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.

 

White House Doxxes Concerned Citizens

page: 5
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 12:15 AM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

Ok, build a strawman when met with facts. Seems like the reasonable thing to do.





Seems like the goal posts are constantly moving.


*punt*




posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 12:26 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kettu

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Kettu
I honestly wonder about the moral fiber of some Americans and ATS members.


A lot of peoples moral fiber is proving to be a bungee cord with Trump in office. As this thread so beautifully illustrates.



Seems like the goal posts are constantly moving.

I can't even imagine the heads that would explode if this had happened under the Obama administration.

And what's strange...is I feel about half of the conservatives here would have frowned and disapproved if Bush Jr had done this.


Public comment on Fed rules was available to whoever asked for it under Obama. No heads exploded.

Why are heads exploding over it now? Almost seems biased.



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 12:57 AM
link   
a reply to: DanteGaland

I'm only on the first page. I wonder if anyone has posted this yet:
Whitehouse.gov Privacy PolicyPrivacy Policy

THE WHITE HOUSE IS COMMITTED TO PROTECTING INDIVIDUAL PRIVACY AND SECURING THE PERSONAL INFORMATION MADE AVAILABLE TO US WHEN YOU VISIT WHITEHOUSE.GOV, USE OUR MOBILE APP, OR VISIT WHITE HOUSE PAGES HOSTED BY OTHER SITES (SUCH AS OUR OFFICIAL PROFILES ON SOCIAL NETWORKING SITES). THIS PRIVACY POLICY DESCRIBES WHAT INFORMATION IS MADE AVAILABLE TO THE WHITE HOUSE AND HOW THAT INFORMATION IS USED AND RETAINED, AND PROVIDES INFORMATION ON:
. . .
Information you choose to share with the White House (directly and via third party sites) may be treated as public information. We may, for example, publish compilations of messages or comments collected through WhiteHouse.gov or official social media pages and provide them to national leaders, members of the press, or other individuals outside of the Federal Government. And the We the People API allows public access to some We the People signature data. However, we exercise discretion to limit such disclosures to protect your privacy (for example, we generally do not publish last names of commenters).




The Privacy Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. § 552a , establishes a code of fair information practices that governs the collection, maintenance, use, and dissemination of information about individuals that is maintained in systems of records by federal agencies. A system of records is a group of records under the control of an agency from which information is retrieved by the name of the individual or by some identifier assigned to the individual.

The Privacy Act requires that agencies give the public notice of their systems of records by publication in the Federal Register. Click here to see a list of DOJ systems of records and their Federal Register citations. The Privacy Act prohibits the disclosure of a record about an individual from a system of records absent the written consent of the individual, unless the disclosure is pursuant to one of twelve statutory exceptions.

I'd say the person responsible for violating the law and the Whitehouse's own privacy policy should be publicly perp-walked straight to jail.

Absent written consent: I don't think a notice qualifies as consent written by the individual sending an e-mail.




edit on 15-7-2017 by pthena because: (no reason given)


(post by zigzags removed for a serious terms and conditions violation)

posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 01:11 AM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 02:01 AM
link   
a reply to: TheRedneck


If you got something to say, at least be proud enough to say it openly. Otherwise, people need to clamp their pie-hole.

So if ATS doesn't give out all your personal info ... hmmm! I guess you'll have to put it in each post, or what did you write?



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 02:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: TheRedneck


If you got something to say, at least be proud enough to say it openly. Otherwise, people need to clamp their pie-hole.

So if ATS doesn't give out all your personal info ... hmmm! I guess you'll have to put it in each post, or what did you write?


And along those lines...

I guess the guy who shared the WWE meme of Trump punching CNN should be proud, and not have a problem being identified?

Wasn't everyone up in arms around here for days and days over that? That wasn't even the government, and it was only one person.

This is hundreds of people, being done by an administration hell-bent on using intimidation and strong-arm tactics to silence dissenting opinions.



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 02:25 AM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

I didn't look at those threads against CNN to tell the truth. CNN doesn't hold executive, legislative, or judicial power over my life. And the privacy act is specifically concerned with federal agencies, not media.

The administration intends to have all the voter information freely available for private parties, like companies specializing in precinct level targeted political messaging.



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 02:33 AM
link   
a reply to: underwerks


I assumed most Americans cared about their privacy, but I guess the attitude of "we've never had it before so what does it matter" is more common than I wanted to believe.

That's why there is a Privacy Act. Americans do expect privacy.

I'm sure the people arguing against privacy now valued privacy too, until Trump.

Trump follower chant: "Trump can do no wrong. Trump can save us. He's the only one who can. If you think Trump's requests are unreasonable, then ..."
edit on 15-7-2017 by pthena because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 02:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: Sublimecraft
a reply to: DanteGaland

Why didn't you post a screenshot of the email where 'your concerned patriotic citizen' boasted about voting in all 50 states in the election?

Don't get me wrong, I will not condone doxxing, but I will call out hyper-hypocrisy from tards though - they can remain anon pussies who won't reveal themselves as far as I'm concerned, but government should not reveal ID.







Good spot. That person should be arrested.
As for details being made public, good. The hearings are public too. The more open this all is the better.

edit on 15/7/2017 by UKTruth because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 02:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Kettu

OK, what is the "legal repercussion" here that makes this an example of a "chilling effect?"



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 02:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kettu

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: TheRedneck


If you got something to say, at least be proud enough to say it openly. Otherwise, people need to clamp their pie-hole.

So if ATS doesn't give out all your personal info ... hmmm! I guess you'll have to put it in each post, or what did you write?


And along those lines...

I guess the guy who shared the WWE meme of Trump punching CNN should be proud, and not have a problem being identified?

Wasn't everyone up in arms around here for days and days over that? That wasn't even the government, and it was only one person.

This is hundreds of people, being done by an administration hell-bent on using intimidation and strong-arm tactics to silence dissenting opinions.



This is a public commission. Why would the complaints against the effort be private?



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 03:07 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
I think the SS# data is interesting.

There is no need for that other than tying a person's info deeper into the system then is need for their purpose. That's not going to be in the voter roles. It is useful for identity theft should it get out there while tied to a name and address.



Might check them against IRS records.

That's what I would do.




posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 03:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ksihkehe

originally posted by: Kettu

originally posted by: underwerks

originally posted by: Kettu
I honestly wonder about the moral fiber of some Americans and ATS members.


A lot of peoples moral fiber is proving to be a bungee cord with Trump in office. As this thread so beautifully illustrates.



Seems like the goal posts are constantly moving.

I can't even imagine the heads that would explode if this had happened under the Obama administration.

And what's strange...is I feel about half of the conservatives here would have frowned and disapproved if Bush Jr had done this.


Public comment on Fed rules was available to whoever asked for it under Obama. No heads exploded.

Why are heads exploding over it now? Almost seems biased.


Mine is about to explode at the utter ignorance I've witnessed here this evening!

Obviously we have people here who have never personally dealt with government in the matter of government solicitation of comments on public policy. Or any other thing I suppose.

Who doesn't know that when you turn over a document to the government---it becomes a government document subject to public scrutiny unless it falls within some narrow restrictions on public documents. But basically it means the government can use that document in any they feel would benefit the government. I learned this in 7th grade civics class.

I think we're seeing the result of years of drugging children. They've had their brains bombarded with foreign substances since they entered the education system. I don't think those brains have had the proper environment to develop normally under those circumstances. Consider that there are plenty of foreign substances in many municipal water supplies....throw a few dozen vaccines into the mix....and you've got a mess. It's really sad.



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 03:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: burgerbuddy

originally posted by: roadgravel
I think the SS# data is interesting.

There is no need for that other than tying a person's info deeper into the system then is need for their purpose. That's not going to be in the voter roles. It is useful for identity theft should it get out there while tied to a name and address.



Might check them against IRS records.

That's what I would do.



EZZZactly! One of many ways they can use the information you've voluntarily surrendered to them. This type of information has been public record in my lifetime. Any activist knows this....

Wonder how many of those "early" emails were from real people and how many were bots? What an interesting study that might be.



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 04:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: UKTruth

originally posted by: Kettu

originally posted by: pthena
a reply to: TheRedneck


If you got something to say, at least be proud enough to say it openly. Otherwise, people need to clamp their pie-hole.

So if ATS doesn't give out all your personal info ... hmmm! I guess you'll have to put it in each post, or what did you write?


And along those lines...

I guess the guy who shared the WWE meme of Trump punching CNN should be proud, and not have a problem being identified?

Wasn't everyone up in arms around here for days and days over that? That wasn't even the government, and it was only one person.

This is hundreds of people, being done by an administration hell-bent on using intimidation and strong-arm tactics to silence dissenting opinions.



This is a public commission. Why would the complaints against the effort be private?


Because they were never properly educated in how the government works. Notice all the die-hard anti-trump posts in this thread are obviously written by those most ignorant of how their government works.

In spite of being informed many times in this thread some members are choosing ignorance and doubling down on it.



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 05:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: roadgravel

Except I'll repeat it again -- this is all stuff any one of us could go and have access to. You. Me. And those shady people you are worried about.


SS# numbers? Must be the dark web.



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 05:17 AM
link   
If you don't want your personal information out there, I would suggest wiping the information.

Like with a cloth or something.




posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 05:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: roadgravel
I think the SS# data is interesting.

There is no need for that other than tying a person's info deeper into the system then is need for their purpose. That's not going to be in the voter roles. It is useful for identity theft should it get out there while tied to a name and address.


If i understand how ss#s work, they want to ensure a) they're not fraudulent and b) they're citizens and not foreigners exempt from voting.

I could be wrong but the ss would make sense if i'm right.

Not necessarily for it but at least it would be logical.



posted on Jul, 15 2017 @ 07:23 AM
link   
Read the fine print

a reply to: burdman30ott6




top topics



 
23
<< 2  3  4    6  7 >>

log in

join