4 ms·

How many other countries would threaten visa denial against the supervisor of a student with 10 Twitter followers? I happen to think the student’s tweets expres

How many other countries would threaten visa denial against the supervisor of a student with 10 Twitter followers? I happen to think the student’s tweets expressed extreme and unfounded views, but they hardly warrant such retaliation from one of the world’s most powerful countries.

perihelions 5y ago
The US itself denies visas over the political views of associated people. This is just one example, but a high-profile one: https://www.techspot.com/news/81644-harvard-student-denied-entry-us-over-friends-social.html https://www.techspot.com/news/81644-harvard-student-denied-e... ("Harvard student was denied entry in the US over friends' social media activity") discussed here at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20816774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20816774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20848359 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20848359 One can only speculate how much worse the PRC's system is. The professor's fears are quite rational (I needn't say I wholeheartedly condemn her actions, and hope she's fired).
- divbzero 5y ago
  Thank you. I find this only slightly less disturbing than China’s behavior. Stopping a visitor at the border for social posts of acquaintances is almost as bad as writing nasty emails threatening to do so. (Edit: Ismail was ultimately granted entry [1] but still shameful incident and disturbing that it could happen at all.) [1]: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/9/3/harvard-student-turned-away-arrives/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/9/3/harvard-student-...
  - guerrilla 5y ago
    > Stopping a visitor at the border for social posts of acquaintances is almost as bad as writing nasty emails threatening to do so. Why is it not the same or worse? Now I suffer consequences for the totally legal actions of somone I know?
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
    - deleted 5y ago
      [deleted]
- mdp2021 5y ago
  > In a press release, Lopez says "this is a move so perverse, so grotesque as to defy explanation. Preventing people from entering the country because their friends critiqued the U.S. on social media shows an astounding disregard for the principle of free speech. The idea that Ajjawi should be prevented from taking his place at Harvard because of his own political speech would be alarming; that he should be denied this opportunity based on the speech of others is downright lawless." I would replace the terms used by Lopez, from "astounding disregard for the principle of free speech" to "astounding disregard for the principle of justice". (Which, I rant, has been devastated in many places in the past 18 months.) Theoretically, though, I understand from some publications that there is an ongoing debate in national security agencies about the thresholds to be observed between false positives and false negatives. Meaning: not that the authorities believed such judgement sensible or fair, but they probably delegated their sense of fairness to a top-down mandate of "better safe than sorry". Which, in the encouraged alienation from good sense, creates these monstrosities.

perihelions 5y ago

The US itself denies visas over the political views of associated people. This is just one example, but a high-profile one: https://www.techspot.com/news/81644-harvard-student-denied-entry-us-over-friends-social.html https://www.techspot.com/news/81644-harvard-student-denied-e... ("Harvard student was denied entry in the US over friends' social media activity") discussed here at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20816774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20816774 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20848359 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20848359 One can only speculate how much worse the PRC's system is. The professor's fears are quite rational (I needn't say I wholeheartedly condemn her actions, and hope she's fired).

divbzero 5y ago
Thank you. I find this only slightly less disturbing than China’s behavior. Stopping a visitor at the border for social posts of acquaintances is almost as bad as writing nasty emails threatening to do so. (Edit: Ismail was ultimately granted entry [1] but still shameful incident and disturbing that it could happen at all.) [1]: https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/9/3/harvard-student-turned-away-arrives/ https://www.thecrimson.com/article/2019/9/3/harvard-student-...
- guerrilla 5y ago
  > Stopping a visitor at the border for social posts of acquaintances is almost as bad as writing nasty emails threatening to do so. Why is it not the same or worse? Now I suffer consequences for the totally legal actions of somone I know?
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
  - deleted 5y ago
    [deleted]
mdp2021 5y ago
> In a press release, Lopez says "this is a move so perverse, so grotesque as to defy explanation. Preventing people from entering the country because their friends critiqued the U.S. on social media shows an astounding disregard for the principle of free speech. The idea that Ajjawi should be prevented from taking his place at Harvard because of his own political speech would be alarming; that he should be denied this opportunity based on the speech of others is downright lawless." I would replace the terms used by Lopez, from "astounding disregard for the principle of free speech" to "astounding disregard for the principle of justice". (Which, I rant, has been devastated in many places in the past 18 months.) Theoretically, though, I understand from some publications that there is an ongoing debate in national security agencies about the thresholds to be observed between false positives and false negatives. Meaning: not that the authorities believed such judgement sensible or fair, but they probably delegated their sense of fairness to a top-down mandate of "better safe than sorry". Which, in the encouraged alienation from good sense, creates these monstrosities.