[HN Gopher] When the physicists need burner phones, that's when ...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       When the physicists need burner phones, that's when you know
       America's changed
        
       Author : giuliomagnifico
       Score  : 218 points
       Date   : 2025-03-29 18:45 UTC (4 hours ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (www.theguardian.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (www.theguardian.com)
        
       | whatshisface wrote:
       | One of the important things to watch for is the linkup of the
       | papers please people with the internet scanners. Right now they
       | seem to be limited to seizing your personal effects, but that is
       | a matter of coordination between departments of the government.
       | If there are laws against it, they are adjacent to other laws
       | which were ignored even in previous years. Once that occurs the
       | use of professional use devices will not make the crossing safe.
        
         | FredPret wrote:
         | Sounds like a social credit score derived from your entire
         | online identity.
         | 
         | I hope that picture of reality stays in Black Mirror.
         | 
         | It would represent a huge decline in personal liberty in the
         | West so I'm betting it will be so unpopular as to be
         | impossible, especially as older voters are replaced by digital
         | natives who are aware of the problem.
        
           | tdeck wrote:
           | > I'm betting it will be so unpopular as to be impossible
           | 
           | People have said the same thing about gutting Social
           | Security, but it seems like that's on the chopping block
           | right now unfortunately.
        
             | FredPret wrote:
             | Social Security is very popular but hasn't been baked into
             | the Western soul for the past 1-2k years like the idea of
             | personal agency & liberty has.
             | 
             | In addition, SS requires a budget so is more open to
             | controversy. Respecting individuals is free; violating
             | their rights requires a budget as well.
        
               | Avshalom wrote:
               | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atlantic_slave_trade Whose
               | personal agency and liberty?
        
               | FredPret wrote:
               | Slavery was always widespread; it was Westerners who saw
               | the moral inconsistency between their self-image and
               | owning slaves, and then fought wars with one another and
               | others to end it globally.
               | 
               | The journey from serfdom to modern human rights was a
               | long one, but it had a clear upward trend.
        
               | gessha wrote:
               | > personal agency & liberty
               | 
               | Those two were very suppressed under monarchy and the
               | Christian religion. It wasn't until modern secularism
               | that those two truly blossomed.
        
               | FredPret wrote:
               | Even so there were clear steps in the right direction.
               | 
               | Monarchs grew steadily more circumscribed from a _de
               | jure_ point of view. Eventually they became
               | constitutional monarchs, then mere figureheads. Their _de
               | facto_ power also went from absolute steadily downward.
               | 
               | The same trend happened with Christianity: at one time
               | the Pope was so powerful, he broke up the Holy Roman
               | Empire. But there were many reformations, revolutions,
               | Protestantism.
               | 
               | There's a clear trend of decentralization across the
               | entire West, spanning a thousand years - because of
               | individuals insisting on what we now call their
               | inalienable human rights.
        
           | tdb7893 wrote:
           | I think we're seeing right now that at least a decent
           | fraction (even if it's not half) would be for it as long as
           | it targets the right people. I think it's a mistake to think
           | people in general are very tied to specific civil liberties
           | for other people.
        
           | thrance wrote:
           | Everything can be made popular through the right wing
           | propaganda pipeline, given enough times. Republicans are now
           | happy to see medicaid and medicare taken away, tariffs
           | imposed on everything they buy...
        
             | tdeck wrote:
             | Indeed, in 5 years we'll have centrist "thought leaders"
             | telling us that maybe we should give up on women's suffrage
             | because it's a losing issue.
        
           | netsharc wrote:
           | Your comment assumes the sanctity of elections...
           | 
           | How much can I win betting the 2026 or 2028 elections will
           | look more Russia-like (or Turkey-like) vs. an election that
           | could be called "free and fair"?
        
         | epistasis wrote:
         | This is already happening to find out who has been supporting
         | Palenstinians in Gaza, and conflating that as support for
         | Hamas, and then deporting people.
         | 
         | Permanent residents a people with student visas are advised to
         | not travel due to the risks or arbitrary detention, search of
         | social media, and deportation on trumped up charges. This
         | researcher, asked to carry frog embryos by her advisor in the
         | way back from France, has been detained becuase od the
         | paperwork around them and may be deported to a hostile nation
         | on those grounds:
         | 
         | https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025/mar/27/russian-scie...
         | 
         | I only link to this one because it's closest to my very narrow
         | area of biology but this sort of thing is happening daily and
         | on even more egregious grounds.
         | 
         | We currently live in an authoritarian state, we just don't all
         | realize it equally, _yet_.
        
       | renewiltord wrote:
       | The people opposing these things do themselves a serious
       | disservice by conflating someone who attended the funeral of the
       | top guy of a designated terrorist group with the biologist moving
       | biomaterial between research labs.
       | 
       | Now every time I hear one of these stories I'm just waiting for
       | the other shoe to drop and hear about how the frog biologist
       | attended Prigozhin's funeral (purely out of recognition for his
       | work as a chef, of course)
        
         | whatshisface wrote:
         | There are in reality only two types of actions, those that are
         | illegal, and those that you think you have every right to do.
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | Fair enough, the government has every right to deport the
           | frog biologist. It's not illegal for them to do so.
           | Regardless, I think they should not have.
        
             | selimthegrim wrote:
             | I must've missed all the people we deported for attending
             | IRA funerals.
        
         | rsoto2 wrote:
         | Right, because the entire US/Israeli/NATO apparatus isn't
         | responsible for terrorizing and murdering tens of _thousands_
         | of children in Palestine. No, that is a just execution of
         | children, surely, at least that's what a dutiful netizen
         | believes.
        
           | renewiltord wrote:
           | I think it would be unsurprising to me if Palestine deported
           | an American who attended an Israeli general's funeral. I'd
           | say "hmm, yeah, makes sense".
        
             | umanwizard wrote:
             | The Palestinian Authority doesn't control who is allowed to
             | enter and live there; Israel does. So "Palestine" has no
             | way to deport anyone.
        
               | khazhoux wrote:
               | Then replace "Palestine" with the name of any nearby
               | nation.
        
           | tdeck wrote:
           | We've got US Senator John Fetterman making a trip to Israel
           | to get a silver plated pager from Netanyahu and publicly joke
           | about a terrorist attack that killed children. The US is
           | surreal sometimes.
        
         | timewizard wrote:
         | > who attended the funeral of the top guy of a designated
         | terrorist group
         | 
         | Designated by whom? I personally have never once felt "terror"
         | from the existence of Hamas nor do I feel confronted by those
         | who would go to the funerals of it's leaders.
        
           | tqi wrote:
           | By the government of this country and many others.
        
             | timewizard wrote:
             | It was by the US State Department in 1997.
             | 
             | Those are either some seriously tricky terrorists or this
             | designation was never meaningful to the citizens of this
             | country.
        
           | 141205 wrote:
           | Wonderful, now we're at a point where Hacker News has people
           | defending a fundamentalist antisemitic hate group that's
           | quite literally performed suicide bombings and launched
           | rockets at civilians.
           | 
           | Maybe you haven't felt terror from them because you aren't
           | one of the innocent Jewish civilians who have been
           | deliberately targeted. Can you go back to reddit where your
           | similarly deranged opinions are tolerated, and stay off of
           | what is meant to be a relatively sane forum?
        
             | tqi wrote:
             | Who said Ted Bundy was a serial killer? Never murdered me,
             | so...
        
         | tdeck wrote:
         | Ah, the old trope of pretending to give a movement advice so
         | they don't "do a disservice" to their cause, advice which just
         | happens to be about throwing marginalized people under the bus
         | yet again.
         | 
         | It's as transparent as it is craven. In the 1960s 50% of white
         | people polled said that MLK was hurting the effort for civil
         | rights. It's because they didn't want to want those civil
         | rights to begin with, in the same way that you're clearly
         | totally cool with the genocide and don't want rights for those
         | who opposed it.
        
         | jimbob45 wrote:
         | Would these people feel the same if he'd attended Hitler's
         | funeral rather than a Hamas funeral?
        
           | freen wrote:
           | True advocate for freedom of speech here.
        
           | tialaramex wrote:
           | "In accordance with Hitler's wishes, their corpses were
           | carried outside to the garden behind the Reich Chancellery,
           | where they were placed in a bomb crater, doused with petrol,
           | and set on fire"
           | 
           | I would describe attending this "funeral" as merely "arriving
           | too late". Hitler was dead, Germany was in ruins.
           | 
           | I'd have more questions about somebody who travelled for the
           | funeral of Levrentiy Beria, because it appears some people
           | (unaware, or deliberately without thinking about what Hitler
           | had ordered done) liked Hitler, I can't find any records of
           | people who liked Beria, they only feared him.
        
       | pmags wrote:
       | I'm a US scientist and the use of minimalist phone and a laptop
       | is something I'm planning for all my travel.
       | 
       | This is for the simple reason that I have determined, based on a
       | large body of cases that are accumulating at a disturbing rate,
       | that the current US administration considers themselves "above
       | the law". Furthermore, the administration has shown that they are
       | eager to carry out actions that violate due process and freedom
       | of speech against anyone they perceive as opposing their
       | policies/views.
       | 
       | EDIT: I'm happy to document such cases for those who have not
       | been paying attention, but I also encourage those who are
       | doubtful to simply search the many examples that have been posted
       | here on HN (unfortunately, many flagged in an attempt to suppress
       | discussion).
        
         | dataflow wrote:
         | Do you not feel unsafe sharing this publicly?
        
           | whatshisface wrote:
           | That is not really relevant, because you sort of have to say
           | what's true whatever happens to you, as required at the
           | intersection of the duties of a scientist, of a citizen of a
           | republic, and even on the basis of the basic tenants of the
           | country's majority religion. In some sense to live a steady
           | life you have to be resigned to potential misfortunes, even
           | if you do not want them to happen to you.
        
             | roxolotl wrote:
             | I've been struggling with this. I've recently started using
             | a new handle as a way to distance myself a bit. I wouldn't
             | expect it to hold up under scrutiny though. And then I
             | wonder about the moral obligation to say what is right. So
             | is it worth, or even morally right, to create a new
             | pseudoanoynomous identity?
        
               | lantry wrote:
               | It is easier to change your behavior, but it is better to
               | change your government.
        
               | stevenAthompson wrote:
               | We can not change the government without changing the
               | people, and the people do not want to change.
        
               | mfuzzey wrote:
               | why? Serious question - as a European I'm really baffled
               | by the US these days?
        
               | stevenAthompson wrote:
               | I can only speculate, but I suspect it's related to our
               | infantilization. A proper democracy requires an informed
               | and rational electorate, and we just don't have that.
               | 
               | As I said elsewhere in this post, most adults now read
               | below the sixth grade level. Popular media has been
               | getting shorter and shorter, all while relying less and
               | less on the printed word. Meanwhile the most popular news
               | sources are targeted to people with the comprehension and
               | reading skills of children, and the most popular movies
               | are literally based on children's comic books. Hell,
               | video games outsell movies by an ever increasing margin
               | and the majority of adults now find it
               | impossible/unpleasant to sit through even an entire comic
               | book film without checking their cell phones. Even music
               | has become increasing simple and repetitive, designed not
               | to challenge the listener. Our shared culture is almost
               | entirely the culture of children.
               | 
               | So then, do we really expect these adult-sized children
               | to be capable of facing down hard choices, or making
               | rational informed decisions? No, they accept the
               | "obvious" (but often incorrect) answers offered by
               | charlatans and simpletons in lieu of genuine reason and
               | the hard work of finding actual (and often painful)
               | solutions for the very messy real world.
        
               | masfuerte wrote:
               | I find it unpleasant to sit through an entire comic book
               | film. The problem is not my attention span.
        
               | giraffe_lady wrote:
               | I don't mean this in a shitty way but how much of what
               | you know about the US comes from recent (say last 40
               | years) media and culture sources?
               | 
               | Because if you read into its history, I mean we started
               | with a genocide and chattel slavery. Then created &
               | implemented an entirely novel and comprehensive social-
               | legal framework to justify and manage an apartheid
               | society for another few generations. Lynching was a
               | beloved public spectacle just a century ago. Hitler &
               | Hendrik Verwoerd looked to us for inspiration.
               | 
               | I'm american and not particularly an america-hater
               | overall, I could create an equivalent list of positive
               | things we've accomplished. But both are true, and the
               | above are facts. What's happening now has always been
               | part of our country too. We have never really reckoned
               | with this, and it will keep coming back until we do.
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | One of the biggest signs that nobody knows was the
               | difficulty of predicting the outcome of the past
               | election.
        
               | muzzledman wrote:
               | >> it is better to change your government.
               | 
               | Not really possible in the US since 2023. Specific
               | political speech, even writing op-eds, has been
               | criminalized or black-list-worthy by both sides of the
               | political spectrum -- democrat and and republican.
        
               | pk-protect-ai wrote:
               | Wait... Trump did it, and he violates the constitution
               | every day since he took office... The democrats and
               | republicans are irrelevant already. He and those money
               | behind him, already changing the government. Do I get it
               | wrong?
        
               | lukan wrote:
               | "So is it worth, or even morally right, to create a new
               | pseudoanoynomous identity?"
               | 
               | It is your life, you choose your battles.
               | 
               | But if not enough dare to speak their mind openly, then
               | this will be the new normal.
        
               | stevenAthompson wrote:
               | Fifty four percent of American adults read below the
               | equivalent of a sixth-grade level. The situation in
               | America is not some temporary aberration, it is a
               | permanent change in the status quo.
               | 
               | Anti-intellectual populism is the new normal, and any
               | thinking person who values their safety should be
               | weighing anonymity and silence as viable options.
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | The Bolsheviks didn't want people who got the message and
               | shut up. They were extremely paranoid about them. They
               | wanted people who had been raised in the new system or
               | who had supported it when the choice was free. I don't
               | think that self-interest is morally right as a guiding
               | principle or that people who have written things as
               | clearly "aware" as your comment have the option you're
               | suggesting.
        
               | stevenAthompson wrote:
               | I understand and respect your moral position, I just feel
               | that I have an even stronger moral requirement to take
               | care of myself and my family first, and I think that
               | others should do the same.
               | 
               | As the stewardesses say, you should always put on your
               | own oxygen mask first.
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | Sure, but nobody is going to read that comment and think,
               | "this guy is a solid Bolshevik."
        
               | stevenAthompson wrote:
               | You're not wrong.
        
               | kenfox wrote:
               | I wonder if the low literacy rate is partly an artifact
               | of non-English speakers. The 54% stat seems to come from
               | PIAAC which only evaluates English literacy in the US
               | https://nces.ed.gov/surveys/piaac/faq.asp
               | 
               | The US hasn't historically had high literacy rates though
               | I definitely agree we are back to McCarthy levels of
               | anti-intellectualism. Probably worse.
        
               | geoduck14 wrote:
               | >Fifty four percent of American adults read below the
               | equivalent of a sixth-grade level
               | 
               | I have a 4th grade child. When she was in 3rd grade, I
               | realized that a 3rd grade education allows you to
               | function in _many_ different forms. A 3rd grade reading
               | level is more than enough for living in nearly every
               | situation.
               | 
               | I would hope that full grown adults develop other
               | "intellect" skills that help them in life, but as far as
               | reading level - 3rd grade is plenty.
        
             | stevenAthompson wrote:
             | It is incredibly relevant.
             | 
             | Thomas Payne published "Common Sense" anonymously, and had
             | that not happened the United States may not exist. It is a
             | relatively obvious fact that there can be no freedom of
             | speech without anonymous speech. Especially in the face of
             | tyranny.
        
               | javajosh wrote:
               | I agree that anonymous speech is an important right in
               | free societies. A novel attack on such a right in the
               | Internet Age is to allow so much speech, anonymous or
               | otherwise, ensure that most of it of is of very low
               | quality, that thoughtful criticisms are ignored or, more
               | accurately, overlooked. A related attack is to "flood the
               | zone with shit", low-quality but emotionally resonant
               | criticisms of speech, generated by hired humans and/or
               | software. (Anecdotally most readers will see any coherent
               | pushback as a signal about the OP's veracity.)
        
               | kmeisthax wrote:
               | "Censorship through free speech", in other words.
        
               | lovich wrote:
               | It's just a special case of signal jamming.
               | 
               | If you add enough random energy to any channel, it
               | becomes impossible to filter signal from noise
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | This is what Shannon disproved in the paper that founded
               | information theory. It never becomes impossible, even at
               | a fixed signal power; the noise reduces the channel
               | capacity, but never to zero.
               | 
               | https://people.math.harvard.edu/~ctm/home/text/others/sha
               | nno...
        
               | lovich wrote:
               | Ok, I'll retract my statement from "impossible" to "what
               | the layman would refer to as impossible when you take
               | into account resource constraints"
        
               | kragen wrote:
               | The layman, almost by definition, would refer to most
               | things as impossible until he sees them done; then he
               | takes them for granted because he has no idea how
               | difficult they were. His opinion about the difficulty or
               | resource requirements of any feat is worthless.
        
               | javajosh wrote:
               | Yes. I'd be curious to know how resistance movements deal
               | with this problem in other regimes. How do (did?) Navalny
               | or Imamoglu supporters organize, for example? Is it
               | simply Telegram & Signal? How does one spread a message
               | to the public under such a regime, via pamphlets? Does it
               | work to share "anonymously" on a foreign-hosted platform?
               | Asking for a friend.
        
               | whatshisface wrote:
               | By not relevant, I mean that while you can use incentives
               | to design a fair society that encourages other people to
               | do right, that's not how you can decide what to do for
               | yourself when the environment for the purposes of an
               | individual choice has already been determined.
        
           | godelski wrote:
           | First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out--
           | because I was not a socialist.         Then they came for the
           | trade unionists, and I did not speak out--because I was not a
           | trade unionist.         Then they came for the Jews, and I
           | did not speak out--because I was not a Jew.         Then they
           | came for me--and there was no one left to speak for me.
           | --Martin Niemoller
           | 
           | At some point you have to be brave and face your fears. If
           | you do not, then the light slowly dies and the darkness
           | grows. By putting your head down and hiding you protect
           | yourself but empower the very thing you are hiding from. It
           | is a classic fallacy as you are taking short term rewards at
           | a much higher cost in the long run. What you gain you borrow
           | from the future, interest applies.                 However
           | vast the darkness, we must supply our own light.       -
           | Stanley Kubrick
        
             | dataflow wrote:
             | The question wasn't about "speaking out", it was about
             | publicly disclosing your own strategy. You can do one
             | without the other.
        
               | godelski wrote:
               | What risk do they have sharing that strategy? It is an
               | extremely basic and common strategy                 >>>
               | the use of minimalist phone and a laptop is something I'm
               | planning for all my travel
               | 
               | This is a strategy recommended to literally every
               | employee that works at a national lab. Similarly to
               | anyone who works with a security clearance, SBU (secure
               | but unclassified) materials, or even ITAR (International
               | Traffic in Arms Regulations) (which includes anyone that
               | works in aerospace. A rocket or a jet is "missile
               | technology")
               | 
               | I don't think their comment has any PII or even signals
               | to adversaries how to fight back. It's just common for
               | people to have lots of information. Sure, adversaries can
               | press you about this but at that point they're probably
               | going to press you for another reason anyways.
        
         | whatshisface wrote:
         | It is probably better to start keeping public lists of
         | surprising incidents, analogously to the way lawyers would
         | summarize case precedent, but applied to the extralegal system.
         | It can be difficult to find old news articles sometimes.
        
           | bilbo0s wrote:
           | Um.
           | 
           | I don't know that I would do that if I was a scientist right
           | now.
        
             | gopher_space wrote:
             | We have reached the point where it's either something like
             | this or leave the country.
        
         | andix wrote:
         | I know this from the European perspective. A lot of companies
         | have policies for US travels for a few years now. Even some
         | government employees on official business in the US, need to
         | drop of their business phone and laptop with IT, before
         | traveling to the US. And pick up a freshly wiped one with
         | limited access, and no data on it.
         | 
         | For some countries like Russia it can be even more strict. They
         | only get laptops not connected to the company network at all,
         | and are only allowed to put a few files onto it via a flash
         | drive. The smartphone is replaced by a feature phone without
         | internet.
        
         | WillPostForFood wrote:
         | Please document one or two cases. Everything I have seen has
         | turned out to be a little more complicated than initially
         | presented.
         | 
         | E.g. This story of the French researcher which started as, "A
         | French scientist has been denied entry into the United States,
         | apparently because the scientist had expressed a personal
         | opinion on the Trump administration's research policy"
         | 
         | In fact turned out to be, "The French researcher in question
         | was in possession of confidential information on his electronic
         | device from Los Alamos National Laboratory -- in violation of a
         | non-disclosure agreement-- something he admitted to taking
         | without permission and attempted to conceal,"
         | 
         | https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/21/world/europe/us-france-sc...
        
           | lovich wrote:
           | They found confidential information on his phone as he was
           | attempting to enter the US, and their response was to turn
           | him back instead of detaining him for violating those
           | agreements or espionage?
           | 
           | Does that sound plausible to you? Or even a better argument?
           | If I was fully onboard with America is the only country that
           | matters I would be apoplectic to find out they let a known
           | spy just leave
        
             | mmcdermott wrote:
             | None of the articles I found went into more detail than the
             | NY Times one. What they all say in common is that the
             | French researcher was denied entrance. If the US version is
             | true (and I can't be sure either way), then the
             | presupposition would be that individual was already on a
             | DHS list, not that customs necessarily found it.
             | 
             | As for whether they knowingly let a spy leave, that would
             | depend on a full timeline.
        
               | lovich wrote:
               | > As for whether they knowingly let a spy leave, that
               | would depend on a full timeline.
               | 
               | No it does not if the defense for denying him entry was
               | knowing that he was a spy?
               | 
               | Stop arguing out of both sides of your mouth. So far both
               | proffered explanations are unacceptable.
               | 
               | To be clear the two answers so far have been,
               | 
               | 1: we found personal comments of him on his phone
               | critical of the administration and denied him entry based
               | on that, which is unacceptable on free speech grounds
               | 
               | Or
               | 
               | 2: he was known or found to have secrets from one of our
               | nuclear labs and was denied entry based on the fact that
               | we knew he had these forbidden files, and we let him go.
               | This is unacceptable on national security grounds.
               | 
               | You can't mix and match from the two scenarios
        
             | isthatafact wrote:
             | Calling it "confidential information" from los alamos is
             | probably just a trick to evoke thoughts and assumptions
             | that he was stealing nuclear secrets.
             | 
             | In reality, given the pattern of intimidation and lies from
             | this government, it was probably something innocuous that
             | was trumped up even just to be a violation of an NDA (e.g.
             | maybe a draft of a not-yet-published non-unusual research
             | paper that included an author from Los Alamos), or else
             | this government would have emphasized the sensitive or
             | dangerous nature of that "confidential information".
        
           | trust_bt_verify wrote:
           | I don't believe we are reprimanding those who mishandle
           | sensitive information any longer. Anyway, they were just
           | joking when he concealed it. That's just their 'weaving'
           | skills on full display.
        
           | maigret wrote:
           | Thanks for the link, without this comment I would have
           | totally missed it. Doesn't change my overall view of what is
           | currently happening but it's a useful nuance.
        
           | wkat4242 wrote:
           | Hmm it's hard to say which side is true. And if he had stolen
           | info and breached an NDA, why deny him entry? It would have
           | been better to capture him and sue him for this.
           | 
           | Also I find it very hard to believe that random border guards
           | would find such thing during a spot check.
        
             | fluidcruft wrote:
             | Personally, I have found the fact this researcher himself
             | is not complaining about this and remains anonymous to be
             | pretty suspicious in itself.
             | 
             | Instead we have a French beurocrat complaining about it on
             | his behalf himself pushing the bad messages found
             | narrative. This all smells of cover-up.
             | 
             | A plausible explanation would be that the US knows
             | confidential information ended up in France and the person
             | who was denied entry was the only plausible vector but was
             | not caught red handed. Instead he was shadow banned and was
             | nabbed for interrogation at the border where he confessed.
             | And it could well be that the border agents scraped
             | together a story about his messages as an excuse to bounce
             | a persona non grata to keep the diplomatic issue quiet
             | because banning a guy for Trump hate is a better diplomatic
             | choice. (i.e. what is to be gained from holding him vs
             | letting France burn him for getting caught). This all seems
             | extremely plausible to me.
             | 
             | In any case there's obviously more to the story and that's
             | the point. Not knowing who this guy is really underscores
             | there's something diplomatically delicate at play here and
             | the US has sent France whatever message it needs already
             | IMHO.
             | 
             | Put another way: if you are affiliated with France's
             | nuclear weapons program maybe there's something work-
             | related going on between France and the US. That's how I
             | interpret this story.
        
           | ck2 wrote:
           | Don't gaslight "it's complicated", that's like right out of
           | 1930s Germany where people insisted everything is fine and
           | there was some kind of just cause
           | 
           | We've been though only 60 days now and institution after
           | institution is being completely dismantled.
           | 
           | Health, Education, Science, Weather Service, soon USPS, aid
           | to the world with medication to stop HIV etc and food for
           | children, all gone.
           | 
           | They paid a torture prison to take people out of US
           | jurisdiction so judges couldn't order hearings, there are
           | people who were legit seeking asylum and have obviously never
           | been in a gang or criminals who might never see the light of
           | day again
           | 
           | Russel Vought, Stephen Miller, Steve Bannon are full blown
           | fascists following the Project2025 plan page by page.
           | 
           | Imagine this country in 200 more weeks.
           | 
           | Imagine what's going to go down once Congress and the Supreme
           | Court are out for the summer and can't react quickly enough
           | to all the illegal activities.
           | 
           | It's going to take DECADES to recover from this damage.
        
             | Kim_Bruning wrote:
             | If this was still 2024, I'd call you crazy. In 2025, this
             | view is not unheard of.
        
       | mjevans wrote:
       | I hear Canadian's are a nice and respectful people. Though as
       | many as can need to stay behind as true patriots who will
       | __actively vote__ in the every election to try to restore freedom
       | and democracy in America.
        
         | hbsbsbsndk wrote:
         | Canada has imported a lot of the same culture war BS as the US.
         | If you're LGBTQ or support human rights Canada is not much
         | better.
        
           | MattGaiser wrote:
           | There's a major difference. Those people are out of power in
           | Canada.
        
           | DanHulton wrote:
           | I think I know roughly where you're coming from -- I mean we
           | absolutely have our share of bigots in or seeking power -- I
           | don't think you realize how very bad it has gotten in the USA
           | very recently.
           | 
           | I have friends who fit in the categories you are describing,
           | who have definitely put up with some shit occasionally here
           | in Canada that would not dream of even visiting the USA, and
           | know people in the USA who are actively looking to escape
           | northward, in fear for their literal lives.
           | 
           | With a looming election that has a cartoonishly, Trumpian,
           | "populist evil" candidate for the leadership of our country,
           | yeah it could definitely get worse, and even to the same
           | amount quite easily. But at least for now, there's a very
           | real -- though definitely not perfect -- refuge for LGBTQ2A+
           | of all stripes up here.
        
       | mixmastamyk wrote:
       | The sad fact is that everyone needs a "burner" laptop and phone
       | these days for travel. Not limited to the trump administration
       | either.
        
         | atoav wrote:
         | *when traveling to the USA or other nations with questionable
         | stances towards basic human rights
         | 
         | A scientist should not worry about having a "wrong" finding
         | about the actual world stored on their digital devices, period.
         | 
         | A don't have a burner phone and within the extended European
         | continent never have felt the need to, including things like
         | the Balkans.
        
           | mixmastamyk wrote:
           | Not about "shoulds."
           | 
           | Five eyes, Russia, China, etc are happy you're comfortable.
        
         | andix wrote:
         | You don't need a "burner" laptop/phone for entering the
         | European Union. There are no routine checks of electronic
         | devices except the usual x-ray machines.
        
           | ohgr wrote:
           | Yeah travel in and out of Europe all the time. No issues
           | ever. Still devices are locked and encrypted though.
        
             | andix wrote:
             | Encryption is great, but in general it is not really
             | needed, as long as you are not a suspect of a crime.
        
               | ohgr wrote:
               | It is required when you're the victim of a crime however
               | so it's a good precaution.
               | 
               | (Had my phone swiped once)
               | 
               | If you have adequate physical security it is less
               | necessary thus my home desktop is not encrypted.
        
           | graemep wrote:
           | Maybe not routine, but UK law allows police and border
           | checks, and did so when we were in the EU. There are credible
           | accusations of this power being over used and misused.
        
             | andix wrote:
             | The UK always had a very American position on those
             | subjects. But they left the EU more than 5 years ago.
        
         | assimpleaspossi wrote:
         | I don't have either and travel everywhere. I see no need and
         | have no need.
         | 
         | I don't get bothered and every one is nice to me. But I base my
         | experience on what is in front of me and not what I read
         | online.
        
           | Havoc wrote:
           | >But I base my experience on what is in front of me
           | 
           | Problem with that approach is it makes you entirely blind to
           | change right up until the moment you experience it
           | personally.
           | 
           | It's entirely possible to have a dozen good encounters at
           | borders and only the 13th is bad. Or maybe the situation
           | changed in the last week and you just didn't travel in that
           | timespan.
           | 
           | Casting the net a bit wider and considering other people's
           | experience increases the sample size & liveness of data. (at
           | the cost of some reliability ofc)
        
             | assimpleaspossi wrote:
             | One shouldn't base their experience on what they read on
             | the internet either. The internet, and other people, is not
             | your reality. If I lived my life based on the internet, I
             | would never leave my house and have all kinds of security
             | systems all over it (I have none now and see no need for
             | them).
             | 
             | I have never been robbed, never broken into, never been
             | shot at, never had my car stolen and don't know anyone who
             | has.
        
               | Havoc wrote:
               | >One shouldn't base their experience on what they read on
               | the internet either.
               | 
               | Not saying you should, just that it is a valuable
               | supplement
        
               | mixmastamyk wrote:
               | Crossing unfriendly borders is not a normal occurrence
               | and therefore modest precautions are warranted.
        
         | jltsiren wrote:
         | Your employer may need them, but you probably don't.
         | 
         | Burner devices may work when you want to protect sensitive
         | information the adversary does not already have. But if you are
         | more worried about authorities making your life difficult,
         | because they don't like you, burner devices may just make your
         | situation worse. From their perspective, it's clear evidence
         | that you are actively trying to hide something.
        
           | mixmastamyk wrote:
           | Overactive imagination. Lack of evidence is not evidence.
           | Many people buy new devices on trips so not even out of the
           | ordinary.
        
       | timewizard wrote:
       | America changed right after 2001. People have been asleep this
       | entire time, presuming that their government would never target
       | them, even though they've slowly been building a giant
       | surveillance network that could only have this ultimate purpose.
       | 
       | Pretending this is "Trump's America" or "Obama's America" or
       | "Bush's America" is ridiculous. They've all participated in
       | building these walls around the country and our freedom.
        
         | rsoto2 wrote:
         | The last five administrations have bombed the poorest country
         | on the planet. Now people are being disappeared by police
         | amidst public cheers. Even the mods on this website think the
         | above headline is sensationalized, meanwhile a few months ago
         | they hosted the AMA of an IDF soldier that probably helped
         | murder children. Major parts of society are pacified and numb.
        
         | bongodongobob wrote:
         | I'm guessing this is being downvoted because the crowd here is
         | too young. Our reaction to 9/11 was horrifying to anyone with a
         | brain at the time.
        
           | tdeck wrote:
           | "We tortured some folks."
        
             | Cyph0n wrote:
             | No, it was not torture, it was just "enhanced
             | interrogation" and "extraordinary rendition".
        
             | Daishiman wrote:
             | They manufactured a war.
        
         | Cyph0n wrote:
         | Precisely. The framework has been in-place since 9/11. The
         | government (i.e., Democrat and Republican) has been testing the
         | limits of what it can get away with, very gradually, ever
         | since.
         | 
         | What Trump is doing right now is nothing but an application of
         | this "domestic security" framework.
         | 
         | Heck, the government even gave everyone a taste of what's to
         | come with the repression of pro-Palestine college protests
         | across the country, and the dystopian shutdown of any criticism
         | of a foreign country.
         | 
         | You can always ignore the use of repression on people or causes
         | you don't agree with, but don't start complaining when you or
         | your cause is the one being repressed.
        
         | mixmastamyk wrote:
         | If interested in this, watch "The United States of Secrets,"
         | doc by PBS Frontline.
        
       | tredre3 wrote:
       | The title is trying to imply that people are being targeted for
       | being physicists or other "benign" scientific work, but that is
       | not the case; Their expressed political opinions are why they're
       | targeted. It's still wrong, it's still bad, but there's no need
       | to mislead people.
        
         | atoav wrote:
         | Scientists are people who for a living often need to cross
         | international borders. The current administration has shown no
         | respect for the Rule of Law and the borders are the place where
         | you will be affected in the worst way if _someone_ gets
         | provoked by _something_. Lawful or not, you may not be on US
         | soil yet when it happens.
        
         | roxolotl wrote:
         | There is no such thing as benign scientific work. Questioning
         | the nature of reality at its core is a radical act. As we're
         | seeing with tons of biology research there are right and wrong
         | questions. It is only time till that spreads.
        
         | rsoto2 wrote:
         | No, the title is implying when professors are being targeted
         | that's when fascism is here; because that's sort of
         | historically what has happened(and it has been historically
         | based on political beliefs, race, or physical appearance)
         | 
         | CS Professor arrested today
         | https://www.reddit.com/r/immigration/comments/1jmrtzz/indian...
        
           | drstewart wrote:
           | >CS Professor arrested today
           | 
           | So? Does being a professor give you some kind of immunity
           | against crimes?
        
             | JumpCrisscross wrote:
             | > _Does being a professor give you some kind of immunity
             | against crimes?_
             | 
             | The state has been able to prove precisely zero crimes in a
             | court of law thus far. By Rubio's admission, they may be
             | arresting without warrants. The criminals are the ones
             | covering their faces while pretending to act under the
             | colour of law.
        
               | nocoolnametom wrote:
               | And it'll be pretty easy to keep track of how many crimes
               | they _do_ discover, because the first one will be
               | trumpeted loudly everywhere, and then after that they'll
               | use the entire list of people as though it's a partial
               | example: "How do we know that this individual is not
               | associated with <crimes>, as we've already seen with
               | _countless_ examples, like <the unspoken entirety of the
               | list of examples>?"
        
               | drstewart wrote:
               | >The state has been able to prove precisely zero crimes
               | in a court of law thus far.
               | 
               | Wow, in your country does the entire criminal justice
               | process take place in the course of the same day of the
               | arrest? Interesting. Care to share details?
        
             | analog31 wrote:
             | The presumption that the person being arrested is suspected
             | of a crime is being called into question.
        
         | nedamd wrote:
         | Being scientist is ideally a quest for finding truth or at
         | least try that. We are in an era where the truth is considered
         | very political and there are very clear indications that in the
         | US funding science and scientists in general is not welcomed
         | anymore. Calls for dismantling NSF/NIH is not hiding or their
         | proponents are shy from expressing what they are trying to
         | pursue.
         | 
         | The idea that politics and science as a practice is separated
         | is a myth.
        
           | ryandrake wrote:
           | Also, griefing scientists, academics and the "educated elite"
           | has been a priority to Republicans for at least a decade.
           | They specifically run on platforms of "sticking it to those
           | snobby experts," and their electorate eat it up. We've seen a
           | huge anti-intellectual and anti-expertise cultural shift in
           | the last 10 years.
        
         | fatbird wrote:
         | Is properly carried-out science in the area of climate change
         | "benign" to the Trump administration?
        
       | delichon wrote:
       | There may be a silver lining. I think that John Roberts is in the
       | mood to spank, and if Trump comes before him with an expansive
       | interpretation of his plenary powers, Roberts will see him as a
       | convincing counterargument. There could be a definitive ruling
       | supporting the free speech right of non citizens.
        
         | p_j_w wrote:
         | Trump will just ignore the courts. Vance said he should do as
         | much during the campaign and our electorate still foolishly
         | voted for him, so they know there will be no consequences.
        
           | ipsocannibal wrote:
           | 85% of Trump's base think this is a bad idea. Trump is not
           | that impervious to public opinion. Especially from his
           | allies. Trump can't escape the laws of political gravity and
           | isn't militarily strong enough to control the country. If he
           | was Congress would have been jailed by now. He will resist
           | and bend the rules as much as he can. But he needs the system
           | to not break do the barrons don't overthrow his ass.
        
         | rufus_foreman wrote:
         | John Roberts is playing with fire. As are the district court
         | judges.
        
         | Trasmatta wrote:
         | John Roberts is one of the people that have been Trump's
         | biggest enablers. I have no faith that he will do anything
         | other than performative actions.
        
         | guelo wrote:
         | John Roberts has been a believer in expanded executive power
         | since before he joined the supreme court.
        
       | j_bum wrote:
       | > The looming crisis in the US is beginning to remind people in
       | Europe of the 1930s, when the UK and the US began to realise that
       | Jewish scientists needed to be rescued from the Nazis.
       | 
       | I feel like I'm living on a different planet. I am not saying
       | things are OK in the US at the moment, but ... are you kidding
       | me? This is one of the most asinine statements I've ever read.
        
         | thrance wrote:
         | The comparison is apt. Things didn't start that bad in Germany
         | either. But day by day, reform after reform... Look back on the
         | past, imagine hearing about a visiting french scientist getting
         | detained at the border for having criticized the president
         | under Obama, and realize how insane that would have been, how
         | normal it seems today, how far this country has gotten and
         | where it is currently headed.
        
           | j_bum wrote:
           | I agree that it is insane what's happening. I do not think
           | this country is on a good trajectory.
           | 
           | But I think the analogy in TFA is also insane.
        
             | thrance wrote:
             | Time will tell I guess, let's hope it really is
             | unwarranted.
        
             | p_j_w wrote:
             | > But I think the analogy in TFA is also insane.
             | 
             | Why? This change has happened over the course of a couple
             | of months. The trajectory is there.
        
               | j_bum wrote:
               | TFA is equating the beginnings of the ethnic cleansings
               | of a highly and historically persecuted peoples to the
               | authoritative actions against politically active citizens
               | and non-citizens. I'm sure there are many cases with
               | classified rationale, and many that are also blatantly
               | illegal.
               | 
               | I'll keep reiterating: I don't think what's happening in
               | the US is ok. But I also don't think the analogy is ok.
        
               | fatbird wrote:
               | Those politically active citizens and non-citizens have a
               | fairly distinguishable ethnic slant. Your logic-chopping
               | the analogy looks like rationalization.
        
             | cyberax wrote:
             | > But I think the analogy in TFA is also insane.
             | 
             | That's what people in Russia were thinking in 2012. And now
             | people there are literally arrested just for saying a wrong
             | thing.
        
           | mnky9800n wrote:
           | i think the comparison to nazi germany only muddies the
           | waters. america is not nazi germany, it did not just get
           | thrashed in ww1 and blamed for everyone's problems. it does
           | not have the option to massively industrialize. everything is
           | different. that doesn't mean america cannot turn into a
           | fascist state if it feels like doing so. it means that the
           | nuances as to what are going on in america right now is not
           | the same nuances as what happened in germany 100 years ago
           | and those nuances are important to understanding what is
           | happening.
        
         | graemep wrote:
         | It is because the west has had a golden age that is over so
         | they are overreacting to the end of it.
         | 
         | I have lived in a country far worse than the US is now or is
         | likely to be - things like journalists being disappeared. Even
         | there the Nazi comparison was excessive. People pushed back and
         | things are much better now.
        
           | barrenko wrote:
           | It was an overreaction during the first term, now it's apt.
           | The destruction of America should be stopped immediately. But
           | I fear we are at Thor: Ragnarok timeline now.
        
             | MiiMe19 wrote:
             | >This political event is just like when the good guys
             | fought the bad guys in the heckin' marvel movies !!
             | 
             | >Edit, thanks for the updoots kind strangers!!
        
         | matthewmacleod wrote:
         | Why do you feel this way - as in, why is this "asinine"?
         | 
         | Anecdotally, I work with many people who frequently travel to
         | the US, as well as a fair few academics over there. There is a
         | clear general consensus that people are significantly altering
         | their plans to reconsider travel to the US, and that others are
         | actively looking to relocate.
         | 
         | There is a very real--not imagined--possibility that some of
         | those people will be subject to being rounded up and detained.
         | The situation isn't obviously as severe as Nazi-era Germany,
         | but it is _absolutely true_ that people are being reminded of
         | this. So why is the comparison anything other than apt?
        
         | fatbird wrote:
         | You need to look around you. People are being disappeared off
         | the streets and sent to hard labor concentration camps in El
         | Salvador. American scholars of fascism are literally fleeing
         | the US saying "this is it!". The federal gov't is being
         | dismantled wholesale. America has destroyed its relationships
         | with Canada and Europe, crippled NATO, and is openly planning
         | to annex foreign territories and countries.
         | 
         | This is it, friend. You're in it. The visible damage hasn't
         | accumulated too much yet, but all the things that fascist
         | regimes do, are being done now. You might argue that Americans
         | are fighting back, that lawfirms targetted by EO are refusing
         | to comply, that the ACLU is fighting in court, that protestors
         | are in the streets. This was all happening in Germany in the
         | mid 30s too. It didn't stop what happened, and the passivity of
         | the "it's not that bad" crowd was a big part of that.
        
         | garciasn wrote:
         | So; you believe it's ok to deport people for exercising a core
         | tenant of the US constitution?
         | 
         | I don't.
        
           | j_bum wrote:
           | This feels like such a bad faith question, but I'll assume
           | you're not asking with mal-intent.
           | 
           | No, I don't think it's ok, and I don't understand how you
           | would make this assumption about my opinion unless you're
           | just speaking emotionally or intentionally rage baiting.
           | 
           | It's like you didn't read my comment.
        
           | umanwizard wrote:
           | Someone can think something is bad, while simultaneously
           | thinking it's an exaggeration to liken it to Nazi persecution
           | of Jews.
        
         | BJones12 wrote:
         | Catastrophizing may be a cognitive distortion, but it's also a
         | behavior encouraged by certain political affiliations.
        
           | bilbo0s wrote:
           | Nah.
           | 
           | Just evolutionary biology and psychology.
           | 
           | You see an 'other'.. Assume the worst.
           | 
           | That's worked for hundreds of thousands of years. Millions
           | actually.
           | 
           | Everyone does it. Because no one can help doing it. No one
           | who is human anyway.
        
         | masterj wrote:
         | Strong "This War Will Destabilize The Entire Mideast Region And
         | Set Off A Global Shockwave Of Anti-Americanism vs. No It Won't"
         | vibes with this comment https://theonion.com/this-war-will-
         | destabilize-the-entire-mi...
        
       | assimpleaspossi wrote:
       | It seems that the examples given in the article are about non-US
       | citizens caught in a tangle of sorts but some physicists are
       | wanting to apply it to themselves as a whole.
        
         | SapporoChris wrote:
         | https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_They_Came
         | 
         | ""First They Came" (German: Als sie kamen lit. 'When they
         | came', or Habe ich geschwiegen lit. 'I did not speak out'), is
         | the poetic form of a 1946 post-war confessional prose piece by
         | the German Lutheran pastor Martin Niemoller (1892-1984). It is
         | about the silent complicity of German intellectuals and clergy
         | following the Nazis' rise to power and subsequent incremental
         | purging of their chosen targets. Many variations and
         | adaptations in the spirit of the original have been published
         | in the English language. "
         | 
         | When you see things happening to those outside your circle you
         | might feel safe, but many times you are just further down the
         | list and your time will come.
        
           | brianmurphy wrote:
           | https://owl.excelsior.edu/argument-and-critical-
           | thinking/log...
           | 
           | "A slippery slope fallacy occurs when someone claims that a
           | position or decision will lead to a series of unintended
           | negative consequences. These negative consequences are often
           | bad and/or increasingly outlandish. The person using the
           | slippery slope fallacy takes these consequences as a
           | certainty and does not analyze the logic of their own
           | position. A slippery slope fallacy can be used as a
           | deflection to avoid discussing the merits of a position,
           | shifting the field of debate."
        
             | einarfd wrote:
             | So where is the slippery slope in the Martin Niemoller
             | poem?
             | 
             | The transgression against the groups does not change, it is
             | just repeated on different "troublesome" out groups. I
             | guess you can argue that the last line, where the I of the
             | text is taken, is the slippery slope. But that seems a bit
             | contrived.
             | 
             | My reading of it is that it is an admonishing against
             | accepting injustice against groups that you yourself is not
             | part of, and that if you do not speak up. Then who will
             | speak up for you, if you need it.
        
         | shadowpho wrote:
         | If they break the laws towards green card holders they'll
         | happily break the law for citizens
        
         | epistasis wrote:
         | As they well should.
         | 
         | Science has been completely destroyed through grant revocation
         | at Colombia on the pretense of unconnected protests about
         | Israel and Palestine.
         | 
         | There is no targeting based on who did what, just being in the
         | same institution is enough.
         | 
         | And many of these physicists have workers from other countries
         | doing research for them. Even if they are US citizens, their
         | thought crimes will have severe problems for those employees.
        
           | WillPostForFood wrote:
           | "Science has been completely destroyed"
           | 
           | Really? Completely?
        
             | pmags wrote:
             | Would you prefer the phrasing "US scientific and public
             | health infrastructure has been subjected to capricious
             | changes that will effect almost all aspects of research and
             | health care for a decade or more"?
             | 
             | https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00954-y
             | 
             | https://www.science.org/content/article/trump-plan-
             | overhauli...
             | 
             | https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00780-2
             | 
             | https://arstechnica.com/health/2025/03/report-us-
             | scientists-...
             | 
             | https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2025/03/28/trump-
             | adm...
             | 
             | https://www.theatlantic.com/health/archive/2025/03/trump-
             | ame...
             | 
             | https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00525-1
        
         | tdeck wrote:
         | It's a concept called solidarity. We are going to need more of
         | it if any of our institutions will survive this.
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | It even happened to US citizens like a NASA employee who would
         | not give access to his devices because they contained NDA info
         | (that he legitimately had access to). He was detained. But let
         | through after things were cleared up.
        
         | whatshisface wrote:
         | As you could say, the walls of the city are the walls of my
         | home.
        
         | Avshalom wrote:
         | If there is no due process for non-citizens then there is no
         | due process for citizens.
        
       | xqcgrek2 wrote:
       | This is a thinly sourced opinion piece selling FUD.
        
         | drstewart wrote:
         | This is how you know HN is changing. Turning into reddit at a
         | frightening pace.
        
         | croes wrote:
         | So you don't think people don't face negative consequences if
         | the find evidence they don't align with the president's agenda.
         | 
         | They can still speak openly with risking their job or funding?
        
       | mirawelner wrote:
       | I'm working at a biomedical lab at UPitt full time and another
       | biomedical at CMU in my "free time"(lol) and it's bizarre how
       | it's now totally okay to talk about politics at work. People are
       | sharing political articles on the teams chat.
        
         | guelo wrote:
         | When politics is coming for you shouldn't you talk about it?
        
       | d_burfoot wrote:
       | I view the current political situation as a historical rhyme of
       | the bloody wars of religion in Europe that saw Catholics and
       | Protestants murdering each by the millions. As with the C v P
       | wars (or Sunni vs Shia in Islam, or Hindu vs Muslim in India),
       | taking a side is the wrong ethical stance; the right stance is to
       | view it clearly as a brutal tribal struggle, and take steps
       | towards a just and honest peace.
        
       | throw7 wrote:
       | "elite institutions devoted to freedom of inquiry and the telling
       | of uncomfortable truths"
       | 
       | That's rich. That hasn't been true for our "elite institutions"
       | for some time now, although I do remember some notable
       | exceptions... University of Chicago comes to mind.
        
       | GistNoesis wrote:
       | I am wondering about hardware keyrings like Yubikeys : From a
       | security point of view is it safe to cross international borders
       | with them ? How do you connect back to your accounts without one
       | when all your devices are based on two-factor authentication if
       | your hardware keyring has been seized when by customs. Could you
       | be detained for not "remembering" the second factor to unlock the
       | keyring ?
        
         | wkat4242 wrote:
         | You could definitely be denied entry and most likely you would
         | be. In terms of detainment, probably only temporarily until
         | they put you on the plane back. Unless they have serious
         | suspicion of something like terrorism they can't just hold you
         | indefinitely for not cooperating.
         | 
         | Ps IANAL. So take this with a gain of salt but I've never heard
         | of someone actually being jailed for not giving access.
        
       | thegrim33 wrote:
       | Yeah this is the last straw for me. This thread breaks pretty
       | much every rule HN has, the comment thread is filled with
       | absolutely vile, delusional, partisan hate and propaganda, it's
       | been on the front page for hours and no moderator has decided to
       | remove it, not enough users have flagged it to get rid of it, I'm
       | officially giving up on HN at this point.
       | 
       | Not going to waste my time any longer flagging and downvoting
       | political content and trying to keep HN good. The propagandists
       | and hate have won and have majority control over it now. Every
       | day a third of the front page is political/social/mainstream news
       | content which isn't supposed to be here. Adios. Time to find the
       | next place.
        
         | krapp wrote:
         | Bye.
        
       | submeta wrote:
       | Let's not lose sight of the cause and effect here. The Israel
       | lobby leaned hard on Trump to stamp out any whisper of criticism
       | against Israel. Meanwhile, groups like Betar are gunning to
       | deport pro-Palestinian students, crowing on X about how they've
       | compiled lists of critics and handed them straight to the Trump
       | administration.
       | 
       | You can spot the same playbook in Germany, where they're scheming
       | to strip citizenship from dual-nationality migrants if they dare
       | speak out against Israel. In Berlin, police are brutally
       | pummeling pro-Palestine protesters--scenes you'd never expect to
       | see in Germany.
       | 
       | Then there's the clampdown in UK and other European countries on
       | journalists and everyday folks calling out Israel's moves in
       | Palestine.
       | 
       | Across the West, these anti-free-speech tactics are piling up,
       | all to muzzle anyone who questions Israel.
        
       | submeta wrote:
       | > AIPAC's Jonathan Kessler co-authored a guide on doxing American
       | professors who protest against Israel in 1984!
       | 
       | > Here he is giving a pep talk to Zionist students on how to
       | takeover student gov to reverse democratically voted policies
       | "just like how AIPAC does it in Congress"
       | 
       | https://x.com/GenXGirl1994/status/1906088715249656167
        
       | nine_k wrote:
       | The lady is indeed in trouble, because she apparently broke an
       | explicit regulation: <<Biological materials imported through
       | passenger or pedestrian travel must be presented to CBP for
       | inspection>> [1]. I very much doubt though that it's a kind of
       | offense that should provide grounds for deportation.
       | 
       | Deportation to the country that would certainly incarcerate her
       | for her political position is a bad idea on may levels; first of
       | all, it's inhumane. If the case really devolves down to the
       | deportation for real, I wonder if some other countries would
       | offer her asylum, because it's definitely better that a prison,
       | especially a prison in Russia.
       | 
       | [1]: https://www.cbp.gov/border-security/protecting-
       | agriculture/i...
        
         | dctoedt wrote:
         | > _she apparently broke an explicit regulation_
         | 
         | What I read was that it was a paperwork oversight -- it wasn't
         | that she wasn't allowed to bring the materials into the
         | country, it was that she didn't check some kind of box on a
         | form.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2025-03-29 23:01 UTC)