Homeland Security’s Intelligence Overreach: Two Cases Illustrate Risks to Civil Society:
Two stories this week show how the Department of Homeland Security is deploying its intelligence apparatus against activists, journalists, and human rights lawyers. While this type of political surveillance rightly raises serious concerns, it is hardly surprising given the immense growth in DHS’s intelligence gathering programs during and since the Obama administration, and the lack of meaningful standards, safeguards, and oversight of their operation.
[...]NBC7 San Diego published a leaked copy of a set of slides titled “San Diego Sector Foreign Operations Branch: Migrant Caravan FY-2019, Suspected Organizers, Coordinators, Instigators and Media,” dated January 9, 2019. The document, which appears under a U.S.-Mexican seal, is essentially a surveillance target list with photographs of 59 people, 40 of whom are identified as U.S. citizens, all of whom seem to have some connection to migrant caravans heading from Central America to the United States. “Alerts” have been placed against the information of 43 people, including 28 Americans. DHS kept dossiers on the targets as well, including one that was shared with NBC 7 on[sic] Nicole Ramos, an attorney with a legal center for migrants and refugees in Tijuana, Mexico.
DHS claims it was tracking people who were in the vicinity of violence near the border in November 2018 and just wanted to talk to them as part of its investigation of those incidents. This justification rings hollow; it is much more plausible that the agency was tagging people based on their perceived involvement with the caravan, not as potential witnesses to any incident of violence.
[...]Far from the southern border, officers of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) division of DHS in New York City were also keeping tabs on protests. Documents obtained by The Nation via a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request included a spreadsheet of public protests, titled “Anti-Trump Protest Spreadsheet 07/31/2018.”
The document covered protests during the two-week period from July 31 to August 17, suggesting that such monitoring may be undertaken on a regular basis. It also showed the number of people who had signed up for the protests on Facebook, indicating that ICE was monitoring social media to follow political movements.
DHS claims it was monitoring leftist activists in New York to provide agents from ICE’s Homeland Security Investigations (HSI) unit with “situational awareness” information in case they were traveling through the city “on work or personal time.” Again, the title of the document gives away what is likely the agency’s true intent: the list is not about protests or demonstrations in general, it is focused on “anti-Trump” (and anti-ICE) political activity.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @01:32PM (12 children)
These are just the first dominos to fall. With governments and administrations that have enemies lists we are going to see much more of this type of thing, and much much worse.
When the press is reviled for reporting what government, military and police officials are doing we need to pay attention. If what is reported is true, then anyone trying to stop it or label the reporters as "enmities of the state" is endangering the 1st Amendment for all of us.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by DannyB on Friday March 15 2019, @02:17PM (4 children)
I agree that is true.
The problem is that about 1/2 the population is willing to turn a blind eye to it because . . . . Trump. MAGA. On Many Sides. Etc.
Which leads me to conclude that we have crossed the event horizon and that your first (unquoted) paragraph is absolutely true.
I'm just waiting to watch the train crash.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Friday March 15 2019, @05:23PM (3 children)
Or Obama, prior to 2016. I think the best thing about Trump is that his support is unusually thin for a president. Sure, he has hardcore supporters, but they're not half of US voters. We actually have a better chance than usual to reverse some of these abuses.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:23PM (1 child)
Reverse to what state? The state of abuse under Obama, Baby Bush, Clinton, Papa Bush, Reagan ...?
(Score: 2, Insightful) by khallow on Friday March 15 2019, @06:41PM
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday March 15 2019, @06:37PM
I could be biased. So I say that up front.
As I seem to recall, not so many people were in favor of the state abuses when it was Obama doing them. Or George W doing them.
With Trump, it is like a cult following. Just IMO. Don't dare criticize Trump. Trump can do absolutely no wrong.
Again, just IMO from my own POV and biases.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @03:03PM (1 child)
Many dominos indeed, for example the Integrity Initiative. It is likely you haven't heard about this yet, as intended.
Data was obtained by anonymous:
https://www.cyberguerrilla.org/blog/operation-integrity-initiative-british-informational-war-against-all-part-4/ [cyberguerrilla.org]
Good coverage on it:
http://syriapropagandamedia.org/working-papers/briefing-note-on-the-integrity-initiative [syriapropagandamedia.org]
another source:
https://www.ukcolumn.org/article/integrity-initiative-look-deep-state [ukcolumn.org]
Their own website:
https://www.integrityinitiative.net [integrityinitiative.net]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:06PM
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/jan/09/free-societies-russia-misinformation-integrity-initiative [theguardian.com]
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @03:58PM (2 children)
Good job for NBC to have published this, this is what journalists should be doing.
On the other hand, this is also what our state security services should be doing. Lest we forget, there is a great human tragedy that was unleashed by a group of (naive?) virtue signallers and social justice warriors. Thousands of people were enticed to leave their villages and travel through a foreign country, with the hope of breaking into a third where milk and honey supposedly flow. When adults (everywhere, btw.) see big money flash before their faces, they will do things like push their kids through the desert even if it comes at the cost of their lives. This is a humanitarian crime.
While the US has been steadfast against any thrusts by the caravan to overrun the border, the Mexicans are now suffering from these economic migrants right now amassed in Tijuana. Indeed, this operation was a joint effort by Mexico and the United States.
It is sensible for the governments to want to know whether the "journalists/photographers" are bona fide, or are part of the PR organization of "Pueblo sin fronteras" and whoever else are the "organizers/instigators".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @07:17PM (1 child)
anti trump protestors is one thing, but investigating who is organizing to bring in illegal immigrants is totally the fucking job of the DHS, assuming the dept. exists in the first place.
(Score: 2) by sjames on Saturday March 16 2019, @02:39AM
The problem with your narrative is that they are not now illegal, and since they intend to present themselves at a port of entry and request asylum, they do not intend to be illegal, that action is entirely legal according to treaties the U.S. signed of it's own free will.
(Score: 2) by DannyB on Friday March 15 2019, @06:38PM
Many dominos dies to bring us this news.
The lower I set my standards the more accomplishments I have.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Friday March 15 2019, @07:38PM
"I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic...." Our wonderful Oath of Allegiance. And that's something we've had since 1790. That's no typo, that's not a typo, I didn't mean 1970. I said, 1790. SINCE BEFORE WE HAD THE 1ST. AMMENDMENT!!!!!! Long time, very long time. And that one's not in our fantastic Constitution. It comes from our Naturalization Act of 1970. Passed by our VERY 1ST. Congress. And signed by our VERY 1ST. President. So long ago, when Andrew Jackson and so many of our Founding Fathers were still around. Still makeing some very special laws. Something that not many folks have heard about. If they became an American, they know. Because we asked them to swear to our Oath. And for a long time, if they didn't swear, they didn't get Citizenship. And, our brave Soldiers swear to that one too. Many people. The ones that are born American, our natural born Citizens, maybe don't know. Maybe, don't have to take it. Too bad. They don't know our very special history.
Our Founding Fathers knew. Because they were there -- making it. They made a lot of enemies. The Foreign. And, unfortunately, the Domestic. And we still have a lot -- too many to keep in your head, we have to write it down. And I don't know when the Enemies Lists started. But I didn't start them. And I don't think Senator McCarthy (RIP!!) started them. I know when my Kill List started. That one is an Obama number. Anomalous, did you tell Cheatin' Obama, "oh, I don't like Kill List -- Disposition Matrix, please cancel that one!" He didn't like calling it Kill List, I call it what it was. What it is. He put many people on that list. And killed, or locked up, so many of them. Foreigners. And Americans. Big success for Obama. And as everybody knows, that's my list now. And suddenly, it's a "bad" thing. According to the haters & loosers. Don't worry, I took many names off of that one. And put on many different names. I can put anybody I want on it. Including reporters. Including people in our government. And their families. I strongly believe we must go after the families. And that's something President Obama never said. And President Bush Jr. never said. But, they did it. Look up, wedding drones. So many articles in our Fake News Media about, they turned Weddings into Funerals. Sounds very funny, it is very funny. And our Fake News MSM had a great sense of humor about that one -- so unlike how they write about Donald J. Trump. But, it's no joke. It's what we needed. These were very foolish Presidents. But they weren't complete fools. They went after our Country's enemies. And, so am I, very strongly. As I promised. And I'm very fortunate to have some very tough folks helping with that one. MAGA!!!
(Score: 0, Interesting) by realDonaldTrump on Friday March 15 2019, @02:06PM (5 children)
"We, most of us, speaking for myself, consider the wall immoral, ineffective and expensive......we have a responsibility, all of us, to secure our borders, north, south, and coming in by plane on our coasts, three coasts, north, south, and west, and that's responsibility we honor, but we do so by honoring our values as well." Nancy Pelosi.
They say, don't build Wall (we're building it). They say, put in drone. Put in security camera. Put in Terra Hertz (O.J. in the airport). Talk to Facebook, put in Facial Recognition. Don't worry, we're doing all that. But, the only way that works 100% is Wall. We need the rest of the $25 billion for Wall. We got the down payment, we need the whole thing. Because a wall with big holes in it isn't a wall. It's a nothing. And in my opinion, Wall honers our Values much more than all that cyber. Than all the new digital spying on people. Did you know, the Feminist Computer Scientists came up with Penis Cam? The camera that clips on a man's, or boy's, very special unit. And watches everything he does with it. Whenever he's peeing, it sends the "streaming" video. Whenever he meets someone, it sends the sex "tape." We love women, we love women's rights. And we love Surveillance, it keeps us safe. But, they've gone too far with that one. What happened to privacy? Privacy is dead, folks. Very sad!
(Score: 0, Touché) by realDonaldTrump on Friday March 15 2019, @03:18PM (4 children)
Dear Dumb Dem Moderators, why "Offtopic"? The topic is the Crisis (National Emergency) on our Southern Border. The "migrant caravans heading from Central America [Middle East] to the United States." The people that are funding the Caravans. And how we're using Surveilance to solve that one. Something the Democrat Party wants us to try. And we're trying very hard. We're not solving it that way. And we're not going to solve it that way. I've always said, we need Wall. Something that hopefully, someday you'll realize. And I think you're going to realize it by November 10, 2020. I think maybe you already do. But you won't admit it to yourselves. You have nothing to say about it. But you want the rest of us, the silent majority, to shut up. And go away. Well, we won't shut up. And we won't go away. MAGA!!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:04PM
Like a little punk bitch you deleted your violence inducing tweet. What a goddamn coward wrapped in a shitty orange skin. Anyone supporting Trump now is a violent sociopath AND coward, a weird despicable combo.
(Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:29PM
Why? That's obvious. What is the topic here? It's a discussion about DHS investigating and spying on journalists.
That's right out of J. Edgar Hoover's playbook. It was wrong and a violation of the constitution back then and it is today.
Your rant (I'll include it here) has nothing to do with the discussion at hand and, as such, is, well, offtopic:
I'd also point out that there's nothing specifically big 'D' Democratic or big 'R' Republican about calling out the government for abuse of power.
Hopefully you'll give up this ridiculous parody once L'Orange is out of office. Don't you feel yourself die a little bit inside every time you blather on like this?
(Score: 1, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:51PM
Because "Sad and Pathetic" is still not a moderation option.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:27PM
Because out-of-work basement dweller "democrats" have nothing better to do than downmod opinions they don't agree with. That is when they're not busy "calling out" against someone.
(Score: 0, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @02:35PM (13 children)
The Open Society Foundations of George Soros and the Atlantic Philanthropies of General Atlantic [archive.is] want you to think it is somehow bad that the Department of Homeland Security is doing its job by investigating agents of a foreign power that is paying mercenaries to invade the United States.
This is literally war propaganda.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by nitehawk214 on Friday March 15 2019, @02:39PM (4 children)
Oh no, not the George Soros boogieman.
George Soros is the monster that hides under Boomers' beds.
Remember, its ok to give up liberties if you are giving them up to Republicans.
"Don't you ever miss the days when you used to be nostalgic?" -Loiosh
(Score: 2, Touché) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:54PM
Man, that guy is everywhere. How does he do it at his age? Is he eating conservative babies to stay young? Maybe he's a vampire-boogieman hybrid? He would go that far, wouldn't he?
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:27PM (2 children)
George Soros is wealthy; incredibly wealthy. George Soros has a political agenda. He does not dispute nor does he try to hide his political strategy and he uses his wealth with great success to achieve that goal. He is no different philosophically than Rupert Murdoch but only resides on a different end of the political spectrum. Every time you (or your political compatriots) show disdain for Murdoch you should show the same for Soros for they are two sides of the same coin. You (or your comrades) only support and defend the activities he financially supports because it aligns with your particular political leanings. As the recent news of the university admittance scandal demonstrates so conspicuously, wealth gives individuals great power and influence. If you do not support the undeserved influence of rich assholes over your lives, you cannot support one and condemn the other. Soros buys influence.
(Score: 4, Informative) by fritsd on Friday March 15 2019, @09:07PM (1 child)
I remember when George Soros had a project to ask Western European universities to send old typewriters and stencil machines to the students in Timişoara, after the dictator's death.
I can really not imagine Rupert Murdoch doing something like that, ever. To enable journalism by people not under your pay and control.
They are on different ends of the political spectrum, but it's two-dimensional. There are authoritarian leftist assholes (Stalin, Ceausescu?) as well as authoritarian rightist assholes.
But the other dimension runs from authoritarian to liberal (in the "personal freedoms" meaning; ordoliberal or ortholiberal or something?). G.S. and R.M. are on different ends in that dimension, as well.
Soros is a Holocaust survivor who doesn't really like authoritarian dictators because he *knows* what they do to scapegoats. He even knows the meaning of the word "invasion".
Anyway, both are going to be dead soon because they're very old. Get ready to select new bogeymen!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 16 2019, @12:02AM
You mean we could actually elect them? Like, aren't they pushed in front by the lizard people or something?
(Score: 1, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:34PM (7 children)
And don't forget, George Soros is *literally* a Hitler [soylentnews.org].
So American journalists are now "agents of a foreign power?"
I mean, we do call them "The Fourth Estate," but isn't that taking things a little too far?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by fyngyrz on Friday March 15 2019, @08:46PM (6 children)
Personally, I don't see them that way. They're almost all for-profit businesses, variously pushing the agendas of the owners, advertisers, publishers, editors and reporters. They're almost all very long on shady forms of spin, and often as not all too short on facts.
That's not a formula for "news", that's a formula for a not-so-subtle control over the general populace with a heavy lean into commercial intent just as strong as any other nostrum vendor one might care to compare them with.
Yeah, I'm cynical about the news media. About 50 years of paying attention, bolstered by some very interesting instances of being present for some very eye-opening things (e.g. the Kent State murders) and then seeing the subsequent reporting distort those instances... and watching decades of fluffing of various agitprop-based false agendas (e.g. the drug war and similar violations of informed choice, the various scare tactics such as OMG terrormists!!1!111)... that's led me to where I stand on these matters today.
Right here, for most things, I'd like to say YMMV to anyone who reads this, but in fact, it won't. You may be bewildered into thinking things are otherwise... but they aren't.
Fixing it? Probably not possible. All that can be done, IMHO, is keep one's awareness that these things are a near-constant factor in the media as high as possible, and try and keep the constant attempts by the media to pull the wool over one's personal eyes from succeeding.
I did try to push this the other way. I marched, I contributed (a lot of) money to various worthy causes, I wrote (and continue to write) to expose and inform on these issues as best I know how... as have many others... but there's been no significant change. The media — and the government — continue to heavily manipulate the facts and engage in flat-out lying and disinformation not noticeably different from yesterday, yesteryear, yesterdecade(s.)
TL;DR: The news media isn't engaged in any serious attempt to be a "4th estate." They're just another commercial entity, and a particularly slimy one, at that.
--
The three Functional Retardations:
traditional, jingoistic, and religious.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @11:11PM (5 children)
Does that make American journalists "agents of a foreign power?"
Because that's what GP said [soylentnews.org] to which I was responding:
By using "The Fourth Estate" I was drawing them as separate from the government or the church or the people.
And asking if that's enough for journalists to be actively financing a foreign invasion.
Do you believe that?
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Saturday March 16 2019, @02:18AM (4 children)
That's what I understood you to mean. In general, they're just another wholly captured cog in the oligarchy. Calling them the, or a, "4th estate", gives them credit they most definitely have not earned.
They're no more or less guilty of such financing than are, for example, congress and the presidents. They're certainly not the top level of such goings-on.
I do think that some of them have served as "useful idiots" to foreign interests. Putin comes to mind pretty much immediately. And of course, the media has been helping to fluff the drug war, which benefits, and is also responsible for creating, criminal foreign (and domestic of course) interests.
--
"Faith": The possessive form of "Superstition."
(Score: 0, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 16 2019, @03:39AM (3 children)
You (clumsily) sidestepped the question.
Do you believe that American journalists (specifically, the ones on which DHS has been spying) are *personally* financing an invasion -- that is, an armed conflict against the government of the US at the behest or direction of one or more foreign governments -- as GP claimed?
Not news outlets. Not entertainment corporations, specific, individual *American citizen* journalists. And not "spin" or "doing their masters' bidding" either, but digging into their own pockets to provide weapons, supplies and logistical support for armed attempts to take territory from the US.
It's a simple and straightforward question. Yes or No?
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Saturday March 16 2019, @05:20PM (2 children)
No, I just ignored it, because that wasn't what I was talking about. I was only seriously interested in the tangental issue of your use of "fourth estate" and how that relates to the media's generally bad behavior WRT actually informing the public of the news. That's still the case.
However, as you seem particularly curious about my take on your question:
I have very low confidence that the answer to that is yes. I don't "believe" anything here, there are no directly related facts for me to assess.
There are indirectly related facts:
Given the propensity of "homeland security" to act unconstitutionally, raise false flags and conduct various kinds of security theater — all of which are known facts — I have moderate confidence that this is either one (or more) of those, or something along the lines of powerful government actors having arranged to keep tabs on people that are some kind of an annoyance to same in the hopes that they can silence or otherwise squash those people if they turn anything up that they can use against the people on that list. Of any kind.
Or IOW, I have moderate confidence that the government is considerably more likely to be the bad actor in the specific context of your question. Basically because they usually turn out to be. When there's no direct knowledge, the bet on outcome goes to the most common result until the facts show otherwise.
WRT another directly related issue, the public has long accepted that the government may keep lists of people without there being any authorized form of due process. There is widespread clamoring for more of it right now, too, most noticeably in the area of gun control.
There are no-fly [wikipedia.org], no-buy [treasury.gov], criminal history [wikipedia.org], registration / tracking / restriction [wikipedia.org], ownership [wikipedia.org] and other lists of various natures, most of which have not even the shadow of due process or legitimate constitutional cover for at least some of those on the list. The general question of "is this type of thing legitimate" has even been to SCOTUS, the majority of which has in turn rubber-stamped said list-keeping and use thereof with the sophism "registration is not punitive [wikipedia.org]", as it is civil law, not criminal law, therefore perfectly okay to do.
So while the idea of the federal and/or state government(s) keeping arbitrary, non probable-cause or judicial sentence-related based lists is odious in the extreme as well as a blatant violation of the sense and intent of the US constitution's 4th amendment [wikipedia.org], there's significant precedent, much of it specifically tuned to inflame the public, that makes it extremely unlikely that any of this will change. If the government wants to keep a list of media (or any other) persons for any particular reason at all, they definitely can, and the odds are excellent that they will.
Niemöller's poem [wikipedia.org] is not generally the first thing that comes to mind when your typical media consumer is faced with some form of overblown "OMG!" That also applies when the media is busily constructing or amplifying same.
And, inasmuch as the media has been deeply complicit in the promotion and encouragement of precisely this kind of government list-keeping, it is somewhat amusing to me that they have now been hoisted upon their own petards [wikipedia.org], even as it serves as another example of government action wildly out of compliance with the constitution that authorizes its very existence.
Will the media learn anything from this other than "ouch"? I honestly doubt it.
--
If the grass is greener on the other side of the fence,
the water bill is probably higher as well.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday March 17 2019, @03:41AM (1 child)
Well then. I guess you'll have a lot of conversations with yourself, if you're going to completely change the subject.
(Score: 2) by fyngyrz on Sunday March 17 2019, @04:44PM
I didn't change the subject. I simply addressed the part of what you said that was actually interesting to me. You'll note I started with a quotation from your post, where you said that 'we do call them "The Fourth Estate,"' when in fact, "we" do not. I call them "a mundane part of the oligarchy." Because that's what they are.
Carry on. 😊
--
Just because someone is offended...
doesn't mean they're right.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by Tokolosh on Friday March 15 2019, @02:47PM
Once you've built the big machinery of political power, remember you won't always be the one to run it. -- P. J. O'Rourke
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Friday March 15 2019, @03:17PM (2 children)
The simple fact is that the US "national security" agencies have never been politically neutral organizations, nor have they ever been concerned with whether their actions are legal. They have no particular interest in protecting American civilians - their actual goals are, in rough order:
1. Protect themselves and their budgets. They spend the vast majority of their time and resources doing this.
2. Protect the largest and most powerful businesses based in New York, the UK, the EU, and a handful of other allied nations.
3. Protect top government officials who they believe are helping them do (1) and (2), and undermining or eliminating those that aren't.
That's been the way it's been since at least the 1940's, if not earlier.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @03:40PM (1 child)
"...based in New York, the UK, the EU, and a handful of other allied nations..."
I'm not entirely sure I'd classify New York as an allied nation. Generally speaking, you can count on allies to be friendly or at least treat you with benign neglect. As a proud citizen of Flyoverstan, I can say that at best New York tends to ignore us. At worst, I wouldn't call them friendly.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:03PM
The leadership staff of the state security organs were drawn from East Cost (including New York) high society scions that went to ivy league schools.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @03:44PM (3 children)
This "caravan" shit is obviously a public relations setup. Some big money went into it. And I for one, am interested myself. I hope they publicize the info they gather.
By the way, why is nobody talking about the CIA breaking into North Korea's embassy in Madrid? That's some serious shit!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:05PM (1 child)
If they can get over the "journalism is under seige by MAGA troops" trope. One can hope.
Links? Enquiring minds want to know.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:31PM
Link [elpais.com]:
At least two of the 10 assailants who broke into the embassy and interrogated diplomatic staff have been identified and have connections to the US intelligence agency. The CIA has denied any involvement but government sources say their response was "unconvincing."
(Score: 2) by shortscreen on Saturday March 16 2019, @12:09AM
Two examples are given in TFS. In the first, we have people potentially crossing the border illegally or conspiring to do so. Why shouldn't DHS investigate this? (assuming their methods are respecting the 4th amendment...)
In the second example, they are surveilling protestors who aren't suspected of any crime. This is the bad, Orwellian shit. COINTELPRO all over again.
(Score: 2) by edinlinux on Friday March 15 2019, @03:57PM (50 children)
Trump being a wacko aside (I didn't vote for him), there are something like between 15 or 20million illegals in this country, depending on which side you ask, mostly walking across the desert from Mexico (or caravan'ing or whatever).
If that is not an invasion then I am not sure what is.. (sheesh, that is almost the population of Canada, here illegally!)
The people facilitating this need to be found and arrested, and DHS is absolutely right investigating this..
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:09PM (39 children)
When people enter your country to live and work it is not an invasion.
Such shitty rhetoric trying to incite violence. You may not have voted for Trump but you do sound like a smarter version of him.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:16PM (26 children)
so then just get rid of the border entirely, and let anyone who wants to come, come in then...
how exactly do you expect that to turn out in the end? (there are over 500 million people in Central and South America who then could just 'walk in' or 'caravan in')
There is nothing wrong with immigration, provided it is based on merit. There are lots of people in the world who would like to come to the USA who can contribute to this country, but because they happen not to be next door and are not able to just 'walk in', they get cut out..
but I guess that is ok, isn't it..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:37PM (9 children)
Who (other than you) said anything even remotely close to that?
Did you pick that one up at Straw Men 'R' Us?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:55PM (8 children)
It's not a strawman . Right now the border is defacto already open
What do you suggest then? Open or closed? How do you decide who gets to come and 'live and work' then?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:07PM (7 children)
Yeah [thedailybeast.com], wide open [woub.org].
Wide, wide open [countable.us].
Please.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:26PM (6 children)
20 million already got through and more come each day (several hundreds to thousands)
Looks pretty open to me..
(Score: 2, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:34PM (5 children)
How many times must people post the FACTS that the vast majority of illegal immigration is due to overstaying visas after people come in legally. You're probably the type that would view Puerto Ricans as illegal immigrants too.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:09PM (4 children)
Here is an estimate from a site tracking "undocumented" who crossed the border (so presumably they are pro illegal immigration, using that loaded "undocumented" word)
https://www.factcheck.org/2018/06/illegal-immigration-statistics/ [factcheck.org]
And even their number is still over 10 million!!
(given it is a pro-illegal article, the real number is probably less than the 25M number bandied by the right, and more than this 10 million figure).
That is still a shitton of illegals...
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:24PM (3 children)
Well then. You better get out there and start knocking on doors and demanding documents from people. Don't bother kicking the brown scum out of the country, just shoot them dead. They deserve it of course, right? In fact, why bother even asking for documents? If they're brown they're probably illegal anyway. And even if they are legal, they're gonna be shifty anway, amirite?
If you had the courage of your convictions that's exactly what you'd be doing anyway, instead of whinging about it here.
It shouldn't take you, your kids, grandkids, great-grandkids and great-great-grandkids more than a few centuries to get it done. So get the hell off SN and get to work you lazy bastard!
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:51PM (2 children)
forgot the </sarcasm> tag..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:56PM
Says who?
Anyone who gets Poe'd [wikipedia.org] with that deserves to either be completely outraged or thinking they've found a kindred spirit.
Either way, if some folks can't figure it out their reactions will be amusing. Kisses!
(Score: 1) by fritsd on Friday March 15 2019, @08:54PM
you can use mine, I had one too many.
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Friday March 15 2019, @04:53PM (13 children)
Totally, I mean that whole "Give me your tired, your poor,
Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free" was just marketing.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Friday March 15 2019, @05:15PM (9 children)
A discussion on who we should let into the country is pointless unless we can stop people from just walking across. But I would be in favor of allowing anyone in who truly just wants a chance to contribute to the country and earn an honest living. Put up the wall and we can let them in while stopping the people looking to exploit them.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:36PM (8 children)
Ummm what now? In no way will that stop the exploiters. Immigrants are easily exploited because they don't know labor laws and their employment prospects are shitty if they don't speak English very well.
The wall is stupid, full stop. It has been sold to you through a variety of emotional fear-mongering talking points, but it will be ineffective and a waste of money.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Friday March 15 2019, @06:29PM (7 children)
How is that an argument against the wall?
Besides, it will stop certain forms of exploitation. Specifically, the coyotes who smuggle people across the border away from the official ports of entry.
(Score: 2) by Barenflimski on Friday March 15 2019, @08:22PM
How would a wall stop smugglers? Why wouldn't the people smugglers still smuggle people to the border and supply people with chutes and ladders? You would still need to staff the border the same way to catch everyone on the U.S. side of this wall you propose. Now you've spent money on a wall that has to be maintained as well as on a force of people to guard said wall. Is this a small government idea?
If you think that a wall will stop people running away from MS-13 which is funded in large part by the United States drug trade, you are looking for simple answers. Simple answers for simple people ey, right?
I'd suggest that instead of looking for simple answers to things, you dig real deep inside and figure out what it is you could change locally that would have an effect on people far away, therefore helping you and your drummed up fears. What are your fears again?
I personally don't fear people that want to escape violence, that want to work, and want a place to raise their kids that is safe. Sounds like me.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by fritsd on Friday March 15 2019, @08:51PM (5 children)
You stop smugglers by making it unprofitable for them.
You stop illegals by enforcing police surveillance of where you find them: at work sites. Less illegals means less people smugglers.
Give large rewards to people who snitch on employers that employ illegals. Your employer will now think twice to replace you with a cheaper illegal.
Give large fines, increasing up to jail, to employers that employ illegals. That will make it too risky for normal employers to continue this practice and most will just give up.
After the police surveillance mechanisms are in place, you should begin to see the great benefits to the people of the border states: increasing wages at the bottom of society, because now the employers have to suddenly hire people protected by USA employment laws (don't know if you actually have any) and trade unions (if they're not made illegal in the last 100 years because communists).
Also, the Mexican immigrants working on a work permit will be discriminated against less, because it will no longer be automatically assumed that they're illegals for hire under minimum wage (the "they're taking OUR jerbs" argument). They become immigrant workers. Every country has them.
All you need is a law that every US company has to provide photocopied photo-id of all employees, including their social security numbers, upon request by the police, or face serious fines and retaliation.
As a side-effect you might see a significant increase in tax revenue, as well.
It isn't hard or expensive for the employers to enforce, either. If aspirant employees don't let you photocopy their driving license or passport, they just don't get hired.
This is how it's done in the Netherlands, AFAIK.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by sjames on Saturday March 16 2019, @03:24AM (2 children)
How about just enforcing minimum wage and other workplace laws? That removes the incentive to hire illegals and doesn't make us one of those "your papers please" dystopias. Note, currently people who don't drive are not required to have a driver's license.
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Saturday March 16 2019, @12:34PM (1 child)
I'm not sure, but to enforce minimum wage is much more difficult (=expensive), because you'd have to send accountants or tax department officials to audit the company's finances.
But a low-level police officer (i.e. without special bookkeeping training) can demand from the HR officer to see the photocopy of the photo id document and verify that the worker under suspicion has a social security number.
There are probably all kinds of complications in real life. But to enforce minimum wage laws I think you'd have to check each company regularly, not just "once per employee hire" (which is a statistic tht the police can't know but just has to guess).
If the system is as cheap as possible then you can check more often. And you don't really need to disturb the workers just the HR officer, and it is their job.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by sjames on Saturday March 16 2019, @05:22PM
Really, just have a cop go ask a few workers about their paycheck. Or hire a few legal immigrants to pretend to be illegal and apply for a job anywhere the cops suspect is a problem.
Cut off civil forfeiture for drugs and set a bounty of employers who cheat on minimum wage and they'll be all over it.
(Score: 2) by slinches on Saturday March 16 2019, @07:20AM (1 child)
You seem to imply that we should do those things instead of a wall. Why not do all of the above and more? The wall is there to make it more difficult and time consuming to cross and makes patrolling the border more effective. The other things you mention make it less attractive to cross illegally. On top of those we could streamline legal immigration to make it easier, quicker and less costly to enter legally. If we do all of that, we might end up with an effective solution.
(Score: 2) by fritsd on Saturday March 16 2019, @01:06PM
You'd formulate a cost function, which is a summation of each policy multiplied by a weight, I guess. I never worked at that high a level of doing things, so I'm just making it up now:
cost = (estimated cost of photo id surveillance at company offices) / (estimated nr of illegals diminished because surveillance)
+(estimated cost of the Trump Wall) / (estimated nr of illegals diminished because wall)
+(estimated cost of streamlining legal migration) / (estimated nr of illegals diminished because streamlining)
Then you try to minimize this cost function. Cheaper surveillance = once a year, for example. Cheaper wall = a chickenwire fence. Cheaper streamlining = a higher price for a work permit. There are of course lower price limits where the effectivity of each of the 3 methods would drop off a cliff because you can't afford techniques that actually work and every perp just ignores the "white elephant". If a work permit costs $ 10 000 then more people will say: "sod it, I'll just try working illegally".
I think I did the cost function wrong. It feels wrong. Maybe it's instead maximize (estimated nr of illegals diminished) / (estimated cost) with dimension persons/$ .
Anyway the policymakers can decide to do all three up to a certain extent, or drop one or more of the measures because they're not worth the bother. The Trump Wall is something that I suspect wouldn't be effective at all below a certain minimum, very high price.
Hiring extra immigration officers is more flexible, but expensive if you need to fire them to reduce costs because you hired too many.
The photo ID surveillance sounds cheapest to me.
I wonder, has the US D.H.S. sent experts to Germany? They could interview Stasi pensioners to ask about the efficiency of the Berlin Wall, costs of the mine field and guards with mitrailleurs, etc.
Trump can't ask Erich Mielke [wikipedia.org] for advice, because he died in 2000.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:58PM (2 children)
That's not policy, it's from a poem written by a Zionist activist.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @11:03PM (1 child)
Wow. Troll? The OP stated only the facts: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emma_Lazarus#Activism [wikipedia.org]
(Score: 2) by Nerdfest on Saturday March 16 2019, @01:33PM
I'd also like to add that you're all talking about building a fucking wall on the border of your country which now has VIPR teams at inland airports, Random traffic stops asking for papers, Constitution free zones, and an immense state surveillance apparatus. You know ... for those keeping score at home that are not cowering in their closets.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:36PM (1 child)
Would it be stretching the point too far to suggest we take your "immigration based on merit" concept and expand on it just a bit?
Why not just simplify it all and just go with merit-based citizenship, regardless of how you got here?
Immigration, kidnapping, birth... doesn't matter. As soon as they come in, weigh them based on merit and only keep those who measure up. Given the wide variety in humanity, it stands to reason that at least some of those born here wouldn't be able to meet the entrance requirements - so why keep them if it's "merit" which is important? The map location of a birth seems a bit arbitrary and capricious when set against a merit standard.
Not sure who'd take those newborns who didn't make the cut, but let's leave that as an exercise for the reader.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @07:57PM
While we’re there, they should weigh up the whole population and kick out the bottom X percent irrespective of citizenship. That would be merit based without the grandfathering in of all the lazy fat ‘American’ assholes that are a drain on society.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @04:25PM
>When people enter your country to live and work it is not an invasion.
Tell that to the Romans after the barbarians came to 'live and work', or to the Japanese after the Russians came to the northern islands at the end of WWII to 'live and work', or to the aboriginals of Australia (or the USA and Canada for that matter) after the whities came to 'live and work'..
turned out swell didn't it. certainly we want that here too :-)
(Score: 2) by slinches on Friday March 15 2019, @05:06PM (1 child)
The people who want to live and work here have legal ways to come do so. The process could certainly stand to be improved and sped up, but unless we actually stop illegal crossings, there's no way to know if any individual coming across illegally is someone looking for a better life, a drug/sex trafficker or an invading foreign agent.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @07:33PM
dude you can't know any of that even from the people living next door to you
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:08PM (5 children)
Shit, man, I guess the Romans weren't woke enough when the Vandals came to "live and work" and take.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:18PM (4 children)
Ah, someone brought up the Romans already.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:24PM
Deusvincere'd already?
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @11:06PM (2 children)
What have the Romans ever done for us?
(Score: 2) by edinlinux on Saturday March 16 2019, @02:32AM (1 child)
They gave us the months July (Julius Caesar) and August (Augustus Caesar). That is why the following months counting is messed up after August (Sept)ember is 9, not 7, (Oct)ober is 10, not 8, (Nov)ember is 11 not 9 and (Dec)ember is 12, not 10).
The Romans give us nice summer days (if you are on the top side) every year, and keep on giving :-)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 16 2019, @01:50PM
Nice try, dude. But you should have used Roman Numerals.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:41PM
When people enter your house to live and work it's not burglary either I guess.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @07:22PM
yes it is. just because they are not using organized violence doesn't mean they were invited, dumb fucker.
(Score: 3, Informative) by SpockLogic on Saturday March 16 2019, @02:08AM
I'm sure that there are at least 331,195,364* people smarter than Trump in this country.
* https://www.populationpyramid.net/united-states-of-america/2019/ [populationpyramid.net]
Overreacting is one thing, sticking your head up your ass hoping the problem goes away is another - edIII
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Thexalon on Friday March 15 2019, @05:28PM (5 children)
Are they taking all your stuff? Trying to kill you? Did they launch an artillery barrage into downtown San Diego when I wasn't paying attention? Are they utterly overwhelming the local police forces and military to the point where they can't function in an area formerly under the control of the United States? Heck, is the power, municipal water system, or other infrastructure not working because of their actions? Are you being forced to pay for things in pesos if the economy is even remotely functioning? Can you walk down the street without wondering if you're going to get sniped?
I think lots of Americans have forgotten what actual invasions look like, because they haven't experienced an invasion of US territory for a very very long time. In real invasions, iconic buildings are destroyed all the time. In real invasions, there is organized violence causing major problems for the civilian population of the area under attack. In real invasions, normal government services stop functioning.
Until that sort of thing starts happening, "invasion" is the wrong word to be using.
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:12PM (3 children)
All those things happen only if the 'invadees' resist the invasion..
Right now we are not resisting..
The Chinese PLA could come in the same way and do the same thing if no one here resisted, and it would still be an invasion..
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:15PM (1 child)
Actually, if we started enforcing immigration laws, and started mass deportations of illegals, you certainly *would* start to see those things and such instability as the mass deportations continued (since it is actually an invasion).
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:22PM
Yup, illegals are like 8% of the US population today. It will be very hard to deport so many now without serious levels of civil unrest or even a real civil war in some regions of the country (i.e. California, where Hispanics now outnumber any other ethnic group). It has gone on for so long now, it would be very messy to resolve no matter how you do it..
(Score: 2) by Thexalon on Friday March 15 2019, @06:25PM
We're deporting something like 400,000 people every year, and have Border Patrol, ICE, and several other agencies involved in finding and removing these folks. How does that qualify as "not resisting"?
The only thing that stops a bad guy with a compiler is a good guy with a compiler.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @06:59PM
Yes. In Yakima, WA: https://www.aclu-wa.org/cases/montes-v-city-yakima-0, [aclu-wa.org] https://www.yakimahispanicchamber.com/ [yakimahispanicchamber.com]
(Score: 1) by fritsd on Friday March 15 2019, @05:32PM (2 children)
It can't be that difficult.
20 million illegal invaders is 2 in 35 Americans.
Ask the D.H.S. to organize you into armed "gilets brunes" groups (something tells me they would be good at this task).
Then just round up everybody in groups of 35, using roadblocks, checkpoints at malls and gas stations, etc.; find out which two of the 35 persons in each group are armed (invaders are, by definition, armed) and disarm and incapacitate them before re-education and deportation back to Mexico.
If they resist your legitimate defense attempts to disarm them, then obviously they must be the aggressive invaders, so just shoot them dead.
I promise you, that within weeks, most of the people who complained that America is overrun by 20 million illegal invaders from Mexico, will somehow magically have silenced their complaints. That means everybody is happy that it worked!!
(It might be difficult to reach them for comments, in fact).
;-)
</sarcasm>
(Score: 2, Funny) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @05:43PM (1 child)
You forgot the opening <sarcasm> line and now my browser is stuck in a dark place. Thaaaanks
(Score: 1) by fritsd on Friday March 15 2019, @08:25PM
sorry. i'm tired. i shall hope that the grues walk past you.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 16 2019, @01:48PM
There are 5-6 million illegal aliens in the US who overstayed their visas and assimilated into society. These mostly European individuals are educated and take good paying jobs from Americans, not shitty dishwasher or landscaper or fieldworker kinds of jobs.
Rounding up these criminals would reduce unemployment and increase wages (a byproduct of shortages of qualified employment candidates). It would also bring down housing costs by freeing up millions of houses and apartments.
Let us address this true crisis affecting the entire country. These illegals must be deported to ensure job and financial security of Americans.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Friday March 15 2019, @05:57PM (1 child)
"A coalition of human rights groups and technology organizations has blasted House Democrats’ high-tech border security proposal as a potentially invasive form of surveillance that would curtail Americans' privacy and target minorities.
'We know that the border is often a testing ground for surveillance technology that is later deployed throughout the United States,' the letter, which was signed by groups including the ACLU and the National Immigration Law Center, states. 'Ubiquitous surveillance technology poses a serious threat to human rights and constitutional liberties.'" foxnews.com/tech/us-border-high-tech-solutions-proposed-by-dems-blasted-by-27-tech-and-human-rights-groups [foxnews.com]
My Sub from more than a month ago. Censored -- they call it Rejected -- by Editors. No explanation, as usual. But, none needed. They're Fake Editors for a Fake News sight. And they're doing great.
(Score: 2) by realDonaldTrump on Friday March 15 2019, @06:25PM
(cont)
"We will push for a smart, effective border security posture, one that does not rely on costly physical barriers. House Democrats’ proposal funds: .....New cutting edge technology along the border to improve situational awareness" The Press Release of the Dem proposal (Jan.). And those of you (not many) that can read, maybe you want to read that one. appropriations.house.gov/news/press-releases/house-democratic-conferees-unveil-proposal-for-smart-effective-border-security [house.gov]
The situational awareness is what NBC 7 is talking about. And they call it that. They call it that. But, dumb Moderators don't want to see that. They don't have the Brains to see that. And when I talk about Border, they don't have the Brains to see that this is about Border. About keeping Border Safe. Keeping tabs on the people that are helping the Caravans. Can we call it treason? Why not? We're trying very hard to stop those people.
And by the way, our Border is not one dimensional. It's not an Arnold Schwarzenegger character. Do you remember Arnold Schwarzenegger, do you remember the maid, Arnold's maid? What a disgrace. Some say, he's a has-been. And some say, he's a never-was. Our Border doesn't just go straight up & down & wiggle around. It has a width. And the width is about 100 miles. More if our brave Border Patrol is chasing someone. Everybody in San Diego is on our Border. And most American people are on our Borders. Where my D.H.S., my Homeland Security, has very special powers. Powers that, it's almost impossible to "abuse" them. Because they're TOTAL & COMPLETE. And possibly you're "thinking" (the few that can think), "oh, of course President Trump would say that, he's the one with the very special powers!" It's me, it is me, I'm very happy to have those powers. Powers the American People (E.C.) gave to me. So I can protect our Country from those who would destroy it. But, it's not just me. All agree on that one. Even liberal A.C.L.U.!!!! aclu.org/other/constitution-100-mile-border-zone [aclu.org]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Friday March 15 2019, @08:22PM
Sadly these current news don't come a surprise.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO [wikipedia.org]