Trump wants to require US visa applicants to disclose 5 years of social media hi

Remember McVeigh?

It turns out that he was part of, or associated with, a web of right-wing terrorists. And maybe this should be acknowledged better - the FBI successfully infiltrated this web and erradicated that particular threat.

Not using mass surveillance. Nobody was prying open every letter sent by every person. They didn't want to catch one particular bozo. They infiltrated and turned people and built up solid cases against people. Work and intelligence.

As far as I have read not a single undocumented immigrant was flagged by some data/mail sweep, or anyone detained because the tag on their boat trailer was out of date. The point was to shut a particular threat down. Which they did.

The leading edge of modern intelligence is big data. The street work isn’t replaced by a machine, it’s enabled by it. A lot of that street work too is tech based.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So I had to think about what I wanted to say on this, because I know we have some highly Conservative members who seem to think if you want to visit a country you give up all civil liberties and right to privacy. However, within your personal social media history is also content and conversations from people who are not traveling, and have not consented to such a search. That is my biggest issue with this. They don't need this data, it isn't going to give them anything useful, beyond potentially using it in a Cambridge analytica style targeted misinformation campaign. I do not trust the government to keep that data private, nor do I trust that they have peoples security or best interests in mind.

I do not trust the government to keep that data private, nor do I trust that they have peoples security or best interests in mind.

Hands up all those that didn't request that their NHS medical history was going on a national database. You had to ask to for a form to be opted out.

Hands up all those that didn't request that their NHS medical history was going on a national database. You had to ask to for a form to be opted out.

Yuck. I could understand centralised EMR systems but those have multiple layers of security. As someone with a complex history I would be ok with a database but only because it would make sure when I'm anywhere in the country they have access to my records. Unfortunately that's not how it works here!

Yuck. I could understand centralised EMR systems but those have multiple layers of security. As someone with a complex history I would be ok with a database but only because it would make sure when I'm anywhere in the country they have access to my records. Unfortunately that's not how it works here!

I'm not sure if it will be possible for immigrants to opt of going on the NHS SPINE system anyway, because UKVI has access to part of that system and uses SPINE to feed information to the NHS staff on who can use the NHS bill free and who must now be billed e.g. if their BRP is no longer valid.

UKVI can also request information from the NHS when the exit checks show that people haven't left the UK, so that UKVI can detain them.

It's amazing how many people are precious over their "the UK must not stamp my passport becasue I am an EEA citizen/using an EEA citizen to be in the UK", who then find that their SAR report shows that the UK knows every time they used a UK port.

Um. Yes. A country can do whatever it deems necessary to ensure those coming in aren't a threat.

It's great that you keep posting this even though it means absolutely nothing.  Really?  A country can do whatever it wants?  How about tattooing a boarding card on someone's forehead?  Chopping off a hand? 
Since we are talking about the US, can we just acknowledge that they can't actually do whatever they want?  Like our Texan Lawyer has pointed out, the rules are different at the border, but it's not a free for all.  There are still rules.   Ask Trump, who found this out the hard way. 

Perhaps you could change your post to read "In my fantasy where we are really tough with those awful foreigners my country can do whatever it wants...."

It's great that you keep posting this even though it means absolutely nothing.  Really?  A country can do whatever it wants?  How about tattooing a boarding card on someone's forehead?  Chopping off a hand? 

Lol, way to take something to a ridiculous extreme to try to prove a flawed argument. A country can refuse entry to anyone for any reason, and it's perfectly within their rights to do so. You can try to argue that if you want, and activist judges can try their best to thwart national security, but you'd be equally wrong.

Terrorists communicate online via websites and social media - if the government of a country has the means to access that information and flag security risks, it's their obligation to follow up on that Intel.

It's like those that tried to argue that the TSA was a violation of the 4th amendment protection against illegal search & seizure. The reason they lost that argument is you don't HAVE to fly. If you don't want to submit yourself to x-ray machines and pat downs, drive instead. Walk. Take a train. Hitchhike. Whatever. But if you want to fly, you will go through TSA and you will be subject to inspection.

Equally so, if this were to pass and become the rules, people don't HAVE to enter the US and be subjected to it. They can go somewhere else for vacation or to live.

And on a side note, earlier someone was talking about a change like this not having any support or something along those lines. There was an election in 2016 and overwhelmingly the American people nominated the candidate who spoke out about the need for radical change to the broken immigration system. President Trump made it VERY clear what he wanted to do with extreme vetting, and social media history is just a part of it. Simple as.

Sent from my VS986 using Tapatalk

There was an election in 2016 and overwhelmingly the American people nominated the candidate who spoke out about the need for radical change to the broken immigration system. President Trump made it VERY clear what he wanted to do with extreme vetting, and social media history is just a part of it. Simple as.

Overwhelmingly? Really?

Is he the one trying to build the wall you can prop a stepladder up against and hop down the other side? That doesn't sound radical. People have been hopping over walls forever.

Will it stop drugs?



12th century tech.

Will it stop drugs?



12th century tech.

I love this.

And don't forget about old fashioned tunnels.

A country can refuse entry to anyone for any reason, and it's perfectly within their rights to do so.

I see, now we are talking about refusing entry.  Bit of a change from being able to do ANYTHING.  Cause we are MERICA. 

Have you ever wondered why Trump's ban on Muslim's isn't in force today?  After all, a country should be able to ban anyone for any reason according to you.  Trump has control of all three branches of the government, should be a simple enough matter to ban all Muslims as Trump promised. 

Can you explain to me why this hasn't happened yet?

I've got a clue for you, the answer is the thing that actually does make America great, despite Trump's best efforts.  Come on, you can do it....

Also, can you please give me some details about this overwhelming victory?  I must have missed that.   

There was an election in 2016 and overwhelmingly the American people nominated the candidate who spoke out about the need for radical change to the broken immigration system.

Ummm...?!?!???  You do know that he lost the popular vote by nearly 3 MILLION votes, don't you?

And just for fun, I've attached my FAVOURITE Trump tweet by a mile.   

Did I kill the thread?  No comments on Trumps tweet?   

Did I kill the thread?  No comments on Trumps tweet?   

You should know better than to show facts to Trump supporters... it makes their heads explode.

Did I kill the thread?  No comments on Trumps tweet?   

Trump said all that needed to be said in his tweet.