Gestapo on Steroids: Trump to force all foreign tourists to provide FIVE YEARS of social media history before entering the United States.

I am unable to read the Daily Mail unless I take out a subscription, or buy a real copy, but searching by "foreign-tourists-to-USA-social-media-history" revealed five screenfulls of links to the story by many American and foreign news outlets, including in the UK, Ghana and Japan.

What it did not show was any official US publication straight from the USA's own government or civil-service.


If a reporter covering this, I would ask the Customs and Border Protection these:

1) Does it also cover non-"tourist", professional visitors?
These include commercial business people, diplomatic, political and intergovernmental-organisation* staff, scientists engaged in international research, airline and shipping-company employees, journalists, arts and sports perfomers, etc?

2) Do the "social media" mean only the major sites like X and Instagram, ironically owned in Amercia, or does it include special-interest fora and voluntary-club web-sites?

3) What "history" - simply dates of use of the sites, or permitting the CBT to read messages?

4) On open sites you have little or no privacy beyond perhaps a user-name. Would the CBT demand knowing nicknames and passwords?

5) What of people who might use the WWW regularly but not "social-media" so have no "history"?

6) How could anyone provide any such information anyway? Especially if loss or breakdown has wiped out previous use; or by simple ending of accounts.

7) Would it make any difference if (like me) their internet use is via a broadband PC not a portable instrument such as a "smart-'phone"? Or indeed do not have any such 'phone?

8) What of people without an e-mail address?
There are people with no personal internet access, for any genuine reason... including choice.

9) What "information on family members" beyond the name, phone number and perhaps home address long used justifiably as emergency next-of-kin contacts?

10) What of visits necessitated at very short notice, leaving no time to ferret through several years of on-line chatter, even if you could do that anyway?
That could be common for professional visits. For private individuals the most likely reason is a major family matter such as a death of a relative who had emigrated to the USA..


11) Does this policy, if implemented, suggest a move to assuming guilt before innocence?

12) What is its real purpose and is it even workable?


I'd suggest many would-be holidaymakers will simply say, "To Hell with it - Uncle Sam does not want foreigners so we'll go elsewhere." Bad for the American tourist trade, of course, and unlikely to really enhance the nation's security. Rogue states like Russia have learnt easy ways to attack other countries without sending personnel there.

++++

*E.g., UN, WHO, ISO, MARPOL, IATA, many other such bodies and treaties.

@beckyromero i look all the way to the bottom and found the registry post. I can't seem to copy it to paste here. I am on my mobile device, perhaps it can be cut and pasted from a computer. Everyone needs to comment.

Yeah this is why I'm not spending a dime in the US for the foreseeable future

Well I won’t be visiting again 😂😂

Everyone needs to submit a reaction to the registry. Any idea how to find it?

And what if they are not on social media?

As has been said in previous posts, if you tolerate this there's a dangerous precedent for any future U.S President who might even be 10 times worse than Trump.

Not even surprising at this point

So? You practice algorithm censorship right the f here. Disgusting, but y'all rock and roll, maintain hegemony through this COGNITIVE WARFARE.
You're a war. Hearing a word or phrase from a US sympathizer is to be attacked?
Derp and dangerous! Duhhh and nukes! Y'all rule!

They’ll end up only accepting the Tate brothers et al. to enter the US in a foreseeable future.