prospect.org
Back to storiesRanked by HN
Comments
334 total · 185 loaded
"one of the components that caused former intelligence contractors’ concern was that ERO ONE agents will analyze both classified and nonclassified information to produce “network, link and relationship” analyses."
Should the federal government be tracking our interpersonal relationships?
Should an immigration officer be privy to the timing and manner of communications that I, a citizen, have with other citizens? Why?
Why should ICE be able to collect this information when domestic law enforcement generally has to show probable cause to a judge to gather similar information? Who decided to make ICE the country's supreme law enforcement agency?
Related, ICE is arresting citizens on fake immigration charges[1]. Some US citizens have been deported.
US citizens "can't" be deported, but ICE has supralegal powers. Should we have a law enforcement agency that is not bound by our laws? Why? What guardrails does it have if not law? Who defines those guardrails?
1 - https://projects.propublica.org/american-citizens-detained-d...
So long as Republicans have no counterbalance in courts, congress, or the whitehouse then these things will continue to metastasize.
The entire experiment here is to bring the surveillance apparatus' of dictatorships to the US. They no doubt see the durability of these dictatorships and one-party states around the world and are drooling at the prospect of running it in the US.
Republicans have suggested for years that there is a counterbalance in the bill of rights.
That has shown to be nothing but hot air and wishful thinking. The second they got into power they’ve thrown any hint of caring about the constitution out the window.
The Bill of Rights is just words on paper. For it to mean anything, the judicial needs to be willing to uphold it and the executive needs to be willing to enforce those decisions.
That becomes much less likely when they are allowed to become overly partisan. The officials who wield power lose the ability to distinguish between civic duty and the rule of law, and loyalty to the party itself.
Yet they continue to ignore court orders when those rights are found to have been violated.
The primary mechanism for redress of constitutional right violations under current law are monetary damages under FTCA, especially now that universal injunctions are dead. There's no actual counterbalance.
Can I buy the same weapons the American military has access to?
Until that's true, the 2nd amendment is meaningless when USAF can buy JDAMs and F35s and I, an American citizen, cannot.
in theory, yes; in practice, no.
Yeah, and what happens every time we take a Republican at his word?
18 U.S.C. § 242: Deprivation of Rights Under Color of Law
A DOJ with its ducks in a row would be charging this left and right.
5 year statute of limitations, unlimited if it results in death.
Unless he pardons literally every ICE agent, a new administration can and certainly should levy all kinds of charges. That's one reason folks have been documenting so much about what's going on even if it can't be stopped right now.
While Republicans certainly have a focus on illegal immigration, support for spying on American citizens is hardly a partisan issue.
ie: 25 years of Patriot Act renewal, Flock rollouts in liberal cities, Obama’s pursuit of Snowden and not the NSA itself
There is certainly liberal leadership concerned with our rights, just as there are conservatives, but they are the minority under both partisan umbrellas.
If you have some information on how much they approve or support these programs i'm open to hearing it, but i'm not sure how much "Both parties have bad people/policies" contributes to a discussion on this specific program.
There's bad. And then there's extremely bad.
So let's not conflate the two, ok?
Even so, scale, severity, and flaunting of the law matter. Current political powers have turned it up to 11. You can absolutely "both sides bad" in general, but I don't think you should be doing so within this context or it's disingenuous / whataboutism.
Republicans mistreated legal immagrants with particular pleasure and revoked their legal status.
Surveillance expanded under Obama and Biden. It would have expanded under Clinton or Harris. It will expand under the next Democratic President and it will expand under the next Republican one.
Maybe the Republicans are worse, I don't particularly give a shit. They're both horrible and anti-American on this issue and nothing will change without systemic changes.
Let's be clear here that this is explicitly not just surveillance. This is surveillance in service of abducting people without due process. We can debate surveillance in the abstract, but this specifically is a feeder program to a system that has illegally deported US citizens without any due process. (Which would have, at step 1, indicated that US citizens cannot be deported.)
This is surveillance as part of a department that explicitly says it is not bound by US law or the Constitution.
All of that makes this program materially different than any other US domestic surveillance program or proposal of which I am aware.
"Maybe the Republicans are worse" when the democrats have a plan to create a 100M domestic surveillance program and push it on the national stage, the word maybe becomes relevant. Until then, it is clear to everyone with a functional set of eyes what is happening; maybe schedule your check-up.
What exactly is the point of this post
[deleted]
Need to rollback the entire post-9/11 security mentality.
Abolishing ICE and DHS is the baseline for Democrats I support going forward.
https://www.newsweek.com/democratic-bill-abolish-ice-shut-do...
>> Abolishing ICE and DHS
Ya, I am a fan of the coast guard... and I think we need the FAA/TSA to keep the planes running on time. And FEMA might be laughed at in some quarters but a federal disaster response is something we should have ahead of hurricane season.
I think most Americans think we should have a sensible border policy and some way to identify and remove the 5-10m illegal immigrants that came in over the Biden administration.
You should rethink your position as it's not going to give you the electoral wins you think it will.
I've always been curious about this mentality, but i've never met one in the wild. So do you think no immigration or coastal defense should be allowed? Does that mean everyone can just come in?
I recall watching live when second tower was hit. US commentator immediately understood the situation and remarked how this is end of an era of freedom and how this will unavoidably bring massive surveillance state aparatus in place from now on and how entire world will be affected negatively. He was 100% correct in all he said.
But lets be clear - its US public that allowed this, over and over. Saner candidates were suppressed as not patriotic enough, entire worse than pointless wars were waged and millions died for nothing. Not US passport holders so I guess thats just an afterthought.
Dont expect rollback in your lifetime. We havent reached even the bottom yet, not with current voting mindset. Still this is what US population wants, I don't see >200 millions even just protesting.
[deleted]
The part that gets me is how many useful idiots who are smart enough to know know better will cheer for these things when sold piecemeal. Your DEP starts trawling the cell phone location records to nab some guy who sold bad dirt. Your traffic cameras tell law enforcement how to tailor their revenue generation toward those who can't push back. Your school system monitors social media to nab some teenager for selling vapes his older relative bought. And people cheer. They call it progress.
Only when the comprehensiveness of this 1984 is presented in an unflattering way like "we're gonna snoop on everything so ICE can round people up" (or an AI camera goes up on every street corner) do they even become uneasy.
> Why should ICE be able to collect this information when domestic law enforcement generally has to show probable cause to a judge to gather similar information? Who decided to make ICE the country's supreme law enforcement agency?
You know what's funny, everything you said is valid, but, I've never seen this much outrage over flock cameras on here or on most tech forums. It's actually the opposite. Somehow spying is ok if they like the company.
A lot of users here have vocally admitted that having Flock cameras was okay because they were a HOA member and it gave them security of some sort and they had "nothing to hide"
Another example was Anthropic getting caught stenographically marking requests[1] and Anthropic's response when they got caught was simply "it was just an experiment" and everyone on here said it's okay.
> Why? What guardrails does it have if not law? Who defines those guardrails?
I wish we asked this question to all our favorite tech companies too, this being a tech forum and all.
[1] https://thereallo.dev/blog/claude-code-prompt-steganography
> I've never seen this much outrage over flock cameras on here or on most tech forums.
Are we on the same platform? Search Flock on HN, below are the top results
Stop Flock
Flock Exposed Its AI-Powered Cameras to the Internet. We Tracked Ourselves
This Flock Camera Leak is like Netflix For Stalkers
US cities are axing Flock Safety surveillance technology
Grand jury declines to indict Ohio man charged with destroying Flock camera
YouTuber Says Cops Visited Him After He Built a Flock-Style Camera to Track Cops
Americans are destroying Flock surveillance cameras
Flock CEO calls Deflock a “terrorist organization” (2025) [video]
I wrote to Flock's privacy contact to opt out of their domestic spying program
Flock-Powered Police Chiefs Stalking Women Shows Why Warrants Are Needed
An interactive map of Flock Cams
Flock and Cyble Inc. weaponize “cybercrime” takedowns to silence critics
Hackers Got Inside a Flock Camera
Ring cancels its partnership with Flock Safety after surveillance backlash
Amazon’s Ring to partner with Flock
Flock Wants a Closely Surveilled World with No Exit
Flock Hardcoded the Password for America's Surveillance Infrastructure 53 Times
> I've never seen this much outrage over flock cameras on here or on most tech forums
I have entirely the opposite impression of HN - I feel like I hear a huge amount of (rightful) resistance to that kind of surveillance.
If you want to build a stasi-like system then the answer to all that’s yes - which seems to be what the majority of us citizens is in favour of, otherwise they wouldn’t have elected this admin
This is why Trump is acting like he's on the ballot in November.
Since he is the face of the Republican party, voters understand they are evaluating his decisions and performance since 2024, and will be voting accordingly.
[deleted]
> US citizens "can't" be deported
Source: I'm a naturalized citizen.
Naturalized citizens can be deported and their citizenship can be revoked in cases of violent crime or other immoral behavior. That information is provided when swearing in.
It's more accurate to say that US citizens who are law abiding and moral, or who are born in the US, can't be deported.
Since we're nitpicking, you are still not correct.
US citizens cannot be deported.
Naturalized citizens cannot be deported for crimes they commit after they became citizens.
Naturalized citizens who obtained their citizenship through fraudulent means can have their citizenship revoked. Then, they are not citizens and can be deported.
US citizens cannot be deported.
(There should be a time limit on revocation after which citizenship becomes permanent and irrevocable.)
According to the government, your citizenship can be revoked for a bunch of reasons:
* https://www.usa.gov/renounce-lose-citizenship
More context:
* https://vertexlegal.org/what-causes-american-citizen-lose-ci...
Technically it's as soon as it's provided. Once you are a citizen the only way in which it can be revoked is if you are found to have committed fraud during the immigration process.
This.
Also, with this administration, if you didn't dot an 'i' or cross a 't' somewhere in your paperwork, citizenship can be revoked.
Basically, if they catch you in any kind of lie. It's fraud.
Could be ex post facto and seemingly innocuous act unconnected to paperwork as well. You came in. Applied for asylum. Went through the process. And, finally, you were naturalized.
Only you traveled back to your hometown in your country of origin at some point. Before or after naturalization.
Boom.
They got you. That's fraud.
Everyone needs to stay extra careful going forward.
> after naturalization
Say more about this. You are hinting at a kind of conditional citizenship that I do not believe exists under US law.
Are you suggesting that there is a class of citizens who did not commit fraud on their naturalization paperwork, yet who are barred from travel to countries that other citizens are able to travel to?
Characterizing the propublica pieces as "fake immigration charges" is pretty misleading. All of their arrests of non-illegal-immigrants has been for (bogus) charges unrelated to immigration, usually some variant of "obstruction".
"Some US citizens have been deported" is also a mischaracterization. Aside from minor children of deported parents, the only case where an American citizen was deported was Brian Morales Garcia.
"fake immigration charges" are what they apply to people born here, so that they can deport them. The charges are facially fake because a person born here cannot have immigrated here.
There is no such thing as a legitimate immigration charge levied against a person born in Chicago or Los Angeles. It's definitionally fake, even if ICE says otherwise. This is part of the reason they deport people before the courts can weigh in.
> "Some US citizens have been deported" is also a mischaracterization
You are simply wrong on this, as you admit in your next sentence. I wonder at the motive for knowingly something flagrantly incorrect, then admitting as much in the next sentence.
In any case, the link I provided includes links to cases where native-born US citizens have been illegally deported without due process. In one case, the prosecutor admitted that the deportations were illegal. But because ICE is supralegal and does not follow due process, those citizens never went before a judge before being deported.
The situation under which citizens have been detained have always been claimed to be for obstruction. I am not aware of a single case where an individual was detained for immigration charges who was not specifically targeted for enforcement, although since ICE is not public about this (and they cannot be in order to protect the accused) it is hard to say for sure.
The link recounts one case, the one I mentioned, Garcia, and the circumstances around his deportation are complex at best. No question that ICE was mistaken on the facts, but the situation was complex -- he had crossed the border into the US illegally; he did have a Mexican passport with a different spelling of his name. I am not aware of any others and the propublica does not cite any others. Please give names if you are aware of any.
My claim was that you mischaracterized the propublica article and I stand by it. You claimed that US citizens were being detained on fake immigration charges and this is not the case (Garcia was a mistake but the charges were not fake, they were just incorrect). You claimed that US citizens have been deported, and the article only provided a single example, which does not support the claim of "people", that being the plural of "person".
The specific clearance requirement may suggest Section 702/FISA capability being employed.
If that ends up being the case, then you're talking a reality where American citizens become the target of warrantless domestic surveillance, using data collected by the NSA. Every phone call, e-mail, text message, DM, group chat; anything a person has ever said or done in their digital lives going back years.
It's worse now with AI, because human effort is no longer required to read intercept transcripts or conversations. Instantaneous surfacing of dirt/leverage.
Warrantless surveillance already exists in the US for monitoring cleared people and those with adjacency. The third party doctrine covers everyone else. Everything you can imagine them doing is being done. They already have the collection methods running and just need authorization to expand the scope.
This would be illegal of course.
That doesn't generally seem to be an impediment to the US gov.
When the courts have no power or are complicit then legality is irrelevant.
I mean, so is murdering people in cold blood, that's why ICE doesn't really do that.
"enforcement and removal", from the actual name, sounds lots worse than "spying"
in fact it sounds uncannily similar to what a bunch of organizations in USSR were doing to citizens, like NKVD and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cheka
The All-Russian Extraordinary Commission, abbreviated as VChK, and commonly known as the Cheka, was the first Soviet secret police organization.
If they can make illegal migrants disappear without any option for them to defend themselves in front of the legal system, they can make anybody disappear, including you.
And if you think: "Why would they want to do that?", consider that even something stupid like someone misinterpreting a gesture or working for a competitor of a company the regime currently favours can get you there.
To be fair, they're not disappearing anyone.
They don't need to, because the US has a finely honed system of railroading.
They push captured migrants through the system to deportation via a "rocket docket" and our rubber stamp justice system.
The system being discussed simply allows them to lay their hands on more migrants to feed that existing quick deportation pipeline.
It's worse than disappearing people. Disappearing people implies they need to hide what they're doing from an objectionable public. Clearly, the people currently in power are blessed with a constituency they don't need to hide from.
So I want to be clear that I don't like how we do that, but the problem is that if your single metric is "I want fewer humanitarian migrants" then the plan is working. It's the disconnect between people who want that and don't care about the migrants themselves, and the people who either want that but do care) or don't want that and care that's driving all of this.
It's also really unhelpful to act like deportation under any* circumstances is WORSE than enforced disappearance, which generally involves murder and anonymous disposal of remains. I don't like how we're treating migrants and I believe that immigration is one of our greatest advantages over countries that reject it. I can still maintain enough objectivity to tell the difference between disgustingly harsh "push vs pull" tactics and organized mass murder.
> uncannily similar to what a bunch of organizations in USSR were doing to citizens
I'm sure Trump has had plenty of input from Putin about all this. Even if he's not formally an "asset", it's more a case of shared goals.
Anyone cheering for this fail to realize that these kinds of programs never ever go away. Even if their budget is restricted by a future congress, some forms of this will remain. Also, political changes occur every 4-8 years. Sooner or later, the other side will control the same levers. Instead of targeting immigration, it could be used to target a community/ideology/group of individuals you align with.
This is all correct. The implication is the only long-term solution is dissolution of DHS.
Whatever functions we need can be rebuilt from scratch later. But this is a rebuild moment, not a refactor moment.
Nonsense. This administration erased entire programs with the stroke of a pen. A future administration could do the same. Everything this administration has done can be unraveled.
Unless it involves the pet projects of those who are really in control.
Not sure if you're being sarcastic or actually believe that. History clearly show its naive to think that will happen. See Post-9/11 domestic surveillance programs by the NSA ramped up during the GW Bush years continuing or even increasing under Obama. We just haven't had a Snowden level leak to show what programs have persisted in the last two administration.
We must push for radical candidates who will be willing to inflict infinite punishment on those who have wronged us. The appetite for such a candidate is brewing.
No, what they are saying is the future Democrat administration which will hem and haw at how their hands are tied will be lying.
They will have the power to at very least lay off every person involved. But will they? Probably not (your point). Trump (illegally) shut down the DOE and USAID by simply firing everyone employed there.
in theory, maybe; in practice, no.
look at the longevity of the Patriot Act - once in place ("because of X!") it's extremely difficult to kill as all kinds of forces work against killing it and it's easy to scare the public about "what will happen if it's not there"
So 700k a year for 142 analysts who might analyze this very comment someday and trace it back to me, great.
I'm liking and commenting under my real name. Fuck ICE.
I’m Spencer Fleming and I approve this message
Fuck ICE. Abolish the agency. Hold ICE agents accountable.
so brave
Hey, analyst reading this:
You should ask for a raise. Seriously look up income in your area, you're getting scammed.
And I upvoted and replied. Great.
Now I’m lumped into this! Greaaat just great
The US Constitution is actually pretty nice if it were enforced by Congress and the courts.
https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/amendment-4/
"Fourth Amendment
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized."
> if it were enforced by Congress
I wish we had a functional congress that was actually motivated to do their job.
https://citizensimpeachment.com/active-impeachments/
All of the impeachment resolutions are dying in committee, too.
The question is, will this hold up against non-citizens as well.
The word citizen is intentionally absent from the text of the amendment. Bill of rights applies to all persons*, not just citizens.
Even those in slavery when the BoR was created?
Exactly this; how do you have a country of law and order if you don’t extend at least the prosecution rights to the people within it’s borders, citizen or not?
No one spoke out when the government started abducting US citizens (who happened to be brown) off the street and killing them in detention centers or putting them on deportation planes to random countries without any due process. This is just the next logical step of the program. All authoritarian governments handle dissidents in this way.
Lots of people have spoken out... some have even died while speaking out.
Do you have any references for these claims?
* Which US citizens have been abducted and by who? Which have been killed?
* Which US citizens found themselves in US detention centers (without lawful arrest) ?
* Which US citizens were placed in other countries without judicial review?
As far as I can tell:
No US citizens have been deported. No US citizens have been detained after evidence of their citizenship has been produced, which is a fast process in practice (taking a few hours), and has affected a few hundred people in total swept up during larger enforcement operations. The worst examples I can find are "At least 36 citizens were held at least a day without being able to contact a lawyer or family." No US citizens have died in detention, nor been killed. In detention, deaths have risen on previous years, but are due to existing medical issues being untreated rather than anyone being killed.
It's hard to say exactly how many because ICE isn't keeping records precisely to make it easier to hide their captives. There are more than a few reports of midnight flights around the country with lawyers being unable to contact their clients.
But for just a taste, here's a propublica article on the matter.
https://www.propublica.org/article/immigration-dhs-american-...
Yes, this is the only evidence I can find of anything even tangentially claimed in this comment. "At least 36 citizens were held at least a day without being able to contact a lawyer or family."
It's unclear how that number could be "0" if there's any immigration enforcement at all. That is: supposing a person is likely to be present without authorisation in the country, and is unable to offer any evidence of citizenship, then what?
It seems this is an incredibly small number for such a large operation, ie., the worst case treatment of US citizens appears to be 36 held for a day.
Could this be improved? Presumably.
If someone requires medical treatment and you prevent them accessing it and they die, then you killed them.
[deleted]
Many people spoke out against it. I don't think "nobody spoke out" is the problem here
"No one spoke out" <- this is just demonstrably false. If you want to live in a doomfantasy be my guest, but don't lie.
yes, people spoke out, but i take your point. a lot of people seemed cool with it or were even excited for it when they thought it wouldn't effect them, but obviously, if they could get away with it with a subset of the population, that subset would only grow.
Many citizens and some politicians spoke out.
> No one
did you speak out?
because those of us who marched in the streets and got tear gassed in front of ICE facilities did speak out
and brave souls like Renee Good and Alex Pretti were killed for speaking out
Plenty of people spoke out but none of the people with power to stop it (courts, Congress)
I mean, it's cliche but vote! Use your right to vote and vote in people who will hold those who abuse their power accountable.
If everyone who was allowed to vote actually voted, I think there's a reasonably high chance we'd have better politicians. As it stands, there's this pretend "virtue" from a bunch of pseudo-intellectual morons who think they're cool by abstaining from their right to vote, and dedicate a lot of time trying to convince people that their votes don't matter.
Cynicism is always tempting but ultimately lazy; if they votes didn't matter then there wouldn't be politicians wasting their time trying to make it hard or impossible for you to vote.
Voting is important, but your voice doesn't stop there. Take to the streets. Block some roads. Occupy some buildings.
The Serbians did that for two years straight, until their government resigned and called for new elections. Look at videos from a protest: https://www.reddit.com/r/europe/comments/1jc29fk/breathtakin...
If a much poorer country with (for now!) much worse repression can do it, what's your excuse, Americans?
Politics isn't just the ballot box every couple of years. Politics is always and everywhere.
Blocking roads seems like a very fast way to have people turn on you and your cause. It might be effective in some places, but in much of America I think it's counter productive.
"Calling for new elections" is a regular process in a parliamentary system, and so protestors can pressure a government into that. The US runs on a fixed election schedule and change doesn't happen outside of that (Congressmen and Senators resigning en masse is a pure fantasy).
I don't disagree with anything you said. I'm just saying that voting is something that's a right given to US citizens [1] that is woefully underutilized. Only about half of those eligible bother voting! If you don't like the current state of politics, you should at the very least do the minimal effort to participate in our republic.
That is, of course, the minimal thing, but I think we'd have way better elections if people just used this fundamental right.
[1] Yes yes I know about disenfranchisement for felonies and the like, you don't need to lecture me.
When the government is shooting citizens in the face, disenfranchising voters, dismantling election committees, and encouraging militant groups to show up to polling places and intimidate vote counters, all while claiming every election they've been a part of was rigged against them, it's natural for people to look outside of voting to make an impact.
I will be voting, like I always have, but I live in a state where that's easy to do. This administration is testing the limits of what people will put up with.
Lots of people did.
And what did you do about it? Probably the same as the rest of us.. nothing that actually matters.
We have no power except a vote. Our country is too big (physically) to effectively protest. Our wealth distribution is too large. Our social safety nets are laughable. People can't even take time off work to protest, or if they just didn't show up they can be fired without recourse.
Our country and government is basically built for the people having no actual power. We are at the mercy of the ultra rich that control everything and a large majority of all of our "elected" officials.
[deleted]
Once they have deported the last undocumented immigrant this system won’t be just decommissioned, it will be repurposed.
Everyone can be stripped off their citizenship now that birthright is debatable (Supreme Court upheld with a narrow 6-3). At which point they are illegals.
The infra we are building for our future dictator is awesome.
Remember those horrible vicious ni… I mean Haitians in Springfield? The ones who are "poisoning the blood of the country", "probably have AIDS", and are "eating the dogs" and "eating the cats"?
They were legal, every last one of them. They were under Temporary Protected Status (TPS). There was no "law and order" justification to object to their presence. Didn't stop the GOP from going after them. Trump and Vance viciously attacked them with the full support of the conservative media. The administration repealed their TPS protection, turning people who had done no wrong into fugitives.
This is about race. Always has been. When they run out of "illegals", they'll turn people into "illegals". When they run out of immigrants entirely, they'll overturn the 14th Amendment and start stripping citizenship from native-born Americans of the wrong color. They've already tried just that, and three motherfuckers on the Supreme Court voted to let them.
what's the problem with ending a temporary protection status? it's supposed to be temporary it's in the name, unless I'm mistaken that program started 16 years ago that seems way past temporary.
There is no problem if it is done for rational reasons and in a fair/unbiased way, but if it is done for irrational reasons (xenophobia, racisms, bigotry, etc) and in unfair/biased way then that is a major problem; the motivations and methods matter.
The name for TPS is not the program is temporary, rather the protection itself is temporary protection (hurr durr) until either the person can return home or seek other means of legal status.
Because it was done for racist reasons. "Poisoning the blood of the country" and all that. The government is not allowed to do anything for an illegal reason.
You in a later comment:
> So the country is too dangerous because of the people? Why would we want people from one of the most dangerous places in the world in our country?
So it turns our you weren't "just asking questions" in good faith, but rather pushing the standard progressively-louder dog whistles. It always boils down to the collectivism of handwaving about "those people", doesn't it?
At this point I not longer give any credence to arguments about "immigration". There are legitimate criticisms to be made for sure, but they're utterly minuscule relative to this revanchist movement to destroy what little Constitutional liberties we have left.
[deleted]
This seems like a problem, reaction, solution scenario where Big Tech was always the solution and needed a problem and a reaction.
It's also their preservation mechanism. expect some of the people investigated to be "anti tech extremists" https://www.wired.com/story/us-law-enforcement-warns-of-anti...
Okay, who here doesn't read this $100M and think something along the lines of Dr. Evil...
Let's add some levity to the situation, and here's the link: https://youtu.be/EJR1H5tf5wE?si=lGJ7_L0IN31WNMKE
(un)fun fact, Deloitte currently staffs what looks like a smaller version of this contract, that this may be intended to replace based on the timing. Example, award ID 70CDCR21FR0000022 on USAspending.gov
ICE is doing something important. They are cleansing the country of outsiders. It is frightening to imagine the US ending up like Great Britain, where the local population is already being oppressed.
Most un-American 142 intelligence operatives to ever exist.
Don't let the US shove this down to other countries' throats. Because, that's what they do, and they're very good at it.
As flawed as the civil service is, it's the notion of "contractors" which concerns me most.
This was once known as Gestapo and Stasi.
Why is this flagged? @dang
I thought the NSA already was the internal spy agency?
Why have one when you can have two?
NSA has a culture of at least sort of following the laws that govern them. This needs to be ICE to land with people who will happily ignore court orders.
Genuine question for people here who still like Trump...does this kind of stuff not scare you?
It doesn’t, because they think he’s on their side. As long as he keeps hurting the right people, they’ll tolerate anything he throws at them.
Sure, but I would actually like to hear what a Trump supporter has to say here. I suspect you and I have a lot of overlap on our opinions, which is great but sort of tangential to what I want to know.
You are extremely unlikely to actually get someone to chat with your earnestly about this on this site. They will get downvoted, flagged, and mobbed by ten other people who want to vent their righteous indignation at your interlocutor.
You will have to know someone personally or read sites that don't just reflect back your existing world view.
Good luck.
There are plenty in this thread, and on this site (social media psychosis affects the terminally online more)
They never address the meat of the issue, it's always some sensationalist whataboutism. In this case, what about all the illegal immigration. Big scary urgent threat! No time to think about civil liberties! No time to consider the restrictions on the government written into its very charter! Oh but don't you know Democrats did bad stuff too!
I'm most certainly willing to update my views, and my characterization. But they would have to engage with the actual points being made, and they never do.
> Sure, but I would actually like to hear what a Trump supporter has to say here.
That didn't happen.
And if it did, it wasn't that bad.
And if it was, that's not a big deal.
And if it is, that's not my fault.
And if it was, I didn't mean it.
And if I did, you deserved it.
Genuine answer: His admin is not doing enough, fast enough. The only scary thing is what happens if they don't dismantle internationalist oligarchs this term. They will come back with a vengeance.
Dont expect answer form one, not here since reactions would be predictable.
They are getting warm and fuzzy in their echo chambers and unfiltered reality rarely comes to them.
I wish I had some solution, but apart from having Thanos glove and with a snap increase IQ of lower 50% of the population by 30 points, or similarly bioengineered nano virus, I dont.
I've tried numerous times to penetrate this membrane of dumb emotional shit but its all negative emotions and insecurities down the hole, us-vs-them and similar, no facts, just trivial to abuse shit. Good moral honest guys always had it much harder there than manipulating sociopaths.
It is just crazy to me that people traded their rights away just because they got mad at some DEI programs and trans people.
Keep people in “system 1” thinking to control them. Given the palpable shift in online conversation since a couple of Russian datacenters got blown up, it’s clear that although these fault lines always existed in US society, fringe opinions have been massively signal-boosted by bots for quite some time. I suspect there’s been a psychological Cold War going on online for at least the last decade or two, with a whole ecosystem of grifters and ragebait view farmers bottom-feeding off of state sponsored PsyOps, leading a corrupt inner circle of elite opportunists to take advantage of the resulting anger for personal gain. We’ll probably never get to tease apart what was a natural side effect of social media and what was engineered deliberately but I bet the story would be every bit as fascinating as the Manhattan project.
> Given the palpable shift in online conversation since a couple of Russian datacenters got blown up
This was a rumor based on a misunderstanding and has since been debunked. It was Yandex search crawler traffic that was reduced.
We do plenty of manipulation and divide-and-conquer on ourselves, which is heavily documented at least since the Cold War. No need to blame it all on outsiders, although certainly some of that is present as well.
Not 'outsiders', russians. They never stopped viewing US as mortal enemy, maybe lowered this a bit during Yeltsin but that paranoid fuck puttin' started quiet war against whole west from Day 1 in tye office.
Many times within EU russian 'diplomats' were caught giving pesky bribes to weak bureaucrats (ie 500 euro for some state secrets)
> Given the palpable shift in online conversation since a couple of Russian datacenters got blown up
Forgive me, but hacker news is the only social media I participate in. Is this a pretty commonly held sentiment? Like are other social media users commenting on this trend? Any news articles? Thanks
This was an early rumor, but it’s been debunked. See https://bsky.app/profile/antibot4navalny.bsky.social/post/3m... and https://cybernews.com/news/yandex-data-centers-bot-traffic-d... and here https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=50042416
Look what the Europeans did from their antisemitism in the 1940s. We need to criminalize hate politics like we've banned other antisocial behaviors such as assault and rape. This just feels so obvious to me. Political hatemongering isn't some mystifying slippery ghost.
But no we're like "oh so we have one candidate that wants to adjust the budget to fund some libraries and this other one that wants to build concentration camps and imprison transgendered people. Alright, let's allow both on the ballot"
Being a violent hateful ignorant bigot isn't a qualifying condition for administering civic life.
Ironically, the right-wing has been the most vocal in pushing for criminalizing anti-semitism as of late, largely to curtail pro-Palestinian protesting.
But let me guess, that'd be bad because you meant "criminalization of speech I don't agree with", not "criminalization of 'hate speech'".
If you oppose them, it'd be good to understand them instead of being shocked about straw men. If you'd like to understand them, it's very easy to find their media and thought leaders sharing eg. demographic data. "Remigration" is the key term, now.
> If you'd like to understand them, it's very easy to find their media and thought leaders…
You can't really understand a hypocrite by taking their public utterances at face value.
I understand what they're saying -- they're still using straw men arguments. So what's your point.
[deleted]
Its been a bad habit since 9/11 and the disgusting mess that is the PATRIOT act.
Never underestimate how much most Americans will gladly shit on their freedoms if they're told it will hurt someone slightly different than them.
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
[deleted]
yeah they may frame it as "uncontrolled migration" but given recent events like the Bo French tweet about Indian Americans, "uncontrolled migration" appears to be more of a euphemism for non-white people becoming more present in American society. Hence the desire to roll back a pluralistic democracy and install an ethnonationalist authoritarian that will privilege a certain class of people and punish others. This is at least the animus behind the MAGA core
As for swing voters, they really just wanted inflation to get under control. So they didn't even trade away their rights for DEI or migration control, just inflation. A bit disconcerting to see that people will so easily give away the very rights that people fought decades to have.
> In this case, it was unchecked migrants coming in at high rates with no good plan for integration- like if HR just started hiring a bunch of random people to your team with no onboarding process, and now you're on the hook for the new workload.
Did this actually happen though? Friends/family in e.g. Texas/California are unconvinced, and I don't think I ever saw any real data versus just scaremongering ("they're eating our cats and dogs").
I found a source from 2024 that seems trustworthy. It comes to the conclusion that about 2.5 million were "released into the US", while an estimated 1.6 million snuck in. That's Feb 2021 to Oct 2023.
The details are complicated, and higher numbers seem to come from the fact that usually _encounters_ are counted, in the wild and at ports of entry, which includes millions of people who were turned around, many of whom will have tried and been encountered multiple times.
The source is extremely comprehensive and deep, way beyond what I wrote above.
https://www.factcheck.org/2024/02/breaking-down-the-immigrat...
That being said, the HR bit that you also quoted from GP is a bad analogy. It should be clear that immigration is quite different than onboarding new hires, something a country literally built on immigration like the US is a testament to.
Edit: As someone is mentioning elsewhere in the thread, let's not forget that during the Biden admin there was a bipartisan immigration and border security bill, including many provisions previously demanded by the Republicans, that got rejected in a turnaround by the Republicans in the end in the election year.
there has been a huge demographic shift in Texas it's not really debatable if the demographics are changing. non Hispanic whites were around 65 to 70 percent 50 years ago to about 37% now. Hispanic went from around 12% to around 40%
Yes, it's widely reported from both sides. Even people like Andrew on Channel5 covered people coming over in droves. I really don't know of anyone refuting it, just whether or not it's good or bad.
Weren't the ads Trump ran on trans fear some of the most effective of the entire cycle?
On what basis are you deciding what is or isn't an issue? You think right wing media doesn't talk about DEI and trans people all day? It's like the only issue they have left to win "middle America" over on.
Who likes seeing ICE thugs round up non criminals on the basis of skin color and nationality alone? Not enough of the middle. I'm seeing more and more Trump voters saying they didn't vote for this. The presidency is won on the Obama-Trump-Biden-Trump voter not on partisans. How many of these voters have articulated the same regret when it comes his policies re DEI or trans rights?
Maybe you are projecting because it's easier to come up with an excuse based on alleged economic malaise?
>In this case, it was unchecked migrants coming in at high rates with no good plan for integration
Theis issue with conservatives isn't the policy you believe in, the issue is that you are just so unbelievably ignorant of how the world works, to where you see an issue like migrants coming in, and think that its such a big problem that the best course of action is giving a flamethrower to a convicted felon rapist and likely a pedo (all the things you supposedly firmly stand against), and trusting him to burn just the right parts down with authoritative force (something you are also supposedly firmly against)
Furthermore, if you bothered to actually care, you would have paid attention, Dems completely would agree with you that undocumented migrants were a problem - Biden had a border bill that was bipartisan, supported by border patrol, that would have allocated all the correct funding to reign in the asylum process, which would have correctly filtered the people that were coming here to work, versus those taking advantage of the system. And consequently, Trump told the Republicans to vote against that bill because it would hurt his chances of getting elected.
So for people like you, it was never about the migrants - you don't actually care. It was always about racism and sexism. At least there isn't any questions about it anymore.
So, a Stasi more or less? Or perhaps KGB is more accurate
Hot take: This is a grifting and jobs program, not an actual solution to a real problem.
Whats the "real" problem? People working for roofing companies? American citizens commit more crime than immigrants by an order of magnitude.
People doing illegal things is the problem. Change the law if you think it's wrong but it's the executive branch's duty to enforce the law.
You can't sit back here and be upset that Trump decides to selectively enforce the law in the ways he sees fit while approving of the exact behavior when there's a different executive.
This is why the problem of executive power exists, people only care when they disagree and actively approve when they agree.
I think it's a Curtis Yarvin take that political power is based on a party's jobs program. In that sense this is never surprising.
The starting people will have top secret security clearance. =(
Grifting, purchasing loyalty, and building a police state panopticon in case of inconvenient election results. A real dystopic trifecta!
YCombinator and their lackies in Big Tech have promoted these types of abuses to occur. The comment section here will be filled with people who lack any substance but will gladly provide lip service. The stories of the modern day Gestapo cannot be told without Silicon Valley.
YC loves domestic spying. They can't get enough of it. Flock, Conntour, Lexius, Protent, Ornadyne, AvairSense, etc.
US of A fone fully rogue. With the help of the tech bros.
[deleted]
Speaking as a die-hard Libertarian who has seen the Democrats and Republicans as approximately equally undesirable for most of my life... I'm voting for every Democrat I can at the Federal level in this coming election. Possibly at the State level as well. Because what the modern day GOP has become is so vile, so reprehensible, that there is now a legit reason for preferring one over the other. And we have to have people in office who can check or counteract at least some of what these Fascist assholes are trying to do.
Will I have to pinch my nose to vote Democrat? Absolutely. Will I feel icky doing it? Absolutely. But will I do it anyway because it's the best choice given the current situation? Absolutely.
Fingers crossed this election isn't stolen. We know they'll try, but here's hoping they're thwarted.
[deleted]
Well there's a reason why people have been calling the US the 4th Reich for the last 10-20 yrs. Its not just political, the similarties are there.
The Gestapo didn't really spy on German citizens, it just waited for those good citizens to denounce each other then rounded them up.
[deleted]
The Fourth Amendment to the constitution disagrees. Blanket surveillance by definition flies in the face of our right against unreasonable search.
> “shooting somebody in the face with a gun”
If you try to visualize this in action, replace somebody with a bad guy. And you quickly see there’s nothing inherently wrong with the idea.
[deleted]
> If you try to visualize this in action, replace economic migrants from Latin America with spies from China. And you quickly see there’s nothing inherently wrong with the idea.
Is this a joke?
Now replace "spies from China" with "your husband/wife", and you will see, that yes, there is something inherently wrong with the idea
"Nightmare" program is right. When the wifey asks where I was last night and can check my story with the ICE app.
Yeah what’s disingenuous about the “spies from China” is that if they are already identified as spies they would be under targeted surveillance already.
Do you think privacy has value?
Dangerously foolish.
It is tiring to hear law enforcement be described as a weapon. Law enforcement keeps society functioning. Journalists and public figures who rule up people to be against the law are the real bad actors here trying to subvert American society.
>It is tiring to hear law enforcement be described as a weapon. Law enforcement keeps society functioning. Journalists and public figures who rule up people to be against the law are the real bad actors here trying to subvert American society.
Tell that to Ilhan Omar[0], Letitia James[1]. James Comey[2], Renee Goode[3], Alex Pretti[4] and countless others.
How does that boot leather taste, friend?
[0] https://www.politico.com/news/2026/10/12/ilhan-omar-home-rai...
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecution_of_Letitia_James
[2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prosecution_of_James_Comey
[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_of_Ren%C3%A9e_Good
Actions have consequences.
Supporting law enforcement is not boot licking. And yes I will tell that to all those people you listed. Law enforcement needs to enforce laws and control over those trying to commit violence and fraud to others.
> It is tiring to hear law enforcement be described as a weapon. Law enforcement keeps society functioning. Journalists and public figures who rule up people to be against the law are the real bad actors here trying to subvert American society.
ICE is against the law. Here's some videos of them doing illegal things.
https://www.propublica.org/article/videos-ice-dhs-immigratio...
> after more than an hour, agents held down Zapata Rivera’s arms. One, who Zapata Rivera’s lawyer says wore a baseball cap reading “Ne Quis Effugiat” — Latin for “So That None Will Escape” — pressed his thumbs into the arteries on Zapata Rivera’s neck. The young man then appeared to pass out as bystanders screamed.
> The technique is known as a carotid restraint. The two carotid arteries carry 70% of the brain’s blood flow; block them, and a person can quickly lose consciousness. The tactic can cause strokes, seizures, brain damage — and death.
> In a bystander video of Zapata Rivera’s arrest, his eyes roll back in his head and he suffers an apparent seizure, convulsing so violently that his daughter, seated in his lap, shakes with him.
> In a social media post after the incident and in its statement to ProPublica, DHS did not cite a deadly threat. Instead, it referenced the charges against Zapata Rivera’s wife and suggested he had only pretended to have a medical crisis while refusing help from paramedics. “Imagine FAKING a seizure to help a criminal escape justice,” the post said.
I don't feel sympathy towards those assaulting law enforcement. They brought it upon themselves by doing illegal things. We cannot have people assaulting law enforcement. This is not how civilized society works.
I'd rather my tax money wasted on get US people watched and silenced, than bombing schools and killing children in Middle East.
I mean if I can choose, I want my tax money spent on making Americans healthier, but I don't get to choose. ICE has $70B to spend, this is just 1/700. I'm sure they will do more before next congress trying to crawl back their money.
If the people in the US get watched and silenced, how will they effectively pressure the govt to not bomb children in the Middle East?
I can’t fathom this kind of thinking. It’s not a case of having to choose between the lesser of evils, it’s a case of having some principles and making decisions based on them.
You can say no.
It's the same forces doing the bombing and the spying. Want to object to Israel/the US murdering a school full of girls? Guess what, now you've got a Palantir tag on you. Push hard enough and maybe Bill Ackman will jump on Twitter and get you blacklisted.
Showing the first 185 comments to keep this page fast. Continue on Hacker News.