Slashdot Mirror
The US Border Patrol Is Checking Detainees' Facebook Profiles (cnet.com)
An anonymous reader quotes CNET:
Border patrol agents are checking the Facebook accounts of people who are being held in limbo for approval to enter the U.S., according to a Saturday tweet by immigration lawyer Mana Yegani that was spotted by The Independent... Yegani, who is a member of the American Immigration Lawyers Association, told CNET that checking phones has been reported by other lawyers as part of the vetting process. "[G]oing through passengers phones from the seven banned countries happens when the individual is interrogated (put under extreme vetting)," Yegani said.
Yegani told The Independent that she and other lawyers have been fielding calls from people who are already cleared to live in America, but are getting stuck at the border regardless. "These are people that are coming in legally. They have jobs here and they have vehicles here," Yegani said in the report.
The EFF warns that "Fourth Amendment protection is not as strong at the border as it is in your home or office. This means that law enforcement can inspect your computer or electronic equipment, even if they have no reason to suspect there is anything illegal on it. An international airport, even if many miles from the actual border, is considered the functional equivalent of a border."
Yegani told The Independent that she and other lawyers have been fielding calls from people who are already cleared to live in America, but are getting stuck at the border regardless. "These are people that are coming in legally. They have jobs here and they have vehicles here," Yegani said in the report.
The EFF warns that "Fourth Amendment protection is not as strong at the border as it is in your home or office. This means that law enforcement can inspect your computer or electronic equipment, even if they have no reason to suspect there is anything illegal on it. An international airport, even if many miles from the actual border, is considered the functional equivalent of a border."
As if I needed more reason not to share my personal life with the world (and TSA)
Are the agents also permitted to provide alternative facts when they don't find what they are looking for under this administration?
Trump is doing exactly what he said he would. He promised this during the campaign. Many on the right said there was hope Trump would do the right thing and, despite criticizing him, cast their votes for him. Trump is keeping his campaign promises and doing so with rapid pace. Many Republicans in Congress sharply criticized him, but most have fallen in line. Even McCain, Graham, and Sasse (who's criticism was incredibly weak) have yet to do anything substantive. Trump gets to appoint a Supreme Court Justice to support his executive actions because last Congress' Senate didn't do their jobs. This is what the far right wanted and they've justified it with alternative facts, which is a euphemism for outright lies and fake news. So many on the right said Trump didn't support their values. So many Christians said Trump's positions were contrary to their beliefs. They voted for him because he called himself a Republican and claimed to be pro-life. So many religious leaders backed Trump on the principles of the GOP platform, but now aren't happy that he kept his promises. Meanwhile, much of the far right continues to live in their own alternate reality with alternative facts and fake news. And this is how tyranny escalates. Trump told all of you he was a tyrant, but too many of you ignored him. And now he has four years (because the Senate will likely stay under Republican control after the 2018 election) to do as much damage as he can, with a handpicked Supreme Court Justice to help prevent his policies from being struck down as unconstitutional.
Cynic in me says they are looking for someone who can be implicated as a terrorist supporter to be used to justify the ban.
Sig ?
The Visa Waiver Program was improved in 2015.
"Nationals of VWP countries who have traveled to or been present in Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, or Yemen on or after March 1, 2011 (with limited exceptions for travel for diplomatic or military purposes in the service of a VWP country)."
Just because it has been ignored by our previous administration, doesn't make entry lawful. It's far past time for enforcement agencies to follow legal mandates. Right or wrong, law is legislated. Instructing agencies not to follow laws created by legislature by defunding or other political means circumvents mandates created by legislature.
We are a democracy. If the law doesn't fit what the majority of the citizens want, change it. Effecting change without legislature is just wrong.
09 F9 11 02 9D 74 E3 5B - D8 41 56 C5 63 56 88 C0 45 5F E1 04 22 CA 29 C4 93 3F 95 05 2B 79 2A B2
Aliens of any type have NEARLY ZERO rights at the border. Consular nonreviewability https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... US Citizens have a reduced set of rights. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
Apparently we've forgotten the folks (San Bernardino, etc) who had "clear evidence of ISIS sympathies" on their Facebook profiles and other public social media that we then asked why hadn't been caught when they were entering the country.
As the SCOTUS has repeatedly stated, aliens have no Right of Entry to the US, and non-citizens have reduced guarantees (and certainly reduced privileges). Even a US citizen may be searched on entry if anything unusual is suspected, and is legally obligated to declare possessions in a way that basically happens nowhere else domestically (except agricultural goods going into California).
This is a Good Thing. How is this not a Good Thing? That's what customs/border inspection is supposed to be doing.
Hire a Linux system administrator, systems engineer,
While checking their phones is disturbing, facebook is public folks. That shits posted straight there and it sure as hell isn't the posters anymore when it hits faceboooks servers.
We can whine all we want about lack of privacy, but not after willingly abdicating it...
Facebook is evil for many reasons, this is one...
I do like that Slashdot chose a story with a tech angle to cover this event, instead of just throwing the first piece of red meat that came along. Also, posting about it the day after it happened gives time to get the facts right, instead of the first tweet that is inevitably wrong.
"First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
You have a reading comprehension problem if that's all you saw in the above comment.
Giving you the benefit of the doubt, I think you're just being disingenuous, though.
I know people have been asked to volunteer Facebook and other social network information upon entry into the US, this has been the case for at least 2 if not 4 years and started under the Obama administration. Even Twitter held back their outrage about the DHS using their information for border controls until AFTER it was clear that Trump had won but even that story is now several months old.
All these 'new things' including the stopping of people at the border from certain nations has been done and legislated under the Obama administration, to quote another user here on Slashdot when Obama seized public lands from use by Indians and other members of the public: "Obama is just implementing what was legislated before, these orders are just telling particular agencies how they should implement the legislation".
Well, at least now you know why such laws should never be allowed, most of you here on Slashdot didn't care or realize the gravity of the issues when Obama, Bush or Clinton signed off on these exact laws. Next up: how Trump uses the DMCA, Patriot Act, NAFTA, TPP etc. to do whatever the fuck he wants - and you (the American public) gave it to them because you either didn't feel safe, didn't care or didn't believe that someone could rise up that would abuse those legislations. Too late now.
Custom electronics and digital signage for your business: www.evcircuits.com
When you try and enter another nation and your not a citizen a nation can ask a lot of and any background questions it wants.
The good news is biometrics will remove a lot of the past issues with people moving around with papers that are shared, limited, lost or fake.
Some people enter a third nation and have been granted total new legal travel documents in a third nation with no vetting.
Other nations sell citizenship with few questions asked.
As for social media, a nation can ask for that during an interview. Entering any nation can see a lot of questions, searches, work details and even digital data requests.
Some nations ask for bank details to see if a person can even afford to support their stay, if they have been a criminal, health questions. At entry into another nation that is all fine and normal practice globally.
The other great aspect about the social media question is the deception aspect.
If a person shows their social media and is in support of groups banned in the USA that can be discovered and entry revoked.
If a person hides their social media accounts when asked directly on entry to the USA and such accounts are then found later, that can revoke documents.
The very aspect of hiding such details when asked is a great way to cancel papers.
Thats why the USA had that list of very classic questions surrounding a persons role in persecution, wars, party membership.
If a person tries to hide some of their social media accounts and its later discovered they did not tell the truth, entry can be revoked.
Any social media questions on entry to the USA are just a natural extension of this policy to find if a person has links to groups or individuals of interest to the USA and then tries to hide such connections.
Other nations will ask for all and any passwords and then read/search emails, social media during an interview on entry.
A green card, other issued travel documents or citizenship is not some diplomatic immunity like protection from questions, searches or now social media requests.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Cynic in me says they are looking for someone who can be implicated as a terrorist supporter to be used to justify the ban.
Funny thing about that...
Trumps actual order has an exception for immigrants who are already in transit, viz section (e): "[...] when the person is already in transit and denying admission would cause undue hardship -- and it would not pose a risk to the security or welfare of the United States."
So holding people up at US airports just some ICE pricks trying to make a false narrative to paint Trump in a bad light.
And other than Syria, which was specifically referenced in the order, Trump is using Obama's list of Muslim countries, viz: "Obama restricted visa waivers for those seven Muslim-majority countries — Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen — and now, Trump is looking to bar immigration and visitors from the same list of countries."
So this is just lefties not caring about the actual issue. When they do it it's OK, but thay have to paint Trump in a bad light when he does it.
(Speaking of which, has Hillary been seen in a black church or black community since November? Or was that just an election thing?)
Also, Obama banned Iraq refugees for 6 months and we didn't hear a peep out of the lefties. Once again, they don't care about the issue, only which side does it.
And no, he didn't ban Muslim immigration. Muslims from Turkey and Saudi Arabia (for example) are not affected by this.
There's a fuckton of people on social media who are actually in favor of this, and who see this as a temporary measure intended to create common-sense rules intended to keep us safe. People are also noting that this was one of his campaign promises, and it's both surprising and refreshing to see someone actually keeping those promises.
You guys have 6 1/2 years to groom a replacement, and you'd better get started real soon now. Your campaign strategy of being the "lesser of two evils" won't work the next time around.
If Jared Kushner or Donald Jr. decides to run for president, the current of actually kept promises will be almost impossible to swim against.
If this is the "standard operating procedure for everyone" why in my 50+ trips across the borders of Canada, Australia and the United States have I never had my texts, emails or social media examined? In fact I've never had that experience at the border of any country.
"Think of it less as a Muslim ban, and more as an American invitation. If you support America and will put America first, you will be welcome."
Empty words, unless one clearly defines them.
Avantgarde Hebrew science fiction
That says more about you and people you call friends than about the situation in Germany.
Matter of fact, the most vocal opponents of Syrian refugees are people from East German villages, the ones with a profound lack of foreigners. I bet your friend has never seen a refugee in first place, but is scared just in case. This attitude is, unfortunately, pretty typical for East Germans. I know - I used to live there, but moved to West Germany in the 1990ies.
"It's such a fine line between stupid and clever" -- David St. Hubbins, Spinal Tap
Parallel construction :
You're grey hat hacker.
You burst into the mail of someone who happens to be a criminal and who plans to rob a bank.
You would like to have the police know it (so they can prevent the robbing),
but you cannot admit that you got the information by hacking into mail servers (that would be illegal, give you trouble, and not necessarily be receivable as proof).
So instead you manage to invent a different reason for the police to "happen to be there by chance" (ask a friend working at the police if they couldn't make a pause with their coworker to come into the bank to retreive money. Or make a false alarm go off somewhere that will cause the police to arrive, etc.)
The basic fact is exactly the same (the criminal XyZ want to rob a bank).
You keep the truth, you just try to hide how you got it and try to invent another way by which this truth can be discovered.
It looks as if method B uncovered the truth (by chance, etc.) whereas in fact it was method A, and method B was setup purposefully knowing that it will also be able to uncover the truth that you knew already in advance.
But the basic information is truth.
In short : Parallel construction is "hide the actual source of the info, come up with a believable way for the info to be discovered elsewhere 'by chance', but the info is legit".
Alternative fact :
You're a politician, A. You don't like politician B.
So you start spreading rumours that politician B is actually a former criminal who got caught while trying to rob a bank.
Newspaper might be doubting your information. So they start digging into record and discover... that politician B never caught for a bank robbery or anything else, and in fact has never been discovered to be a criminal at all.
When they come back to you trying to get you admit that you lied,
you answer that your informations are simply "alternative facts". That you were "having the impression that politician B could have been a criminal" and that impressions aren't objective but personal, you're entitled to have your own impression and the journalist can't come criticising you for your impressions because these are hard to judge objectively and it's hard to give a definitive answer that politician B has never been and will never be a criminal.
The basic information (politician B == bank robber) is complete bullshit, but you come up with a weird reasoning of why the things you said can be considered as facts, and why those facts differ from that fact that other people pretend can be objectively judged.
In short : It's insane troll logic trying to justify why you want your lies to be believed as facts.
"Sufficiently advanced satire is indistinguishable from reality." - [Tips: 1DrYakQDKCQ6y52z6QbnkxHXAocMZJE61o ]