Capgemini to sell the biz that works for US government amid criticism of ICE contract

French consulting and tech services giant Capgemini has decided to offload Capgemini Government Solutions (CGS), the entity it uses for some work with the US government – including a controversial gig assisting immigration authorities. The company on Sunday issued a brief statement that says it “determined that the customary …

[45RPM]

Better late than never. There is no excuse for capitulating to nazis.

[Anonymous Coward]

Unlike the Nazi Gestapo, ICE is accountable to elected leaders and the public. You can openly protest their policies, sue them in court, or vote to change the laws they enforce - none of which was possible in Nazi Germany

[Anonymous Coward]

You first!

Good luck with that.

[Anonymous Coward]

If I lived out that way I might well go and protest. But I wouldn't drive away when a cop tells me to get out of the car, I wouldn't bring a gun, I wouldn't kick the tail lights out of ICE cars, spit at officers or try to box them in. That would be risking getting a criminal record, or perhaps being shot in the heat of the moment. The risk/reward is not worth it.

[45RPM]

No - I wouldn’t bring a gun either. But if it’s allowed to carry a gun, and if the rights of Trump supporters to carry weapons to a protest are upheld (as they are) then the rights of anyone to be armed at any protest should also be upheld.

And whilst you are right that you should follow the instructions of a cop (whose face will be visible, who will have identification (and hence be accountable)), it would be foolish in the extreme to follow the instructions of someone who isn’t a cop and who doesn’t have ID, and who hides their face. They could be a thief. They could be a murderer. And, as we have seen, if they’re ICE then they may very well be.

[Anonymous Coward]

Just because you have the right to do something, that doesn't mean it's not a very very stupid thing to do. If you bring a gun to an extremely volatile situation like that, there's a small but significant chance you aren't coming back.

I'm pretty sure that if you wanted to rob or murder someone you could produce a fake ID and show your face with trivial simplicity. No one is really going to check that carefully, especially with whistles blowing around you and people screaming, etc.

I'm pretty sure Goode would have known they were genuine law enforcement, what with all the cop cars around and the uniforms.

I think a good compromise might be that enforcement officers have to display a highly visible number, which can be tied back to them without giving up their identity to everyone.

[Anonymous Coward]

You are Kyle Rittenhouse and I claim my £5! _{</gut-wrenching-nausea>}

[Androgynous Cupboard]

While I agree carrying a gun is dumb, it's because guns and the whole US approach to guns is dumb.

The rest of your points have been rebutted so many times in so many ways - in poetry ("first they came for the jews..."), in philosphy ("for evil to flourish..."), in history (the gradual slide into the third reich) and in law, where proportionality in response has been a key concept since literally the Magna Carta.

You don't have to go out and protest against the USA becoming a police state, but for those that do it's within their rights - for now - and while you may think it's stupid, I beg to differ. And history rarely celebrates the people that sat around and did nothing.

[45RPM]

Ahh. So that’s where the nuanced and thoughtful opinions are kept. They were tidied away into the Androgynous Cupboard.

[Anonymous Coward]

Or maybe even start with Uniforms? I mean, that would seem to be the very minimum requirement of actual law enforcement officers. And, as you say, a clearly displayed badge/warrant number for each individual.

[Doctor Syntax]

Good luck with trying not to have done those things. Which things you did will be decided after you got shot.

[Anonymous Coward]

what, when there's 17 different cameras pointed at you?

[sal II]

You also have the right to be shot in the back while laying on the ground, subdued and disarmed.

[45RPM]

Aww. Sweet. You either believe that or you’re a bot.

If ICE were accountable then they’d show identification. If ICE were accountable then they wouldn’t cover their faces. In this respect they’re actually less accountable than the Gestapo.

As for being accountable to the elected leaders, I don’t think that it’s by any means certain that there will be another election. We’ll see if the mid terms happen, and we’ll see whether or not the elections (if they do happen) will be free and fair and honoured.

[Anonymous Coward]

So don't cover your face and then get doxxed and harassment and your family threatened?

Last paragraph totally delusional.

[45RPM]

That is the risk associated with accountability. But if you’re doing the right thing, if you abide by the law, if you really only go after people who are committing criminal acts or in the country illegally, provided you don’t act in a morally bankrupt manner, then you won’t have anything to worry about, will you?

[DrSunshine0104]

Suing the police in the US is a fool's errand. They have some many ways to escape responsibility given to them by the highest court that they are borderline untouchable. Yes, there is the mouth-service that they can be held accountable and at times things work out but the reality is far bleaker. Additionally, at first, you could sue the Nazi government, but they slowly consolidated power over 5 years through systematic means of purges and loyalty that they became incapable of being sued.

Additionally, ICE is enforcing laws that are not considered criminal in nature but are torts. In my opinion, there is no reason to have people being shot, citizen held for months sometimes deported for essentially trespass.

[chuckufarley]

Perhaps I could by it...

...Are they willing to take small monthly payments?

[wolfetone]

Re: Perhaps I could by it...

No but they may accepted $TRUMP coin...

[elsergiovolador]

Caught

So that would be all fine if they weren't caught.

Says all about crapgermini.

Sensible governments would have used that as a good opportunity to cancel contracts with the lot.

[Anonymous Coward]

ICE

You mean the poorly trained murder squads?

[wolfetone]

Re: ICE

I'd say they seem fairly well trained in committing murders. Very proficient in that.

[QET]

Re: ICE

Definitely not trained in any other aspects that isn't something a stereotypical fascist leader highly prioritizes.

Which renders them as nothing more than wannabe death squads with itchy trigger fingers LARPing as a immigration agency.

[Dan 55]

I wonder how much of this was due to their other clients telling them they don't want to be caught up in a US fishing expedition? (See also OVH's separation of their US entity.)

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, even the Milan Winter Olympics are caught up in the complete and utter disaster that are the US ICE fishing punitive expeditions ... gotta put these US ICE fishing masked thug squads of domestic terrorists that kidnap, rape, and murder folks right off the streets to meet the daily intimidation quotas imposed by their syphilitic mafia boss out of their bloody misery imho, and presto!

[Roland6]

CGS “ operates under a Special Security Agreement”

Interesting, so this seems to mean a foreign government. (Ie. French government) can’t apply French/European law and gain access to CGS’s US-based computer systems and client data on those systems. Yet this doesn’t seem to apply in reverse where the computer systems are located outside of the US, the company is HQ’d in the US and it’s the US government doing the asking…

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: CGS “ operates under a Special Security Agreement”

"apply French/European law and gain access to CGS’s US-based computer systems and client data on those systems"

What law would allow them to do that? Extra-territorialism is a US speciality.

[Claptrap314]

Re: CGS “ operates under a Special Security Agreement”

Well, this is kinda how it goes (the factual part, not your speculations). You have a successful company. You want to expand your business to do work with a foreign government. Specifically, you want to sell your expertise to them. They say, "Well, this work you want is going to be classified." You say, "so how do we do this?". They say, "You need to set up an organization ENTIRELY within our sovereignty--the board, the employees, the networks--everything. Of course, you send your expertise. We'll send the money."

No doubt, your government will take an interest in the deal--and not just taxes. But the foreign government is only going to do the deal if the other organization is entirely beyond the control of your government.

This looks completely sensible. Of course, if the US CLOUD Act actually prevent a US company from setting up a shop elsewhere, well, that's a problem to adre$$ to congre$$.

[Someone Else]

From the article:

The DHS, ICE, and US Border Patrol are currently conducting operations to find, detain and deport suspect illegal migrants – with a focus on those who have committed crimes, per the policies of never-ending stream of bluster and bullshit from the tRump administration.

There, FTFY.

Those efforts have become controversial as they have sometimes resulted in detention, and occasional murder, of US citizens, or people lawfully resident in the USA.

There, FTFY again

[IGnatius T Foobar !]

Law enforcement doing its job.

I for one wish to salute both ICE and the Trump Administration for doing the proper job of removing foreign invaders who have entered the nation illegally.

Any computer system, any technology agency, any platform, any *anything* that assists in this important job is to be *commended*.

[Dan 55]

Re: Law enforcement doing its job.

Law enforcement is not what you think it is, but it's not your fault, you've just seen too much TV.

[Someone Else]

Re: Law enforcement doing its job.

Did I miss a <sarcasm> tag somewhere?

[zebm]

"Two US citizens who protested the immigration crackdown have died"

Violent protests, the first died but would have killed someone if her wheels hadn't spun on the ice before traction control kicked in and she hit him causing internal bleeding. The second was carrying a pistol with what looks like a laser sight, two spare mags and a round in the chamber which discharged when he was being searched leading to him getting shot by multiple officers. Not exactly normal protests.

[Dan 55]

I would stay off of Facebook grandpa, you're obviously getting confused by the AI videos.

[sal II]

Had you bothered watching some other bystander videos and not jus the DHS propaganda, you can clearly see an "officer" removing the suspect firearm and taking it 20 feet away from him, before the shots are fired.

But why do I bother correcting you, at this point anyone defending ICE (if not in general, at least in this particular situation) is clearly delusional and beyond redemption.

[Andy Baird]

Obscurantist wording

"Two US citizens who protested the immigration crackdown have died after federal agents used firearms"

Simon, this seems needlessly roundabout. Why not simply state the truth: "Two US citizens who protested the immigration crackdown were killed by federal agents."

[Anonymous Coward]

ICE

Idiots

Carrying (out)

Executions

[ind]

Passive language is complicit.

(This builds on Andy Baird's previous comment.)

"Two US citizens who protested the immigration crackdown have died after federal agents used firearms, and those incidents have attracted widespread condemnation and protest." - Simon Sharwood, about ICE agents killing two activists.

"But we did not achieve what we wished, and serious mistakes were made in trying to do so. We will get to the bottom of this, and I will take whatever action is called for." - President Reagan on Iran-Contra.

Passive language hides what really happened. In Reagan's case, he was denying responsibility for his own lies. In this Register article, it avoids impugning ICE agents.

But why use this tactic? Why are you using passive language in your report?

The ICE agents did not generally "use" their firearms. That implies far more than shooting, specifically removing focus on shooting protestors. Were the ICE agents only brandishing pistols without firing them? Were their open-carried, holstered weapons used as visual deterrent? Were they hammering nails like Homer Simpson?

And "have died" does not describe what happened to the protestors. Again, this implies far more than being shot by ICE. Did Good die from a car accident? Did Pretti fail to keep his organs working due to ten sudden interruptions of normal functionality?

Passive misdirection may be protecting The Register from libel. Accusing ICE agents of murder or other illegal killing usually implies intent, which can only be inferred, so not a fact. Because the fact of murder is hard (impossible?) to prove, claiming someone is murdered should be avoided. But "killing" is merely stating a factual consequence, without trying to glean intent. There are ways to use active language. Duh.

So instead of solving a nonexistent problem, The Register now finds itself aligned with other current pop rhetoricians. Here is Pam Bondi talking about the Pretti killing, "'An individual approached US Border Patrol Officers with a 9mm semi-automatic handgun." Pretti was holding a phone and his holstered weapon was on his back. Every idea is designed to use implication to create doubt about Pretti and absolve ICE.

Are The Register's witty observations of tech moving toward state propaganda? Did ICE agents shoot the protestors? Did ICE agents kill the protestors?

Why am I lecturing you on how to write correctly?!

Use exact language. Report what happened.