- Registration time
- Last login
- Online time
- 582 Hour
- Reading permission
You have to admit that the Switzer government had arrogantly and smirkingly REFUSED to collaborate with the international community over how to handle dirty money and its illegitimate owners. It took a few scandals involving WESTERN COUNTRIES for the Switzers to realise they are crooks and must behave - or will face international opprobrium!
For example the U.S. government prevailed in Bern in the matter of Jewish money on Switzer banks from the Nazi period. The banks buckled under and restituted money. It was the New York mayor, Mr Giuliani, who caused the Switzer banks to finally own up and stop playing fools!
Then they ran into the next grenade lobbed at them from Uncle Sam's arsenal: it was over tax evasions. I was scandalised to learn the Switzer taxpayers (!!!) had to foot an enormous bill of U.S. yoyo 70 billion (or was it 70 billion Francs?) to the UBS to tide the bank over the cash-strapped situation into which this scandal plunged it. Then the Europeans came knocking on the door over tax dodgers from their own countries hiding their savings on Switzer banks ... The Switzers arrogantly said "It is no crime to put German money on our bank accounts ... we don't need to reveal the names of YOUR citizens who do this!"
Finally I learnt (two days ago!) that the Bern government has been negotiating with ATHENS a tax revenue repatriation deal involving Greek billionaires who have parked their ill-gotten money on Switzer banks ...
The Switzer government has stooped to every depth to accommodate its criminal banking system over the past century or so! It is high time they fell out of the tree tops and crashed to the same floor where everybody else is!
I think you're mixing up two issues here.
The first is jewish money, the second is privacy laws.
As for the first one, we must analyze the history more thoroughly:
When the Nazis prosecuted and killed jews, many jews put their money in Swiss accounts to hide it from the Nazis (which was possible due to the extensive privacy laws, which I will talk about in the second paragraph below). However, some of those jews were nevertheless caught and killed by the Nazis, leaving considerable amounts of money on their Swiss bank accounts. Now usually, if somebody dies, the heirs can take the death certificate and retrieve those deposits from bank accounts. However, the Nazis didn't issue any death certificate, so the heirs couldn't prove that their ancestors were death, which rendered them unable to get their money back - especially if the respective individual put his or her money on a number account (which were perfectly anonymous in the 1930ies and 1940ies), so it was not even possible for the heirs to prove that they were related to the (unknown) acount owner.
So the World Jewish Congress (which was then, by the way, a Swiss organization founded in Geneva), wanted to get the money back from all jews. This, of course, meant that the involved banks had to dissolve anonymous accounts without being able to tell whether or not the owners are jewish and dead. The lawsuit then envolved around the following questions:
1) How much of the money stored in old, unused anonymous accounts belongs to jews?
2) Does an organization like the World Jewish Congress have the right to take the money that actually belongs to individuals?
However, the lawsuit was led under US law - thus, neither Swiss law nor the Swiss government were involved. Only a privately owned Swiss bank at this stage.
Now unfortunately, it was a congress election year and US politicians got envolved and turned it into a public issue, accusing Switzerland of not being tough enough on the Germans and thereby prolonging the war. This was, however, just a sideline and resulted in a joint historical commission which analyzed whether the war was or was not prolonged by Switzerland. The subsequent report (which was of course published after the congress elctions were over in the US) found that Switzerland did not prolong the war and the according accusations were groundless (which was to be expected, considering the small size of Switzerland).
The lawsuit ended with UBS paying 1,25 billion US-Dollars to the USA (not israel), which is in my point of view another scandal. The lawful heirs of the holocaust victims never saw one franc. Israel never got anything either. All money was sent to New York.
However, a procedure for processing claims of anonymous accounts had been established by UBS afterwards, repaying another 450 million Dollars to individuals.
Now let's talk about the second issue: Privacy laws.
Swiss laws prevent authorities (national and foreign) from accessing corporate data without search warrant. A search warrant is, like in most countries, issued only if there is an ongoing investigation against a certain individual. This law allowed a few criminals to hide part their incomes from their governments and avoid taxes - and the question now is whether privacy (thus, the individual) or taxes (thus, the government) are more important.
Here is striking cultural difference between Germany in Switzerland. Even in history, the Germans preferred a powerful government with perfect control over people, while the Swiss have always been defending individual freed0m and direct dem0cracy. During the Nazi regime, the Swiss had to decide whether they want to protect the privacy of the people who deposit their money and data in Switzerland, or whether they should cooperate with Hitler. Switzerland partly gave in, cooperated with Hitler on some issues and it turned out to be a huge mistake.
So 60 years later, the German government wants once again to gain access to the all the data of its citizens. Now, the Swiss Banks and IT companies could either deliver the data to Germany if privacy laws are loosened - or they could stand strong against the new storm and don't make the same mistake like 60 years ago.
It's hard to say which culture is right - we'll never know for sure whether individualism or centralism is better. But personally, I would not want my government to know everything about me.
If I were to suggest a solution, it would be to make a referendum on the law in Germany - if the German people want that their government gets their data, so be it. If not, the government would have to accept this then too.