice. Limiting prepaid card value to 500Euro or something should suffice.
That said I don't see how any of that would've prevented the Paris attacks or allowed the accomplices to be found out after the fact. Wallet cash could've covered transportation, food and lodging; and the guns (probably the largest expense) were smuggled into the country anyhow. The total cost was probably less than 50k Euros, almost all of which was probably paid in cash to criminals who weren't going to try and trace their payment even if it were traceable (demanding cash because they don't want to be traced themselves). I don't know the details of the case though. All I see is politicians trying to push through a EU PATRIOT ACT.
Re: (Score:2)
OK, so how about offering some good, constructive and effective ideas to deal with the problem? As far as I can see, with the problems we are facing: terrorism, unsustainable growth, climate change etc - we don't have the option of not making any sacrifices at all. All we have is a choice of which sacrifices, and the time may run out on that as well. ISIS, Boko Haram and other vermin will only multiply, unless we actively stop them, and if we don't find a better way, we will end up with WWIII in some form,
Re: (Score:3)
So, why should I offer ideas to deal with someone else's problems thousands of miles away?
I should also note that I disagree with your list of insurmountable problems.
That said...
As to things like the Paris incident, it occurs to me to wonder h
Re:How Would That Help? (Score:5, Interesting)
> As to things like the Paris incident, it occurs to me to wonder how easy it would have been to wander through a crowded venue shooting people at random if some of those people had been armed themselves...
The homicide rate with guns in the USA shows the difficulty. The idea that an "armed society is a politie society" was explored by Robert Heinlein in a number of his stories. In real life, the frequency of domestic violence and of violent neighborhood brawls remains so high that the deaths from household violence far outnumber those which might be saved by making personal firearms widely available.
Your other suggestions have similar difficulties. "Raising everyone's standard of living" requires steps, like educating women and reducing the gross disparities between ruling elites and grinding poverty, and birth control to prevent simply creating more starving poor, with profound social and religious consequences that are often resisted by those currently in power.
Re: (Score:3)
There is a wide range of household gun ownership among US states (from 10% to 60%) and no correlation between g
Re: (Score:2)
If what you fear is getting shot, by a terrorist or anyone else, then it's worth pointing out that that's much much less likely in a society where no one has weapons except the bad guys (and the state, though I suspect many don't make that distinction).
If what you fear is a cataclysmic situation where it ma
Re: (Score:3)
You presume incorrectly that there is "a problem". Terrorism is a negligible cause of death. In fact, violent death as a whole keeps decreasing.
Who is this "we" you are speaking of? If you want to make sacrifices in order to deal with your fear of
Re:How Would That Help? (Score:4, Insightful)
These are "problems" only from the point of view of anti-terrorism efforts, but these laws are useless against terrorism anyway. What these laws are for are mostly to extend the power of banks (by eliminating cheap competition) and police (by letting them go on fishing expeditions through your data).
Precisely. And they weren't going to comply with reporting requirements either.
Prepaid phone SIM (Score:2)
They certainly are cracking down on prepaid phone SIMs, where the owner of the phone isn't identified. Apparently Belgium and Luxembourg were the only EU countries left which still had them, but they are phasing them out quicker (now!) than was planned. Apparently, there were just too many shenanigans done with them.
I'm less sure about prepaid credit cards, we've got one of those in the household, but I didn't hear anything yet about them being phased out. They were offered as one means to limit losses in c
Re: (Score:3)
They certainly are cracking down on prepaid phone SIMs, where the owner of the phone isn't identified.
So the criminal have to go back to killing people for their cell phones? Good to know...
Re: (Score:2)
That is certainly false. A lot of "eastern block" countries still have them like Romania, Czech Republic, I think Bulgaria. If you think they aren't "EU enough" there's also the UK (and probably Ireland) - where you don't even have mandatory ID card.
And even with registration go on german ebay (Germany has mandatory regis
Re: (Score:2)
That is certainly false. A lot of "eastern block" countries still have them like Romania, Czech Republic, I think Bulgaria. If you think they aren't "EU enough" there's also the UK (and probably Ireland) - where you don't even have mandatory ID card.
And even with registration go on german ebay (Germany has mandatory registration since before 9/11!) and you can buy preregistered cards by 10-pack, 100, sometimes 500 and 1000.
Well, that points out the fine quality of our local media reports then... </sarcasm>
Freedom (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Freedom (Score:4, Interesting)
draft conclusions? (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
To rubberstamp the "conclusions" handed down by the unelected banksters from behind the curtain.
Cut off ISIS oil sales (Score:2)
More effective would be to go against the middlemen who buy oil from ISIS for half the market value and then make a nice profit by reselling it on the open market.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/... [zerohedge.com]
Unless those middlemen are too big to fail and we can't do anything, of course.
Re: (Score:2)
More effective would be to go against the middlemen who buy oil from ISIS for half the market value and then make a nice profit by reselling it on the open market.
http://www.zerohedge.com/news/ [zerohedge.com]... [zerohedge.com]
Unless those middlemen are too big to fail and we can't do anything, of course.
They haven't stopped the middlemen because they use bitcoin to buy ISIS' oil. That's why they *must* ban bitcoin and other alt-currencies, with cash next up on the chopping-block. /sarc
Strat
I haven't heard any reports that bitcoins... (Score:5, Insightful)
...were used to support the attack. But, hey, never let a good crisis go to waste, right?
anonymous payments, not Anonymous payments (Score:4, Insightful)
Because apparently Anonymous is on our side in this case.
Sure Bitcoin is the root of all evel... (Score:2)
Too bad there's this thing called CASH, which is just as anonymous as Bitcoin. I feel for law enforcement's need, but I also have a right to go to the store and buy some gum and a soda and not have it tracked.
The way things are going these days, I'm waiting for the FBI and Interpol pre-crime divisions to be spun up any day now.
Re: (Score:2)
Coincenter Response (Score:4, Interesting)
Ridiculous! (Score:4, Insightful)
terrorists celebrating the additional publicity (Score:2)
wow, man. terrorists love the chaos and publicity that they receive. they love the reactions, the outrage, the responses that they get, because they don't need to do anything other than kill a few people, and the rest of the damage people - and governments - do *to themselves*. trying to "crack down" on anonymous payments all in the name of "terrorism"... it's amazing. i look forward to a time when people - and governments - understand that terrorising *ourselves* with the knee-jerk after-reactions ofte
Because it already is (Score:4, Insightful)
Because it already is. And killing people with guns and bombs is something you want to prevent instead of penalizing it after it happens. For this you need the ability to predict what will happen. Such ability is gained from observing the current state of the world (because you cannot observe the future), and drawing inferences from these observations. The more you observe, the more predictive power you gain. Large-scale organized activities (like organized crime or organized terrorism) usually require monetary support, thus observation of monetary transfers gives valuable information about the existence of organized structures, which in turn improves prediction about terroristic (or criminal) activity.
Re: Because it already is (Score:3)
Specifically, tracking the inequality of
the wealth distribution more carefully will provide plenty of information to prevent negative consequences of the system, and to undermine the power of individuals who use the system to advance their own interest.
That is, if humanity is the center of the proposition.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
They have always wanted to do X. They just wait for Y to come along and getting X done is easier.
Let no tragedy go to waste.
Re: Because it already is (Score:5, Insightful)
Those who employ violence most readily to terrorize is and achieve their goals care not one bit about income inequality. They are interested only in serving their leaders who either believe their cause will result in a new Earth under their rule, or only want took subjugate all others.
Do you not know this yet? Listen to them.
Re: Because it already is (Score:3)
Yes, and the most conflict ridden areas are the ones with resources, or the ones where the super powers have played their game. There has not been a natural nation forming process there since at least well in the 19th century.
FTFY.
Many conflicted areas have nothing but tyrants.
Re: Because it already is (Score:4, Insightful)
"We made the mistake of letting in barbarians. Fix that mistake, deport the barbarians and we can keep our freedoms."
Mod parent up. The object of terrorist activity is to change your target society into the rights-free, fun-free hellhole you came from. Large western cities are exactly the kind of places they hate the most. People at concerts, in hotels and clubs, crowding in to restaurants - terrorists want to arrange things so that nobody will do such things again.
Instead of cowering behind our security agencies and letting terrorists impose Sharia on us by default, do as many Dresdens as it takes to convince them that we can and will kill them all faster than they can kill us.
The teror scenario is unfolding in Mali right now as we speak. There is no amount of domestic spying and security in target countries that will fix this.
Re: Because it already is (Score:5, Insightful)
How did you get modded up? The object of terrorism is to instill fear and to dispirit the targets, it is NOT to remove rights from people. That's absurd. You probably believe the "try hate our freedoms" yarn. Islamic terrorists may dislike what other cultures do with their freedoms, but nobody hates anyone because they have freedoms. The real reason they dislike and are trying to fight against the west is because of the effect western cultures has had on them and their countries directly over time. You don't see them trying to blow up hindus or buddhists because of their different ideologies or the rights and freedoms their cultures have which differ from theirs. They don't feel that their cultures, values, and nations have been trodden over by them so they're not so eager to go to war with them.
Large western cities are where these terrorists want to target the most because they are highly visible, not because they "hate" them more than other areas with ideologies they don't like.
There are good arguments for and against use of force and various responses to this situation, but basing them on shallow, ignorant BS beliefs about the other side won't lead to any reasonable argument, just emotional ones. Which maybe is what both the terrorists and the politicians looking to use this as an excuse to see even more into everybody's private lives want.
Politicians and governments taking these things and using them as an excuse for extending their power is reprehensible in any case and does, indeed, effect our society in a much more substantial way than actual terrorist attacks do in the long run.
Re: Because it already is (Score:5, Informative)
http://hinduexistence.org/category/attack-upon-hindus-by-muslims/ [hinduexistence.org]
https://www.rt.com/news/buddhist-temples-torched-bangladesh-342/ [rt.com]
And yes, these types of attacks have led to wars where Hindus and Buddhist (monks!) are now attacking Muslims back.
Muslims attack all non-Muslims and their goal, as your parent post stated is to turn every country on earth into a Muslim hellhole.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
How did you get modded up?
Your other shit was TL;DR, but I can help with this part.
When you have mod points, a heretofore not seen little box appears at the bottom of each comment.
You click on the down arrow associated with mod options, select one, and click on it.
You will be notified when you have mod points.
Re: (Score:2)
FTFY.
Re: (Score:3)
You are trying to control the *totality* if the body in order to extinguish the symptoms instead of going after the cause.
Actually, one could argue that this tendency has caused the whole mess to begin with. Instead of going after wealth inequality and economic restrictions, they went on to create more inequality and more restrictions.
The case at hand is even more advanced, since digital currencies have not been used by terrorists. They could help with economic restrictions though, which I'm guessing you wo
Re: (Score:2, Troll)
You think a new currency will cure income inequality? That's almost funny.
Re: (Score:3)
I said it could help with economic restrictions, which is a natural consequence of the argument made against it. I specifically refrained from talking about its effects on inequality, since it depends on which school of economics you favor.
Re:Because it already is (Score:4, Informative)
Clue: suicide bombers really don't give a damn how much money they have in the bank, or how big their mansion is.
You (and others) harp on "wealth inequality" as if it 'solving' it were some sort of panacea. It's not. The source for this mess is far more ideological than economic. You could make everyone equally wealthy tomorrow morning at 9am sharp, and it wouldn't change a thing as far as these folks are concerned.
Militant Islam doesn't really give a shit about wealth, except for the type and quantity of armaments that can be purchased with it.
Re:Because it already is (Score:4, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
Militant Islam doesn't really give a shit about wealth
Militant Islam, and any sort of extremism really, not only feed off of, but also depend on hopelessness. The entire structure exists because there are an enormous number of people who are forcefully deprived of all means to find meaning.
Lack of reach, both socially and economically is the primary culprit. But you also have those who have suffered for decades without the feeling of any sort of power. So it is not really surprising to see them cling to an implausible but overwhelming promise of eternal well b
Re:Because it already is (Score:5, Insightful)
Terrorists use banks and SMS quite often and the intelligence community have been unable to use that data to prevent terrorism.
Having the relevant data hasn't been able to prevent any terrorism, why would having more data prevent terrorism.
Re:Because it already is (Score:5, Insightful)
They also claim the data is used to attack organised clime. There is no evidence of success there either.
In fact, there is considerable evidence that they have no idea how to use the data in any meaningful way. Perhaps they should hire the people targetting online adverts to manage the data. Oh, wait ...
Re: (Score:2)
You don't say! And how is that working out for you?
You can do that even better by turning countries into police states or fascist dictatorships. Is that what you're going to advocate next?
No, sorry, in practice that's not true: more information only gains you "predictive power" if you have the resources to process it.
An excuse (Score:4, Interesting)
I understand that cutting of the money supply for terrorist is very effective, and I can understand bitcoin as it can move large amounts of money, however I don't get pre-paid cards? Do they want traceability when people use these items when using a VPN?
It's money laundering. The terrorism is in part an excuse, but realistically a massive portion of the criminal economy runs on cash. If you have a way to turn cash into transmittable currency, you have easy money laundering and untraceable transactions.
We appreciate our privacy, but there are *billions* of dollars of illegal transactions because cash exists and is largely untraced. Any sane government would want to crack down on cash transactions up to the point where it starts hurting their own economy in a serious way.
Re: An excuse (Score:2)
Governent makes all untaxable activity illegal.
Re: (Score:2)
At the request of the central banks. The IRS and CRA are little more than collection agencies for the banksters.
Money As Debt [youtube.com]
Re: (Score:2, Informative)
No it's not. Money laundering is something completely different. If you want to turn cash into transmittable currency bitcoin is a terrible ida, which is why most criminals use other methods, like art auctions where you can make clean bank transactions and pay taxes which IS money laundering.
So? Why would every sane government do that? It looks completely insane. There are no sane argument presented that from any perspective makes cracking this sane. The argument used is that unregulated money can create to
Re: (Score:2)
I thought the whole point of Bitcoin is that it cannot be regulated by a central authority. I fail to see how the EU intends to "crackdown on Bitcoin." How exactly do they think they are going to stop peer-to-peer transactions?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Actually this is one of the few times I broke with tradition and read TFA. All it has to say is they're going "to propose measures to strengthen the controls of non-banking payment methods." Whatever the hell that means.
It means the bureaucrats are still thinking about what to do, but the reporters need a quote for the morning edition. Slow news day. The real news is probably still under surveillance, under interrogation or under attack.
Bitcoin: A bit counter productive (Score:5, Insightful)
I understand that cutting of the money supply for terrorist is very effective, and I can understand bitcoin as it can move large amounts of money
Also, you need to understand that the main keypoint of bitcoin: is that it's distributed.
Bitcoin protocol advantage isn't that you can move these large amounts of money anonymously.
Bitcoin protocol advantage is that it's only the poeple involved that get to make the call, there's no central authority.
This lack of central authority is done by the distribution. Every single transaction is broadcast to the whole network, and is stored into the blockchain: a huge virtual ledger of which every single node in the network has local copy. That's far from anonymous. That's publicly broadcast.
The bitcoin protocol still provides pseudonymity. In the blockchain, transaction aren't stored together with some username/identity. There is none as there's no central authority with which to register. Instead in the blockchain, transaction are signed with cryptographic key. And each user's wallet generates constantly new cryptographic keys specific to this user.
For an individual, it might not be easy to track every single such use of cryptographic key, in order to be able to trace a "money trail" between 2 users on the network.
But for a government, even more for an entity as the whole european union, that's well within their capability of "Big Data" analysis.
Much more easy to track than plain cash: with plain cash, you only get to read the serial number when the ATM handle out the money at one end of the chain, and when the deposit machine gets the cash back later. Any transaction that has happened in between is left to the imagination of the detective.
Whereas with bitcoin, it's as if every single movement of cash note was publicly broadcast. Be it when the cash changes hands (e.g.: an actual transaction between a merchant and a seller) or simply changes pocket (metaphorically symbolising the constant stream of generated crypto key as part as the normal function of a wallet).
A single individual might not follow it.
But a government could at least do the tracking, alghouth they can't block it (that's the whole point of the "no central authority").
Also, law is still law, and all the law against money laundering still apply against any institution that handles money. No matter if the money is plain cash, or credit cards or, in this case a weird protocole with no central authority.
BTC exchange, payment processor, etc. all requires user registration, and all require all the other procedures in place against laundering.
Simply, the transactions happening bitcoin will happen without any control from 3rd party (just like cash changing hands, although better traceable, as mentionned above).
Unlike transaction with credit card and central payment processor like Pay-pal, where the Visa, MasterCard or Paypal companies are able to freeze accounts and reverse transactions.
Bitcoin protocole still offers advantage for the average citizen: absence of monopoly.
(mainly the main advantage of cash, except that it also works online.
or the main advantage of SEPA payment, except that it works anywhere in the world, not only between european bank account supporting the protocol and a faster speed being minute to hours instead of next-day to days)
Meaning:
- freedom to chose one provider and interact as long as everbody else supports the same protocole.
- not a single company being jury judge and executionner (like with credit card companies and charge-backs), but instead enabling complexe multi-party scheme, were seller and buyer can freely agree before hand on a 3rd party arbiter (a role that the various consumer associations and certification groups in europe would be happy to play)
- not being at the whim of Visa/MasterCard freezing acount. Currently it's not possible to use a Credit Card to pay anything that they don't like.
(e.g.: you can't donate money to whistleblower. Wiki
Re: (Score:2)
Based on what? Have there been any successful financial actions against terrorists, ever? I know the US Treasury likes to claim there has, but whenever you look at the details you discover that by "terrorist" they meant something like "someone wiring money to Cuba or Iran". Not actual terrorists of the kind that blow themselves up.
The blunt reality is that terrorism is very cheap. The entire cost of 9/11 came under the $10,000 repo
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Sorry, banksters need more warm bodies to "stimulate the economy" and further inflate the debt balloon. Muslims are the top men at breeding uncontrollably, so they are preferred. So what if Islam is bit medieval, Banksters do not care. All they care about is that we accommodate the new warm bodies and run up more debt while doing so.
Killing non-bank transactions - and eventually cash too, it is coming but it can't happen before all other non-bank alternatives have been marginalized or killed - doing that ha
Re:Close the f'ing borders already! (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm actually quite impressed that you know every muslim. Really? By name?
So you don't want to let them enter Europe. So what's the alternative? Shoot them? Let them drown in the Mediterranean Sea? Let them starve and freeze to death? You can shout that most of them are young men. Still, there are a lot women, children and babies among them.
I'm not even claiming that we should allow them to enter Europe. I just take offence at the idea that a (or any) solution is 'simple'. The fact that so many people find the parent's post informative, saddens me.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
> You are aware of that most victims of ISIS are moslem?
This is literally only because they can only reach other Muslims. Give them a gun to your head and they'll fire it- if you are a "crusader", then they'll smile while they do it. Their literature exhorts anyone to kill "crusaders".
Isis kills their neighbors. For now, that's Muslims- not that this is really any comfort.
Re: (Score:2)
Even if we don't let the new immigrants in Europe, we still have the old ones, their children and grandchildren to deal with.
Some of the old ones may not even have been regarded as immigrants at the time. IIRC, Algeria was considered part of France for about 125 years until Algeria achieved independence in the early 1960s.
Re: (Score:3)
Sure, close the borders. A fine example right now is the one between France and Luxembourg, passed each day but tens of thousands of commuters who live in France but work in Luxembourg. What was already bad logistics, prone to accidents and thereby traffic jams, is now a nightmare each morning and evening. No, that nightmare won't be helped by those people moving, as there isn't anywhere near sufficient housing available, and prices are already at levels comparable to inner city London or Paris. The Schenge
Re: (Score:3)
The idea is to secure the Schengen borders, i.e. not the borders inside of Schengen.
It's been proven that immigration benefits the economy if it is immigration from inside EU or Europe. You can hardly say that there is any benefit to having 30% unemployment rates and high criminality among immigrants.
For your first point: well, France has closed all borders, including inside of Schengen. We'll see how long it will last, as it does have nasty repercussions (so much for "they won't change our values, our way of life").
For your second point: according to german economists, the current immigration wave is good for the german economy. Also, german police has confirmed the criminality rate is no higher with the immigrants than with the general population - adding that there's been quite a wave of extreme-righ
Re: (Score:3)
Talking about France, yes, we could close the borders, it may be beneficial or it may not but it won't solve your "Muslim" problem. And that is if we could call terrorists who follow the most twisted interpretation of Islam imaginable "Muslims".
Many French immigrants and Muslims in particular are actually French citizens born in the country from naturalized parents. So where do you want to kick them out to? If the goal is to stop them, then it is too late. And just to let you know, when they entered the cou
Re: (Score:3)
Don't give up to the fallacy that Islam is the problem. The problem is that the middle east is a prime location for proxy wars and it happens that Islam is the dominant religion there. Should them have been Christians, Jews or even Buddhists that it wouldn't have been different.
This is exactly right. Over the last couple of centuries Britain and France (particularly) and latterly the US have ridden roughshod over national sovereignty and human rights in the middle east whenever it suited their political or economic purposes. People who wonder why there is so much anti-western feeling in the region need to read up on the history. If it was themselves and their families on the receiving end they would likely feel exactly the same way.
Re:Close the f'ing borders already! (Score:5, Insightful)
Do you imagine the MIddle East had liberal democracies before the US and Europe came in and destroyed it? The Middle East has been a totalitarian shithole for a long, long time. It never had "human rights" in the Western sense. And the whole point of many of these Islamic movements is to get rid of "national sovereignty" and restore an Islamic empire. And creating that Islamic empire isn't for the good of humanity, it is to take revenge for the fact that Europe successfully defended itself and kicked out the first few Islamic empires.
Now, I disapprove of the US and European governments meddling in the Middle East. It is clearly not very effective, it is very costly, and it just riles up the people who live there. But the West does not bear any moral responsibility for the plight of the people in the Middle East, and it isn't our responsibility to ensure that they have "national sovereignty and human rights". In fact, the Middle East probably has achieved more "national sovereignty and human rights" with US and European meddling than without, it's just that the price we are paying for it is too high for us.
Re: (Score:2)
Do you imagine the MIddle East had liberal democracies before the US and Europe came in and destroyed it? The Middle East has been a totalitarian shithole for a long, long time. It never had "human rights" in the Western sense. And the whole point of many of these Islamic movements is to get rid of "national sovereignty" and restore an Islamic empire. And creating that Islamic empire isn't for the good of humanity, it is to take revenge for the fact that Europe successfully defended itself and kicked out the first few Islamic empires.
Now, I disapprove of the US and European governments meddling in the Middle East. It is clearly not very effective, it is very costly, and it just riles up the people who live there. But the West does not bear any moral responsibility for the plight of the people in the Middle East, and it isn't our responsibility to ensure that they have "national sovereignty and human rights". In fact, the Middle East probably has achieved more "national sovereignty and human rights" with US and European meddling than without, it's just that the price we are paying for it is too high for us.
You've just proved my point. The West has a history of supporting repressive regimes (like Saudi Arabia) because it's "good for business". The West talk a good game when it comes to democracy in the middle east but in reality they only want "friendly" regimes in place. They say they want free elections, but when there is one and the people use their votes to elect the "wrong" party there's suddenly a coup to restore the status-quo. Here's a recent article in this very topic from the BBC; Does the West w [bbc.com]
Re: (Score:2)
I just choked on my morning cup of tea. You really think the US of A has no problem kicking out the hordes of illegal invaders, out of its borders?
That, I got to see.
Maybe if The Donald actually pulls it off, and wins a year from now. Even then, it's not guaranteed, unless the congressional Republicans also find where they misplaced their ba
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's utter bullcrap and extremely racist to proclaim 'muslims are the bad guys', you know? I live in a muslim community. I'm an atheist myself but none of my friends looks upon me as a lesser human or someone to either be converted or killed. It's sad that the press has you so riled up that you proclaim 'muslims are bad, m'kay'. You're a twisted and paranoid individual and you might not realise it but when you talk like that you sound very much like an extremist evil muslim.
Your ideas would have some merit if you knew what the word "racist" means.
Re: (Score:2)
> Have you stopped and thought for a minute about who the immigrants are fleeing from?
>Hint: It's the terrorists you are impying them being part of. They are actually not the same, even though they are all brown people. I know, tough concept.
Yes, the same terrorists that they raised in their country by just a simple modification of their beliefs and the absence of a totalitarian system that suppressed them. So, they carry the seed of their destruction within them and the next generations will act accordingly. Highway to hell...
Example A: Tsarnaev brothers
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Better get the trains, planes, buses, taxis, pedicabs, and backpacks while you are at it....
Re: (Score:2)
Better car bombings than horse bombings. Won't someone please think of the horses?!
Re: (Score:2)
To be perfectly clear, cars *would* be banned if they weren't so widely used already.
The sad truth is, democracy is yet another method to herd people into working towards goals set by oligarchs.
Yes, "we" could have elected some other people, but "we" do not and would not.
Re: (Score:2)