Følg dem - De kidnappes fortsat ulovligt... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bv3hxpqHWWc Francesca Albanese, UN Special Rapporteur oPt @FranceskAlbs ALERT! Yet another act of piracy by the Israeli army in international waters: intercepting the flotilla carrying basic necessities to a desperate population in Gaza. Shame on European govts who are not acting to stop Israel! When will Israel's impunity end? https://x.com/FranceskAlbs/status/2056322680614195518?s=20

https://www.theregister.com/systems/2026/05/16/europe-built-sovereign-clouds-to-escape-us-control-then-forgot-about-the-processors/5237735?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=bluesky

Nyt: TYSK MYNDIGHED FRAVÆLGER PALANTIR til fordel for ArgonOS fra europæiske ChapsVision 🇪🇺 Læs mere herunder 💡 Husk at du kan vælge at læse vores opslag på LinkedIn (censurerende og 🇺🇸-kontrolleret medie) eller via vore kanaler på Socii.dk og Meningspunktet https://www.heise.de/en/news/Digital-Sovereignty-BfV-Buys-European-Palantir-Alternative-11293717.html

19% er ikke nok Europæisk vindenergi status 2024 frem mod 2030 Vind dækkede 19% af EU’s elforbrug i 2024, men vi er bagud. Vi har kurs mod 351 GW i 2030, hvilket er langt fra målet på 425 GW – et mål, der i forvejen er reduceret fra de oprindelige 440 GW. Her er de vigtigste strategiske indsigter fra WindEurope-rapporten: Rekordhøje investeringsbeslutninger: Selvom onshore dominerede med 84% af de 16,4 GW nye installationer, er det reelle signal rekorden i Final Investment Decisions (FID) på €33 mia. Investeringslysten er massiv, men netflaskehalse er nu industriens største barriere for skalering og europæisk konkurrenceevne. Repowering som strategisk genvej: I 2024 blev 1,6 GW repoweret. Det er en matematisk vinder: En gennemsnitlig tredobling af produktionen med 25% færre turbiner. Det løser både behovet for mere strøm og udfordringer med lokal modstand. Den tyske benchmark: Tyskland tillod rekordhøje 13,8 GW i 2024 ved at implementere princippet om ”Overriding Public Interest”. Det er den guldstandard for hurtig eksekvering, som resten af Europa skal måle sig med. Danmarks situation - repowering en overset mulighed Med en vindandel på 56% er vi i front, men vi har en af Europas ældste flåder. Løsningen for Danmark kunne være en tredobling af produktionen med færre møller: Ved repowering udskiftes ældre møller med moderne vindmøller, der er langt mere kraftfulde og effektive. På grund af store teknologiske fremskridt fører dette til, at man i gennemsnit tredobler elproduktionen, samtidig med at antallet af vindmøller reduceres med 25 % De bedste vindplaceringer: De ældste vindmølleparker er ofte bygget på de mest optimale steder med de bedste vindressourcer. Genbrug af eksisterende infrastruktur: Meget af den fysiske infrastruktur, såsom veje, kabler og transformerstationer, er allerede etableret og kan ofte genbruge Hurtigere godkendelsesprocesser: Fordi anlægget og infrastrukturen i forvejen findes, bør processen med at indhente nye tilladelser tage kortere tid og være mere effektiv sammenlignet med at bygge helt nye vindmølleparke Dyk ned i tallene og de strategiske fremskrivninger i rapporten. Læs mere: https://windeurope.org/data/products/wind-energy-in-europe-2024-statistics-and-the-outlook-for-2025-2030/

Danmark er på EU's sorte liste vedr. luftforurening. Ifølge en undersøgelse lavet af EU's miljøagentur (som i øvrigt ligger på Kgs. Nytorv i København), er Danmark et af de EU-lande, hvor der er målt for høje koncentrationer af de sundshedsskadelige fine sodpartikler i luften. Se denne artikel: https://www.euronews.com/my-europe/2026/05/06/deadly-air-which-european-countries-have-the-worst-pm-25-levels Som de skriver: "...even Denmark, at a site in Copenhagen, which recorded a striking 95 μg/m3". Grænseværdien er 25 μg/m3. Lidt sjovt, at journalisten skriver "EVEN Denmark", men det er måske fordi vi regnes for a generelt at være et af de EU-lande, hvor der er styr på tingene. Det er der så ikke i dette tilfælde. Der skrives ikke noget nærmere om hvor det "site in Copenhagen" befinder sig. Tør man mon gætte på, at det er i nærheden af lufthavnen?

For 1 år, 7 måneder og 7 dage siden deltog jeg i mit første Political Assembly hos Det Europæiske Folkeparti, EPP, i Europa-Parlamentet i Bruxelles. Jeg var afsted som stedfortræder for vores internationale sekretær, Nik Bredholt, som var forhindret. Selvom jeg tidligere havde besøgt Europa-Parlamentet sammen med KristenDemokraternes hovedbestyrelse, så var dette noget helt andet. Denne gang stod jeg der alene til et formelt todages møde blandt erfarne politikere, rådgivere og repræsentanter fra hele Europa. Blandt gæsterne var også den nuværende tyske forbundskansler Friedrich Merz. Jeg følte mig ærligt talt lidt som en fisk ude af vandet. Det var learning by doing. Jeg følte mig nok mest som en vikar, der forsøgte ikke at lave fejl eller skade vores renommé. Heldigvis gik det vist ganske fornuftigt. Efter mødet deltog jeg i et spændende arrangement hos Wilfried Martens Centre for European Studies, inden turen gik hjemad mod KristenDemokraternes landsmøde i Middelfart, som jeg ankom direkte til. Et halvt år senere deltog jeg i KristenDemokraternes delegation til EPP’s kongres i Valencia. Endnu en stor oplevelse, fyldt med spændende møder, samtaler og nye perspektiver. Omkring 11 måneder efter det første Political Assembly ønskede Nik ikke at genopstille som international sekretær. Efter nogle overvejelser og en snak med vores landsformand valgte jeg at stille op til posten, og hovedbestyrelsen valgte mig. Fra vores landsformand var naturligvis også en bekymring for, om så relativt uprøvede kræfter kunne løfte en vigtig international opgave. Det forstår jeg egentlig godt. Siden da er det blevet til flere Political Assembly-møder hos EPP, andre internationale arrangementer, både fysisk og online, samt lærerige besøg hos vores svenske søsterparti Kristdemokraterna og det tyske søsterparti CDU. I dag oplever jeg at blive genkendt, have opbygget en bred vifte af internationale kontakter og faktisk føle mig som en del af fællesskabet. Nervøsiteten fra det første møde er efterhånden blevet erstattet af spænding over de mange opgaver, samtaler og mennesker, man møder undervejs. Nogle opgaver er man skabt til. Andre vokser man til. Hvad der gælder her, må andre nok afgøre. Men jeg forsøger, som altid, at gøre mit bedste. Til oktober er der så landsmøde igen, hvor der bl.a. skal vælges international sekretær

<b>Europe "One on one"</b> -Sprit ny single fra Europe. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0PVLyBYNFj4

Lobby virksomhed part 4 5. Meta Keeps International and US Child Safety Lobbying Completely Separate I cross-referenced Meta's 18 EU retained lobbying firms against US lobbying registrations. Three firms confirmed operating for Meta in both jurisdictions: Firm EU Role US Connection Trilligent (APCO Worldwide subsidiary) EUR 680K for AI Act, DMA, DSA APCO offices in DC; Meta VP calls them "integrated members of our Meta team" White & Case LLP EUR 50-100K, digital markets/services Lead international outside counsel, 70+ lawyer team FTI Consulting Belgium EUR 10-25K Subsidiary of FTI Consulting Inc (NYSE: FCN, HQ Washington DC) None of these firms touch child safety or age verification for Meta. The child safety lobbying runs through entirely separate state-level firms: Headwaters in Colorado, Pelican State Partners in Louisiana. None of Meta's US federal lobbying firms (Avoq, Mindset, Blue Mountain) have EU operations. International regulatory work (AI Act, DSA, DMA) goes through global firms. Age verification lobbying goes through state-level specialists with no international footprint. Two separate networks, no overlap. Sources: EU Transparency Register via LobbyFacts.eu, OpenSecrets, Senate LDA filings, firm websites The Global Picture 30+ jurisdictions introduced age verification legislation within 18 months (October 2024 to March 2026). Meta spends EUR 10 million per year on EU lobbying. 30 lobbyists. 18+ consulting firms. 277 European Commission meetings over a decade, including meetings specifically on "Children on internet protection" and "Minor protection online." RSF (Reporters Without Borders) documented 2,977 lobbying actions by Meta and Google across 10+ countries. Same playbook everywhere: astroturfing, revolving door hiring, front groups, disinformation. In Brazil, former President Michel Temer acted as an intermediary for big tech. Meta ran paid ads falsely claiming regulation would "ban the Bible." Meta failed to shift the compliance burden outside the US. The ASAA puts verification on app stores and devices. In Brazil, the EU, UK, and Australia, the burden falls on platforms directly. The ASAA playbook worked in four US states. It worked nowhere else. Sources: Corporate Europe Observatory, LobbyFacts.eu, RSF/Agencia Publica cross-country investigation, HRW, IAPP, EFF All Findings Are Now Public and Off Big-Tech Platforms Everything is at https://tboteproject.com The repository can be found at https://tboteproject.com/git/hekate/attestation-findings The research repository contains all source documents, IRS 990 analyses, state lobbying data, API query results, and disclosure PDFs. Every finding sourced from public records: IRS filings, state lobbying disclosures, PAC filings, campaign finance databases, corporate registries, congressional APIs, EU transparency registers, UK charity filings, and archived websites. You are free to fork, clone, or otherwise share these files. I encourage you to email your favorite YouTubers or forward it to trust worthy media. What's Next March 16, 2026: February monthly disclosures due in Colorado, the first filings covering SB26-051 activity March 17, 2026: Brazil's Digital ECA takes effect CORA and FOIA responses pending from Colorado SOS, Colorado AG, and Louisiana Ethics Board Still needed: DCA fiscal sponsor confirmation, Casey Stefanski's NCOSE "Global Partnerships" role, bill text comparison across jurisdictions Sources (all public records) IRS 990 filings: ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer (ICMEC 2022-2024, ConnectSafely 2017-2024) UK Charity Commission: Childnet International (1080173), FOSI UK (1095268) Brazil: Chamber of Deputies API (dadosabertos.camara.leg.br) EU lobbying: LobbyFacts.eu, Corporate Europe Observatory, EU Transparency Register Cross-country investigation: RSF, Agencia Publica, CLIP US lobbying: OpenSecrets, Senate LDA filings, Colorado SOS, Texas Ethics Commission Reporting: Bloomberg, HRW, IAPP, EFF, Biometric Update All other sources can be found on the repository

Lobby virksomhed META! 👇 part 1 TL;DR: Four new findings. (1) ICMEC, the nonprofit that authored Meta's preferred age verification model bill, is $2.28 million in debt and kept alive by board member loans totaling $1.1M, yet produced a full legislative toolkit aligned with Meta's lobbying position. Meta is a confirmed $25K+ donor. (2) ConnectSafely's $100K/year UK wire most likely goes to Childnet International, a co-member of Meta's Safety Advisory Board since 2009. The UK Charity Commission is currently investigating Childnet for censoring young ambassadors who criticized a funder. (3) Meta sent a named representative to two Brazilian congressional hearings on the Digital ECA, invited directly by the bill's rapporteur. (4) Three of Meta's EU lobbying firms also operate in the US, but Meta keeps its child safety lobbying completely compartmentalized from its international operations. The full investigation, all source documents, and the research repository are now public at Everything is at https://tboteproject.com The repository can be found at https://tboteproject.com/git/hekate/attestation-findings What I Did Follow-up to my previous posts about Meta's $26.3M federal lobbying operation, the DCA exposure, ConnectSafely's 9-year donor concealment, and the Heritage Foundation pipeline. This round focused on international connections: who funds the organizations writing the model legislation, where ConnectSafely's UK money goes, and whether Meta's US influence playbook extends to Brazil and Europe. 1. ICMEC Is Nearly Insolvent and Meta Funds It ICMEC (International Centre for Missing & Exploited Children, EIN 22-3630133) authored the Digital Age Assurance Act (DAAA), the model bill that shifts age verification from social media platforms to device and OS manufacturers. Meta is a confirmed $25K+ donor. I pulled three years of ICMEC's 990 XML filings (2022-2024). Financial picture: Metric FY 2024 FY 2023 FY 2022 Revenue $3.80M $5.02M $3.51M Expenses $4.47M $5.61M $5.15M Net Assets -$2.28M -$1.64M -$1.09M Employees 13 21 21 Negative net assets every year, getting worse. Revenue down 24% year over year. Headcount dropped from 21 to 13. Their 2024 audit flagged "substantial doubts regarding the organization's ability to meet financial obligations." Board members are personally loaning money to keep it running: Lender Role Outstanding Balance Franz Humer Board Member (retired Chairman, Roche/Diageo) $807,000 Sally Paul Board Chair $210,000 Rick Li Board Member (Goldman Sachs) $100,000 Total $1,117,000 With $1.1M in board loans and negative $2.28M net assets, ICMEC still managed to produce model legislation, a constitutional analysis, a technical whitepaper, FAQs, a dedicated website (ageverificationpolicy.org), Virginia General Assembly testimony, and co-sponsorship of California AB-1043. All in 2024-2025. Their largest expense category: "Other professional fees" at $952K. That money paid for the DAAA policy work. No external grants anywhere in the filings. No Schedule I filed in any year. The only outgoing money goes to ICMEC's own Singapore subsidiary ($170-206K/year). ICMEC Australia Ltd holds $13.9M in assets. The parent holds $1.05M. ICMEC loaned $868K to the Australian subsidiary in 2023. The filings do not explain why the subsidiary has 13x the parent's assets. Sources: ProPublica Nonprofit Explorer (990 XML object IDs: 202513219349317586, 202433209349302068, 202303179349304730), ICMEC supporters page, ageverificationpolicy.org

Lithauania tree of the year 2025 https://vstt.lrv.lt/en/news/the-2026-european-tree-of-the-year-competition-B9U/