41–49 of 49 posts
Wait, so they want unrestricted access to all databases or only access the entries for those that travel to the US?
They're presenting the Visa Waiver Programme as conditional so my read is that it's access pertaining to ESTA applicants. Sounds like another drive-by meant to burn another bridge with EU.
This is for the visa-free travel program (VWP). The US wants to check whether people who show up for vacation without a visa have a criminal record. If European countries don't want to grant access that's their right, but it's not at all an unreasonable thing for the US to want access to, if the data exists and is easy to check. If someone is a convicted sex trafficker or drug dealer or whatever, I'm fully in favor o…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
For a variety of reasons, it's pretty common in many western countries for convicted first/second offenders even for pretty serious crimes to not serve much time. You see that in the UK for sex crimes for example, where offenses with "mitigating" cultural factors are punished extremely lightly. Which again is that country's choice, but it's not one that countries accepting their tourists are obligated to accept.
A country has the full right to deny entry to anyone for whatever reason. We have had instances of that in the Netherlands with religious folks who wanted to give hate speech tours. The government just stops them at the airport customs control. It is ofcourse potentially a diplomatic shit storm.
In Belgium, our Minister of Defence talks about buying services from Palantir, and wants to let Oracle build a cloud for the Defence department. He even dares to say that this will result in our own Sovereign Data Streams [1]. I can imagine this is a guy that will have not a single issue sharing the requested data with the US Government, even in the face of the recent hostility of the US towards the EU. [1] https://x…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A country has the full right to deny entry to anyone for whatever reason. We have had instances of that in the Netherlands with religious folks who wanted to give hate speech tours. The government just stops them at the airport customs control. It is ofcourse potentially a diplomatic shit storm.
That's yet another can of worms. Supposedly the US isn't supposed to deny a visa because of speech that would be protected by the first amendment, but the current administration doesn't seem to be following that.
In Belgium, our Minister of Defence talks about buying services from Palantir, and wants to let Oracle build a cloud for the Defence department. He even dares to say that this will result in our own Sovereign Data Streams [1]. I can imagine this is a guy that will have not a single issue sharing the requested data with the US Government, even in the face of the recent hostility of the US towards the EU. [1] https://x…
And that's the country that hosts the EU. What could go wrong :(
? did.
In Belgium, our Minister of Defence talks about buying services from Palantir, and wants to let Oracle build a cloud for the Defence department. He even dares to say that this will result in our own Sovereign Data Streams [1]. I can imagine this is a guy that will have not a single issue sharing the requested data with the US Government, even in the face of the recent hostility of the US towards the EU. [1] https://x…
https://www.heise.de/news/Bundeswehr-setzt-auf-Google-Cloud-...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Of course, amongst all the examples you could choose, you had to give a xenophobic example. There were no other example you could think of. You are seriously stating that the country who elected a sex offender (on top a being many other things like being a con man and an insurrectionist who tried to overturn a legitimate election and got away with it - hey, isn't that "offenses with "mitigating" cultural factors puni…
I picked the example of under-sentencing (and early release) which most people accept is the most clearly applicable. The fact that you know exactly what I'm talking about based on a very general statement about sex offense, is strong evidence you know it's true. In terms of rhetoric, you can argue that Donald Trump is bad for his alleged sex crimes, or you can argue that the US is wrong for vetting tourists, but you…
No, it is strong evidence that I can hear the very noisy xenophobic propaganda and whistle.