Etiquette



DP Etiquette

First rule: Don't be a jackass. Most people are good.

Other rules: Do not attack or insult people you disagree with. Engage with facts, logic and beliefs. Out of respect for others, please provide some sources for the facts and truths you rely on if you are asked for that. If emotion is getting out of hand, get it back in hand. To limit dehumanizing people, don't call people or whole groups of people disrespectful names, e.g., stupid, dumb or liar. Insulting people is counterproductive to rational discussion. Insult makes people angry and defensive. All points of view are welcome, right, center, left and elsewhere. Just disagree, but don't be belligerent or reject inconvenient facts, truths or defensible reasoning.

Tuesday, December 16, 2025

MAGA's authoritarian surveillance state

The bad news continues to flow as our democracy, rule of law and civil liberties continue to fade.

MAGA's authoritarian surveillance state gains reach and power 


The HDS (Department of Homeland Security) is proposing a vast expansion in government surveillance reach and power. This is aggressive and intrusive based on no evidence and crackpot reasoning. What DHS proposes is a drastic, unconstitutional expansion of the MAGA's surveillance state capabilities. The fig leaf to hide the illegality and authoritarianism is alleged border security needs. In recent years, the CBP (Customs and Border Control) increased biometric data collection, but this specific vast expansion crosses red lines regarding privacy, genetic sovereignty, and guilt-by-association.

The most radical shift is the expansion of "biometrics" to explicitly include DNA and iris scans for nearly all Form I-94 applicants (all tourists, business travelers, students and foreign workers). Before this, biometrics were limited to fingerprints and face photos. 

Requiring DNA submission for routine tourist or business travel treats every entrant as a criminal suspect. DNA collection is usually reserved for arrestees, not tourists or business travelers. There is no immediate security utility for DNA in a typical border crossing scenario that fingerprints or face photos do not already provide.

But wait!! There's much more: Worse than all of that, the proposed changes mandate collecting intrusive data about a traveler's family. That includes (1) family member telephone numbers used in the last five years, and (2)​ family member dates of birth, places of birth, and residencies. By demanding 5 years of phone history for family members, the government is effectively building a surveillance database of people who are not crossing the border. That includes millions of US citizens who are related to foreign visitors. This requirement means that a traveler's eligibility can depend on the conduct or identity of their remote relatives. It is a classic tool of authoritarian regimes to leverage family data to pressure or monitor individuals.

The perjury trap: The 5-year data requirement requirement is administratively absurd. Most people cannot accurately recall every family member phone number over a five-year period. This intentionally creates a perjury trap. Inevitable minor errors can be used to deny entry or revoke visas later. 

Unneeded and unjustifiable: Although the stated goal is identity verification, current e-Passports (with chips), facial recognition, and 10-print fingerprinting is already statistically almost perfect for proving identity. Adding iris and DNA would yield diminishing very little added security while exponentially increasing privacy risk.

The DHS notice cites an "unanticipated event" to justify an emergency clearance, but it fails to explain why historic family phone numbers are suddenly critical for national security. Common sense says it will rarely be useful. However, this vague justification is evidence the MAGA government is fabricating a crisis to permanently expand its authoritarian powers. These changes transform the I-94 from a travel document into a comprehensive intelligence dossier. It demands that visitors surrender not just their own privacy (genetic data), but the privacy of their entire family tree (contact history).

No comments:

Post a Comment