- This topic has 7 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 1 month ago by
.
-
Posts
-
-
What does the author mean when he writes, “email is skywriting?” (page 87) Do you agree or disagree? What steps have you taken to make sure your electronic privacy isn’t violated? “Nastier rulers will use what they know about you to push you around.” What does this mean to you?
-
I think perhaps he means that emails that are sent to others over platforms are never really private. They can be leaked by someone, they can be reviewed by the hosting providers, and they can be retrieved by court orders. There’s always a digital footprint. But will the emails that I write be of consequence to the government? I don’t think so. But for people involved directly with protests and organizations that are noticed by the current US administration, they might need to worry. On a broader scale, I do worry about my American friends who now have DOGE poking around in social security and the IRS and have access to the personal data that citizens have entrusted to the government.
I think we’re seeing what “nastier rulers” will do already to people they don’t like or want to make an example of etc already. People travelling into the US need to note that border control have access to any individual’s phones and computers. The other thing to note is that your social media presence can be weaponized. Just this past week, Valerie Costa, a community organizer in Seattle who founded an environmental group recently, helped organize a peaceful protest as part of the “Tesla Takedown” demonstrations going on globally. Musk singled her out on X and claimed her group was backed by a Democrat fundraising platform (she isn’t) and then alleged she was committing crimes, according to NPR.
“When one of the most powerful, if not the most powerful, people in the world is saying you’ve committed a crime, it doesn’t matter what the truth is,” Costa said. As a result, she knew she had to protect herself—she was being flooded with threats and harassment.
The NPR article quotes, “She removed as much personal information as she could from the web. Even her work email was being flooded with attacks, so she deleted the address from her consulting business website. She connected with a lawyer. Then she brought together her roommates to map out a safety plan.” She says her freedom of speech is being threatened, so she doesn’t plan to be silent. For me this definitely is a case of intimidation tactics being used to try and silence protest and other people’s rights to freedom of expression. Source: https://www.npr.org/2025/03/17/nx-s1-5328626/elon-musk-protests-tesla-takedown
-
I agree Libby, this is a good example, Tara. What we say online is now being used to target us. And track us. There is a report about FB giving the Chinese government access to user information, including HongKongese citizens in exchange for access to the Chines market. Be wary of platforms that are privately owned – know who the owner is and understand how trustworthy, or untrustworthy, they are. It does matter.
-
-
Absolutely Tara. It is another form of suppressing the people. They are taking away our means of educating ourselves – by intimidating people, making them question everything they say whether it is written or verbal ( cell phones are not secure) or marching in protest they silence our voices. When people shut down they become easier to manipulate. Easier to control. We are slowly losing our 1st amendment rights and it’s happening so subtly that most don’t/ won’t realize it until it’s too late. It is a scary time in this country for sure.
-
Well! I am fairly certain that when Snyder said “email is skywriting” he was not thinking of a major national security breach where U.S. national security personnel add a journalist to a chain of communications about a pending military action punctuated with slurs about U.S. allies. Maybe these folks would benefit from reading “On Tyranny.”
Snyder is addressing the risks to us of online communication and use of social media. He is absolutely on target. It is prudent to expect that every email, text and online activity is traceable by someone and those might well be people who would track, threaten or intimidate us. Anything that erases the line between private and public for an individual carries profound risk and one not to be ignored or minimized. His message is a warning about protecting oneself while resisting.
i still find the laziness, ignorance and disregard for fundamental protection of national security intelligence stunningly dangerous. The issue is not whether I support the action revealed, it is that any breach of classified communications threatens us all.
-
Agreed, Jane! Re: the security breach and those involved – they all know that “email is skywriting” but likely had completely different intent for using Signal – they did so because what they say and do is not preserved for official record, which is required by law. (Signal, you may or may not know, has automatic delete functions) They know full well that if they used the highly secured means of communication available at government what they said would be preserved in the government archives. The astounding level of arrogance, hypocrisy and lawlessness of these people…it brings new definition to “stupefying.”
-
I couldn’t agree with you more Jane. Well said.
-
Such a timely topic and a shocking display of incompetence. Maybe it’ll the their ineptitude that saves us all somehow in that their administration fails so demonstrably that all US citizens will come together. You’ve expressed exactly my thoughts on this Jane.
The timing of this discussion could not be more appropriate.
This was posted by Robert Reich today.
Friends,
Let’s say you don’t like what the Trump administration is doing, or you don’t like Trump. You express these views on Facebook, TikTok, and Instagram.
You take a two-week vacation in France. When you try to return to the United States, U.S. immigration agents arrest you. They detain you in solitary confinement. They don’t let you contact your family. They don’t let you contact a lawyer. Then they send you to a brutal prison in El Salvador.
But wait! You scream over and over. You can’t do this! I’m an American citizen!
Your screams have no effect.
Sound far-fetched? Recently, a French scientist was prevented from entering the United States because U.S. Border Patrol agents had found messages from him in which he had expressed his “personal opinion” to colleagues and friends about Trump’s science policies.
In another case, immigration agents detained Dr. Rasha Alawieh, a kidney transplant specialist and professor at Brown University who was trying to return to the United States after visiting relatives in Lebanon.
Dr. Alawieh was not allowed to do that. She was deported despite having a valid visa and a court order blocking her removal. Federal authorities alleged that they found “sympathetic photos and videos of prominent Hezbollah figures” in her phone and that she attended the funeral for the leader of Hezbollah in February.
But these are just the Trump regime’s allegations. No court has been able to review this evidence.
U.S. border officials concede they’re using more aggressive tactics these days, which the administration calls “enhanced vetting,” at ports of entry to the United States.
Okay, so maybe you don’t go abroad. You just express views that the current U.S. government regime dislikes. As a result, U.S. government agents arrest and detain and then “disappear” you. They say you’re a threat to national security.
Again, not as far-fetched as it sounds.
The regime has begun to target legal immigrants in the United States who have expressed views that the Trump regime believes threaten national security and undermine foreign policy.
Investigators for Immigration and Customs Enforcement have been searching videos, online posts, and news clippings of campus protests against the Israel-Hamas war.
To deport people living in the United States with green cards or valid visas, the Trump regime has invoked a rarely used provision of the Immigration and Nationality Act that gives the secretary of state sweeping power to expel foreigners who are seen as a threat to the country’s foreign policy interests.
Using that authority, ICE agents arrested Mahmoud Khalil, a Columbia graduate who has Palestinian heritage and took on a prominent role in the pro-Palestinian protests at the school, and Badar Khan Suri, an Indian citizen who has been studying and teaching at Georgetown.
Mr. Khalil has a green card, which means he is a legal permanent resident.
Apparently, the State Department believes Dr. Suri engaged in antisemitic speech that would undermine diplomatic efforts to get Israel and Hamas to agree to a ceasefire. He is in the United States on a visa for academics.
On Monday night, Dr. Suri was surrounded by masked Homeland Security agents outside his home in Virginia, arrested, and placed in an unmarked SUV. A judge has temporarily blocked his removal from the country.
Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, accuses Khalil of “siding with terrorists” and Dr. Suri of “spreading Hamas propaganda and promoting antisemitism on social media.”
But why should we believe her? She has provided no evidence. Why should we believe anything the Trump regime alleges? Neither Khalil nor Suri has been charged with a crime.
Or consider Venezuelan and Salvadoran men who have been detained by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement. Where are they now? Their families don’t know. They’ve been disappeared over the past week, with no explanation provided by the government over why or where they may be.
None of these cases has been reviewed by a court of law. There have been no independent findings that any of these people constitute a danger to the United States, or even that their views are dangerous.
There’s not even been an independent finding that these people are non-Americans. For all we know, they could be just like you or me — Americans who have expressed views that the Trump regime dislikes.
Do you see how perilously close we are to the edge?
-
-
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.