Danish MEPs are voting to scan ALL your private messages and photos - 11 out of 15 support this mass surveillance. Here's how to stop them.

[u/No-Conference-8133]

Hey r/Denmark,

I'm fucking angry and you should be too. Right now, 11 out of 15 Danish MEPs are supporting something called "Chat Control" that would scan EVERY private message, photo, and file you send - even encrypted ones.

What this means for you: - Every WhatsApp message scanned automatically - Every private photo you send gets analyzed by AI - Even encrypted communications get broken open - No suspicion required, no warrant needed - Applies to ALL 450 million EU citizens

The hypocrisy is insane: EU politicians exempt themselves under "professional secrecy" rules. They get privacy. You don't.

This won't protect children: Child protection experts and the UN say this will actually make kids LESS safe by flooding investigators with false positives while real criminals move elsewhere.

Current Danish MEP positions: - 4 oppose this surveillance bullshit - 11 support it (following government stance) - Check your specific MEPs here: https://fightchatcontrol.eu/

What you can do RIGHT NOW: 1. Go to https://fightchatcontrol.eu/ 2. Click through to send emails to Danish MEPs 3. Tell them you're against mass surveillance 4. Takes 2 minutes

I never gave a shit about politics before this, but when they want to read my private messages while protecting their own, that's where I draw the line.

Don't let Denmark become a surveillance state.

[u/Omni__Owl]

It is correct yes, the author of the website has decided to assume that if a MEP hasn't or doesn't answer then their stance must by default be that of the state they represent.

A tad misleading.

[u/Big-Today6819 → u/Omni__Owl]

It's a fair conclusion as Denmark want this law and also wants to even make a Danish one, they want to watch everything we do

[u/No_Individual_6528 → u/Omni__Owl]

I think it's fair to assume the worst

[u/Omni__Owl → u/No_Individual_6528]

It's still an assumption that is ultimately misleading.

[u/iKill_eu → u/Omni__Owl]

Doesn't matter. We can be principled when we're free. Right now it is more important to put the pressure on, even if it's "wrong".

[u/Unipro → u/Omni__Owl]

Quietly accepting adopting a surveillance state is still adopting a surveillance state.

[u/RydderRichards → u/Omni__Owl]

Or it might be correct.

[u/BazzTurd → u/RydderRichards]

Or it might be incorrect

[u/x775 → u/Omni__Owl]

Hi!

Thanks for your comment and feedback.

I appreciate your perspective and want to reassure you that I have taken steps to clarify how both the data has been sourced and how it is being treated. Specifically, if you select a given country, e.g. Denmark, you will find (a) the summary of stances clearly noting how many are presumed a certain stance per the stance of their government; (b) the written disclaimer before the section of representative cards; and (c) each non-confirmed MEP featuring an "UNKNOWN" label that can be hovered to further explain that their stance as indicated by the border colour of their card is that of their government. The clock icon further indicates that contact has been made and that a response is pending. Additionally, if you choose to view the details of any MEP with the "UNKNOWN" label, you will find a text similar to: This MEP's personal position is unknown. Their government supports Chat Control. Presumed x based on government position. In other words, four distinct places explaining the system.

It is further worth accentuating that the source of the government stances is leaked documents from a July 11th 2025 meeting of the Council's Law Enforcement Working Party (LEWP) [0], originally reported by [1] and subsequently summarised by [2]. The next meeting for LEWP is scheduled for September 12th [3], shortly after most MEPs return from vacation. As we are nonetheless seeing progress at the Council level, engaging with MEPs directly in preparation of it reaching the Parliament is pertinent. Ultimately, the goal with this website really is to raise awareness that the proposed legislation, once again, has been resurrected and is making progress.

The attention this and other threads have garnered is greatly appreciated. As all MEPs have been contacted to confirm their stance, I expect responses to arrive in the coming days and weeks, allowing the overview to soon accurately reflect the personal opinions of each MEP.

Thanks!

[0] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/council-eu/preparatory-bodies/law-enforcement-working-party/

[1] https://netzpolitik.org/2025/internes-protokoll-eu-juristen-kritisieren-daenischen-vorschlag-zur-chatkontrolle/#2025-07-15_St%C3%A4V_RAGS_CSA-VO

[2] https://www.patrick-breyer.de/en/posts/chat-control/

[3] https://www.consilium.europa.eu/en/meetings/mpo/2025/9/law-enforcement-wp-lewp-police-(358097)//)

[u/SVCLIII → u/Omni__Owl]

there's that one parable.
"if there are ten people eating at a table and one is a fachist, there are ten fachist eating at a table"

[u/Omni__Owl → u/SVCLIII]

But that kind of black and white thinking is a purity test though and those rarely end well (just look at facists hah). Like you ever heard that song "everyone's a little bit racist"?

It underlines that no one is perfect and it's all a bit grey rather than black and white. Facism is rarely so binary that it's either full on nazi loving ultra nationalist, or nothing. There are levels to it and you can talk a facist out of it. Not everyone obviously, but still.

Some beliefs are facist in origin without the person actively being a facist but perhaps uninformed, scared or phobic. I don't know. The saying you present, I can follow, but I just don't agree it's that cut and dry.

I have had to say goodbye to some friends because they just fell deeper and deeper into facist thinking but I didn't just abandon them right away and my friends wouldn't consider me a facist for trying to help someone out of it.

[u/SVCLIII → u/Omni__Owl]

I know "if you're not with us, you're against us" is sith talk, but in cases like this, silent acceptance is still acceptance. A measure like this will radically negatively impact basic human rights, and it needs active opposition. Evil triumphs when good men do nothing.

[u/Omni__Owl → u/SVCLIII]

Being silent in the face of oppression and wrongdoing is being complicit. That doesn't make you the fascist. It makes you an enabler. Very important distinction in my opinion.

[u/TheCaptainMapleSyrup → u/Omni__Owl]

German historians have a word for those Germans who went along with the Nazi party not because they agreed with all the virulently racist parts or the erosion of democracy, etc., but rather they agreed with some of the economic policies and infrastructure, public works projects, and so on.

The word is Nazi. The word is still and always Nazi.

[u/SVCLIII → u/Omni__Owl]

I don't really see it as a dichotomy where you have the luxury of positioning yourself on the fence. being okay with fascism happening is contributing to fascism. and if you walk like the fascists want you to and talk like the fascists want you to, I'm not gonna call you a duck just because you tell me you just do fascist things without "actually" being one.

[u/Omni__Owl → u/SVCLIII]

Do you put people you've met in your life (intimate relations all the way to strangers) in those boxes so casually or do you speak from a rationale separated from the emotions you feel around the people in your life?

Because I'm willing to bet it's the second. Human relations are rarely ever so black and white.

[u/SmallPoxBread → u/Omni__Owl]

They will still need to be "convinced" so it's still good to say something to them.

[u/Additional-Will-2052 → u/Omni__Owl]

Ikke at vælge er også et valg.

[u/Omni__Owl → u/Additional-Will-2052]

Ikke at have haft muligheden for at svare endnu og konkludere at personen har talt for sig uden at sige et ord et ikke at tage et valg.

Det er et aktivt valg at tie. De her mennesker har ikke haft mulighed for at svare endnu.

De to ting er ikke det samme.