>The contractor is collecting information which is public I think that, maybe, you're confusing the Thomson Reuters situation[0] and this one. In this one, the

>The contractor is collecting information which is public I think that, maybe, you're confusing the Thomson Reuters situation[0] and this one. In this one, they're contracting the actual Title III intercepts[1] to be done via a contractor (which is what I understand from words such as: annual support, operation, and maintenance. [Well, operation by itself, really, but packaged together it's more inferred to as being as simple as going to a cloud provider.]) >ICE working with this contractor is not what would cause them to monitor "people sympathetic to enforcing immigrants’ rights" Right. I never said it was? ...but to infer that ICE was just doing this as a normal course of business ignores the fact that some of what it's doing isn't (and never should have been) considered it's normative operations. I have the distinct impression that we're talking past each and I apologise if any of the fault to be had is my own. [0] - https://www.privacyinternational.org/feature/2079/updated-thomson-reuters-selling-us-immigration-and-customs-enforcement-ice-access-data https://www.privacyinternational.org/feature/2079/updated-th... [1] - https://itlaw.wikia.org/wiki/Title_III_intercept https://itlaw.wikia.org/wiki/Title_III_intercept