NSA science departments being demolished is lowkey great news; as a European, I feel like there's already enough SIGINT going around on their part. No doubt they'll be capitalizing on AI advantage anyway. If this kind of news means there will be less of it, we all stand to gain from it. Especially now that the U.S. has become comically unreliable, and indeed, dangerous—ally to its friends, it's hard to view this bit of news in bad light.
Ironic to read this gloat, given the new spyware, chat control and anti online privacy acts that the EU countries are pushing for, which will also be achieved using US/Israeli tech instead of domestically developed one, because the EU has none.
So your tax money will go to the US big-tech(again!) so that your government can spy on you. I don't think this is something to be happy about just because hey at least the US has domestic issues.
There's barely enough plausible deniability, but not enough to fool the journos:
https://balkaninsight.com/2023/09/25/who-benefits-inside-the...
Of course the US would benefit from EU's chat control. Duh! Nothing eye opening in your comment. That's like being surprised the shovel makers benefit from a gold rush. If the EU started the demand, the US will happily supply because otherwise someone else will.
However, my biggest problem as an EU citizen is the fact that the EU is implementing chat control in the first, not that the US is happily supplying it since the US government is not accountable to me, but sadly it seems mine isn't either.
> and never targeting U.S. policy-makers in the first place
Why would they shit where they eat or bite the hand that feeds them?
I find it hard to root for this kind of interference.
100% false. It's not like the EU is some tiny third world banana republic under US colonialism that has zero say in how it runs its domestic affairs. So please let's start holding our own politicians accountable for their actions instead of moving the blaming to external factors we can't control since accountability is their biggest enemy.
> It's hard to blame EU bureaucrats.
It is VERY easy to blame them, I'm doing it right now because they're MY civil servants paid from MY taxes and should do what's best for me. They can easily drop the chat control if they want to. But they won't because they made unpopular decisions in the last ~20 years that ended up negatively affecting the working class population, so democracy and freedom of speech is now a threat to them so they seek to control what I see and what I say so they protect their wealth, status and power.
I'm not. The goal of all politicians in every country is to manage public opinion so they can keep their seats, it's that simple. And EU politicians they finally realized how important control over internet media and speech is to managing that public option, so they'll seek to control it like the state controls TV broadcasting.
>There is one driving force behind all Chat Control legislation, and it's the U.S.
There's no evidence for this. EU politicians are the ones pushing for this to "save the children" or to "prevent fascism" lol.
>but the real issue is not that they govern too much, it's that they govern too little
Why not both? They govern too much on useless bullshit that hurts the economic competitiveness, and then govern too little on the things we need them for like sustainable policies for welfare, education, housing, immigration, birth rates, etc.
So we'll see if they can get it through European Parliament.
Meanwhile European citizens didn't vote for the corrupt Ursula "Censura" v.d. Leyen, yet she represents the EU citizens on the international stage but they can't vote her out no matter how much they hate her, so it's ironic to virtue signal to Americans about democracy from that position. Plus many European countries are still actual monarchies, with kings and queens.
So who's the one under actual emperor rule here?
Untrue, Trump failed to achieve a majority of the popular vote (which doesn't determine the US president), only a plurality.
That only US President elected with a lower percentage in the last 25 years was... also Trump, in 2016.
You originally said something different and more-specific, something contradicted by all official records.
Let's try another style:
YOUR OWN LINK SAYS 49.81% OF VOTES.
THAT PORTION IS LESS THAN HALF.
IT IS A MINORITY, NOT A MAJORITY.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION TO THIS MATTER.
If I were you, I'd ask the schools you went to for a refund, since they obviously didn't do their job.
> majority of the population who showed up to vote, Einstein.
[sigh] That "49.81% OF VOTES" is already exactly what you're asking for, idiot. That minority (plurality!) of the people who showed up to vote voted for Trump.
Your weird desperation to deny even the smallest and most-understandable mistake has only built a large pile of very embarrassing crazy excuses.
Read this after: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Plurality_(voting)
https://www.npr.org/2016/11/02/500112248/how-to-win-the-pres...
Economically, yes. Militarily, not really but yes NATO will need to meet their obligations, which I can see they're not used to doing.
But Intel, I don't think any of us are privy to any changes to Five Eyes, etc.
That's a really cute way to describe a deliberate fabrication of intelligence in an effort to unseat an elected President of the United States.
Yet congress and the courts are allowing Trump to destroy all the hard work prior generations put in to trying to better the US. Now the US will end up like many Countries that people are trying to leave as fast as they can.
This is not supported by the data. Seems like we're having to kick people out and have soldiers at the border to prevent incursions.
not supported by the data
We are having to force people out at gunpoint.
I provided statistical evidence that people are avoiding the USA. And the people who are here based on previous goodwill are being held at gunpoint and told to leave.
duxup•5mo ago
Lost job because a political appointee claims he did something or other…. but won’t show any proof of it.
Current administration is a clown car of incompetence.
quantified•5mo ago
subscribed•5mo ago
ahmeneeroe-v2•5mo ago
Gibbon1•5mo ago
mindslight•5mo ago
Gibbon1•5mo ago
duxup•5mo ago
treetalker•5mo ago
Not entirely sure this is accurate: according to the article, Gabbard (political appointee) fired him because Trump ordered her to do so. The question is why Trump gave that order; I suspect, but cannot show any direct evidence, that Laura Loomer (not a political appointee) had something to do with it. (As discussed in the article and as we know from many other instances and sources, Loomer goes about picking people to get rid of — for whatever reasons — and apparently has a lot of sway with Trump.)
But don't get me wrong: I agree with you in spirit!
> Current administration is a clown car of incompetence.
Self-evident.
bananapub•5mo ago
gosub100•5mo ago