[DoingIsLearning]

This is (mostly) about Tech companies' money, namely:

- Palantir Technologies

- 'not-for-profit' Thorn

> The Commission’s failure to identify the list of experts as falling within the scope of the complainant’s public access request constitutes maladministration. [0]

> ... the complainant contended that the precision rate of technologies like those developed by the organisation are often overestimated. It is therefore essential that any technical claims made by the organisation concerned are made public as this would facilitate the critical assessment of the proposal. [1]

> The Commission presented a proposal on preventing and combating child sexual abuse, looking in particular at detecting child pornography. In this context, it has mentioned that support could be provided by the software of the controversial American company Palantir... [2]

> Is Palantir’s failure to register on the Transparency Register compatible with the Commission’s transparency commitments? [2]

(Palantir only entered the Transparency Registry in March 2025 despite being a multi million vendor for Europol and European Agencies for more than a decade)

> No detailed records exist concerning a January meeting between European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen and the CEO of controversial US data analytics firm Palantir [3]

> Kutcher and CEO Julie Cordua held several meetings with EU officials from 2020 to 2023 - before the former stepped down from his role - including European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen, Home Affairs Commissioner Ylva Johansson, and European Parliament President Roberta Metsola.[4]

> The Ombudsman further concluded that Thorn had indeed influenced the legislative process of the CSAM regulation. “It is clear, for example, from the Commission’s impact assessment that the input provided by Thorn significantly informed the Commission’s decision-making. The public interest in disclosure is thus self-evident. [4]

> EU Ombudsman Emily O’Reilly has announced that she has opened an investigation into the transfer of two former Europol officials to the chat control surveillance tech provider Thorn. [5]

[0] https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/decision/en/176658

[1] https://www.ombudsman.europa.eu/en/recommendation/en/179395

[2] https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/E-9-2024-00016...

[3] https://www.euractiv.com/news/commission-kept-no-records-on-...

[4] https://www.euronews.com/next/2024/07/18/european-ombudsman-...

[5] https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/chat-control-eu-ombudsman-l...

[varispeed]

and if people point out EU is completely corrupt and we have complete breakdown of any agencies that should keep it under control, they get downvoted.

EU turns into fascist (policies controlled by corporations) quasi state before our eyes.

If you are working for any crime agency, put away biscuits and move your lazy arse to work!

[DoingIsLearning]

No, I strongly disagree.

The EU is by far one of the least corrupt and most transparent organizations in European History, by design and by process.

The fact that I am able to produce all those reference documents in the previous comment is substantial evidence of this.

The issue here is the European Comission. Both in the appointment of Commissioners as well as in the checks and balances against the Comissioners and President of the EC.

To be anti-EU is throwing the baby with the bathwater and more seriously plays into the hands of every geopolitical player around us.