<article>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#article10_02_06_1836221</id>
	<title>EU Committee Says No To Bank Data Sharing</title>
	<author>kdawson</author>
	<datestamp>1265485560000</datestamp>
	<htmltext>krupert writes to let us know that the civil liberties committee of the European Parliament has <a href="http://www.dw-world.de/dw/article/0,,5220092,00.html">voted to revoke the data-sharing arrangement</a> by which US intelligence agencies have access to EU banking data via the SWIFT system. The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled, which it will be next week if the full European Parliament votes in line with the committee's recommendation. US intelligence agencies <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/06/06/24/045200/US-Secretly-Tapping-Bank-Databases">clandestinely tapped the SWIFT interbank clearing data</a> from just after 9/11 until 2006, when the secret arrangement was made public. After that, Belgium-based SWIFT pulled their servers from the US and set up shop in Brussels, and the US had to <a href="//yro.slashdot.org/story/09/11/27/150234/EU-About-To-Grant-US-Unlimited-Access-To-Banking-Data">negotiate with the EU to keep tapping</a> the data.</htmltext>
<tokenext>krupert writes to let us know that the civil liberties committee of the European Parliament has voted to revoke the data-sharing arrangement by which US intelligence agencies have access to EU banking data via the SWIFT system .
The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled , which it will be next week if the full European Parliament votes in line with the committee 's recommendation .
US intelligence agencies clandestinely tapped the SWIFT interbank clearing data from just after 9/11 until 2006 , when the secret arrangement was made public .
After that , Belgium-based SWIFT pulled their servers from the US and set up shop in Brussels , and the US had to negotiate with the EU to keep tapping the data .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>krupert writes to let us know that the civil liberties committee of the European Parliament has voted to revoke the data-sharing arrangement by which US intelligence agencies have access to EU banking data via the SWIFT system.
The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled, which it will be next week if the full European Parliament votes in line with the committee's recommendation.
US intelligence agencies clandestinely tapped the SWIFT interbank clearing data from just after 9/11 until 2006, when the secret arrangement was made public.
After that, Belgium-based SWIFT pulled their servers from the US and set up shop in Brussels, and the US had to negotiate with the EU to keep tapping the data.</sentencetext>
</article>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047658</id>
	<title>Trade ya some lives for a bank account.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265448300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>So lets see if I grasp this correctly. The US is willing to hold hostage certain bits of terrorist information over banking data. Hm.</htmltext>
<tokenext>So lets see if I grasp this correctly .
The US is willing to hold hostage certain bits of terrorist information over banking data .
Hm .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So lets see if I grasp this correctly.
The US is willing to hold hostage certain bits of terrorist information over banking data.
Hm.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31053436</id>
	<title>Re:Not quite</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265568840000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><blockquote><div><p>    * The US embassador to the European Union, William Kennard blackmailed members of the European Parliament</p></div></blockquote><p>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; * Europeans get nothing in return for the transmission of their sensitive data</p><p>Seems to me you can't blackmail people who don't actually want something.</p><blockquote><div><p># Restore the honour of the US diplomatic corps by a dismissal of the offender Kennard</p></div></blockquote><p>Do you seriously think Americans give a damn what Europeans or European diplomats think of Kennard?</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>* The US embassador to the European Union , William Kennard blackmailed members of the European Parliament         * Europeans get nothing in return for the transmission of their sensitive dataSeems to me you ca n't blackmail people who do n't actually want something. # Restore the honour of the US diplomatic corps by a dismissal of the offender KennardDo you seriously think Americans give a damn what Europeans or European diplomats think of Kennard ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>    * The US embassador to the European Union, William Kennard blackmailed members of the European Parliament
        * Europeans get nothing in return for the transmission of their sensitive dataSeems to me you can't blackmail people who don't actually want something.# Restore the honour of the US diplomatic corps by a dismissal of the offender KennardDo you seriously think Americans give a damn what Europeans or European diplomats think of Kennard?
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047660</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047438</id>
	<title>End of Technology Euphoria</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265489580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I think we are finally beginning to see some of the endings to the technology euphoria that have developed over the past 20 years. As technology and the internet improved and people discovered all of these extra amazing ways to make different processes more efficient, it's becoming more and more obvious that certain processes simply should not be efficient. This includes government ability to collect data as well as corporate ability to do the same. When it's harder to do, it's fine because it doesn't have as strong of an effect and the mere difficult limits its use. The easier it gets the more often it will be abused or over-used because it's possible.</p><p>Essentially, just because we can build this network, doesn't mean we should. I'm giving a big nod of the head to the EU over this one.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I think we are finally beginning to see some of the endings to the technology euphoria that have developed over the past 20 years .
As technology and the internet improved and people discovered all of these extra amazing ways to make different processes more efficient , it 's becoming more and more obvious that certain processes simply should not be efficient .
This includes government ability to collect data as well as corporate ability to do the same .
When it 's harder to do , it 's fine because it does n't have as strong of an effect and the mere difficult limits its use .
The easier it gets the more often it will be abused or over-used because it 's possible.Essentially , just because we can build this network , does n't mean we should .
I 'm giving a big nod of the head to the EU over this one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I think we are finally beginning to see some of the endings to the technology euphoria that have developed over the past 20 years.
As technology and the internet improved and people discovered all of these extra amazing ways to make different processes more efficient, it's becoming more and more obvious that certain processes simply should not be efficient.
This includes government ability to collect data as well as corporate ability to do the same.
When it's harder to do, it's fine because it doesn't have as strong of an effect and the mere difficult limits its use.
The easier it gets the more often it will be abused or over-used because it's possible.Essentially, just because we can build this network, doesn't mean we should.
I'm giving a big nod of the head to the EU over this one.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051262</id>
	<title>Re:Trade ya some lives for a bank account.</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265539680000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Well, seeing how well it helped to prevent the Amsterdam-Detroit flight bombing, I suppose it's not much of a deal<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)</p><p>We'll just put one Dutch in every airplane. Problem solved.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Well , seeing how well it helped to prevent the Amsterdam-Detroit flight bombing , I suppose it 's not much of a deal : ) We 'll just put one Dutch in every airplane .
Problem solved .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Well, seeing how well it helped to prevent the Amsterdam-Detroit flight bombing, I suppose it's not much of a deal :)We'll just put one Dutch in every airplane.
Problem solved.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047658</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048934</id>
	<title>Fat lot of good their own intelligence did them</title>
	<author>mimiru</author>
	<datestamp>1265460660000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled</p></div><p>
Like US intelligence means something. Fat lot of good their own intelligence did them.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled Like US intelligence means something .
Fat lot of good their own intelligence did them .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is canceled
Like US intelligence means something.
Fat lot of good their own intelligence did them.
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047856</id>
	<title>This is a big reason to not do IT in the US</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265450220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The United States Government claims all in the name of security, but in doing so, steals everyone elses information whenever possible.  They call their justification "The Patriot Act", which allows them to steal all information on any computer in the US.  Now its true that in the US, they are not allowed to divulge information about Americans.  Foreign nationals, and information about people in other countries don't get any kind of consideration in this manner.  The short answer is: all others are ripe for the picking!  Banking information, health records, scientific, technical, any other kind of information is stealable by the US government, and since they aren't stealing from Americans, they haven't broken any laws!  The rule goes like this: 1. The US gov't. can steal information from Amercians, if the Americans complain, then they are not being patriotic, 2. stealing information from foreigners is ok since they aren't Americans.  3. whenever possible, apply the rule "Might Makes Right".  If they argue with you, show them the business end of a shotgun.  If they pull out a bigger gun, keep pulling out bigger guns of your own, till you have to start pulling out devices with radiation symbols painted on them.  At that point, negotiations may be possible.  4. Apply American laws to foreign nationals whenever possible.  Ignore foreign laws even in foreign countries.  Cite this line "It doesn't apply to me, I'm an American".   5. Remember at all times: God put Americans in a special place.  Foreigners don't count, so moral codes don't apply to them.  You can even behave as a Psychopath in their countries, and when in doubt, apply rules 1-4.<br>Sincerely,<br>Government of the United States of America<br>Department of Homeland Security, CIA, NSA, DOD, etc.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The United States Government claims all in the name of security , but in doing so , steals everyone elses information whenever possible .
They call their justification " The Patriot Act " , which allows them to steal all information on any computer in the US .
Now its true that in the US , they are not allowed to divulge information about Americans .
Foreign nationals , and information about people in other countries do n't get any kind of consideration in this manner .
The short answer is : all others are ripe for the picking !
Banking information , health records , scientific , technical , any other kind of information is stealable by the US government , and since they are n't stealing from Americans , they have n't broken any laws !
The rule goes like this : 1 .
The US gov't .
can steal information from Amercians , if the Americans complain , then they are not being patriotic , 2. stealing information from foreigners is ok since they are n't Americans .
3. whenever possible , apply the rule " Might Makes Right " .
If they argue with you , show them the business end of a shotgun .
If they pull out a bigger gun , keep pulling out bigger guns of your own , till you have to start pulling out devices with radiation symbols painted on them .
At that point , negotiations may be possible .
4. Apply American laws to foreign nationals whenever possible .
Ignore foreign laws even in foreign countries .
Cite this line " It does n't apply to me , I 'm an American " .
5. Remember at all times : God put Americans in a special place .
Foreigners do n't count , so moral codes do n't apply to them .
You can even behave as a Psychopath in their countries , and when in doubt , apply rules 1-4.Sincerely,Government of the United States of AmericaDepartment of Homeland Security , CIA , NSA , DOD , etc .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The United States Government claims all in the name of security, but in doing so, steals everyone elses information whenever possible.
They call their justification "The Patriot Act", which allows them to steal all information on any computer in the US.
Now its true that in the US, they are not allowed to divulge information about Americans.
Foreign nationals, and information about people in other countries don't get any kind of consideration in this manner.
The short answer is: all others are ripe for the picking!
Banking information, health records, scientific, technical, any other kind of information is stealable by the US government, and since they aren't stealing from Americans, they haven't broken any laws!
The rule goes like this: 1.
The US gov't.
can steal information from Amercians, if the Americans complain, then they are not being patriotic, 2. stealing information from foreigners is ok since they aren't Americans.
3. whenever possible, apply the rule "Might Makes Right".
If they argue with you, show them the business end of a shotgun.
If they pull out a bigger gun, keep pulling out bigger guns of your own, till you have to start pulling out devices with radiation symbols painted on them.
At that point, negotiations may be possible.
4. Apply American laws to foreign nationals whenever possible.
Ignore foreign laws even in foreign countries.
Cite this line "It doesn't apply to me, I'm an American".
5. Remember at all times: God put Americans in a special place.
Foreigners don't count, so moral codes don't apply to them.
You can even behave as a Psychopath in their countries, and when in doubt, apply rules 1-4.Sincerely,Government of the United States of AmericaDepartment of Homeland Security, CIA, NSA, DOD, etc.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048608</id>
	<title>so it's like this,</title>
	<author>Adult film producer</author>
	<datestamp>1265457780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>"Give us the banking data or innocent people in your european union may die in terrorist attacks."<br> <br>

Fuck... I'm glad we have this global war on terror.  I feel safer already.   Who's to say that the euros will not reciprocate?</htmltext>
<tokenext>" Give us the banking data or innocent people in your european union may die in terrorist attacks .
" Fuck... I 'm glad we have this global war on terror .
I feel safer already .
Who 's to say that the euros will not reciprocate ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Give us the banking data or innocent people in your european union may die in terrorist attacks.
" 

Fuck... I'm glad we have this global war on terror.
I feel safer already.
Who's to say that the euros will not reciprocate?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31052096</id>
	<title>RFID</title>
	<author>mahadiga</author>
	<datestamp>1265554560000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>What if currency notes are RFID enabled?</htmltext>
<tokenext>What if currency notes are RFID enabled ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>What if currency notes are RFID enabled?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049316</id>
	<title>Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265464140000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>US "terrorist intelligence" has also demonstrated itself to be politically driven doggerel, such as the "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq" and the "terrorists" held in Guantanamo Bay, some of whom have already been murdered under torture in secret interrogation installations. (http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368). Such "intelligence" causes far more death and destruction than it prevents: from decades of experience with the PLO, the IRA, Basque insurgents, Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan under the Russions, they know \_exactly\_ what happens when you replace law and courts with "stopping terrorism".</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>US " terrorist intelligence " has also demonstrated itself to be politically driven doggerel , such as the " weapons of mass destruction in Iraq " and the " terrorists " held in Guantanamo Bay , some of whom have already been murdered under torture in secret interrogation installations .
( http : //www.harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368 ) . Such " intelligence " causes far more death and destruction than it prevents : from decades of experience with the PLO , the IRA , Basque insurgents , Korea , Vietnam , and Afghanistan under the Russions , they know \ _exactly \ _ what happens when you replace law and courts with " stopping terrorism " .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>US "terrorist intelligence" has also demonstrated itself to be politically driven doggerel, such as the "weapons of mass destruction in Iraq" and the "terrorists" held in Guantanamo Bay, some of whom have already been murdered under torture in secret interrogation installations.
(http://www.harpers.org/archive/2010/01/hbc-90006368). Such "intelligence" causes far more death and destruction than it prevents: from decades of experience with the PLO, the IRA, Basque insurgents, Korea, Vietnam, and Afghanistan under the Russions, they know \_exactly\_ what happens when you replace law and courts with "stopping terrorism".</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047732</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31050590</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>rhizome</author>
	<datestamp>1265480580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The funny thing is that the terrorists (that the US cares about) are only attacking the US and those who collude with the US. A refusal to cooperate with the US is likely the safer position to take. The only information about terrorists the US is going to withold is that which concerns any danger that countries incur by continuing relations with the US.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The funny thing is that the terrorists ( that the US cares about ) are only attacking the US and those who collude with the US .
A refusal to cooperate with the US is likely the safer position to take .
The only information about terrorists the US is going to withold is that which concerns any danger that countries incur by continuing relations with the US .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The funny thing is that the terrorists (that the US cares about) are only attacking the US and those who collude with the US.
A refusal to cooperate with the US is likely the safer position to take.
The only information about terrorists the US is going to withold is that which concerns any danger that countries incur by continuing relations with the US.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047678</id>
	<title>At least the US negotiates</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265448480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Because we all know that the French, British, Russians, Chinese, Cubans, Iranians, Israelis, and maybe even the Venezualans all ask before cracking European databases containing private data....</p><p>Yes, that's a pretty good list of the countries other than the US that conduct global intelligence gathering.</p><p>What, you think those countries DON'T do that?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Because we all know that the French , British , Russians , Chinese , Cubans , Iranians , Israelis , and maybe even the Venezualans all ask before cracking European databases containing private data....Yes , that 's a pretty good list of the countries other than the US that conduct global intelligence gathering.What , you think those countries DO N'T do that ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Because we all know that the French, British, Russians, Chinese, Cubans, Iranians, Israelis, and maybe even the Venezualans all ask before cracking European databases containing private data....Yes, that's a pretty good list of the countries other than the US that conduct global intelligence gathering.What, you think those countries DON'T do that?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048798</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>digitig</author>
	<datestamp>1265459520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>it&rsquo;s warmer</p></div><p>Than where? Greece? Southern Spain? Don't think so.</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the food is better</p></div><p>If you can live on a diet of cheese and chocolate. Would you happen to be American?</p><p><div class="quote"><p>the scenery is beautiful</p></div><p>I'll give you that one.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>it    s warmerThan where ?
Greece ? Southern Spain ?
Do n't think so.the food is betterIf you can live on a diet of cheese and chocolate .
Would you happen to be American ? the scenery is beautifulI 'll give you that one .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>it’s warmerThan where?
Greece? Southern Spain?
Don't think so.the food is betterIf you can live on a diet of cheese and chocolate.
Would you happen to be American?the scenery is beautifulI'll give you that one.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047882</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049538</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265466480000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization."</p><p>I'm certain that you must be pulling the collective leg of the Slashdot reading audience with this one.  You simply must be.</p><p>The EU would be an intelligent organisation without the inclusion of the UK?  That's particularly entertaining considering that their prime candidate for EU leadership was Tony Blair.  Tony Blair, a fine example of poor leadership if ever there was one, and one of the few British Prime Ministers that could muster almost Thatcher levels of utter incompetence.</p><p>And even he declined their offer.</p><p>As a British citizen, I'm well aware that the British Gov't has its foolish moments, and those tend to be the rule rather than the exception, but I'd also say that considering their choice of leaders the EU appears incompetent enough all by its lonesome, it really doesn't need Britain's aid to be even more so.</p><p>So truly, it is to laugh.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization .
" I 'm certain that you must be pulling the collective leg of the Slashdot reading audience with this one .
You simply must be.The EU would be an intelligent organisation without the inclusion of the UK ?
That 's particularly entertaining considering that their prime candidate for EU leadership was Tony Blair .
Tony Blair , a fine example of poor leadership if ever there was one , and one of the few British Prime Ministers that could muster almost Thatcher levels of utter incompetence.And even he declined their offer.As a British citizen , I 'm well aware that the British Gov't has its foolish moments , and those tend to be the rule rather than the exception , but I 'd also say that considering their choice of leaders the EU appears incompetent enough all by its lonesome , it really does n't need Britain 's aid to be even more so.So truly , it is to laugh .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.
"I'm certain that you must be pulling the collective leg of the Slashdot reading audience with this one.
You simply must be.The EU would be an intelligent organisation without the inclusion of the UK?
That's particularly entertaining considering that their prime candidate for EU leadership was Tony Blair.
Tony Blair, a fine example of poor leadership if ever there was one, and one of the few British Prime Ministers that could muster almost Thatcher levels of utter incompetence.And even he declined their offer.As a British citizen, I'm well aware that the British Gov't has its foolish moments, and those tend to be the rule rather than the exception, but I'd also say that considering their choice of leaders the EU appears incompetent enough all by its lonesome, it really doesn't need Britain's aid to be even more so.So truly, it is to laugh.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047552</id>
	<title>It's about time!</title>
	<author>synoniem</author>
	<datestamp>1265447460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not that I trust my government but at least they are my government. It's obvious that the EU does not really care about data from European citizens going to the US but our international firms do. And further it's quite simple: not one bankrecord from the US went to Europe while all bankrecords from Europe went to the US. And that has to get even now.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that I trust my government but at least they are my government .
It 's obvious that the EU does not really care about data from European citizens going to the US but our international firms do .
And further it 's quite simple : not one bankrecord from the US went to Europe while all bankrecords from Europe went to the US .
And that has to get even now .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that I trust my government but at least they are my government.
It's obvious that the EU does not really care about data from European citizens going to the US but our international firms do.
And further it's quite simple: not one bankrecord from the US went to Europe while all bankrecords from Europe went to the US.
And that has to get even now.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048074</id>
	<title>What are we the Mafia now?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265452500000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Withholding terrorism help if they cancel the program?  I can just see some government negotiator saying "You know, it would be a shame if something was to... happen."</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Withholding terrorism help if they cancel the program ?
I can just see some government negotiator saying " You know , it would be a shame if something was to.. .
happen. "</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Withholding terrorism help if they cancel the program?
I can just see some government negotiator saying "You know, it would be a shame if something was to...
happen."</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051100</id>
	<title>rsspect</title>
	<author>anonieuweling</author>
	<datestamp>1265535780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>Of course the USA respectfully and nicely accepts this disappointing yet semi-democratic decision.<br>
NOT!<br>
They threaten Europe with not sharing terrorism related information.<br>
So we expect a false flag soon?</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course the USA respectfully and nicely accepts this disappointing yet semi-democratic decision .
NOT ! They threaten Europe with not sharing terrorism related information .
So we expect a false flag soon ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Of course the USA respectfully and nicely accepts this disappointing yet semi-democratic decision.
NOT!
They threaten Europe with not sharing terrorism related information.
So we expect a false flag soon?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049254</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>sa1lnr</author>
	<datestamp>1265463360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization."</p><p>Haha, no chance.</p><p>Considering the level of expenses that an MEP gets, you'll never be rid of UK politicians.<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization .
" Haha , no chance.Considering the level of expenses that an MEP gets , you 'll never be rid of UK politicians .
; )</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.
"Haha, no chance.Considering the level of expenses that an MEP gets, you'll never be rid of UK politicians.
;)</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047732</id>
	<title>Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!!</title>
	<author>Teun</author>
	<datestamp>1265448900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext>Yeah right, 9/11 is the only successful terrorist attack ever.<br>
In the mean time don't be a moron, Europe has just as much to gain by effective anti terrorist intelligence as the rest of the civilised world.<p>
But there was nothing civilised or intelligent about the SWIFT treaty as it stood, it was utterly one-sided.</p><p>
We cannot avoid having learned from the stupidities in international politics the Bush-era has bestowed on the world, there were no safeguards what-so-ever the data was going to be used for purpose.</p><p>
When the US government can make a case sharing of European banking data is going to help all sides in our joint fight against violent and criminal zealots of any description I'm sure they could win the support of Europe.</p><p>
Because the UN includes some rather nasty members I won't go so far as to suggest a UN institute should do the intelligence but an international body is the only reliable way to handle such sensitive data.</p><p>
We all remember what happened when a European delegation was in China to sign off on an important Airbus contract and a US company could out of the blue undercut the price.</p><p>
Banking information is sensitive!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Yeah right , 9/11 is the only successful terrorist attack ever .
In the mean time do n't be a moron , Europe has just as much to gain by effective anti terrorist intelligence as the rest of the civilised world .
But there was nothing civilised or intelligent about the SWIFT treaty as it stood , it was utterly one-sided .
We can not avoid having learned from the stupidities in international politics the Bush-era has bestowed on the world , there were no safeguards what-so-ever the data was going to be used for purpose .
When the US government can make a case sharing of European banking data is going to help all sides in our joint fight against violent and criminal zealots of any description I 'm sure they could win the support of Europe .
Because the UN includes some rather nasty members I wo n't go so far as to suggest a UN institute should do the intelligence but an international body is the only reliable way to handle such sensitive data .
We all remember what happened when a European delegation was in China to sign off on an important Airbus contract and a US company could out of the blue undercut the price .
Banking information is sensitive !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Yeah right, 9/11 is the only successful terrorist attack ever.
In the mean time don't be a moron, Europe has just as much to gain by effective anti terrorist intelligence as the rest of the civilised world.
But there was nothing civilised or intelligent about the SWIFT treaty as it stood, it was utterly one-sided.
We cannot avoid having learned from the stupidities in international politics the Bush-era has bestowed on the world, there were no safeguards what-so-ever the data was going to be used for purpose.
When the US government can make a case sharing of European banking data is going to help all sides in our joint fight against violent and criminal zealots of any description I'm sure they could win the support of Europe.
Because the UN includes some rather nasty members I won't go so far as to suggest a UN institute should do the intelligence but an international body is the only reliable way to handle such sensitive data.
We all remember what happened when a European delegation was in China to sign off on an important Airbus contract and a US company could out of the blue undercut the price.
Banking information is sensitive!</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048218</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265454180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Not that I disagree that this is a good thing, but your facts fail:</p><p><div class="quote"><p>The fact that US also did this <b>secretly against a Belgian company</b> is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data </p></div><p>The accessing of information was done with full consent and cooperation of SWIFT.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Not that I disagree that this is a good thing , but your facts fail : The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on ( just like China secretly accessing Google 's data The accessing of information was done with full consent and cooperation of SWIFT .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Not that I disagree that this is a good thing, but your facts fail:The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data The accessing of information was done with full consent and cooperation of SWIFT.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051166</id>
	<title>Re:Sorry, that is completely wrong</title>
	<author>asaz989</author>
	<datestamp>1265537580000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>I've been counting the votes:

The Socialists and Democrats [left-wing] (184 votes), the Greens/Free Alliance [basically, Greens and stateless minorities] (55 votes), the ALDE [think MUCH less radical libertarians] (84 votes), and the EUL-NGL [hard-left, and Scandinavian Greens] (35 votes) have come out against the treaty. These parties have cohesion rates (according to <a href="http://www.votewatch.eu/" title="votewatch.eu" rel="nofollow">VoteWatch</a> [votewatch.eu]) in the mid-90 percent range, and put together are just 10 votes shy of a majority. The UKIP (a British eurosceptic party with 13 seats) seems from the blogospheres to be against the treaty on general principles (we ain't lettin' the EU give away anythin'!), and of the non-inscrits [independents], of whom there are 22, about half are far-left and will thus probably vote against the treaty, bringing opposition slightly into the majority, even without taking into account the rather fuzzy positions of the less extremely eurosceptic parties. Taking into account that, only the EPP (admittedly the largest single party, but still with only 265 votes out of 736) has actually made a clear public statement for the treaty. I don't think the final vote will be much more strongly against the TFTP treaty than the committee's 29-23, but I'm still fairly confident that it will be a thumbs-down.</htmltext>
<tokenext>I 've been counting the votes : The Socialists and Democrats [ left-wing ] ( 184 votes ) , the Greens/Free Alliance [ basically , Greens and stateless minorities ] ( 55 votes ) , the ALDE [ think MUCH less radical libertarians ] ( 84 votes ) , and the EUL-NGL [ hard-left , and Scandinavian Greens ] ( 35 votes ) have come out against the treaty .
These parties have cohesion rates ( according to VoteWatch [ votewatch.eu ] ) in the mid-90 percent range , and put together are just 10 votes shy of a majority .
The UKIP ( a British eurosceptic party with 13 seats ) seems from the blogospheres to be against the treaty on general principles ( we ai n't lettin ' the EU give away anythin ' !
) , and of the non-inscrits [ independents ] , of whom there are 22 , about half are far-left and will thus probably vote against the treaty , bringing opposition slightly into the majority , even without taking into account the rather fuzzy positions of the less extremely eurosceptic parties .
Taking into account that , only the EPP ( admittedly the largest single party , but still with only 265 votes out of 736 ) has actually made a clear public statement for the treaty .
I do n't think the final vote will be much more strongly against the TFTP treaty than the committee 's 29-23 , but I 'm still fairly confident that it will be a thumbs-down .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I've been counting the votes:

The Socialists and Democrats [left-wing] (184 votes), the Greens/Free Alliance [basically, Greens and stateless minorities] (55 votes), the ALDE [think MUCH less radical libertarians] (84 votes), and the EUL-NGL [hard-left, and Scandinavian Greens] (35 votes) have come out against the treaty.
These parties have cohesion rates (according to VoteWatch [votewatch.eu]) in the mid-90 percent range, and put together are just 10 votes shy of a majority.
The UKIP (a British eurosceptic party with 13 seats) seems from the blogospheres to be against the treaty on general principles (we ain't lettin' the EU give away anythin'!
), and of the non-inscrits [independents], of whom there are 22, about half are far-left and will thus probably vote against the treaty, bringing opposition slightly into the majority, even without taking into account the rather fuzzy positions of the less extremely eurosceptic parties.
Taking into account that, only the EPP (admittedly the largest single party, but still with only 265 votes out of 736) has actually made a clear public statement for the treaty.
I don't think the final vote will be much more strongly against the TFTP treaty than the committee's 29-23, but I'm still fairly confident that it will be a thumbs-down.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047572</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265447640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We're seeing this play out in the same way as many other things, where European governments fight for citizen privacy while the US government fights for government monitoring of everything that anyone ever does.</p><p>I wonder who will win this time.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We 're seeing this play out in the same way as many other things , where European governments fight for citizen privacy while the US government fights for government monitoring of everything that anyone ever does.I wonder who will win this time .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We're seeing this play out in the same way as many other things, where European governments fight for citizen privacy while the US government fights for government monitoring of everything that anyone ever does.I wonder who will win this time.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047598</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>patro</author>
	<datestamp>1265447820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a great thing. US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing. </p></div><p>Or at least if they want this data then obviously they must share all US banking data with us in the spirit of cooperation.</p><p>One sided data sharing is out of the question.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a great thing .
US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing .
Or at least if they want this data then obviously they must share all US banking data with us in the spirit of cooperation.One sided data sharing is out of the question .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a great thing.
US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing.
Or at least if they want this data then obviously they must share all US banking data with us in the spirit of cooperation.One sided data sharing is out of the question.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047660</id>
	<title>Not quite</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265448300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>--- Problem ---</p><ul><li>The current agreement is unacceptable for Europeans and would be interim anyway</li><li>The US embassador to the European Union, William Kennard blackmailed members of the European Parliament and the leaders of the groups. He has to abstain from interference into the inner affairs of the EU and violated the rules of diplomatic conduct. His black mail attempt was foolish because it is impossible for member states to enter bilateral agreements with the US and that would be an unbearable and illegal act of illoyality. His bluff: 'I am unsure whether Washington agencies would again decide to address this issue at EU level'</li><li>The European Commission thought they could ignore the European Parliament as the competent body. Currently a new Commission is put into office.</li><li>SWIFT data is toxic and European financial institutions are very sensitive about this. The use of the SWIFT data for anti-terrorism purposes is fishy.</li><li>Europeans get nothing in return for the transmission of their sensitive data</li></ul><p>--- Process ---</p><blockquote><div><p>Agreement between the EU and the USA on<br>the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the<br>European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist<br>Finance Tracking Program, Rapporteur: Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert (A7-0013/2010)</p></div></blockquote><p>
&nbsp; ---- Scenarios and options ---- </p><ul><li>Restore the honour of the US diplomatic corps by a dismissal of the offender Kennard</li><li>Interinstitutional deal and adoption (Clinton)</li><li>Rejection by the European Parliament plenary and renewed referral.</li><li>Even stronger resolution by the European Parliament than what the Committee proposed, given the latest incidents.</li></ul><p>A rejection is currently <b>likely</b>. See the debate and voting timetable at <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/sed/agenda.do?offLang=en&amp;sessionDate=20100210" title="europa.eu">Seance en direct</a> [europa.eu].</p><p>
&nbsp; ---- Documents ----</p><ul><li><br><a href="http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2010:008:0009:01:EN:HTML" title="europa.eu">Council Decision 2010/16/CFSP/JHA of 30 November 2009 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program - Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program </a> [europa.eu]</li><li>OEIL: <a href="http://www.europarl.europa.eu/oeil/file.jsp?id=5836062" title="europa.eu">NLE/2009/0190 EU/USA agreement: processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program </a> [europa.eu] </li></ul></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>--- Problem ---The current agreement is unacceptable for Europeans and would be interim anywayThe US embassador to the European Union , William Kennard blackmailed members of the European Parliament and the leaders of the groups .
He has to abstain from interference into the inner affairs of the EU and violated the rules of diplomatic conduct .
His black mail attempt was foolish because it is impossible for member states to enter bilateral agreements with the US and that would be an unbearable and illegal act of illoyality .
His bluff : 'I am unsure whether Washington agencies would again decide to address this issue at EU level'The European Commission thought they could ignore the European Parliament as the competent body .
Currently a new Commission is put into office.SWIFT data is toxic and European financial institutions are very sensitive about this .
The use of the SWIFT data for anti-terrorism purposes is fishy.Europeans get nothing in return for the transmission of their sensitive data--- Process ---Agreement between the EU and the USA onthe processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from theEuropean Union to the United States for purposes of the TerroristFinance Tracking Program , Rapporteur : Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert ( A7-0013/2010 )   ---- Scenarios and options ---- Restore the honour of the US diplomatic corps by a dismissal of the offender KennardInterinstitutional deal and adoption ( Clinton ) Rejection by the European Parliament plenary and renewed referral.Even stronger resolution by the European Parliament than what the Committee proposed , given the latest incidents.A rejection is currently likely .
See the debate and voting timetable at Seance en direct [ europa.eu ] .
  ---- Documents ----Council Decision 2010/16/CFSP/JHA of 30 November 2009 on the signing , on behalf of the European Union , of the Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program - Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program [ europa.eu ] OEIL : NLE/2009/0190 EU/USA agreement : processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program [ europa.eu ]</tokentext>
<sentencetext>--- Problem ---The current agreement is unacceptable for Europeans and would be interim anywayThe US embassador to the European Union, William Kennard blackmailed members of the European Parliament and the leaders of the groups.
He has to abstain from interference into the inner affairs of the EU and violated the rules of diplomatic conduct.
His black mail attempt was foolish because it is impossible for member states to enter bilateral agreements with the US and that would be an unbearable and illegal act of illoyality.
His bluff: 'I am unsure whether Washington agencies would again decide to address this issue at EU level'The European Commission thought they could ignore the European Parliament as the competent body.
Currently a new Commission is put into office.SWIFT data is toxic and European financial institutions are very sensitive about this.
The use of the SWIFT data for anti-terrorism purposes is fishy.Europeans get nothing in return for the transmission of their sensitive data--- Process ---Agreement between the EU and the USA onthe processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from theEuropean Union to the United States for purposes of the TerroristFinance Tracking Program, Rapporteur: Jeanine Hennis-Plasschaert (A7-0013/2010)
  ---- Scenarios and options ---- Restore the honour of the US diplomatic corps by a dismissal of the offender KennardInterinstitutional deal and adoption (Clinton)Rejection by the European Parliament plenary and renewed referral.Even stronger resolution by the European Parliament than what the Committee proposed, given the latest incidents.A rejection is currently likely.
See the debate and voting timetable at Seance en direct [europa.eu].
  ---- Documents ----Council Decision 2010/16/CFSP/JHA of 30 November 2009 on the signing, on behalf of the European Union, of the Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program - Agreement between the European Union and the United States of America on the processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data from the European Union to the United States for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program  [europa.eu]OEIL: NLE/2009/0190 EU/USA agreement: processing and transfer of Financial Messaging Data for purposes of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program  [europa.eu] 
	</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049262</id>
	<title>remember the Marshall Plan...</title>
	<author>anechoic</author>
	<datestamp>1265463540000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...which was merely a way for the US to quickly expand its markets into a war torn Europe while busting unions to keep labor cheap and subverting at all costs to keep capitalism expanding -  not only did the US make money on WWII but it made even more by 'rebuilding' Europe and installing our corporations and military everywhere it could</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...which was merely a way for the US to quickly expand its markets into a war torn Europe while busting unions to keep labor cheap and subverting at all costs to keep capitalism expanding - not only did the US make money on WWII but it made even more by 'rebuilding ' Europe and installing our corporations and military everywhere it could</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...which was merely a way for the US to quickly expand its markets into a war torn Europe while busting unions to keep labor cheap and subverting at all costs to keep capitalism expanding -  not only did the US make money on WWII but it made even more by 'rebuilding' Europe and installing our corporations and military everywhere it could</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048260</id>
	<title>Summary</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265454600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>USA wants their unintelligence agencies to have acces to the EU banking information over SWIFT for a period of nine months (if it is so important for fighting terrorism, why don't they want a permanent deal?).</p><p>They do not give ANYTHING in return (our agencies don't have acces to their banking data).</p><p>They don't give any guarantees about how and when the data will be accesed.</p><p>They don't give any guarantees that the information won't be transmitted to 3rd partys, nor do they give guarantees about privacy.</p><p>You will only hear three words from any european: go f*** yourselves.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>USA wants their unintelligence agencies to have acces to the EU banking information over SWIFT for a period of nine months ( if it is so important for fighting terrorism , why do n't they want a permanent deal ?
) .They do not give ANYTHING in return ( our agencies do n't have acces to their banking data ) .They do n't give any guarantees about how and when the data will be accesed.They do n't give any guarantees that the information wo n't be transmitted to 3rd partys , nor do they give guarantees about privacy.You will only hear three words from any european : go f * * * yourselves .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>USA wants their unintelligence agencies to have acces to the EU banking information over SWIFT for a period of nine months (if it is so important for fighting terrorism, why don't they want a permanent deal?
).They do not give ANYTHING in return (our agencies don't have acces to their banking data).They don't give any guarantees about how and when the data will be accesed.They don't give any guarantees that the information won't be transmitted to 3rd partys, nor do they give guarantees about privacy.You will only hear three words from any european: go f*** yourselves.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047588</id>
	<title>reasonable request, but...</title>
	<author>lordholm</author>
	<datestamp>1265447760000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>3</modscore>
	<htmltext>It is reasonable that individual requests for banking data in the EU can be done by the US, but as should always be the case, this should go through proper channels, which means a court decision with human beings taking decisions. Secondly, if a person is investigated and not found to be involved in anything, he should be notified and given compensation. Further, if the US should be given access to EU banking data, then the US should grant the EU authorities access to US data (hah... that will never happen...).

From a procedural point of view, this was one of the few real fuckups by the Swedish presidency of the Union. The deal was approved by the Council the day before the Lisbon treaty went into effect. This meant that the Parliament could not have anything to say in the contents (which they would have had if it had been passed the day after). Now, the Parliament cannot amend it, but they can reject it which I think the Council did not think of, now they get what they deserve<nobr> <wbr></nobr>:)

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

And for all those who dislike Lisbon, can you tell me what is the problem with parliamentary influence over the additional areas given in the treaty?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31050740</id>
	<title>Re:End of Technology Euphoria</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265483220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>We agree. Getting people to encrypt their email is too hard and it doesn't prevent traffic analysis anyway.  So encourage admins to enable opportunistic TLS on their mail servers.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>We agree .
Getting people to encrypt their email is too hard and it does n't prevent traffic analysis anyway .
So encourage admins to enable opportunistic TLS on their mail servers .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>We agree.
Getting people to encrypt their email is too hard and it doesn't prevent traffic analysis anyway.
So encourage admins to enable opportunistic TLS on their mail servers.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048086</id>
	<title>Re:End of Technology Euphoria</title>
	<author>rve</author>
	<datestamp>1265452620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>Essentially, just because we can build this network, doesn't mean we should. I'm giving a big nod of the head to the EU over this one.</p></div><p>You misunderstand. This has nothing to do with fighting terrorism or protecting privacy, but everything to do with tax evasion. As long as the US has official, legal access to European banking data, it's a lot less safe for American tax evaders to use Europe based banks to keep their unreported money.</p><p>The US will obviously still have access to all this data via unofficial channels, for use in counter terrorism, but I doubt that illegally obtained data could be used in court to prosecute a tax evader.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>Essentially , just because we can build this network , does n't mean we should .
I 'm giving a big nod of the head to the EU over this one.You misunderstand .
This has nothing to do with fighting terrorism or protecting privacy , but everything to do with tax evasion .
As long as the US has official , legal access to European banking data , it 's a lot less safe for American tax evaders to use Europe based banks to keep their unreported money.The US will obviously still have access to all this data via unofficial channels , for use in counter terrorism , but I doubt that illegally obtained data could be used in court to prosecute a tax evader .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Essentially, just because we can build this network, doesn't mean we should.
I'm giving a big nod of the head to the EU over this one.You misunderstand.
This has nothing to do with fighting terrorism or protecting privacy, but everything to do with tax evasion.
As long as the US has official, legal access to European banking data, it's a lot less safe for American tax evaders to use Europe based banks to keep their unreported money.The US will obviously still have access to all this data via unofficial channels, for use in counter terrorism, but I doubt that illegally obtained data could be used in court to prosecute a tax evader.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048062</id>
	<title>Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265452440000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Seek help.<br> <br>

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

Conspiracy theories as thought games are one thing, but to run around proclaiming, "we still don't know who did it, guys!!", is just flat out wrong.</htmltext>
<tokenext>Seek help .
We know damn well who piloted those planes .
To sit around and concoct these wild-eyed 9/11 conspiracy theories does nothing but great disservice to the deceased and their families .
Quite frankly , it 's pretty damn sick .
Conspiracy theories as thought games are one thing , but to run around proclaiming , " we still do n't know who did it , guys ! !
" , is just flat out wrong .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Seek help.
We know damn well who piloted those planes.
To sit around and concoct these wild-eyed 9/11 conspiracy theories does nothing but great disservice to the deceased and their families.
Quite frankly, it's pretty damn sick.
Conspiracy theories as thought games are one thing, but to run around proclaiming, "we still don't know who did it, guys!!
", is just flat out wrong.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047670</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048598</id>
	<title>Minor hickup</title>
	<author>lorg</author>
	<datestamp>1265457600000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I seriously wonder if this is going to be more then a minor hickup at worst even if it goes thru. Can't they just get one of the "friendly" EU members to make them a copy as the info comes across the wire and pipe it over to them. Shouldn't be rocket science. I'm sure one of them nice countries that lent the CIA a few prison blocks to store them undesirable terrorists for "harsh questioning" etc wouldn't mind offering this service to.</p><p>They don't share US data with EU members. Question remains; is that something we really want? I'm not exactlly in fear of some US born or based terrorists coming over to Europe to end life as we know it. Seems fairly unlikely. Even if they where coming I'm not sure swapping banking data would stop them or really help track them down. So it seems to me that US banking transaction data would be a fairly useless request or demand. If we should trade for it, atleast trade it for something useful.</p><p>So it's not like they are not going to get their hands on it in the end if they really want to. This just seems like politico theater at its finest, each blaming the other and pretending to be the stand up guys.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I seriously wonder if this is going to be more then a minor hickup at worst even if it goes thru .
Ca n't they just get one of the " friendly " EU members to make them a copy as the info comes across the wire and pipe it over to them .
Should n't be rocket science .
I 'm sure one of them nice countries that lent the CIA a few prison blocks to store them undesirable terrorists for " harsh questioning " etc would n't mind offering this service to.They do n't share US data with EU members .
Question remains ; is that something we really want ?
I 'm not exactlly in fear of some US born or based terrorists coming over to Europe to end life as we know it .
Seems fairly unlikely .
Even if they where coming I 'm not sure swapping banking data would stop them or really help track them down .
So it seems to me that US banking transaction data would be a fairly useless request or demand .
If we should trade for it , atleast trade it for something useful.So it 's not like they are not going to get their hands on it in the end if they really want to .
This just seems like politico theater at its finest , each blaming the other and pretending to be the stand up guys .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I seriously wonder if this is going to be more then a minor hickup at worst even if it goes thru.
Can't they just get one of the "friendly" EU members to make them a copy as the info comes across the wire and pipe it over to them.
Shouldn't be rocket science.
I'm sure one of them nice countries that lent the CIA a few prison blocks to store them undesirable terrorists for "harsh questioning" etc wouldn't mind offering this service to.They don't share US data with EU members.
Question remains; is that something we really want?
I'm not exactlly in fear of some US born or based terrorists coming over to Europe to end life as we know it.
Seems fairly unlikely.
Even if they where coming I'm not sure swapping banking data would stop them or really help track them down.
So it seems to me that US banking transaction data would be a fairly useless request or demand.
If we should trade for it, atleast trade it for something useful.So it's not like they are not going to get their hands on it in the end if they really want to.
This just seems like politico theater at its finest, each blaming the other and pretending to be the stand up guys.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047520</id>
	<title>Whatever</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265447220000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Flamebait</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Shut the fuck up, you stupid muppet.  For someone living in the UK, you sure seem to love Micro$oft a whole lot.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Shut the fuck up , you stupid muppet .
For someone living in the UK , you sure seem to love Micro $ oft a whole lot .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Shut the fuck up, you stupid muppet.
For someone living in the UK, you sure seem to love Micro$oft a whole lot.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047560</id>
	<title>Sorry, that is completely wrong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265447520000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Informativ</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>At the moment, only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot. The real ballot is on Thursday next week. Up to then, the US American administration (including the US ambassador to the EU and Hillary Clinton) put pressure (including various legal and illegal threats) on the Members of the European Parliament to change their mind. They were already successful insofar that the ballot was moved from Wednesday to Thursday. And as I consider the European politicians as corrupt and ready to betray the basic rights of the European people in order to gain more control over them, I guess the Americans will be successful in getting their SWIFT treaty exactly as they want it.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>At the moment , only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot .
The real ballot is on Thursday next week .
Up to then , the US American administration ( including the US ambassador to the EU and Hillary Clinton ) put pressure ( including various legal and illegal threats ) on the Members of the European Parliament to change their mind .
They were already successful insofar that the ballot was moved from Wednesday to Thursday .
And as I consider the European politicians as corrupt and ready to betray the basic rights of the European people in order to gain more control over them , I guess the Americans will be successful in getting their SWIFT treaty exactly as they want it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the moment, only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot.
The real ballot is on Thursday next week.
Up to then, the US American administration (including the US ambassador to the EU and Hillary Clinton) put pressure (including various legal and illegal threats) on the Members of the European Parliament to change their mind.
They were already successful insofar that the ballot was moved from Wednesday to Thursday.
And as I consider the European politicians as corrupt and ready to betray the basic rights of the European people in order to gain more control over them, I guess the Americans will be successful in getting their SWIFT treaty exactly as they want it.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047500</id>
	<title>withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!!</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265447040000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Isn't the US the one that got attack the 9/11 or I got it wrong? Is it the US then the one interested in a withhold information war? Does not sound like a smart threat unless the  plans US to ban every flight coming from Europe... Those kind of threats shows politicians have little class and less brain.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Is n't the US the one that got attack the 9/11 or I got it wrong ?
Is it the US then the one interested in a withhold information war ?
Does not sound like a smart threat unless the plans US to ban every flight coming from Europe... Those kind of threats shows politicians have little class and less brain .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Isn't the US the one that got attack the 9/11 or I got it wrong?
Is it the US then the one interested in a withhold information war?
Does not sound like a smart threat unless the  plans US to ban every flight coming from Europe... Those kind of threats shows politicians have little class and less brain.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31109946</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>bigdonthedj</author>
	<datestamp>1265914800000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Being a US citizen myself and being prone to major dangers by international terrorists...WTF US government has no right to be in ANY outside banking system. As a government, the US has had theirs hands in way too many other countries banks, military, privacy, and just about every other damn thing. Normally I can make quite compelling statements that make complete sense and sound quite intelligent. This piece of my mind is somewhat difficult because it is a subject that just pisses me the hell off. The US needs to get out of all of your countries and concentrate on home and let others live as they want. If someone asks for help, that's one thing. But us jumping the gun (literally) and creating our own personal war is outright ridiculous.
This has become a rant. My sincerest apologies to anyone who read this expecting more. please read on to other people's replies for more intelligent and relevant statements</htmltext>
<tokenext>Being a US citizen myself and being prone to major dangers by international terrorists...WTF US government has no right to be in ANY outside banking system .
As a government , the US has had theirs hands in way too many other countries banks , military , privacy , and just about every other damn thing .
Normally I can make quite compelling statements that make complete sense and sound quite intelligent .
This piece of my mind is somewhat difficult because it is a subject that just pisses me the hell off .
The US needs to get out of all of your countries and concentrate on home and let others live as they want .
If someone asks for help , that 's one thing .
But us jumping the gun ( literally ) and creating our own personal war is outright ridiculous .
This has become a rant .
My sincerest apologies to anyone who read this expecting more .
please read on to other people 's replies for more intelligent and relevant statements</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Being a US citizen myself and being prone to major dangers by international terrorists...WTF US government has no right to be in ANY outside banking system.
As a government, the US has had theirs hands in way too many other countries banks, military, privacy, and just about every other damn thing.
Normally I can make quite compelling statements that make complete sense and sound quite intelligent.
This piece of my mind is somewhat difficult because it is a subject that just pisses me the hell off.
The US needs to get out of all of your countries and concentrate on home and let others live as they want.
If someone asks for help, that's one thing.
But us jumping the gun (literally) and creating our own personal war is outright ridiculous.
This has become a rant.
My sincerest apologies to anyone who read this expecting more.
please read on to other people's replies for more intelligent and relevant statements</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047596</id>
	<title>I miss two or three things:</title>
	<author>kubitus</author>
	<datestamp>1265447820000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>I miss the apologies of the US for stealing data from a foreign, but friendly country!<p>
I miss the clear statement that such data sharing is mandatory bidirectional!1</p><p>
And I would like to have the same transparency about US state Delaware's mailbox-companies financial transactions!</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I miss the apologies of the US for stealing data from a foreign , but friendly country !
I miss the clear statement that such data sharing is mandatory bidirectional ! 1 And I would like to have the same transparency about US state Delaware 's mailbox-companies financial transactions !</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I miss the apologies of the US for stealing data from a foreign, but friendly country!
I miss the clear statement that such data sharing is mandatory bidirectional!1
And I would like to have the same transparency about US state Delaware's mailbox-companies financial transactions!</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047838</id>
	<title>Is it a two-way thing?</title>
	<author>Peachy</author>
	<datestamp>1265449980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I wonder whether the Federal Reserve + CHIPS systems, through which similar transfers are cleared in the US, share pertinent data with EU governments?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I wonder whether the Federal Reserve + CHIPS systems , through which similar transfers are cleared in the US , share pertinent data with EU governments ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I wonder whether the Federal Reserve + CHIPS systems, through which similar transfers are cleared in the US, share pertinent data with EU governments?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051630</id>
	<title>Catch-22 ...</title>
	<author>golodh</author>
	<datestamp>1265546280000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext>The key issues are: reciprocity and "subsidiarity" versus trust.
<p>
Reciprocity is easy to understand: it isn't there in the current agreements. As in: the US can look at any financial transaction in the EU it likes, the EU cannot do the same thing with financial transactions in the US. If I were on a EU committee like the one described, I'd nix any data-sharing agreement on that ground alone. Can you imagine the US allowing a foreign power to rifle through its citizen's private financial records without getting the same powers in return? No? Then why should the EU?
</p><p>
"Subsidiarity" is a code-word coined by the EU bureaucracy which basically means that responsibility for something should be put at the lowest possible level: if something can be handled at national level, the EU has no business with it. Sort of like the division of powers between individual states and federal government (guess where they found the inspiration for this one). The same idea applies between nations / states. If some state / nation is capable of fishing for terrorists, then it ought to do so instead of sending off the raw data to another entity for processing, analysis, and monitoring. So why not let the EU trawl through its own stuff (e.g. according to algorithms we provide) and put an agreement in place that they alert us the instant they find anything? That's how policing works (and often doesn't work).
</p><p>
The "trust" angle is what makes things difficult. Basically the US are developing ways of data-mining financial transactions for traces of unlawful activity (terrorist, drugs-related, or otherwise). That's currently a research area (not in the least because our opponents are very much moving targets and you therefore need to tweak such searches all the time) and it simply doesn't want to let 23 other parties (all EU member states, the EU commission, and one or two EU agencies) know the exact nature of its analyses. That makes absolute sense because with so many parties involved there are bound to be leaks, so the US might as well publish its algorithms on the web if it did. If it does, then any terrorist organization worth its salt will move quickly to hide the exact patterns the search is looking for, rendering the whole exercise rather pointless.
</p><p>
The next question of course is why the US doesn't want to make its internal financial transactions available to the EU on the same basis. That would remove the pain for the EU. Legal obstacles apart, it's not as if the EU and its members are likely to abuse that. The problem however is that if the EU gets such rights, then *every* other party that's ever approached with a request for data will demand the same. Would you like all your financial transactions to be visible to e.g. China, Russia, India, Japan, Korea, Australia, Indonesia and any other nation we need data from? No? You don't want China to know that you flew to Taipei or that your company sold stuff there? I wouldn't either. So it's best not to put anything like that on the table. Ever. Right?
</p><p>
So there's the catch-22. We can't afford to offer the EU reasonable (for them) terms for data-access, and if they grow a pair they won't just give us the data either (which they seem to be currently doing).
</p><p>
Anyone got any bright ideas?</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The key issues are : reciprocity and " subsidiarity " versus trust .
Reciprocity is easy to understand : it is n't there in the current agreements .
As in : the US can look at any financial transaction in the EU it likes , the EU can not do the same thing with financial transactions in the US .
If I were on a EU committee like the one described , I 'd nix any data-sharing agreement on that ground alone .
Can you imagine the US allowing a foreign power to rifle through its citizen 's private financial records without getting the same powers in return ?
No ? Then why should the EU ?
" Subsidiarity " is a code-word coined by the EU bureaucracy which basically means that responsibility for something should be put at the lowest possible level : if something can be handled at national level , the EU has no business with it .
Sort of like the division of powers between individual states and federal government ( guess where they found the inspiration for this one ) .
The same idea applies between nations / states .
If some state / nation is capable of fishing for terrorists , then it ought to do so instead of sending off the raw data to another entity for processing , analysis , and monitoring .
So why not let the EU trawl through its own stuff ( e.g .
according to algorithms we provide ) and put an agreement in place that they alert us the instant they find anything ?
That 's how policing works ( and often does n't work ) .
The " trust " angle is what makes things difficult .
Basically the US are developing ways of data-mining financial transactions for traces of unlawful activity ( terrorist , drugs-related , or otherwise ) .
That 's currently a research area ( not in the least because our opponents are very much moving targets and you therefore need to tweak such searches all the time ) and it simply does n't want to let 23 other parties ( all EU member states , the EU commission , and one or two EU agencies ) know the exact nature of its analyses .
That makes absolute sense because with so many parties involved there are bound to be leaks , so the US might as well publish its algorithms on the web if it did .
If it does , then any terrorist organization worth its salt will move quickly to hide the exact patterns the search is looking for , rendering the whole exercise rather pointless .
The next question of course is why the US does n't want to make its internal financial transactions available to the EU on the same basis .
That would remove the pain for the EU .
Legal obstacles apart , it 's not as if the EU and its members are likely to abuse that .
The problem however is that if the EU gets such rights , then * every * other party that 's ever approached with a request for data will demand the same .
Would you like all your financial transactions to be visible to e.g .
China , Russia , India , Japan , Korea , Australia , Indonesia and any other nation we need data from ?
No ? You do n't want China to know that you flew to Taipei or that your company sold stuff there ?
I would n't either .
So it 's best not to put anything like that on the table .
Ever. Right ?
So there 's the catch-22 .
We ca n't afford to offer the EU reasonable ( for them ) terms for data-access , and if they grow a pair they wo n't just give us the data either ( which they seem to be currently doing ) .
Anyone got any bright ideas ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The key issues are: reciprocity and "subsidiarity" versus trust.
Reciprocity is easy to understand: it isn't there in the current agreements.
As in: the US can look at any financial transaction in the EU it likes, the EU cannot do the same thing with financial transactions in the US.
If I were on a EU committee like the one described, I'd nix any data-sharing agreement on that ground alone.
Can you imagine the US allowing a foreign power to rifle through its citizen's private financial records without getting the same powers in return?
No? Then why should the EU?
"Subsidiarity" is a code-word coined by the EU bureaucracy which basically means that responsibility for something should be put at the lowest possible level: if something can be handled at national level, the EU has no business with it.
Sort of like the division of powers between individual states and federal government (guess where they found the inspiration for this one).
The same idea applies between nations / states.
If some state / nation is capable of fishing for terrorists, then it ought to do so instead of sending off the raw data to another entity for processing, analysis, and monitoring.
So why not let the EU trawl through its own stuff (e.g.
according to algorithms we provide) and put an agreement in place that they alert us the instant they find anything?
That's how policing works (and often doesn't work).
The "trust" angle is what makes things difficult.
Basically the US are developing ways of data-mining financial transactions for traces of unlawful activity (terrorist, drugs-related, or otherwise).
That's currently a research area (not in the least because our opponents are very much moving targets and you therefore need to tweak such searches all the time) and it simply doesn't want to let 23 other parties (all EU member states, the EU commission, and one or two EU agencies) know the exact nature of its analyses.
That makes absolute sense because with so many parties involved there are bound to be leaks, so the US might as well publish its algorithms on the web if it did.
If it does, then any terrorist organization worth its salt will move quickly to hide the exact patterns the search is looking for, rendering the whole exercise rather pointless.
The next question of course is why the US doesn't want to make its internal financial transactions available to the EU on the same basis.
That would remove the pain for the EU.
Legal obstacles apart, it's not as if the EU and its members are likely to abuse that.
The problem however is that if the EU gets such rights, then *every* other party that's ever approached with a request for data will demand the same.
Would you like all your financial transactions to be visible to e.g.
China, Russia, India, Japan, Korea, Australia, Indonesia and any other nation we need data from?
No? You don't want China to know that you flew to Taipei or that your company sold stuff there?
I wouldn't either.
So it's best not to put anything like that on the table.
Ever. Right?
So there's the catch-22.
We can't afford to offer the EU reasonable (for them) terms for data-access, and if they grow a pair they won't just give us the data either (which they seem to be currently doing).
Anyone got any bright ideas?</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31052006</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265553240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>-1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>The EU, "intelligent"?!?  Please, you made me laugh so hard I pulled a rib muscle.</p><p>Then again, I guess "intelligent" to you is levying fines against big industry players for billions of dollars in order to help fun the economic recovery of EU member nations.  Just remember, without the US, there wouldn't BE fucking European countries left to BE the EU.  Much less if Hitler hadn't been stupid and gone after Russia.  You'd be one, happy, big, Germany.</p><p>Maybe the US should stop sending food and other goods to EU nations...see how they like the jack up in prices from other sources.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>The EU , " intelligent " ? ! ?
Please , you made me laugh so hard I pulled a rib muscle.Then again , I guess " intelligent " to you is levying fines against big industry players for billions of dollars in order to help fun the economic recovery of EU member nations .
Just remember , without the US , there would n't BE fucking European countries left to BE the EU .
Much less if Hitler had n't been stupid and gone after Russia .
You 'd be one , happy , big , Germany.Maybe the US should stop sending food and other goods to EU nations...see how they like the jack up in prices from other sources .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>The EU, "intelligent"?!?
Please, you made me laugh so hard I pulled a rib muscle.Then again, I guess "intelligent" to you is levying fines against big industry players for billions of dollars in order to help fun the economic recovery of EU member nations.
Just remember, without the US, there wouldn't BE fucking European countries left to BE the EU.
Much less if Hitler hadn't been stupid and gone after Russia.
You'd be one, happy, big, Germany.Maybe the US should stop sending food and other goods to EU nations...see how they like the jack up in prices from other sources.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047940</id>
	<title>Re:End of Technology Euphoria</title>
	<author>Teun</author>
	<datestamp>1265451300000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>Maybe we should stop automatically treating new technology as different or exempt re. (privacy, patents, IP) law.<p>
Just apply the rules that grew over centuries and make adjustments in the same spirit and only after a good case was made.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Maybe we should stop automatically treating new technology as different or exempt re .
( privacy , patents , IP ) law .
Just apply the rules that grew over centuries and make adjustments in the same spirit and only after a good case was made .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Maybe we should stop automatically treating new technology as different or exempt re.
(privacy, patents, IP) law.
Just apply the rules that grew over centuries and make adjustments in the same spirit and only after a good case was made.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047438</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048084</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265452620000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Interestin</modclass>
	<modscore>4</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>This is a great thing. US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing. The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data <i>anyone?!</i>)</p><p>Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.</p></div><p>The thing that amazes me is that the EU denies because of privacy concerns and then the US tries to negotiate (sometimes called 'blackmail') the deal by withholding intelligence on terrorism!</p><p>And so the issue is quite clear.  Give up your privacy else the US will not try to help prevent terrorism despite the US's declaration of a war on terror and its facade of integrity to 'do its best' in that effort.</p><p>I am sincerely bothered that a nation so 'right' about terrorism and its purposes of fighting terrorism, would not do everything possible to prevent it, and would deliberately NOT fight terrorism for petty political purposes.</p><p>And the US wonders why people around the world hate them... It's scary that the rest of the world sees the difference between the words and the actions but the democratic voters of the US are largely unaware.  I guess this is partially due to the fact that American Politics are so bipartisan that the focus of questions is on the party and not of the sum of the whole.  Thus they have news that relates to how one candidate might be wrong, or another might be corrupt, but none that truly reflects upon or questions the actions of the nation as a whole.</p><p>It isn't a conspiracy theory to say that major media in the US is in cooperation with its corporations and lobbies to make more money; the connections are clear and publicly available.  It isn't any stretch of imagination to think that a corporate news source that is directly connected to other forms of business would skew its facts and present information that in ways that would benefit its business.  Such wide-scope congolmerate-corporations are complete enemies to truth and competition;  the extended shame of it being that the GOP, the party whose members vote to retain small government and market competition continually elects leaders/lawmakers that do not do so and bend over quite easily to corporations.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a great thing .
US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing .
The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on ( just like China secretly accessing Google 's data anyone ? !
) Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.The thing that amazes me is that the EU denies because of privacy concerns and then the US tries to negotiate ( sometimes called 'blackmail ' ) the deal by withholding intelligence on terrorism ! And so the issue is quite clear .
Give up your privacy else the US will not try to help prevent terrorism despite the US 's declaration of a war on terror and its facade of integrity to 'do its best ' in that effort.I am sincerely bothered that a nation so 'right ' about terrorism and its purposes of fighting terrorism , would not do everything possible to prevent it , and would deliberately NOT fight terrorism for petty political purposes.And the US wonders why people around the world hate them... It 's scary that the rest of the world sees the difference between the words and the actions but the democratic voters of the US are largely unaware .
I guess this is partially due to the fact that American Politics are so bipartisan that the focus of questions is on the party and not of the sum of the whole .
Thus they have news that relates to how one candidate might be wrong , or another might be corrupt , but none that truly reflects upon or questions the actions of the nation as a whole.It is n't a conspiracy theory to say that major media in the US is in cooperation with its corporations and lobbies to make more money ; the connections are clear and publicly available .
It is n't any stretch of imagination to think that a corporate news source that is directly connected to other forms of business would skew its facts and present information that in ways that would benefit its business .
Such wide-scope congolmerate-corporations are complete enemies to truth and competition ; the extended shame of it being that the GOP , the party whose members vote to retain small government and market competition continually elects leaders/lawmakers that do not do so and bend over quite easily to corporations .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a great thing.
US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing.
The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data anyone?!
)Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.The thing that amazes me is that the EU denies because of privacy concerns and then the US tries to negotiate (sometimes called 'blackmail') the deal by withholding intelligence on terrorism!And so the issue is quite clear.
Give up your privacy else the US will not try to help prevent terrorism despite the US's declaration of a war on terror and its facade of integrity to 'do its best' in that effort.I am sincerely bothered that a nation so 'right' about terrorism and its purposes of fighting terrorism, would not do everything possible to prevent it, and would deliberately NOT fight terrorism for petty political purposes.And the US wonders why people around the world hate them... It's scary that the rest of the world sees the difference between the words and the actions but the democratic voters of the US are largely unaware.
I guess this is partially due to the fact that American Politics are so bipartisan that the focus of questions is on the party and not of the sum of the whole.
Thus they have news that relates to how one candidate might be wrong, or another might be corrupt, but none that truly reflects upon or questions the actions of the nation as a whole.It isn't a conspiracy theory to say that major media in the US is in cooperation with its corporations and lobbies to make more money; the connections are clear and publicly available.
It isn't any stretch of imagination to think that a corporate news source that is directly connected to other forms of business would skew its facts and present information that in ways that would benefit its business.
Such wide-scope congolmerate-corporations are complete enemies to truth and competition;  the extended shame of it being that the GOP, the party whose members vote to retain small government and market competition continually elects leaders/lawmakers that do not do so and bend over quite easily to corporations.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049964</id>
	<title>Re:At least the US negotiates</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265472780000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>HAHA you seriously think Cuba has an international spy ring and is a threat of any sort...</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>HAHA you seriously think Cuba has an international spy ring and is a threat of any sort.. .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>HAHA you seriously think Cuba has an international spy ring and is a threat of any sort...</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047678</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31113794</id>
	<title>A haven for tax cheats...</title>
	<author>jerzee55z</author>
	<datestamp>1265993640000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>    Of course, underlying a lot of this discussion should be the fact the Swiss banks are bleeding, because the wealthy tax cheats from the U.S. are closing up accounts, and moving them offshore to a 'different' tax haven. This has less to do with privacy than it does with business, or catering to the wealthy. True, the U.S has gone a bit over the edge with its paranoia over terrorists and is dealing with the consequences of selling its soul to international corporations. We have allowed our manufacturing base to disappear, and our economy is based on endless consumption of Chinese made objects. While we have exported our jobs, skills and environmental problems abroad, we have become a nation of undereducated, unappreciative whiners with an absurd sense of entitlement. Our government has become a finger pointing club where representative spend their time blaming or discrediting their opponents, rather than negotiating or cooperating with each other for the good of the people they claim to represent. Freedoms have become secondary to security, in a county founded on the rights and responsibilities of the individual, because of endless fear mongering in attempts to distract people from the fact that the infrastructure of the country is collapsing around them. We can spend money to fight foreign wars, but not to heal sick children or seniors. We can bail out huge banks, but not help small businesses find loans to grow and survive. We have sadly, lost our way, lost the voices of our great newspapers or journalists to remind us of our loss of direction, and are drifting along in an orgy of consumerism and self indulgence. The great news is we can talk to each other about it all the time on our cell phones, which are probably an even greater source of 'loss of privacy' than international banking information....</htmltext>
<tokenext>Of course , underlying a lot of this discussion should be the fact the Swiss banks are bleeding , because the wealthy tax cheats from the U.S. are closing up accounts , and moving them offshore to a 'different ' tax haven .
This has less to do with privacy than it does with business , or catering to the wealthy .
True , the U.S has gone a bit over the edge with its paranoia over terrorists and is dealing with the consequences of selling its soul to international corporations .
We have allowed our manufacturing base to disappear , and our economy is based on endless consumption of Chinese made objects .
While we have exported our jobs , skills and environmental problems abroad , we have become a nation of undereducated , unappreciative whiners with an absurd sense of entitlement .
Our government has become a finger pointing club where representative spend their time blaming or discrediting their opponents , rather than negotiating or cooperating with each other for the good of the people they claim to represent .
Freedoms have become secondary to security , in a county founded on the rights and responsibilities of the individual , because of endless fear mongering in attempts to distract people from the fact that the infrastructure of the country is collapsing around them .
We can spend money to fight foreign wars , but not to heal sick children or seniors .
We can bail out huge banks , but not help small businesses find loans to grow and survive .
We have sadly , lost our way , lost the voices of our great newspapers or journalists to remind us of our loss of direction , and are drifting along in an orgy of consumerism and self indulgence .
The great news is we can talk to each other about it all the time on our cell phones , which are probably an even greater source of 'loss of privacy ' than international banking information... .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>    Of course, underlying a lot of this discussion should be the fact the Swiss banks are bleeding, because the wealthy tax cheats from the U.S. are closing up accounts, and moving them offshore to a 'different' tax haven.
This has less to do with privacy than it does with business, or catering to the wealthy.
True, the U.S has gone a bit over the edge with its paranoia over terrorists and is dealing with the consequences of selling its soul to international corporations.
We have allowed our manufacturing base to disappear, and our economy is based on endless consumption of Chinese made objects.
While we have exported our jobs, skills and environmental problems abroad, we have become a nation of undereducated, unappreciative whiners with an absurd sense of entitlement.
Our government has become a finger pointing club where representative spend their time blaming or discrediting their opponents, rather than negotiating or cooperating with each other for the good of the people they claim to represent.
Freedoms have become secondary to security, in a county founded on the rights and responsibilities of the individual, because of endless fear mongering in attempts to distract people from the fact that the infrastructure of the country is collapsing around them.
We can spend money to fight foreign wars, but not to heal sick children or seniors.
We can bail out huge banks, but not help small businesses find loans to grow and survive.
We have sadly, lost our way, lost the voices of our great newspapers or journalists to remind us of our loss of direction, and are drifting along in an orgy of consumerism and self indulgence.
The great news is we can talk to each other about it all the time on our cell phones, which are probably an even greater source of 'loss of privacy' than international banking information....</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047766</id>
	<title>Re:Sorry, that is completely wrong</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265449200000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p><div class="quote"><p>At the moment, only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot. The real ballot is on Thursday next week. Up to then, the US American administration (including the US ambassador to the EU and Hillary Clinton) put pressure (including various legal and illegal threats) on the Members of the European Parliament to change their mind. They were already successful insofar that the ballot was moved from Wednesday to Thursday. And as I consider the European politicians as corrupt and ready to betray the basic rights of the European people in order to gain more control over them, I guess the Americans will be successful in getting their SWIFT treaty exactly as they want it.</p></div><p>Umm, there's no such thing as an "illegal threat" in international relations.</p><p>Welcome to reality.</p><p>It sucks.</p><p>Wake up an realize it.</p></div>
	</htmltext>
<tokenext>At the moment , only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot .
The real ballot is on Thursday next week .
Up to then , the US American administration ( including the US ambassador to the EU and Hillary Clinton ) put pressure ( including various legal and illegal threats ) on the Members of the European Parliament to change their mind .
They were already successful insofar that the ballot was moved from Wednesday to Thursday .
And as I consider the European politicians as corrupt and ready to betray the basic rights of the European people in order to gain more control over them , I guess the Americans will be successful in getting their SWIFT treaty exactly as they want it.Umm , there 's no such thing as an " illegal threat " in international relations.Welcome to reality.It sucks.Wake up an realize it .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>At the moment, only a committee of the European Parliament voted against it in a test ballot.
The real ballot is on Thursday next week.
Up to then, the US American administration (including the US ambassador to the EU and Hillary Clinton) put pressure (including various legal and illegal threats) on the Members of the European Parliament to change their mind.
They were already successful insofar that the ballot was moved from Wednesday to Thursday.
And as I consider the European politicians as corrupt and ready to betray the basic rights of the European people in order to gain more control over them, I guess the Americans will be successful in getting their SWIFT treaty exactly as they want it.Umm, there's no such thing as an "illegal threat" in international relations.Welcome to reality.It sucks.Wake up an realize it.
	</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047560</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31052494</id>
	<title>hope for change</title>
	<author>viridari</author>
	<datestamp>1265559240000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext>So how's that working out for you?</htmltext>
<tokenext>So how 's that working out for you ?</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So how's that working out for you?</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047882</id>
	<title>Re:Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265450460000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>I recommend moving to Switzerland. As long as you can limit the alcohol drinking...<nobr> <wbr></nobr>;)<br>They are not in the EU, it&rsquo;s warmer, the food is better, the scenery is beautiful, they have a great air force, and nobody is going to put the country under pressure, that has all his money, anyway. ^^<br>Plus, you get a (partially?) direct democracy with referenda. Which is the most valuable of all properties.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>I recommend moving to Switzerland .
As long as you can limit the alcohol drinking... ; ) They are not in the EU , it    s warmer , the food is better , the scenery is beautiful , they have a great air force , and nobody is going to put the country under pressure , that has all his money , anyway .
^ ^ Plus , you get a ( partially ?
) direct democracy with referenda .
Which is the most valuable of all properties .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>I recommend moving to Switzerland.
As long as you can limit the alcohol drinking... ;)They are not in the EU, it’s warmer, the food is better, the scenery is beautiful, they have a great air force, and nobody is going to put the country under pressure, that has all his money, anyway.
^^Plus, you get a (partially?
) direct democracy with referenda.
Which is the most valuable of all properties.</sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051488</id>
	<title>nobody mentions this</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265543700000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>They say they need the data about normal bank transfers to find terrorisms<nobr> <wbr></nobr>...... but what about the fact that these "terrorists" never used such ways to transfer, nor have a need to do that?</p><p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawala" title="wikipedia.org" rel="nofollow">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawala</a> [wikipedia.org]</p><p>giving the us access to the european swift system to "fight against terrorism" is utter bullshit and only a facade to do easy economic espionage against european coroporations</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>They say they need the data about normal bank transfers to find terrorisms ...... but what about the fact that these " terrorists " never used such ways to transfer , nor have a need to do that ? http : //en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawala [ wikipedia.org ] giving the us access to the european swift system to " fight against terrorism " is utter bullshit and only a facade to do easy economic espionage against european coroporations</tokentext>
<sentencetext>They say they need the data about normal bank transfers to find terrorisms ...... but what about the fact that these "terrorists" never used such ways to transfer, nor have a need to do that?http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawala [wikipedia.org]giving the us access to the european swift system to "fight against terrorism" is utter bullshit and only a facade to do easy economic espionage against european coroporations</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402</id>
	<title>Who let US out of the playground again?</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265489160000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>This is a great thing. US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing. The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data <i>anyone?!</i>)</p><p>Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>This is a great thing .
US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing .
The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on ( just like China secretly accessing Google 's data anyone ? !
) Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>This is a great thing.
US has no fucking business to our banking data or any other thing.
The fact that US also did this secretly against a Belgian company is just outstanding and shows the level of hypocrisy going on (just like China secretly accessing Google's data anyone?!
)Now if they just would get UK out of EU it would actually be quite an intelligent organization.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047670</id>
	<title>Re: withhold cooperation on terrorism!!!!?? WTF!!!</title>
	<author>kubitus</author>
	<datestamp>1265448360000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Troll</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>who was responsible for the steering of the two planes is not yet out<p>
A senior NATO Air-commander claims that a special 747 equipped to remote control airplanes was in the airspace over NY at that time.</p><p>
We here on the eastern rim of the big pond think that the US fed Osama and the Taliban as long as it served their wish to get the Russians out of Afghanistan.The US has a history of making allies with whoever is helping them at the moment, without any thought of the day after.</p><p>
The US declared a borderless world - dropped Visa applications and has now re-invented them with the data-transfers of every passenger.</p><p>
I recently visited China. Their Immigration Officers make you think you come into a civilized country.</p><p>
I have been also to the US. Their Immigration Officers make you think came from the Gestapo or the SSD </p></htmltext>
<tokenext>who was responsible for the steering of the two planes is not yet out A senior NATO Air-commander claims that a special 747 equipped to remote control airplanes was in the airspace over NY at that time .
We here on the eastern rim of the big pond think that the US fed Osama and the Taliban as long as it served their wish to get the Russians out of Afghanistan.The US has a history of making allies with whoever is helping them at the moment , without any thought of the day after .
The US declared a borderless world - dropped Visa applications and has now re-invented them with the data-transfers of every passenger .
I recently visited China .
Their Immigration Officers make you think you come into a civilized country .
I have been also to the US .
Their Immigration Officers make you think came from the Gestapo or the SSD</tokentext>
<sentencetext>who was responsible for the steering of the two planes is not yet out
A senior NATO Air-commander claims that a special 747 equipped to remote control airplanes was in the airspace over NY at that time.
We here on the eastern rim of the big pond think that the US fed Osama and the Taliban as long as it served their wish to get the Russians out of Afghanistan.The US has a history of making allies with whoever is helping them at the moment, without any thought of the day after.
The US declared a borderless world - dropped Visa applications and has now re-invented them with the data-transfers of every passenger.
I recently visited China.
Their Immigration Officers make you think you come into a civilized country.
I have been also to the US.
Their Immigration Officers make you think came from the Gestapo or the SSD </sentencetext>
	<parent>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047500</parent>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047482</id>
	<title>Sudden outbreak of common sense</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265446980000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>0</modscore>
	<htmltext>Sudden outbreak of common sense</htmltext>
<tokenext>Sudden outbreak of common sense</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Sudden outbreak of common sense</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31109540</id>
	<title>They hate us for our freedoms</title>
	<author>kelanden</author>
	<datestamp>1265910180000</datestamp>
	<modclass>None</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>Clearly, Old Europe hate us for our freedoms. Specifically, they hate us us for the freedoms we take with their citizen's personal information.</p><p>How shocking.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>Clearly , Old Europe hate us for our freedoms .
Specifically , they hate us us for the freedoms we take with their citizen 's personal information.How shocking .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>Clearly, Old Europe hate us for our freedoms.
Specifically, they hate us us for the freedoms we take with their citizen's personal information.How shocking.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047472</id>
	<title>Much better that this data...</title>
	<author>Anonymous</author>
	<datestamp>1265489940000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>1</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>...only be available to European governments.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>...only be available to European governments .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>...only be available to European governments.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048008</id>
	<title>Familiar tactics</title>
	<author>Erikderzweite</author>
	<datestamp>1265451900000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>5</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>So, the US government has terrorist intelligence in its power, demands access to European bank data and threatens to cut off the cooperation on terrorist intelligence (which may result in death of many people*) if its demands are not meat.<br>This is a well-known tactics used by several smaller organizations and groups around the globe. Can't recall the name of a prominent one though... Al-Qsomething...</p><p>* I don't believe that US' intelligence is useful (e.g. WMD), nor do I believe in terrorism fear-mongering, nor do I want to give up my rights for this -- free society has a price which I am ready to accept.</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>So , the US government has terrorist intelligence in its power , demands access to European bank data and threatens to cut off the cooperation on terrorist intelligence ( which may result in death of many people * ) if its demands are not meat.This is a well-known tactics used by several smaller organizations and groups around the globe .
Ca n't recall the name of a prominent one though... Al-Qsomething... * I do n't believe that US ' intelligence is useful ( e.g .
WMD ) , nor do I believe in terrorism fear-mongering , nor do I want to give up my rights for this -- free society has a price which I am ready to accept .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>So, the US government has terrorist intelligence in its power, demands access to European bank data and threatens to cut off the cooperation on terrorist intelligence (which may result in death of many people*) if its demands are not meat.This is a well-known tactics used by several smaller organizations and groups around the globe.
Can't recall the name of a prominent one though... Al-Qsomething...* I don't believe that US' intelligence is useful (e.g.
WMD), nor do I believe in terrorism fear-mongering, nor do I want to give up my rights for this -- free society has a price which I am ready to accept.</sentencetext>
</comment>
<comment>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047990</id>
	<title>Tyrants</title>
	<author>paxcoder</author>
	<datestamp>1265451720000</datestamp>
	<modclass>Insightful</modclass>
	<modscore>2</modscore>
	<htmltext><p>"The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is cancelled" - US threatening Europe. Now, someone's crazy here. And it's not Europe (see also: software patents).</p></htmltext>
<tokenext>" The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is cancelled " - US threatening Europe .
Now , someone 's crazy here .
And it 's not Europe ( see also : software patents ) .</tokentext>
<sentencetext>"The US has threatened to withhold cooperation on terrorist intelligence if the bank data deal now in place is cancelled" - US threatening Europe.
Now, someone's crazy here.
And it's not Europe (see also: software patents).</sentencetext>
</comment>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048218
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_13</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051166
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_17</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047940
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048798
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047882
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31052006
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_16</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31053436
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047660
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_14</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048062
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047670
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_18</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049538
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048084
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_20</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047598
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047766
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047560
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051262
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047658
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31050740
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_11</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051630
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047572
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31050590
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_21</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049316
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047732
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047500
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31109946
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_15</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049254
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_19</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048086
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047438
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049964
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047678
</commentlist>
</thread>
<thread>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#thread_10_02_06_1836221_12</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047520
http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
</commentlist>
</thread>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.2</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047438
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31050740
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047940
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048086
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.10</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31052494
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.0</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047596
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.3</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047678
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049964
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.1</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047472
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.6</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047658
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051262
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.4</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047560
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047766
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051166
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.7</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047402
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047882
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048798
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049254
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048084
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047572
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31052006
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31051630
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31109946
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31050590
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049538
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047520
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047598
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048218
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.5</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047838
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.8</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047500
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047732
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31049316
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047670
--http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31048062
</commentlist>
</conversation>
<conversation>
	<id>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#conversation10_02_06_1836221.9</id>
	<commentlist>http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31047660
-http://www.semanticweb.org/ontologies/ConversationInstances.owl#comment10_02_06_1836221.31053436
</commentlist>
</conversation>
