From: "Robert G Lewis" 


"Adam" <""4thwormcastfromthemolehill\"{at}the
field.near the bridge"> wrote in message
news:449c32b1{at}w3.nls.net...
>
>> Another concrete example is shown in the LA Times article on the SWIFT
>> information (story broken by NY Times)
>>
>
> Staggeringly bad news for SWIFT.
>
> Already the Arabs & Europeans are  pig sick of the US throwing it's
> weight around wrt financial firms etc. (e.g. determining who can send
> money to who on the basis of domestic US law & the threat of sanctions
> against those financial firms which don't kowtow.)
>
> e.g the EU wants to start re-providing aid to the Palestinians & the US
> made it clear that they'd sanction any financial comp which took part.
> The EU is now on the verge of making clear to global financial houses
> that they'll have a choice of operating in the Eu or in the US if a
> similar thing ever happens again.
>
> Ditto wrt the Arabs/Muslims & their wish to send money.
>
> This is just such a "similar thing"
>
> An international money system should not be subject to the domestic law
> of any one country.
>
> Like I said, staggeringly bad news for SWIFT. My guess is that there'll
> be a "sans-US" financial transfer system in the works.
>
> If you want to transfer to the US use swift if not....use this more
> private system.
>
> Adam

Although I agree with the larger point I do feel that ANY company ( or
monetary transfer system) should be subject to the laws in the countries
that it operates in for those transactions which occur IN THAT COUNTRY. Not
for activity outside that country though.

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5