EU to hand over digital bank records to US in "anti terrorist move"

Run_to_da_hills

The European Commission has approved a deal to allow US anti-terror investigators continued access to European bank transaction data.

The European Parliament still has to vote on the revised deal.

Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso told MEPs that the new draft "has strict safeguards on privacy".



I wouldn't trust Barossa as far as I would throw him, it was only recently he warned Spain, Portugal and Greece of "loosing democracy" which is some cheek to say considering Lisbon has already stripped these countriies of what democracy they already had. ROFL.

US access to bank data in the Swift money transfer system would be "strictly limited" to the prevention and detection of terrorist financing, he said.

Another fascist move by the EU to wards a one world Government, and more so as we push further to wards the cashless society.

What is the US definition of a terrorist? Someone who purchases basic household materials with their credit card that could be used in a so called "terrorist attack", like several empty containers, petrol and some fireworks. :rolleyes:

Yesterday a School in the UK had to be shut down because a few buzz words picked up on a search robot through a social networking site triggered off anti terrorist alarm bells.

We can now expect the same over the banking ststem and expect a lot more doors to be kicked down and arrests thanks to this EU move that was not put to the people.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/world/europe/10321388.stm

humanji

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Yesterday a School in the UK had to be shut down because a few buzz words picked up on a search robot through a social networking site triggered off anti terrorist alarm bells.

Where was this?

Run_to_da_hills

humanji wrote: »

Where was this?

Merseyside, it currently being discussed in AH.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/10319053.stm

Di0genes

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

Merseyside, it currently being discussed in AH.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/england/merseyside/10319053.stm

And if they'd done nothing and a potential Columbine or Dunblaine happened what would you say?

Torakx

Er were talking about Terrorists here not citizens lol
CIA = terrorists imo.
I think Columbine was out of or under control kids. Dunblaine was the bombing? if so id say MI6/CIA

studiorat

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

What is the US definition of a terrorist? Someone who purchases basic household materials with their credit card that could be used in a so called "terrorist attack", like several empty containers, petrol and some fireworks. :rolleyes:

Basic houshold materials? you call them basic houshold materials? That made me laugh. Couple of bags of fertilizer, rubber gloves and a plane ticket

if you spotted your neighbour going in and out of his garage with those items wouldn't you be a little concerned?

Di0genes

Torakx wrote: »

Er were talking about Terrorists here not citizens lol
CIA = terrorists imo.
I think Columbine was out of or under control kids. Dunblaine was the bombing? if so id say MI6/CIA

Dunblaine was the school shooting in scotland in 1996. You're thinking of the Lockerbie bombing of 1988.

But hey it's good that you can claim the bombing was carried out by the CIA despite getting the town wrong, and missing the date by over a decade. It's your grasp of those intricate facts that make your opinion sound very authoritative.

Torakx

I didnt make a mistake,i asked a question.
Im not an authority on English history or a big follower of it...hence the question which you mistook for an authoritive explanation ^^
Thanks for the answer though.
I suppose because i asked a question that automatically means the CIA didnt do any bombings too or had any possible reason dealings with brainwashing controlling teenagwers on rampages....yes i follow this logic when i need to understand how others think.It isnt however what i would be agreeable with.
Im not saying that the CIA/MI6 for sure brainwashed some kids to do these things.
I believe its just a possibility and also its possible that some kids just go nuts because of their situation.There is alot of media out there encouraging this activity so it can be seen in many ways.

But with this new idea of letting the Americans monitor everyones bank transactions i feel its unnecessary considering i also believe the terrorists people fear are actually some shadow organisation that is in power or working for those in power in most countries.
Like IRA,ETA,Al-Qaeda,nazi-skin heads,mafia etc etc
Just a hunch really but its based on all the stuff that i have learned about and i feel this really makes the bigger picture look alot more reasonable.

Mahatma coat

Just lookin at my bank statement here, Jaysus I must be a Terrerist too :eek:

in the last month I have purchased
some beer Some cigarettes Some Chinese Food.
400L of diesel
200L Hydraulic oil
25L Grease
2 New Chainsaw Bars and Chains
10KG Decking Nails
a 1T bulker bag of Fertiliser
a New Phone
4 55L Metal Dustbins
10 Styrafoam Eskies
a Couple of late night Taxi Fares
2 Plane Tickets from the GC To TVL and back
Petrol in a few fairly remote parts of FNQ
A new Remote Central Locking unit for my Landcruiser
2 Deep cycle 12V Batteries
I have also drawn about $2K in Cash


there are 3 cars registered in my name being driven by other people in different parts of Australia right now.


Now everything on that list is legal to own, and I have valid reasons for posessin all those things, but if someone was lookin for keywords I'd light up like a christmas tree.


thats why I'm against this sort of sh!te, if I was actually makin a bomb do you think I'd buy all the bits with my own Visa card???

Dude111

I dont know just more invasion of privacy is really all it is!

Di0genes

Torakx wrote: »

I didnt make a mistake,i asked a question.
Im not an authority on English history or a big follower of it...hence the question which you mistook for an authoritive explanation ^^

So you're basically admitting that your understanding of the events of the lockerbie bombing is something you ill educated and informed about and yet still feel confident to blame the CIA/MI5 for it?

But with this new idea of letting the Americans monitor everyones bank transactions i feel its unnecessary

It's also technically unfeasible.

considering i also believe the terrorists people fear are actually some shadow organisation that is in power or working for those in power in most countries.
Like IRA,ETA,Al-Qaeda,nazi-skin heads,mafia etc etc
Just a hunch really but its based on all the stuff that i have learned about and i feel this really makes the bigger picture look alot more reasonable.

So you're rationalizing the motivation of terrorist groups simplifying their goals and desires because it's more "reasonable"?

Torakx

I only hold my current perspectives because of all the things i have read and researched.
The IRA and eta al-queda may not be CIA/MI6 lead or they might be.Either way there wont be much proof lying around for or against.
You obviously have a view of the world that corelates better with the mainstream news which i consider to be part propoganda.
I dont believe terrorists would start a war with the USA because its the stupidist thing ever to imagine they would incur that kind of military action on themselves.There are lots of reasons and threads that help me to put that picture together.
We will just have to agree we dont think the same way i guess.
Sure the guy that ran his plane into a government building in the states might have been angry at the gov and could be counted as a terrorist.
But there is only so far i can stretch a story before it becomes shaky and the whole 9/11 war in Iraq,Afghanistan and soon imo Iran is showing me that it isnt about terrorist shutdown.Its about something else i just dont know if its oil,democracy or whatever.

yes with my little knowledge of what the hell happened at Lockerbie i can feel safe in GUESSING it was MI6 or CIA involvement.Might have been irish and english citizens involved but i would imagine its the government that needs the terrorists and the terrorists need the government.Again i could be wrong but that is just where my oppinion would be on that matter without further research.

About terrorist goals yes i am simplifying their motivations quite alot.I realise the situation may involve more than just CIA wants to run/destabilize your country or whoever was involved in whichever case you desire to look at,its quite possible and i think likely that the people doing these bombings actually believe they are effecting a change for the good.
Ofc i may be wrong i dont contest that!Im just saying this is how it looks to me and until i see evidence to show me otherwise i will continue to have a small inkling that the situation as i see it is the case.
Maybe i cant prove the IRA is/was being controlled backed or lead by the CIA/MI6 but id be more than happy if someone proved they werent also.I just see that if i was to try, the former would appear to be easier to me..hence reasonable thought as appose to convictions.

Di0genes

Torakx wrote: »

I only hold my current perspectives because of all the things i have read and researched.
The IRA and eta al-queda may not be CIA/MI6 lead or they might be.Either way there wont be much proof lying around for or against.

Have you actually read any credible decent accounts of any of these organisations.

There's plenty of proof that these aren't CIA/MI6 fronts.

You obviously have a view of the world that corelates better with the mainstream news which i consider to be part propoganda.

Where you appear to have decided Bond movies are an accurate interpretation of reality.

I dont believe terrorists would start a war with the USA because its the stupidist thing ever to imagine they would incur that kind of military action on themselves.There are lots of reasons and threads that help me to put that picture together.

The concept of religious fanaticism eludes you.

yes with my little knowledge of what the hell happened at Lockerbie i can feel safe in GUESSING it was MI6 or CIA involvement.

And this guess is based on what?

Might have been irish and english citizens involved but i would imagine its the government that needs the terrorists and the terrorists need the government.

You're flat out contradicting yourself now. Firstly governments run terrorists, now these terrorists need governments?

Maybe i cant prove the IRA is/was being controlled backed or lead by the CIA/MI6 but id be more than happy if someone proved they werent also.

You understand it's impossible to prove a negative don't you? You might as well say "I can't prove Al Qaeda were being controlled by the Romulans but show me they weren't."

You see how impossible your request is?

Torakx

I have taken all you have said into account.I also consider these things apart from romulans
I dont see everything so black and white.I believe its likely some government agencies are using terrorist groups as a means to an end.Or more likely a World government.
All these anti terrorist moves would be consistent with my perspective.
We all have a belief on what is the case to some extent.Its based on propoganda from all angles so we both most likely dont have the full story or idea of whats really happening.
Thats why i am open to other peoples ideas on what is going on.
And thats why i would ask how do you know for sure the CIA/MI6(not romulands or smurfs i mean but actual real known organisations ^^) isnt or wasnt working with terrorist groups,because we dont for sure doesnt mean it isnt the case.
They say history is written by the winners.So i doubt its going to be publisized very much if it was true.People have been known to have accidents after making movies and books that tell certain stories.
Do you also think the US government were not working with the mafia on some levels?