It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Obama Admits The Government Monitors Your Browsing History

page: 1
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 05:54 PM
link   
During a PBS town hall meeting, president Obama was asked why he and Hillary want to control and restrict guns and ammunition to responsible gun owners. Obama's response was the typical stock answer of rejecting the "notion" that anyone is hell-bent on taking away "folks' guns", yada yada.

However, as AllOutdoor notes, if you listen carefully to Obama's full response, there is a comment Obama gives about knowing browser history that should sent everyone into a blind rage.


"I just came from a meeting, today, in the situation room, in which I’ve got people who we know have been on ISIL websites living here in the United States - US citizens. And we’re allowed to put them on the no fly list when it comes to airlines, but because of the National Rifle Association I cannot prohibit those people from buying guns!"


Original Source

Needless to say I went ballistic. I can't believe the depths the government has sunk to in the name of security.

Is there anything that can be done, I hope someone out there can, but personally I doubt it.




posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 05:55 PM
link   
wonder if this was bushs' monster, the DHS ?



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:02 PM
link   
a reply to: syrinx high priest

Nope...it was the Democratic voter's monster...Obama.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:10 PM
link   
Does not seem to me to be saying out right that he has been monitoring all internet browsing histories of every US citizen.

Dont get me wrong i approach the internet with a attitude that everything i do on-line can and probably will be monitored.

I am just saying that i don't think this can be interpreted as a full on admission by POTUS

And as much as i hate to say it he has a point, if US intelligence intercepts electronic communications that shows some guy sitting in Utah is googling stuff to the effect of "buy big guns USA" followed up by "White house attack plans" then goes and visits a whole load of jihad websites and it sending emails to some guy in Yemen then yeah i think the authorities should have the ability to stop that dude buying guns.
edit on 5-6-2016 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:14 PM
link   
is it just me or is the terrorists buying guns thing bad to ?


+1 more 
posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:16 PM
link   


However, as AllOutdoor notes, if you listen carefully to Obama's full response, there is a comment Obama gives about knowing browser history that should sent everyone into a blind rage.

His quote does not seem to say anything about browser histories.

Here is his next paragraph:

I just came from a meeting today in the Situation Room in which I got people who we know have been on ISIL Web sites, living here in the United States, U.S. citizens, and we’re allowed to put them on the no-fly list when it comes to airlines, but because of the National Rifle Association, I cannot prohibit those people from buying a gun.


This is somebody who is a known ISIL sympathizer. And if he wants to walk in to a gun store or a gun show right now and buy as much — as many weapons and ammo as he can, nothing’s prohibiting him from doing that, even though the FBI knows who that person is.

Browser history, not so much. ISIS websites being monitored, you bet. Paying attention to certain individuals on those websites, yup.



edit on 6/5/2016 by Phage because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:34 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

One of my senior tech guys . . . who was definitely in a position to know . . . insisted in about 1970 in the Navy that officials had been monitoring ALL electricity based communications circuits for some time--with literally acres of computers.

I do NOT believe they monitor LESS now. Not by a long shot.

He also said they had a technology to 'open' without physically opening such . . . snail mail . . . and unfolding it and reading it--by computer. He said he didn't have direct knowledge of that but believed the one who'd told him.

He had direct knowledge of the other, IIRC.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:37 PM
link   
a reply to: Phage

There are even contentions by a very few . . . that the oligarchy has exotic tech that allows them essentially to tap into a 3D holographic video of virtually any goings on in any spot on the planet above ground or under ground . . . to some degree in the past and definitely in the present. That they 'merely' have to have the coordinates in space and time . . . evidently coordinates that also involve people in the scene, IIRC.

Time will tell.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:41 PM
link   
a reply to: syrinx high priest

the majority of the no fly list have never ever even committed a crime, let alone a terrorist act. I would like to put you on a list of people who don't think before they speak/write, and then restrict your rights though. How would that feel??



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:42 PM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN




One of my senior tech guys . . . who was definitely in a position to know . . .


Let me guess, high level intel, with priv-acc?

Yeah who just gives out that kind of stuff to every man and his dog to post online......

This kind of pisses me off, ATS is full of people like yourself who like to claim to have some kind of special knowledge, talk about being ex-intel or spec ops but in very cryptic ways and I am sure that there are plenty of those guys on ATS..... they are not going about advertising it.

Besides you saying I knew a guy who knew some stuff is hardly makes your point any more or less credible when all we have is your word for it.

Now again I do not doubt that if any western government wanted to they could have a snoop and see what porn we've all been looking at this week with out having guy who was in a position to know......

Its not just you there are loads on ATS who do this but I don't think you realise that it comes off like a 14 year old who played way to much CoD while reading Mcnab books.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:54 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

By all means . . . trash the report all you wish.

My ego is not attached to the knowledge.

Besides, it's customary on ATS to trash such information.

100% of ALL such reports HAVE to be false . . . it's the standard dogma that they HAVE to be false.

etc. etc. etc.

yada yada yada.

I hope for all your certainty on your perspective that it helps you sleep better at night.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:55 PM
link   
I'm sure most of our communications are monitored, but it seems to be more logical that they monitor websites then track those that visit them, as opposed to analyzing the browser histories of 300 million to visit a site they already knew was bad.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 06:56 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

BTW, have you studied tyranny at all?

Are you aware of the mentalities, values etc. of tyrannical sorts of people with too much wealth and power for their own good?

Are you aware that the MEANS to do XYZ in the hands of such people virtually always results--and that rather quickly--in a DONE DEED?

I guess you aren't.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 07:00 PM
link   
a reply to: BO XIAN

Have you not read what i have said.

I believe that any western government wanted to they could find out what any of us have been browsing on the internet, read all our emails and monitor our calls and location if they were inclined to do so.

I am not disputing that.

What i am disputing is firstly that Obama has not actually admired anything in this interview to that effect and specifically towards yourself that you do not need to go about claiming to know a guy who knows some stuff to know that they can monitor pretty much all electronic communications.
edit on 5-6-2016 by OtherSideOfTheCoin because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 07:07 PM
link   

originally posted by: BO XIAN
a reply to: Phage

One of my senior tech guys . . . who was definitely in a position to know . . . insisted in about 1970 in the Navy that officials had been monitoring ALL electricity based communications circuits for some time--with literally acres of computers.

I do NOT believe they monitor LESS now. Not by a long shot.

He also said they had a technology to 'open' without physically opening such . . . snail mail . . . and unfolding it and reading it--by computer. He said he didn't have direct knowledge of that but believed the one who'd told him.

He had direct knowledge of the other, IIRC.


This is almost true.... unfortunately DOD personnel according to EO 12333 cannot collect information on US persons or Persons residing in the US. This was signed into law during the Clinton administration and re affirmed under Bush and Obama....that being said...these guys/gals are not going to pass a federal background check for firearms in any state and will likely procure arms from Mexico as part of the illicit gun trade.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 07:14 PM
link   

originally posted by: AmericanRealist
a reply to: syrinx high priest

the majority of the no fly list have never ever even committed a crime, let alone a terrorist act. I would like to put you on a list of people who don't think before they speak/write, and then restrict your rights though. How would that feel??


So what your saying is you know each and every person in the no-fly list personally? (Tongue and cheek Is implied)



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 07:16 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Web searches have been offered in evidence in more than one murder trial within the EU.

Your browser history is retained and available.

This is a matter of public record.

A link to assist...

www.gchq.gov.uk...

176 acres and in operation since well before 1970.




posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 07:19 PM
link   
a reply to: draoicht

Again totally agree.

Really struggling to understand why your response seems to be written as if i am trying to argue that this is not possible.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 07:24 PM
link   
a reply to: draoicht
Browser history obtained after the fact? Directly from the computer/device of the suspect? Or browser histories being remotely monitored?

The OP claims that the President admitted that our browser histories are being monitored. He didn't really say that.



posted on Jun, 5 2016 @ 07:26 PM
link   
a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

You are conducting an ad hominem attack.

Simply factual...





top topics



 
12
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join