It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


WARNING: Police Ask For Entire City's Google Searches and The Court Says Yes

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Mar, 18 2017 @ 11:07 PM

originally posted by: JanAmosComenius

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: dreamingawake

There's a reason people used to use something called "pay phones" for certain things. I guess people forget.

Until they banned it ... at least at many EU countries ...

However your view is perfectly valid. Vault7 suggest CIA tools are predominantly Windows oriented. Linux is my choice. Also I do not use my "smart" phone for nothing else but call/SMS services. Those "smart" thingies are constallation of security holes.

Keep in mind payphones were, unless still are as they are harder to come by now days-in the US, monitored in some areas-namely sketchy areas. Sings were posted about that near the phone. The same was done with the pre smart phones/ ie the Cricket Phones to moniter drug phone calls, as was stated when you signed up to use the phone.
edit on 18-3-2017 by dreamingawake because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 09:02 AM

originally posted by: Raxoxane
a reply to: Phage

Well if he comes up with a link it will probably only confirm what we already know - that All of us are watched,recorded,logged etc.Especially you Americans.

It's the same in Europe. I just installed a new Linux OS on my PC along with Firefox. I was able to visit some online UK newspapers. But others would just not load. Then I visited Googles main search page and agreed to their terms. All of a sudden everything starts working.

posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 02:05 PM
a reply to: Phage

I found this:

posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 03:10 PM
Investigate Every one.
and if they um! get lucky and fine'd other crimes.
all the beter for them!
so Every one IS a criminal and they get to Investigate them.
Guilty until proven Innocent.

posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 08:28 PM
a reply to: TobyFlenderson

In the article snipped in the op it states the perpetrator made a phone call to the victims bank, and actually withdrew money from this persons account from a bank located in that city of MN.

And Google is one of the largest search engines in the entire world, with a user base that topples every other search engine. Why cut yourself short in a search by asking Bing? Or Yahoo?

And at the same time, if this person is desparate, he probably would have used google, bing, and yahoo to search for the name.

As for the people who search for specific names on google..... how many people search for a specific persons name, of which who is not famous?

You might have searched for your old high school enemies or friends on google, but I highly doubt you do it every single day. And the chance of pure coincidence is extremely low.

This person had to have been targeted based on a few key elements. And for him to steal 28k from a bank account using a social hack is pretty astonishing.

And as a bonus note: even if they have the number of the cell phone used to create this call, it is extremely simple to purchase several prepaid phones that can be set to forward a call to another phone number. And that is probably where their investigation hit a dead end. They traced the call to a dummy phone. And that dummy phone could not be located, or obtained.

edit on 3192017 by GiulXainx because: Added bonus.

posted on Mar, 19 2017 @ 10:58 PM
a reply to: GiulXainx

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree. It seems to me, with your reasoning, that every time to cops come to a dead end, they'll just invade privacy rights.

In my profession I search individuals names all of the time, so do the police, investigators, HR departments, etc, etc..

Lastly, assuming that a person who stole from a bank is necessarily from the same town the bank is located within is not sound reasoning. I'd dare to bet that the converse is more likely true.

posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:05 AM
And the New World Order creeps ever closer. Do any see the truth?

posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 06:07 AM
a reply to: Sublimecraft

I know you're trying to represent a lot of fish, but making the percent smaller just means....

edit on 23-3-2017 by MacK80 because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 23 2017 @ 07:22 AM
a reply to: jafo1973

Change your MAC address, use a different browser at a different resolution, and few other stop gaps and you're but a grain of sand on the beach.

Puff, your gone.

top topics

<< 1  2   >>

log in