4 ms·

> His real mistake was to write about his drug experiences and post this on the web, even in a respected journal like Janus Head. In the light of the NSA scand

> His real mistake was to write about his drug experiences and post this on the web, even in a respected journal like Janus Head. In the light of the NSA scandal, would it really have made any difference if he had only admitted to drug use in private communication? If the DHS has no access to NSA surveillance data right now (or had in 2007, when this happend), it's only a matter of time until they do.

buro9 13y ago
In light of PRISM, no. I guess the only difference was whether you saw the border control use Google, or whether you just arrived and were declined entry without information as to why.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
pasbesoin 13y ago
We continue to learn about more and more "exceptions" the authorities have written themselves that allow them to examine the contents of U.S. correspondence without a warrant. Who knows how deep this rabbit hole goes? Today, or in the future; I suspect that the rabbit is still digging. I'm not a drug user -- never have been. I have some friends who have been (I'll be judicious with my tense, here). I would guess that 50% of U.S. citizens, if not more, have used illicit drugs at least once. (And, remember also, underage drinking is "law breaking".) I find this... "policy" abhorrent in its formulation and execution. Individual results are essentially "luck of the draw" and up to the attitude of individual border agents. ('There's something about this person... Let's google them.') The current President has admitted to smoking marijuana. Should Canada exclude him from entry? What about all the troubles sports stars? What about all the troubled actors who travel north for their productions to take advantage of lower production costs in Canada? What about all the Canadian actors down here? One can hardly toss a stone without hitting one. (Lots of boozers and "experimenters" in that lot.) Preferential treatment, maybe?

buro9 13y ago

In light of PRISM, no. I guess the only difference was whether you saw the border control use Google, or whether you just arrived and were declined entry without information as to why.

deleted 13y ago
[deleted]

pasbesoin 13y ago

We continue to learn about more and more "exceptions" the authorities have written themselves that allow them to examine the contents of U.S. correspondence without a warrant. Who knows how deep this rabbit hole goes? Today, or in the future; I suspect that the rabbit is still digging. I'm not a drug user -- never have been. I have some friends who have been (I'll be judicious with my tense, here). I would guess that 50% of U.S. citizens, if not more, have used illicit drugs at least once. (And, remember also, underage drinking is "law breaking".) I find this... "policy" abhorrent in its formulation and execution. Individual results are essentially "luck of the draw" and up to the attitude of individual border agents. ('There's something about this person... Let's google them.') The current President has admitted to smoking marijuana. Should Canada exclude him from entry? What about all the troubles sports stars? What about all the troubled actors who travel north for their productions to take advantage of lower production costs in Canada? What about all the Canadian actors down here? One can hardly toss a stone without hitting one. (Lots of boozers and "experimenters" in that lot.) Preferential treatment, maybe?