←back to thread

When the physicists need burner phones, that's when you know America's changed

(www.theguardian.com)
267 points giuliomagnifico | 4 comments | 29 Mar 25 18:45 UTC | HN request time: 0.822s | source
Show context
pmags ◴[29 Mar 25 19:14 UTC] No.43517799[source]▶
I'm a US scientist and the use of minimalist phone and a laptop is something I'm planning for all my travel.

This is for the simple reason that I have determined, based on a large body of cases that are accumulating at a disturbing rate, that the current US administration considers themselves "above the law". Furthermore, the administration has shown that they are eager to carry out actions that violate due process and freedom of speech against anyone they perceive as opposing their policies/views.

EDIT: I'm happy to document such cases for those who have not been paying attention, but I also encourage those who are doubtful to simply search the many examples that have been posted here on HN (unfortunately, many flagged in an attempt to suppress discussion).

replies(6): >>43517821 #>>43517838 #>>43518113 #>>43518270 #>>43518508 #>>43522930 #
WillPostForFood ◴[29 Mar 25 20:36 UTC] No.43518508[source]▶
Please document one or two cases. Everything I have seen has turned out to be a little more complicated than initially presented.

E.g. This story of the French researcher which started as, "A French scientist has been denied entry into the United States, apparently because the scientist had expressed a personal opinion on the Trump administration's research policy"

In fact turned out to be, "The French researcher in question was in possession of confidential information on his electronic device from Los Alamos National Laboratory — in violation of a non-disclosure agreement— something he admitted to taking without permission and attempted to conceal,”

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/03/21/world/europe/us-france-sc...

replies(6): >>43518558 #>>43518585 #>>43518593 #>>43518608 #>>43518653 #>>43519431 #
wkat4242 ◴[29 Mar 25 20:47 UTC] No.43518608[source]▶
Hmm it's hard to say which side is true. And if he had stolen info and breached an NDA, why deny him entry? It would have been better to capture him and sue him for this.

Also I find it very hard to believe that random border guards would find such thing during a spot check.

replies(1): >>43518910 #
1. fluidcruft ◴[29 Mar 25 21:33 UTC] No.43518910[source]▶
Personally, I have found the fact this researcher himself is not complaining about this and remains anonymous to be pretty suspicious in itself.

Instead we have a French beurocrat complaining about it on his behalf himself pushing the bad messages found narrative. This all smells of cover-up.

A plausible explanation would be that the US knows confidential information ended up in France and the person who was denied entry was the only plausible vector but was not caught red handed. Instead he was shadow banned and was nabbed for interrogation at the border where he confessed. And it could well be that the border agents scraped together a story about his messages as an excuse to bounce a persona non grata to keep the diplomatic issue quiet because banning a guy for Trump hate is a better diplomatic choice. (i.e. what is to be gained from holding him vs letting France burn him for getting caught). This all seems extremely plausible to me.

In any case there's obviously more to the story and that's the point. Not knowing who this guy is really underscores there's something diplomatically delicate at play here and the US has sent France whatever message it needs already IMHO.

Put another way: if you are affiliated with France's nuclear weapons program maybe there's something work-related going on between France and the US. That's how I interpret this story.

replies(1): >>43520721 #
2. wkat4242 ◴[30 Mar 25 02:31 UTC] No.43520721[source]▶
Hmm I think the Trump criticism is the last kind of thing the border agents would make up as a coverup to be honest. It reflects poorly on the administration by reinforcing the amount of criticism it gets. I think any civil servant would keep their head down especially now that layoffs are left right and center. It's also not a valid reason to ban him anyway.

A simpler thing to make up would be a family matter, some unverifiable criminal record or whatever. Even noncooperation which is a valid reason to refuse entry. Or most likely: simply "no comment" would have done.

It doesn't help that we don't know the identity, no. But I'd keep my head down too if it happened to me. Science is a field where everyone knows everyone and it's not one where you want to be known as a troublemaker.

I agree we don't know the details and that there's probably more to the story but I don't think the criticism thing is made up.

replies(1): >>43520802 #
3. fluidcruft ◴[30 Mar 25 02:46 UTC] No.43520802[source]▶
Well, I'm just saying people claiming it was about Trump criticism is easy. For example there's another case where a UK band was denied entry and the band had to cancel their performances. Which the band played up as denied because of vocal Trump criticism. Yet buried in the fine print of the reporting they admitted they had the wrong visa to be performing in the US.

It just keeps seeming to be these things where the press is really pushing this narrative but the stories they bring always carry an asterisk.

To be quite honest I have alarm fatigue when these keep popping up. They all register as clickbait. I have not encountered a single one yet that wasn't smoke spun up for clicks and outrage.

replies(1): >>43523172 #
4. wkat4242 ◴[30 Mar 25 11:01 UTC] No.43523172{3}[source]▶
Yeah that is a good point. And it is very unnecessary because there is lots of stuff that Trump does that is totally outrageous. And that doesn't even seem to get people worried.