Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

statewatch.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 279 posts

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#41

Post by squigz »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #29
aldsfh wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is currently an initiative to forbid a political party, the AfD in Germany. This is not supported by the CDU, but by others. While I do not like the AfD, forbidding political parties that serve as an outlet for people who do not support the uniparty and their essentially identical policies seems to be one of the most totalitarian measures in postwar Germany. The SPD should instead examine why they themselves ar…

Politics across the world has ossified and become terrified of change. So they stick their heads in the sand.

Why do you think that is?

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#42

Post by questinthrow »

poszlem wrote: post #17

[flagged]

Assuming I'm a politician, couldn't I use those imported people to stir up trouble so I can get enough political support to change legislation so it fits me like in the article here? More surveillance and control isn't a bad thing if you're at the top. Furthermore these imported people all have very simple "triggers" to make them do violent stuff so its very easy to use them towards your own ends.

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#43

Post by McDyver »

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #33
smashah wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's not a coincidence that the more shameless politicians ignore peaceful protests while doing the bidding of lobbyists, the more climate-concerned people feel the need to escalate their nuisance tactics which conveniently makes those same shameless politicians feel that they can justify more draconian measures to stifle privacy, speech and activism.

Ghandi set the standard for effective peaceful protests. Most protests I see people doing are laughably useless. You have to know how to suffer for what is important. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mahatma-Gandhi/Resistan... "Thus was born satyagraha (“devotion to truth”), a new technique for redressing wrongs through inviting, rather than inflicting, suffering, for resisting adversaries without rancor and figh…

How about politicians setting the standard for not fucking up the whole world and their fellow humans?

Why must it be the people suffering the consequence of greedy politicians, who must be the ones behaving with the high moral compass?

This seems to me like blaming the victims

Edit to add:

> You have to know how to suffer for what is important.

With that principle, people who have the decisional power should "suffer" by refraining from causing harm to others/the planet

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#44

Post by llm_trw »

yunohn wrote: post #39
consp wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Funny thing with those violent protesters is ... Sometimes they are not protesters. I had the opportunity to be with a peaceful protest against canceling student financing and the people who started violence after it finished were neither part of, nor affected by, the issues or organisation.

Yes, sadly this is a common tactic by the incumbent corruption (politicians, corporations, otherwise) to make the protestors seem dangerous. Nothing new, but maybe it hasn’t been exposed at home as much as it has been abroad.

There is no need to bring in agent provocateurs in this day and age. Both anti-fa and fa are a bunch of meth heads looking for an excuse to bash someone's head in. They are perfectly happy to start violence if the police doesn't actively stop them.

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#45

Post by tokai »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #29
aldsfh wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is currently an initiative to forbid a political party, the AfD in Germany. This is not supported by the CDU, but by others. While I do not like the AfD, forbidding political parties that serve as an outlet for people who do not support the uniparty and their essentially identical policies seems to be one of the most totalitarian measures in postwar Germany. The SPD should instead examine why they themselves ar…

Politics across the world has ossified and become terrified of change. So they stick their heads in the sand.

It would be a pretty big change to outlaw afd, so how does that fit with your statement?

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#46

Post by Rinzler89 »

consp wrote: post #24
johndunne wrote: post #18

From the article "Climate activism is on the rise, together with an increased willingness to use violence, marking a shift from environmental activism to environmental extremism" As far as I can tell, climate activists have been making a nuisance of themselves much more than a 'willingness to use violence.' I find this justification concerning, to say the least.

Funny thing with those violent protesters is ... Sometimes they are not protesters. I had the opportunity to be with a peaceful protest against canceling student financing and the people who started violence after it finished were neither part of, nor affected by, the issues or organisation.

>Sometimes they are not protesters

I don't have the source at hand but I remember reading that in Germany, plain clothes police inserted themselves into the group of climate protestors and start throwing rocks at the riot police, in order to give them legal justification to engage the protestors.

Don't know if this is the truth, but since this has also happened in my country in the past, I wouldn't be surprised that it is. Governments and the ruling elite can and will always find ways to legally justify their actions against citizens they consider a threat. The US had the Pinkertons (who stil exist today) who did similar actions but for the private sector.

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#47

Post by generic92034 »

v7n wrote: post #36

The headline got me worried, but after reading the article it became clear that was purposeful with weasel words like "states can now collect". There seem to be no new databases or new actual mechanisms in place, it's just about the clarification of which kind of potential threats are encouraged to be entered into the already existent system. The criteria seems reasonable enough. If there is objective, verifiable inf…

> I would hope that this data is shared between the Union members now and in the future.

If parliaments had decided that, my objections would be much lower. But the institutions just deciding for themselves seems to be potentially abusive. It is not like there would be no examples.

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#48

Post by llm_trw »

rosmax_1337 wrote: post #6

This will be used to silence political dissent in the EU. The current rulers fear the change which could come about if they allow the political climate to shift in the direction which it is ready to.

And which direction is that?

Because I find people are very upset about this until it's used on people they don't like - socialists or fascists - and then they are very happy it's being used to 'stop the slide into fascism/communism' until it's used on them again.

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#49

Post by throw14125 »

throwaway48476 wrote: post #29
aldsfh wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is currently an initiative to forbid a political party, the AfD in Germany. This is not supported by the CDU, but by others. While I do not like the AfD, forbidding political parties that serve as an outlet for people who do not support the uniparty and their essentially identical policies seems to be one of the most totalitarian measures in postwar Germany. The SPD should instead examine why they themselves ar…

Politics across the world has ossified and become terrified of change. So they stick their heads in the sand.

Yes, they cling to their positions and pensions. In the case of Germany/SPD it is especially amusing (or tragic):

With a leader like Willy Brandt and the historical SPD they'd easily get 40%. The current mediocrities in the SPD are old enough to know that. Yet they still prefer their positions over actually serving the country.

Re: EU: Definition of "potential terrorists" opens door to broad information-sharing

#50

Post by highcountess »

FollowingTheDao wrote: post #33
smashah wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe it's not a coincidence that the more shameless politicians ignore peaceful protests while doing the bidding of lobbyists, the more climate-concerned people feel the need to escalate their nuisance tactics which conveniently makes those same shameless politicians feel that they can justify more draconian measures to stifle privacy, speech and activism.

Ghandi set the standard for effective peaceful protests. Most protests I see people doing are laughably useless. You have to know how to suffer for what is important. https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mahatma-Gandhi/Resistan... "Thus was born satyagraha (“devotion to truth”), a new technique for redressing wrongs through inviting, rather than inflicting, suffering, for resisting adversaries without rancor and figh…

Pretty sure Jesus set that standard many centuries before Gandhi. If anything Gandhi was just taking inspiration from Jesus.
Post reply on HN