La disparition de Benoît Duquesne est encore dans tous les esprits. France Télévisions a souhaité mettre le journaliste décédé à l’honneur cette semaine.

Le vide est cruel. Benoît Duquesne aurait dû tourner en ce moment les épisodes hors-série d’été de son Complément d’enquête. Mais une crise cardiaque foudroyante a emporté le journaliste. Sa célèbre émission est pour l’instant orpheline. Les équipes de la rédaction de France 2 qui ont appris avec stupeur l’annonce de son décès ont souhaité se réunir en mémoire du journaliste et lui rendre un dernier hommage.

Lundi, un portrait de Benoît Duquesne à été diffusé sur le grand écran du hall d’entrée de France Télévisions. Thierry Thuillier, le patron de France 2 a lu un discours devant cette photo au milieu de l’équipe de Complément d’enquête, et face au reste des journalistes de la chaîne. Sur Europe 1, le directeur des programmes a décrit Benoît Duquesne comme “robuste, grand et que rien ne pouvait abattre”. Lui qui confiait ne “pas imaginer à 56 ans que l’on puisse disparaître comme ça” a souhaité poursuivre l’hommage.

Depuis ce mardi, les célèbres fauteuils, qui servaient d’écrin aux interviews de Benoît Duquesne dans Complément d’enquête, trônent dans le hall d’entrée de France Télévisions. Les deux assises en cuir rouge, placées face à face et en quinconce siègent comme les totems d’une époque, désormais endormie pour toujours.

Click Here: cheap nsw blues jersey

Le 5 juin dernier, Anh-Dao Traxel publiait un livre sur ses années passées au sein du clan Chirac. Deux mois après, elle aborde ce texte dans une interview avec Point de vue.

A 55 ans, Anh-Dao Traxel a enfin décidé de publier un ouvrage sur sa famille adoptive. Dans Chirac: une famille pas ordinaire – Les confidences de leur fille de cœur (Ed. Hugo & Cie), sorti le 5 juin dernier, elle revient sur sa relation avec Bernadette Chirac, sa reconnaissance envers Jacques et ses retrouvailles avec ses parents biologiques.

Durant sa jeunesse, Anh-Dao Traxel avait plus souvent affaire à Bernadette qu’à Jacques. L’ex-maire de Paris était bien trop occupé par son travail pour veiller quotidiennement sur ses enfants. Bernadette, elle, veillait au grain. « Quand l’heure d’autorisation de sortie était dépassée, se souvient Anh-Dao, elle nous attendait dans le noir. Dès que le parquet se mettait à grincer, elle allumait en grand et nous passait un savon ». Lorsqu’elle aborde le sujet de sa mère adoptive, l’écrivaine se souvient d’une femme « très droite, élevée dans le culte de l’effort » et qui ne lui disait jamais qu’elle était fière d’elle.

En ce qui concerne Jacques Chirac, Anh-Dao Traxel confirme avoir toujours eu une place de choix dans le cœur de l’ancien chef d’état. « Lorsqu’il revenait avec des cadeaux, il me laissait toujours choisir la première », se souvient-elle. Et même si elle déclarait fin mai avoir été utilisée par le couple à des fins électorales, elle garde un souvenir ému de ces années. « J’ai vécu des moments incroyables, j’ai rencontré la reine d’Angleterre, le dalaï-lama, le pape. Je suis tellement fière de mon père ».

Si son éducation a pu être pénible par moments, elle en a tiré les valeurs qui ont fait d’elle une femme épanouie, « la droiture, la volonté et le respect ». Aujourd’hui, Anh-Dao Traxel n’a plus de contact avec ses parents adoptifs mais elle a retrouvé ses parents biologiques. Père et mère ont rejoint la France 10 ans après l’arrivée de leur fille. Son père est aujourd’hui disparu mais la femme de 55 ans reste très proche de sa vraie mère. « Nous nous voyons tous les jours. Avec elle, tout est amour », affirme-t-elle. Anh-Dao est aujourd’hui la mère de trois enfants qu’elle a « élevé à la baguette ». « Je crois que, comme Bernadette, je suis une guerrière », conclue-t-elle.

La mère de Reeva Steenkamp, tuée en 2013 par le champion paralympique Oscar Pistorius sort du silence. Alors que l’athlète vient tout juste d’écoper de 5 ans de prison ferme, les premiers extraits du livre Reeva par sa mère sont publiés ce week-end dans le Times. Blade Runner y est décrit comme un «arrogant», «explosif» et «possessif», qui n’aurait eu aucun scrupule à retenir de force sa petite amie, bien décidée à le quitter.

«Il n’y a aucun doute dans nos esprits que quelque chose a terriblement mal tourné, quelque chose l’a tellement bouleversée qu’elle s’est cachée derrière une porte fermée avec deux téléphones portables». Dans son livre Reeva par sa mère, June Steenkamp est catégorique: Oscar Pistorius est bel et bien un assassin. Selon elle, le champion paralympique a tué sa fille volontairement dans la nuit du 14 février 2013, jour de la Saint Valentin, alors qu’elle tentait de rompre avec lui.

Click Here: Geelong Cats Guernsey

«Ses habits étaient emballés. Il n’y a aucun doute dans nos esprits: elle avait décidé de quitter Oscar cette nuit-là», peut-on lire ce week-end dans le Times qui publie en avant-première quelques extraits choisis de l’ouvrage (dont la sortie est prévue le 6 novembre prochain en anglais). Une annonce qui arrive avec fracas après le jugement rendu par le tribunal de Cape Town, qui considère Pistorius non coupable du meurtre de son ex, appuyant plutôt l’homicide involontaire.

Ce n’est pas la seule surprise que dévoile l’hebdomadaire américain. En plus de ce climat tendu au sein du couple – le mannequin avait «des doutes persistants quant à leur compatibilité» – la mère de Reeva Steenkamp assure: «Elle m’avait confié qu’elle n’avait pas couché avec lui. Ils partageaient le même lit mais elle avait peur de porter leur relation à ce niveau… Elle n’aurait pas voulu coucher avec Oscar si elle n’était pas sure. Je pense que leur relation était en train de se terminer. Au fond de son coeur, elle ne pensait pas que celle-ci rendait l’un ou l’autre heureux.»

Autant de raisons qui auraient poussé la jeune femme à faire ses valises à l’aube de la Saint Valentin 2013. Face à elle, c’est un homme «sournois» et «armé jusqu’aux dents», ayant «la gâchette facile» qu’elle aurait trouvé, toujours selon sa mère. «Ça a été la malchance de Reeva de le rencontrer, parce que tôt ou tard, il allait tuer quelqu’un. Je crois profondément à ça», écrit-elle dans son livre.

NEW YORK (AP) — Liam Neeson is again apologizing for revealing that he wanted to kill a random black person nearly 40 years ago after a close friend had been raped by a black man.

Neeson issued a statement Friday apologized for “hurtful and divisive” comments that “do not reflect, in any way, my true feelings nor me.”

The actor caused a firestorm in early February when he told The Independent that after learning his friend’s attacker was black, he hoped a black person “would come out of a pub and have a go at me about something, you know? So that I could kill him.”

He later told “Good Morning America” that he is not a racist and moved past his desire for violence after seeking help from a priest and from friends. But the controversy overshadowed his new film, “Cold Pursuit.”

In his latest statement, Neeson said he has had time to reflect on “my unacceptable thoughts and actions at that time.” He said that in trying to explain his feelings, he “missed the point and hurt many people.” He ended the 155-word statement by saying: “I profoundly apologize.”

Hollywood kicked off this week by melting down over former Department of Homeland Security (DHS) secretary Kirstjen Nielsen’s resignation, alternatively calling for her to be jailed or attacking White House advisor Stephen Miller as a “white nationalist.”

Nielsen resigned amid a surge in illegal immigration and chaos at the border. According to reports, President Trump told Stephen Miller that he is “in charge” of immigration policy.

Hollywood naturally melted down, blaming both Nielsen and Miller for allegedly abusing children due to policies that separate migrant parents from their children in detention centers.

John Cusack said the former DHS secretary should be jailed for “child abduction and torture.”

In another social media post, Cusack compared Nielsen to a German who was “just following orders.”

“That evil human belongs in jail with miller and trump,” he added.

Chelsea Handler chimed in, “No word yet if Kirstjen Nielsen left her job on her own will or if she was separated from her job and then locked in a cage. She should be in jail.”

“Those responsible for orchestrating or implementing the policy of separating children from their parents belong in prison #cages,” Mia Farrow said.

Others seized on Rep. Ilhan Omar’s (D-MN) smear that Stephen Miller is a “white nationalist.”

Rob Delenay expressed affection for the Minnesota Democrat Tuesday morning.

Director Morgan J. Freeman went in for the kill, comparing Miller, who is Jewish, to Adolf Hitler.

“We are witnessing the deliberate reincarnation of Adolf Hitler right before our eyes in Stephen Miller, who will stop at nothing to preserve some BS pure white bloodline,” Freeman said. “We should be very scared, and must stop Trump from empowering this evil & hatful man.”

Big Bang Theory producer Bill Prady also ran cover for Omar, saying that even though Miller is Jewish, he can still be called a “white nationalist.”

“People confused as to how Stephen Miller, a Jew, can be a white nationalist—a group that traditionally hates Jews—might consider other examples of self-loathing. For example, think about homophobic gay man Roy Cohn or Starkist spokesfish and canned tuna advocate Charlie.”

Finally, Star Trek actor George Takei ominously panicked, saying that America “can expect the horrors to come to be far worse.”

BERLIN — She’s an under-60 polyglot, a political centrist who enjoys power, but isn’t intoxicated by it. Behind closed doors, her demeanor is polite and calm, yet forceful. Most important, she’s discreet.

Meet France and Germany’s dream candidate for the next president of the European Commission. Like most fantasies, she’s unlikely to ever materialize.

The next election for the European Parliament may be more than a year away, but Europe’s capitals have already given up hope of installing a dream team to run the Commission. Instead, there’s growing resignation that selecting the EU’s new leadership will be (like most important European decisions) a slog.

“There’s not much we can do but wait and see what happens,” said a senior French diplomat involved in the deliberations.

The difficulty is that the path to next year’s election, scheduled for the end of May, is strewn with political hurdles — from the Franco-German discussion on EU reform, to Brexit, to the budget.

The top job at the Commission will also inevitably be part of the horse-trading for other big posts that become open next year — the presidency of the European Council (the club of the then-to-be 27 EU countries), the bloc’s foreign policy chief and, arguably the biggest of them all, who’ll lead the European Central Bank in Frankfurt.

More fundamentally, there are still competing visions within the EU27 over the role of the Commission. While French President Emmanuel Macron favors a more activist executive (at least publicly), others, including several Eastern European countries and Germany, are wary of vesting the Commission with more political clout.

In their view, allowing Brussels more influence means losing it at the national level. They long for a return to the pre-Juncker era, when the president saw himself as more of a bridge-builder than an enforcer and agitator who oversees (in incumbent Jean-Claude Juncker’s words) a “political Commission.” That’s especially true in countries such as Poland and Hungary, which have borne the brunt of the Commission’s activism in recent years.

“There is no overall vision for Europe at the moment,” said Jan Techau, director of the Europe program at the German Marshall Fund of the United States, a think tank. “No one has one.”

That’s unlikely to change. France and Germany are nowhere close to agreeing to the kind of sweeping European reforms Macron has put on the table, and it looks increasingly unlikely the Juncker Commission will even manage to usher the new multi-year budget through by the end of its term.

Winding road

Against that backdrop, selecting a new person to run the Commission will be particularly fraught. All the more so, given that the question of the so-called Spitzenkandidat has yet to be settled.

To review: The Lisbon Treaty granted Parliament a larger role in approving the Commission president, but it’s still up to the Council to nominate a candidate.

Even if that sounds straightforward, it’s far from it.

The key parties in Parliament insist they won’t approve a nominee who wasn’t a Spitzenkandidat — a candidate selected by his or her party to lead the ticket in the upcoming election. According to the Parliament, the next Commission president must be a Spitzenkandidat.

Parliament argues that electing the Commission president in this way provides the office with more democratic legitimacy, which is exactly why many member countries oppose the process.

Those forces also played out in 2014, when the European People’s Party selected Juncker as its lead candidate, and the Party of European Socialists Martin Schulz. Though many conservatives, including German Chancellor Angela Merkel and U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron, were uncomfortable with Juncker, he ended up getting the job anyway, in part because the EPP, which received the most votes, couldn’t settle on another candidate.

A number of parameters will be different this time around. The biggest change is the absence of the U.K., which will trigger a complete recalibration of the Parliament.

The body has been dominated by an effective grand coalition between the center right and center left for decades. But with the British Labour Party exiting and the center right under increasing pressure from populist parties, it’s unclear what kind of result will emerge next year.

Even if the EPP remains the leading force, as is widely expected, it’s unlikely to enjoy the same sway it does now.

That’s one reason why whomever the EPP selects as its Spitzenkandidat won’t be a shoo-in for the presidency.

Brexit man in front

So far, most attention has focused on Michel Barnier, the chief Brexit negotiator. A former French foreign minister, Barnier tried to edge out Juncker in 2014 for the EPP nomination but fell short.

This time, if he manages to negotiate a Brexit deal that both limits the damage to Europe and puts the future EU-U.K. relationship on solid footing, he could be hard to stop. His position as chief negotiator has helped him build relationships with leaders across the EU27, an advantage no other candidate is likely to have.

But being an early favorite can be dangerous and there are still big questions about what support, if any, Barnier would get from his party and government. Not having the backing of his party and President Emmanuel Macron in Paris could sink his chances before he gets started.

Also, at 67, Barnier is older than Juncker. For those who want Europe to project an image of modernity and vitality, a white man in his late sixties might not be the best answer.

And then there’s the age-old question of Franco-German balance. If a Frenchman gets the Commission presidency, will Paris give Germany the presidency of the European Central Bank next year? Berlin has long coveted this job.

Focus on Macron

Other viable candidates include Macron-favorite Margrethe Vestager, the competition commissioner.

Vestager, a Danish liberal, checks many boxes for the ideal candidate in both Paris and Berlin. But Merkel is unlikely to support a candidate from outside the center-right family. Some in Germany also perceive Vestager as too strong-willed and as someone who would pursue a more activist agenda.

Much will depend on what course Macron steers with his En Marche party. En Marche, which didn’t exist at the last European election, has been flirting with the liberal ALDE group and other centrist forces in Parliament.

If Macron succeeds in galvanizing support for his European ideas beyond France, En Marche could become a force to be reckoned with in Parliament. But that’s still a big if.

Federica Mogherini, the EU’s foreign policy chief, is often named as a potential lead candidate for the social democrats. But given the party’s desolate state, it’s doubtful her star would lift it from the doldrums.

The more contentious the process of settling on a nominee via the Spitzenkandidat process becomes, the more likely it is a dark horse candidate could emerge.

Topping that list is Christine Lagarde, who currently heads the International Monetary Fund.

A former conservative French finance minister, Lagarde is widely respected in Germany and has a strong personal relationship with Merkel.

She also knows how Europe works, is multilingual and credited with diplomatic skills that even charmed Wolfgang Schäuble, Germany’s curmudgeonly former finance minister.

At just over 60, Lagarde might be older than the ideal candidate. But then in European politics, no one is perfect.

“In the end it will be a big European mishmash,” Techau said of the process. “But that’s normal.”

Given the challenges Europe faces in the coming months, “normal” may be little more than another fantasy.

Michel Barnier: EU won’t break the single market for Brexit UK

‘There will be no unraveling of what we’ve achieved,’ says EU chief negotiator.

We will bend the EU’s rules for the sake of Ireland, but don’t think for a minute that we will unravel the single market for a departing U.K.

That was the message from a speech by EU chief negotiator Michel Barnier that was billed as an update on the state of the negotiations, but which had a clear subtext for Theresa May as she attempts to win agreement among her divided Cabinet over Brexit.

Asked about the Cabinet get-together at the prime minister’s country residence Chequers Friday, Barnier refused to comment directly, saying he would wait for “workable solutions” in the government’s white paper next week. But even without engaging directly with May’s customs plan — called the “facilitated customs arrangement,” under which the U.K. would remain close to Brussels’ rules on goods — it wasn’t hard to divine what kind of reception it will receive at the European Commission.

Barnier’s remarks, at an event organised by the Institute of International and European Affairs think tank in Brussels, amounted to a robust defense of the EU single market — “The heart of the European project,” and the EU’s “main economic public good,” as he put it. It has taken 45 years to build, he said, including the U.K.’s “important and positive role,” and with Europe facing so many challenges it has to consolidate its accomplishments.

“There will be no damage to it,” said the EU negotiator. “There will be no unraveling of what we’ve achieved.”

His decision to emphasize the point on the day of May’s “body bag summit” — so named by MPs because of the chance of Cabinet resignations — does not bode well for the prime minister. Under her plan, the U.K. would continue to levy EU tariffs at its borders, but use technology and “trusted trader” schemes to track goods on their journey through supply chains to market. Traders selling goods with lower tariffs destined for U.K. consumers would have the tariffs reimbursed.

In addition, the U.K. would aim to stay in close alignment with EU single market product and manufacturing standards for goods — in order to maintain seamless trade and avoid so-called non-tariff barriers. In short, the U.K. remaining part of some bits of the single market, while not accepting freedom of movement for people.

On the Northern Ireland border, Barnier had a plea to “de-dramatize” the EU’s proposed backstop solution to avoid a hard border post Brexit. May has said that no British prime minister could agree to the proposal that would effectively keep Northern Ireland within the EU’s customs union.

“Let me be clear. We are not asking for any new borders between Northern Ireland and the rest of the U.K.,” said Barnier, “We will obviously need to clarify how and where this control will be done. But ultimately, these are only technical controls on goods. No more, no less.”

He acknowledged candidly that the EU has bent its rules to come up with an Ireland plan — though he did not use the phrase “cherry-picking” — but he said such flexibility was motivated by the “unique circumstances” of Ireland and Northern Ireland. “This solution is tailor-made to address the very specific challenges on the island of Ireland,” he said.

The negotiator lamented the fact that he and his U.K. counterparts are engaged in “negative negotiations” which are ultimately a “lose-lose game.” But he did offer sympathy for May’s predicament. “I have … real respect for Theresa May and I know that her daily work is not so easy,” said the Frenchman.

Click Here: Aston Villa Shop

Actress-turned-political activist Alyssa Milano appears to be running cover for former vice president and 2020 Democratic candidate Joe Biden, releasing a podcast interview with him about women’s issues and appearing on MSNBC Monday to defend him.

“I am proud to call Joe Biden a friend,” Alyssa Milano said on her podcast “Sorry Not Sorry.”

“He has been a leader and a champion on fighting violence against women for many years.”

Milano notes that her interview with Biden was recorded before numerous women came forward to say that he had made them uncomfortable with inappropriate touching. She played his statement regarding the allegations against him and segued into her recorded interview, first asking Biden, “Why was the issue of sexual assault important to you?”

Biden answered that his father taught him that “the greatest sin of all is the abuse of power, and a cardinal sin was for a man to raise his hand against a woman.”

The former senator then bizarrely claimed that Anita Hill’s testimony re-ignited his passion for protecting women from “sexual harassment and assault.” Of course, Biden was a part of the Anita Hill hearings and reportedly said at the time he thought she was lying.

Milano also asked Biden what he thought about people who say that the #MeToo movement has gone too far.

“You know, when I hear that the pendulum has swung too far, I think, how absurd that is. This kind of backlash occurs when you start to make real progress. We have hundreds of years to make up for. We have to change the culture of the United States and this is our moment. This is our moment.” Biden said. “#MeToo has been a powerful tribute to truth telling.”
Alyssa Milano was also joined on the podcast by Tarana Burke, an activist that is largely credited with founding the #MeToo movement.

“I’ve said this a hundred times–sexual violence, assault, harassment–those things don’t discriminate. There’s no one community that’s more depraved than another. But I think that the response to it differs. And so, it’s not that, you know, communities of color have more sexual violence, it’s that communities of color have less attention to what the kind of violence is happening in our communities,” Burke said.

She also blamed higher rates of sexual assault among “indigenous communities” on “white supremacy.”

Finally, Milano appeared on MSNBC Monday to further defend Biden, saying, “I also want to talk about Anita Hill and really just say that I know this is an issue that has come up for Democrats how the vice president had maybe handled that situation.”

She continued:

Milano also said that the Democratic primary needs to be about “beating Trump,” who she described as a “horrible, horrible president.”

Model-turned-left-wing activist Chrissy Teigen slammed Laura Ingraham as a “white supremacist” after the Fox News host questioned whether she deserved to be featured in the TIME 100 “Most Influential People” list.

“Model and wife of John Legend, Chrissy Teigen, was also chosen as one of the 100 most influential,” Ingraham said during Wednesday’s edition of The Ingraham Angle. 

“She is also known for her vicious attacks on President Trump, and according to the program she was chosen because ‘all her life, Chrissy has liked to eat. She’s not shy about that, or anything else really,’” she continued. “Well, that’s nice and innovative, I guess… eating.”

Ingraham also mocked how Teigen said during last week’s Democratic retreat that the one piece of advice she would give to women is to say “fuck you more.”

“Corny monster. There were 1 million other ways to try and take me down and this is what you choose? Fuck you,” Teigen replied. “When Time comes out with their 100 most influential white supremacists list, I promise I won’t question your worthiness.”

Corny monster. There were 1 million other ways to try and take me down and this is what you choose? Fuck you. ? https://t.co/wETBvafAzo

— christine teigen (@chrissyteigen) April 18, 2019

The 33-year-old model then posted a photo of Ingraham waving to a crowd where her arm unintentionally resembles that of a Nazi salute.

Teigen is known for her vicious outbursts against various conservative figures, including Donald Trump, who she insists would make her throw up if she were forced to meet him.

“No, I would never,” she said when asked if she would meet with the current president. “I think I would throw up in my mouth. It’s just impossible to me.”

Click Here: Golf special

She has also previously blamed Trump for her declining mental state, claiming his presidency gives her crippling anxiety.

“So fucking tired of this manically insane, incompetent president and this dumpster fire administration I’m gonna have to go on another med,” she complained in 2017. “I think I need to either up my dosage or talk to my doctor to “see what works for me” when the world explodes.

Follow Ben Kew on Facebook, Twitter at @ben_kew, or email him at [email protected].

LONDON — When Facebook chief executive Mark Zuckerberg told U.S. lawmakers last week that he would extend Europe’s strict new privacy rules to the company’s 2.2 billion users around the world, many took his word at face value.

It turns out, they should have read the fine print.

Despite Zuckerberg’s pledge, almost all of the privacy standards included in Europe’s overhaul, known as the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, will remain off-limits to Facebook users outside the 28-member bloc, according to legal experts and company insiders.

Click Here: cheap sydney roosters jersey

A big reason why: Facebook has altered its legal language so that people from across Asia, Latin America and Africa would no longer fall under the jurisdiction of Ireland’s privacy watchdog.

That means non-EU users will no longer be able to appeal to European data protection authorities to uphold EU rules, including the “right to be forgotten,” which will force companies like Facebook to delete people’s online information under certain circumstances — and which are likely to conflict with the right to freedom of speech, most notably in the United States.

Another is Europe’s upcoming demand that businesses inform regulators within three days if people’s data has been hacked. Such rules are unlikely to apply outside of the European Union, where other countries’ own privacy rules put far less onerous demands on companies to come clean when digital information is stolen.

Similarly the right to turn to European data protection agencies to enforce the Continent’s upcoming privacy standards, which come into force on May 25, will not extend to those outside of Europe, who make up the vast majority of the social networking giant’s 2.2 billion users. 

“It appears Facebook wants to create a version of GDPR that meets its own requirements,” said Simon McGarr, director of Dublin-based Data Compliance Europe, a consultancy that advises companies about how to abide by Europe’s privacy rules. “That is not how Europe’s privacy rights work.”

Facebook said Zuckerberg only outlined that the new privacy controls under GDPR, and not the other regulatory requirements, would be applied to Facebook’s global network.

“We’re committed to rolling out the controls and the affirmative consent and the special controls around sensitive types of technology, like face recognition, that are required in GDPR,” Zuckerberg told the U.S. Senate’s commerce and judiciary committees on April 10; his notes included the reminder to tell U.S. lawmakers that “Don’t say we already do what GDPR requires.”

“We’re doing that around the world,” Facebook’s chief added.

The company spent more than two years, with a team of hundreds of lawyers, coders and designers, creating new tools for its users that would allow them to understand how their data is used. Many of these upgrades have started to be rolled out worldwide.

EU vs. global rights: What takes precedent?

Europe’s upcoming privacy standards represent the largest global overhaul of data protection rights in the last 30 years. They have led many non-EU countries, notably Canada, Argentina and Japan, to revamp their own domestic legislation to fall in line with the EU rules.

As part of the revamp, any company with European customers — ranging from multinationals like Google and General Electric to small businesses and tech startups — must comply with the EU data protection rules or face fines of up to €20 million or 4 percent of its global revenue, whichever is higher.

But, importantly, these legal prescriptions will apply only to corporate activities within the Continent, meaning that non-EU companies are not obliged to extend the same protections to their customers outside of the bloc.

Legal experts say many businesses are voluntarily making some of the same rights available to their global users, mostly because it is easier to comply with Europe’s globally reaching standard than to adopt country-by-country rules.

“There’s no doubt it’s having an extraterritorial impact,” said Eduardo Ustaran, co-director of the global privacy and cybersecurity practice at Hogan Lovells, in reference to Europe’s new privacy rules.

But the most onerous legal obligations, including hefty financial penalties for wrongdoing required under the GDPR, will be limited to Europe.

Questions also remain about how many of Europe’s privacy rules would be legally enforceable elsewhere, particularly in the U.S., where the country’s own privacy standards are more relaxed than those in the EU and where other rights — particularly freedom of speech guaranteed under the First Amendment — may run counter to European-style privacy rules.

Europe’s beefed-up “right to be forgotten” rule is a case in point.

Expanding on a 2014 legal ruling against Google by Europe’s highest court, the new provisions allow Europeans to demand that companies tell them everything they know about them and require businesses to delete all of that information.

That right may run counter to freedom of expression principles outside of the EU. That’s particularly true if individuals with no connection to Europe begin to use these newfound standards to remove harmful, but legally required, information about themselves from the internet, such as references to criminal records or other legal documents.

Emily Sharpe, a privacy and public policy manager at Facebook, told POLITICO that the company always has given people the right to delete information, though questions have been raised whether the social network retains data on both its users and those who don’t use the platform.

Facebook’s privacy upgrade: GDPR in name only

Other European-mandated privacy requirements also will remain out of reach for Facebook’s global users.

Under the EU’s upcoming standards, companies must tell regulators within three days if people’s data has been hacked or face hefty fines. Yet in the U.S., a mixture of state-by-state privacy rules mean American companies will continue to have weeks, if not months, to make similar disclosures about their U.S. customers.

Facebook’s most recent data scandal, which involved a third-party app allegedly collecting data on up to 87 million users without their consent, was not considered such a data breach. But when other high-profile companies like Uber and credit agency Equifax were hacked, they waited up to a year or longer to inform authorities that personal data had been compromised.

In addition, non-EU Facebook users will soon not be able to rely on the Continent’s data protection agencies to uphold their rights.

Previously, all of the company’s non-North American customers, or roughly 80 percent of its users, were overseen by the Irish regulator because Facebook’s international headquarters was located in the low-tax country.

But under proposed changes, these non-EU users would now have a legal contract with Facebook’s U.S. entity, meaning that they would fall under America’s privacy standards that are perceived by many privacy campaigners as not as rigorous compared to Europe’s upcoming privacy legislation.

The change would also ensure that only European citizens, and not the vast majority of the social network’s customers, could turn to the Irish agency or other European watchdogs if they believed their privacy rights have been violated.

“We have been clear that we are offering everyone who uses Facebook the same privacy protections, controls and settings, no matter where they live,” Stephen Deadman, Facebook’s deputy chief global privacy officer, said in a statement in response to the privacy change, which was previously reported by Reuters. “These updates do not change that.”