Pretty much anything, it turns out, can be framed as a one-on-one, zero-sum game.

But not necessarily sensibly. Framing anything which isn't zero-sum as a zero-sum game leads to suboptimal decisions. Framing one-on-one-on-one-on-one games as six simultaneous one-on-one games violates the assumption of independence.

So countries which leave the EU are going to amend their current constitutions to remove freedom of religion? Why would they do that?

Destroyed generations, seriously? What a drama queen you must be.

This is why we need to pass a SIMPLE amendment:
We, the Citizens of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, shall have the right to amend the constitution directly, by having a simple majority of voters of three fourths of the states OR two thirds of voters in two thirds of the states, within a 10 year period of the first state passing the amendment.

A simple amendment like that would allow us to fix a large number of issues that CONgress will not do. Why will they not do it? Because they are controlled by 2 horribly corrupt parties that are controlled by rich ppl, businesses, and even foreign governments. We need to take back our government.

????
WTF does your second url have to do with ANY of this? 2 criminals were illegally stopped, but not due to any information from above.

Fusion centers? Are you talking about information moving from local LEOs up to the FBI and DNI??
Personally, I would prefer that information to go to DNI et. al, and not FBI, but that is for judges to decide. Even if the information flows downwards, I am good with that, AS LONG as it was legally obtained and is applicable to the situation. For example, NSA did NOT tap into to Trump's calls. OTOH, they DO tap various Russian calls, of which obviously a number of trump calls BEFORE he made president was done (this is why NSA objected to giving him, his family, and certain members of his admin access to intel, but esp. to Russian intel). If NSA had learned that Trump was getting marching orders from putin to sell fentanyl on the street, that should not be allowed to be sent down. Why not? Because this is not about terrorism/spying, it is about a criminal charge, which is where NSA is NOT concerned. However, I do not know if such information IS flowing downwards. I would hope not.

So, you do not think that NSA, DIA, etc should have the ability to know as much about Americans as China and Russia legally do?
Why is that? If you had paid attention to Snowden the ILLEGAL spying that was going on, was NOT from NSA iteself, but from individuals in there using gear that was only meant to go after terrorists, spies, etc. but instead using it on their own families/friends.

And there is a lot less sharing of information in the 5Is than you realize. To ask one of the others means that you generally have to show some sort of reason for it. Not a warrant, but certainly not the wild sharing that you seem to think is going on.

Israel's business is far more profitable than having your head cut off by Hamas for the crime of usury.

As long as other nations can purchase this, then NSA, CIA and our general intelligence community should be able to access that without a warrant.
Now, as far requiring it for DoJ/FBI/local police/etc... GREAT.

The first two points seem dubious to me, but the third one seems insane. I may be misinterpreting again, but are you seriously saying that you think that the EU will declare itself a nation-state, abrogate the constitutions of all of its current member states, and introduce a state religion which somehow satisfies the respectively Catholic, Protestant, and fiercely secular inclinations of all of them? You also seem to be fundamentally misinformed about the current situation. Of the four largest countries in the EU, one has secularism enshrined in its constitution, two recognise a special relationship with the Catholic church but explicitly say that it's not the state religion, and the fourth has freedom of religion. The UK was an outlier.

In many European kingdoms, only the royally observed church, depending on the state, that could be the Catholic or Anglican or Protestant (although in the recent history, others can apply for delegated privilege as well) has authority to commit a couple to marriage which will then be recognized by the state in lieu of a civil procedure.

"Many"? There are seven kingdoms in Europe. In Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands no church wedding is legally binding. In Denmark it seems that any registered church can conduct legally binding weddings. In the UK the Anglican church has special privileges: ministers of other denominations used to train as sub-registrars to be allowed to essentially include a civil wedding in their religious weddings, but IIRC that began to be restricted a decade or two ago. Norway and Sweden are the other two, and while their "royally observed" churches can conduct legal weddings it's not clear to me whether they have a monopoly. So it's somewhere between 1/7 and 3/7, which seems a bit few to qualify as "many".

They are NOT using AI to go after wealthy payers. They are using AI to figure out who to look which has a high probability to cheating the system. The fact that they are wealthy has NOTHING to do with it.

I find it interesting that the woke are the ones that scream about words having meaning/power, but then turn right around and screw with things like this BS.
I say go after these a55holes that are trying to hide paying their taxes.
But even better would be to re-write our taxes so that they are fair and near impossible for someone to cheat at.

First off, I said, bad title:

No Consent or ppl in that.

Secondly, adding "without consent" does not mean that it is a particular person's image, but could still require consent by someone else to create a totally fake one (which would be horrible, yet, governments do such BS).

The default result? Dude, in what century are you living?

It is images of OTTHER PEOPLE, not just images.

That is pretty much what JPL did.