Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

bbc.co.uk

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–200 of 304 posts

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#191

Post by scarecrowbob »

rayiner wrote: post #120
daveoc64 wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>Besides, why would you want to come if you don’t like it here? There's a difference between saying that you disagree with the way that a country is being run, and wanting to be violent or pursue criminal activity against that country or its people. What you're missing is that the former should be legal in any democracy (and is in the UK), and the latter shouldn't be legal anywhere (and isn't in the UK). You're claim…

> You're claiming the UK lacks "freedom of speech" because it doesn't allow people to incite violence online, while saying the USA has free speech, despite it seemingly rejecting visitors for legal political speech. Free speech means the country must tolerate what citizens say; it does not mean the country can't exercise its discretion over its borders to bar entry to foreigners who say things citizens don't like.

Is it not chilling if government can proscribe the things that you say for other people, as if your position is one the government can directly oppose and call illegitimate?

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#192

Post by TimorousBestie »

bananalychee wrote: post #102
a-saleh wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

On one hand, you are clearly exaggerating. On the other hand, the actual conversations I hear my friends having about business-trips to US are more stressed than conversation my dad used to have with my mom when he was traveling to do business for banks in India, Pakistan or Russia decade or two ago.

I suspect that much of the hysteria surrounding the tightening of border controls is a result of selective reporting. We weren't bombarded with articles about people being sent to secondary inspection or denied entry prior to this year. I travel internationally a fair bit and was also nervous traveling into the US this year, but having gone through multiple times now, I haven't seen any change in the process aside fr…

> I suspect that much of the hysteria surrounding the tightening of border controls is a result of selective reporting.

A >0.01% chance of being indefinitely detained and eventually deported/expelled is actually a risk that people are rational to consider when traveling to the US. Low probability * extremely high penalty = medium risk.

The fact that <99.99% of travel is routine does not change that calculation.

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#193

Post by TimorousBestie »

rayiner wrote: post #60
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No no, spend three months in an untraceable maze of ICE holding facilities, then to jail, then deported to a 'shithole' country that you didn't come from in the first place.

You only get deported to a third country if you refuse to be deported to your home country.

The information you would need to be able to state this categorically is not publicly available.

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#195

Post by mvdtnz »

throw310822 wrote: post #188
JKCalhoun wrote: post #4

"Officers were instructed to screen for those "who advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to national security; or who perpetrate unlawful anti-Semitic harassment or violence"." Okay, that's your job then. It's not mine or anyone else's job to just hand everything over.

> perpetrate unlawful anti-Semitic harassment Interesting that threats to national security and "antisemitism" are put on an equal footing and clearly above everything else; also makes me wonder what is "unlawful antisemitic harassment"- the US considers every speech lawful as far as I understand. Or, if some speech is indeed unlawful, is it going to matter only if that speech is against Jews or Israel?

[flagged]

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#196

Post by mvdtnz »

saxenaabhi wrote: post #29
mothballed wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure but they'll make your day extremely unpleasant before deporting you or if a USC letting you in. A few things that's happened to me as a citizen after invoking right to remain silent to CBP 1) Told I could not enter the country. Held up for 3-24 hours in holding areas. Officials come in and claim they will revoke my passport under "national security"-esque grounds. Lots of bluffing and huffing and puffing. Diesel…

Wait what did I just read? This sounds horrible and pure evil and not worthy of america. My sympathies are with you!

What do you mean "not worthy of America"? It is America.

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#197

Post by belter »

netfortius wrote: post #136
BLKNSLVR wrote: post #41

What of those who have virtually no footprint? Almost the only thing I have is LinkedIn, which is always only as up to date as the last time I changed jobs, which I don't do often. No Facebook, insta, snap, twitter, tiktok. I subscribe to maybe five channels on YouTube. My HN account isn't linked to my main 'identity' email address so I could hide it just by having a clean phone (which I do for international travel a…

Wouldn't an HN account need to be mentioned, once this platform is made visible enough, so that the bozos in charge, in the US, take it seriously? A social media ICE would love to dig into such.

If you have advocated for Linux you must be a communist....

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#198

Post by estearum »

throw310822 wrote: post #189
estearum wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Precisely speaking, they're looking to catch any critique of Israel because it'll provide a broad dragnet that will exclude a lot of Muslims and libs. (I'm not just saying this to be inflammatory. We already know the administration has been going after legal immigrants on the basis of criticisms of Israel. This is a completely reasonable connection to this social media policy.)

And why would they exclude muslim and liberal tourists ? The reason they are creating all sort of censorship and unconstitutional rules to prevent criticism of Israel is, surprise!, to benefit Israel . It's otherwise incredible how Israel happens to be always the lucky recipient of all sorts of benefits and favours that are all intended for some other purpose. Come on.

> And why would they exclude muslim and liberal tourists?

What? Because MAGA hates Muslims and libs, that's why. What's confusing about that?

Yes a lot of the policies are designed to benefit Israel, however that's completely distinct from being designed to benefit Jews. The administration doesn't care about ant-semitism on its own merits, but it does care about protecting Israel.

Do some reading on the theological love affair between American evangelicals and Israel to understand the distinction more clearly. The short version is that evangelicals need Israel to be controlled by Jews in order for their end-world prophecies to come true. Said prophecy includes all the Jews being left here on earth post-rapture to face 7 years of horror.

Yes, people do literally believe this and yes, it is a significant force in American politics.

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#199

Post by k_roy »

lawn wrote: post #14

> who advocate for, aid, or support designated foreign terrorists and other threats to national security; or who perpetrate unlawful anti-Semitic harassment or violence The regime will simple classify pro-LBQT, anti-MAGA, and anti-Trump comments as "threats to national security" or as supporting terrorism. Also funny how anti-Semitic harassment is emphasized, while other forms such as anti-black or anti-Latino harass…

> The regime will simple classify pro-LBQT, anti-MAGA, and anti-Trump comments as "threats to national security" or as supporting terrorism.

Did they not already?

Antifa, which doesn't exist as a formal organization, literally means "anti-fascism" and is now a terrorist organization. Of course these are the same people who want to arrest people for treason when they said "You do not have to follow illegal orders"

It's just mental gymnastics of Olympic-level proportions.

Re: US could ask foreign tourists for five-year social media history before entry

#200

Post by throw310822 »

mvdtnz wrote: post #195
throw310822 wrote: post #188

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> perpetrate unlawful anti-Semitic harassment Interesting that threats to national security and "antisemitism" are put on an equal footing and clearly above everything else; also makes me wonder what is "unlawful antisemitic harassment"- the US considers every speech lawful as far as I understand. Or, if some speech is indeed unlawful, is it going to matter only if that speech is against Jews or Israel?

[flagged]

It's fair to be very loud (and even very disruptive, although that hardly applies to this case) when protesting against a genocide. That's what democracy is for, sorry that it hurts the feelings of the supporters of a country whose prime minister is wanted for crimes against humanity.
Post reply on HN