US to require would-be immigrants to turn over social media handles

[NBA16 55]

Umm, not sure if they won't deny visa for anti-Trump comments

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/sportsnews/article-5344935/Diego-Maradona-denied-entry-insulting-Trump.html
 

[SwissAmerican 33]

I do not see what gun control has to do with checking on WHO is immigrating? Maybe you should open your eyes to the fact that ILLEGAL immigrants and people who immigrate and "behave badly, negatively or criminally" are hurting ALL of America and the image of us LEGAL immigrants. Especially AS a legal immigrant, and one who sees first hand HOW ridiculous, expensive and lengthy the whole process is, I side with those folks who enforce the immigration laws of this country to the letter. To keep it short: if you post no negative and/or criminal stuff or stuff that shows you're of bad character, you should not have to worry about them looking at your profiles. And yes, I agree with those who stated that the article is exaggerating the whole issue. Wishing you luck on your immigration-journey!

[Springrain22 427]

Trump and his actions are right and correct. He's the best President so far and he cares about everything. This country needs more security, that's why you will be checked.

[yeahbuddy 20]

12 minutes ago, David & Zoila said:

P.S.  Out of curiosity what other country besides the US has these "women's marches" of which you speak?   

Every continent: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/01/21/world/womens-march-pictures.html

 

Anyway, I just wanted to say America is great and Trump is the BEST EVER. God bless Trump. God bless America. God bless whoever receives my username on this forum on a future form and has to read through all of my online comments. You da best. 

[navj1699 11]

8 minutes ago, Springrain22 said:

Trump and his actions are right and correct. He's the best President so far and he cares about everything. This country needs more security, that's why you will be checked.

Yeah rite he's best at so many things.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

55 minutes ago, navj1699 said:

Anyways, Point is crystal clear. The way orange guy's primary focus has been to demolish immigration, He's using this as a distraction for people to not get questioned about administration's incompetency to make America greater!

 

 

How is he demolishing immigration at all? He is making it so that people that are not from this country are not coming here like they did during the Obama era. We are a nation of laws and it's great that someone is actually enforcing those laws and trying to make up ways around them. 

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

28 minutes ago, Dianalorena said:

*grabs popcorn*

 

Honestly, privacy when it comes to social media has always been an illusion. Take what's happening with the whole Facebook fiasco, how they sold personal data to third parties. Every day we agree to publically share our lives and even if we think we're doing it privately. They even know about Visajourney or other immigration forums. We all choose to share information online, and it's public domain. 

 

It's not far-fetched that sharing your facebook or twitter account could play a role during an immigration process. It's free, it's right there. CBP already asks for people's phones when going through airport security, this is how they find discrepancies in people's stories because newsflash, it is known that people can lie about their intentions. Is it fair? many people might not think it is, they're invading your privacy, sure. unfortunately, enough people abuse the system that this becomes a necessity. Just like taking your shoes off because someone hid something at one point. Or body scans. Background checks, the list goes on. 

 

If you don't have anything to hide, this really shouldn't be much of an issue besides the inconvenience of it. I don't think a post complaining about Trump/or about anyone else would be reason enough for denial, as opposed to serious threats,  posts that show the person is clearly unhinged, and content that proves they're scamming people.  Just my two cents, of course. 

Everybody has known for years that FB and other companies were doing that. Obama actually got applauded for doing it in 2012. But it's only bad now because Trump did the same thing to win in 2016.

[George & Roth 1,485]

1 hour ago, Ben&Zian said:

People who want all this other security measures, or new laws for such things like gun laws to even banning "assault" weapons... trust me I don't like or approve of that as an NRA member myself and a legal hand gun owner... but then what is the issue with screening people who want to come into this country? Is it "inconvenient" perhaps? Sure, but if there's nothing to hide then shouldn't be an issue.

 

I'm former military, do I get upset when they want to do a background check on me for purchasing a firearm? Of course not.

Is it Ok if I am pro screening and anti guns?

 

Or is everyone required to be grouped together in advance as anti-guns and anti-screening? 

 

Why are you talking about your guns? 

Edited March 29, 2018 by George & Roth

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

Yeah it has been going on for several years now that CBP will ask for your username and pw for your devices to see what's in them. The only people afforded privacy at any time during the POE are USCs.

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

1 minute ago, George & Roth said:

Is it Ok if I am pro screening and anti guns?

 

Or is everyone required to be grouped together in advance as anti-guns and anti-screening? 

 

Why are you talking about your guns? 

The OP started it when he said that guns are easier to buy than beer. That is why we supposedly need gun control. 

 

You can be anti-guns and pre-screening. That's the glory of the USA you can be whatever you want as long as you don't impede someone else's right to be or think what they want.

[George & Roth 1,485]

If you have a legit relationship to beneficiary this will make your case more of a sure thing if you use those sites.

 

 I want more screening, even if I’m grouped by people as liberal in most cases this is just common sense. 

[yuini 29]

"We had our CR1 visa interview the 28th, we were told it'll take give or take a week after the interview to issue a visa, and we were asked to provide our social media accounts, it's been two weeks now and were still waiting for the social media AP to end, I saw on the group, that if they don't issue the Visa in a week, it means it'll take months, is that true, did someone else wait longer ?
Our applied in the Madrid embassy"

 

So I saw this post in a Facebook group. I was initially shocked that they do social media account screening. Meanwhile, I had my interview just recently and I didn't have that problem.

 

(via US Embassy Manila)

Edited March 29, 2018 by yuini
He said he is in the US now. And they mailed him few days after his post.

[Orangesapples 1,954]

2 hours ago, Ben&Zian said:

People who want all this other security measures, or new laws for such things like gun laws to even banning "assault" weapons... trust me I don't like or approve of that as an NRA member myself and a legal hand gun owner... but then what is the issue with screening people who want to come into this country? Is it "inconvenient" perhaps? Sure, but if there's nothing to hide then shouldn't be an issue.

 

I'm former military, do I get upset when they want to do a background check on me for purchasing a firearm? Of course not.

As long as they do the same types of checks for gun purchases, especially for white males who commit the most domestic terrorism acts, it's fine. 

Edited March 29, 2018 by Orangesapples

[Cyberfx1024 7,980]

3 minutes ago, Orangesapples said:

As long as they do the same types of checks for gun purchases, especially for white males who commit the most domestic terrorism acts, it's fine. 

Of course in order to legally buy a firearm you have to pass a background check. But I will leave out the obvious racist comment you said. 

 

 

[Unidentified 2,930]

1 hour ago, yeahbuddy said:

What if they see I attended the Women's March and then that puts me on a list of potential troublemakers? What if I've posted in support of abortion and that goes against their morals? What if I have an Instagram full of photoshopped pics of Trump getting pissed on and they're not in the mood to laugh that day? Point is, they need to say what exactly they'll be using this info for, and who will be making those judgement calls. 

 

ETA: Sorry, I just think a criminal background check is good enough, and social media monitoring is already ongoing and managed by other agencies. It doesn't belong in this process, it's too intrusive.

This is the 3rd time I'll say this: if you are posting something you could get fired for, don't post it. Someone might not want to hire you if you are openly posting pictures of the president in bad situations. 

 

Doubt they're going to give you ####### for voicing your opinion at the Women's March, the US have freedom of speech.