President Trump 2.0

Still seems an odd choice, there is little on the BBC site about Vietnam, and its mostly about the damage caused by storms etc.

[Dingbat]

It appears to have been blocked since 2002.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intern...hip_in_Vietnam

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

https://travel.state.gov/content/tra...dslAaFRUxF8z7g

H-1B applicants are foreign professionals seeking temporary U.S. work in "specialty occupations" (requiring higher education/skills like tech, medicine, law) sponsored by a U.S. employer, needing at least a U.S. Bachelor's degree or equivalent,

So not tourists, general visitors to the US, World cup fans or participants…………

As I said.

Most likely bollocks but easily lapped up by …….those that easily lap up these things

Lap, lap, lap, lap, lap, …………

[Stephen]

Originally Posted by Pierre

So not tourists, general visitors to the US, World cup fans or participants…………

As I said.




Lap, lap, lap, lap, lap, …………

But they are proposing to bring in all that was listed for tourists. It is under consideration.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Stephen

But they are proposing to bring in all that was listed for tourists. It is under consideration.

Bollocks, unworkable. Give your head a wobble. As I said from the outset.

Tens, possibly hundreds, of Millions of tourists visit the US each year. Can’t be checked in that detail.

But you can check specific visa applicants, applying for positions of significance.

Somebody got a headline, broke the story without the the detail, and the usual suspects, lapped it up, without a critical thought in their head…….like “doesn’t sound workable to me” but Trump is evil, so it must be true….

Originally Posted by Pierre

So not tourists, general visitors to the US, World cup fans or participants…………

As I said.




Lap, lap, lap, lap, lap, …………

That was a separate piece of legislation about H-1B applicants being required to set Social Media to ’Public’, unrelated to the ESTA proposals

In case you missed the specifics re ESTAs, here it is again…

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=2078

The United States could begin requiring visitors from countries on the visa waiver program to provide up to five years of their social media history, according to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection proposal posted to the Federal Register to be officially published Wednesday.

https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...-form-i-94-and

3. Mandatory Social Media:

In order to comply with the January 2025 Executive Order 14161 (Protecting the United States From Foreign Terrorists and Other National Security and Public Safety Threats), CBP is adding social media as a mandatory data element for an ESTA application. The data element will require ESTA applicants to provide their social media from the last 5 years.

4. High Value Data Elements:

To comply with the January 2025 E.O. (14161), and the April 4, 2025, Memorandum Updating All Forms to Collect Baseline Biographic Data, CBP will add several “high value data fields” to the ESTA application, when feasible. This is in addition to the information already collected in the ESTA application.

The high value data fields include:

a. Telephone numbers used in the last five years;

b. Email addresses used in the last ten years;

c. IP addresses and metadata from electronically submitted photos;

d. Family member names (parents, spouse, siblings, children);

e. Family number telephone numbers used in the last five years;

f. Family member dates of birth;

g. Family member places of birth;

h. Family member residencies;

i. Biometrics—face, fingerprint, DNA, and iris;

j. Business telephone numbers used in the last five years;

k. Business email addresses used in the last ten years.

CBP invites the public to comment on both the previously approved emergency changes and the newly proposed changes.

Type of Information Collection: Paper I-94.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 865,639.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent 1.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 865,639.

Estimated Time per Response: 8 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 115,418.

Type of Information Collection: I-94 website.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,278,054.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 1.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 2,278,054.

Estimated Time per Response: 4 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 151,870.

Type of Information Collection: ESTA Mobile Application.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 14,484,073.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 1.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 14,484,073.

Estimated Time per Response: 22 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 5,310,827.

Type of Information Collection: CBP Home.

Estimated Number of Respondents: 600,000.

Estimated Number of Annual Responses per Respondent: 1.

Estimated Number of Total Annual Responses: 600,000.

Estimated Time per Response: 2 minutes.

Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 20,000.

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

That was a separate piece of legislation about H-1B applicants being required to set Social Media to ’Public’, unrelated to the ESTA proposals

In case you missed the specifics re ESTAs, here it is again…

https://www.cableforum.uk/board/show...postcount=2078



https://www.federalregister.gov/docu...-form-i-94-and

You’ve just reposted,………..nothing really

The United States could begin requiring visitors from countries on the visa waiver program to provide up to five years of their social media history, according to a U.S. Customs and Border Protection proposal posted to the Federal Register to be officially published Wednesday.

The operative word being……”could”

Have they?

I don’t think they have, outside of specific H-1B requirements. If they have, by all means enlighten me, but I doubt you will.

I’m happy to admit if I’m wrong……….I don’t think I’ll have to.

How about you?

Also they don’t want your social media “history”

They request your usernames, which they have done for the last decade.

This “proposal”, makes it mandatory, but it’s a proposal……..”could”

You may wish to refer your questions to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Department of Homeland Security, who are the ones proposing these requirements…

As you said

Until there is something official, from the US government, confirming that……it remains fiction.

Not fiction…

[Pierre]

Originally Posted by Hugh

You may wish to refer your questions to the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), Department of Homeland Security, who are the ones proposing these requirements…

As you said



Not fiction…

You can reman in your Trump Deranged status Hugh.

The requirement to voluntarily submit your social media logins under ESTA has been in place for over a decade, and through the Biden administration.

This “proposal” to make it mandatory, is no more onerous, “if” it is employed.

As usual, this terrible Trump story, is nothing of the sort.

Changing it from optional to mandatory, along with all the other requirements, is quite the request, though. As is this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1dz0g2ykpeo

As well as the collection of social media information, the new document proposes the gathering of an applicant's telephone numbers and email addresses used over the last five and 10 years respectively, and more information about their family members.

That is ridiculous, and it's a legitimate proposal that Trump's government has put forward. I am not sure what your objection to pointing this out is?

[1andrew1]

Originally Posted by Damien

Changing it from optional to mandatory, along with all the other requirements, is quite the request, though. As is this: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1dz0g2ykpeo

That is ridiculous, and it's a legitimate proposal that Trump's government has put forward. I am not sure what your objection to pointing this out is?

The only people not wanting these proposed requirements to be discussed are Trump supporters as they know it makes his administration look weird and thin skinned.

Originally Posted by Pierre

You can reman in your Trump Deranged status Hugh.

The requirement to voluntarily submit your social media logins under ESTA has been in place for over a decade, and through the Biden administration.

This “proposal” to make it mandatory, is no more onerous, “if” it is employed.

As usual, this terrible Trump story, is nothing of the sort.

Except…

The additional data required by the CBP proposal

To comply with the January 2025 E.O. (14161), and the April 4, 2025, Memorandum Updating All Forms to Collect Baseline Biographic Data, CBP will add several “high value data fields” to the ESTA application, when feasible. This is in addition to the information already collected in the ESTA application.

The high value data fields include:

a. Telephone numbers used in the last five years;

b. Email addresses used in the last ten years;

c. IP addresses and metadata from electronically submitted photos;

d. Family member names (parents, spouse, siblings, children);

e. Family number telephone numbers used in the last five years;

f. Family member dates of birth;

g. Family member places of birth;

h. Family member residencies;

i. Biometrics—face, fingerprint, DNA, and iris;

j. Business telephone numbers used in the last five years;

k. Business email addresses used in the last ten years.

[Carth]

I've not been following this much, doesn't hold much interest for a poor pensioner that won't ever visit . . even if somehow I win the lottery.

All this data they're wanting, is it just from people coming in, or will it include all the nutjobs that already reside in the good old US of A?

[Anonymouse]

I forgot the link again (damn memory), but it seems journalists are being laid off...on the grounds of colour.

Okay, I'm going to make 2 assumptions here, which may be wild and/or unsafe given what we've seen so far:

1) Trump can read;

2) He can understand what he's reading.

How long until To Kill A Mockingbird is banned? In defending Tom, the implication that he's innocent and in fact wasn't even physically capable of the rape (owing to him being crippled) is very clear. That, to MAGA et al, is bad - he's black, so of course he's guilty. How dare the author suggest otherwise?

I didn't bother with <sarcasm> tags for once. Still...