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.

 

FBI can listen to you even when your phone is OFF!

page: 2
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 12:51 PM
link   
most people talk about nothing the goverment is interested in, idle mundane chit-chat, it would seem the definite cost would not be worth the potential gain.




posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 12:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stewart Lewis
most people talk about nothing the goverment is interested in, idle mundane chit-chat, it would seem the definite cost would not be worth the potential gain.


thank YOU Mr. Lewis!
Give the man a hand!

That is exactly what I'm trying to say!



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 01:33 PM
link   

Originally posted by drconfused
This is a good page with info about this and other devices that can transmit unsecure/secure data...
www.privacyrights.org...

And there is no way that the authorities have 300 million people monitoring phones in the U.S. unless they extensively go outside the country to have people monitor these conversations...
U.S. population = about 300,000,000 people



Relax, that was sarcasm. I was pointing out how ridiculous the notion was of every phone call being monitored. That number is the number of Americans roughly, so that's where that came from. Besides we'd need to outsource to India, because it'd take 3 or 4 times that # at a minimum, since you'd have to work in shifts.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 01:35 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaginaryReality1984
"If you've got nothing to hide you've got nothing to fear"

This kind of attitude is what will allow governments to strip your freedoms.


i can see how it will be taken advantaged of, but its my attitude as of now...





posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 01:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by they see ALL
don't break the law or commit unlawful acts and you will have nothing to worry about


But what if you happen to have political views that the government considers anti-american or even terroristic (is that a word lol)?

That might not be a big probelm now, but the way things are going it soon will be.


A bit of hyperbole don't you think? As long as you're not advocating the violent overthrow of the US Government or assasination of its leaders, you don't have anything to worry about, even if you have negative opinions of it.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 01:46 PM
link   
^Maybe, but we'll see won't we?



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 01:47 PM
link   
All you have to do is watch an episode of "Without a Trace", or something else federally involved. If they have your number you can a will be tracked if they want to find you. Thats why when you are on the run the first thing you do is drop your phone in the trash. Don't use credit or debit cards of any kind. You pay for everything in cash, including prepaid cells. This is just from watching tv.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Hamburglar
I'm not so sure I agree that it is just a case of using technology that is inherent in the phones. This is in large part because I can't think of one logical, practical purpose for including the ability to remotely swtich on a microphone (outside of surveillance, of course). Clearly, the ability to track a phone via a chip could be useful for a variety of reasons (911, avalanche rescue, earthquake rescue, people lost in the woods, etc.). What I can't fathom is why the phone companies would, on their own, think, "gee, on top of installing this chip that allows us to track the phone, we should also make it so it can turn on the mic on the phone, even if it's turned off..." That is a difficult thought to believe.

Basically, there doesn't seem to be a reason for it other than surveillance. They are clearly not advertising this to customers, so we can assume this is not done for the customers. Doesn't it seem unusual that a company would spend money (R&D, production, etc.) to install a feature on phones that customers don't even know anything about? So who benefits? Not the consumer. Was this feature suggested to manufacturers?

This issue raises a host of questions that aren't even remotely answered by, "if you don't do nothin' wrong, you don't got nothin to worry about." That is a dangerous precedent to follow when questioning the necessity for privacy protection.



Cellphones are software driven, which is why remote access is possible. It's the same as when a cell provider is activating a phone, they have to be able to communicate to the phone and have it respond, so a number can be assigned w/ access. As for tracking, it's through triangulation. You have X number of cell towers that the phone is talking to. If a company wants to know where (XXX)XXX-XXXX is, that ID code would be triangulated giving the whereabouts +/- within the accuracy limits of the system.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 01:50 PM
link   
A big problem with the attitude of 'if someone has nothing to hide the person has nothing to worry about' is that it trains people to infer/assume guilt on anyone whom is arrested or accused of anything.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jessicamsa
A big problem with the attitude of 'if someone has nothing to hide the person has nothing to worry about' is that it trains people to infer/assume guilt on anyone whom is arrested or accused of anything.



I only infer guilt if someone is acting as if they've got something to hide, or acts like they've got a guilty conscience. Otherwise, I give the benefit of the doubt, if the circumstancial evidence doesn't appear to be damning.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:02 PM
link   
If someone supports a "terroristic viewpoint", you bet I want them monitored!

Like others have said I too have nothing to hide and no I don't fear having my liberties taken away. IMO there is a point at which we should certainly balk but we are not there.

The question is: Would you rather these agencies couldn't legally monitor you? But before you answer think about it. If they can't legally monitor you then they can't legally monitor anyone. This makes operating a terroristic community much easier and more feasible, which puts you and your loved ones in danger.

That national terror alert would be spiked every day.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:07 PM
link   
Well that remind me of making sure I mention bush stupidity at least once every time I am in the phone.

Also call them corrupted government and sick deprived spies.

Let see how well they listen . . .


Doesn't certain words hold a key if mention?

let see . . .



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:09 PM
link   

Originally posted by jbondo
If someone supports a "terroristic viewpoint", you bet I want them monitored!


The point wasn't whether someone actually had terroristic viewpoints, but whether their viewpoint was considered terroristic by the government.

Which could be anyone who is against the war for example.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jessicamsa
A big problem with the attitude of 'if someone has nothing to hide the person has nothing to worry about' is that it trains people to infer/assume guilt on anyone whom is arrested or accused of anything.



Exactly not only that but to assume some one is guilty and is hiding some thing because they don't agree with being watched/listened to 24/7.

"But hey we live free right it does not matter it does not effect me I have nothing to hide. But wait for a few miles I was going one MPH over the limit oops it's just a little thing no one will care. Wait why is that cop pulling me over why am I being arrested for one MPH over the limit? Ofcourse I think (insert some gov. official here) os a moron and should never have been elected...but what does that have to do with any thing? Enemy combatant what do you mean I no longer have a right to a trial or reason for arrest? It was one one MPH over the limit."

Or

"Ma'am we have video evidence of you crossing the street illegaly and a reporting witness to boot. Yes I know it's only J walking and you were in the middle of the block and it was not that big of an infraction but it is a law. Ma'am maybe if you would be a law abiding citizen and not complain about our "elected" officials you would not be in jail for breaking such a simple law. Lawyer LOL ma'am you are not even getting a trial we know your guilty"

The I have nothing to hide issue is bunk there is not one person posting on this board that has never and will never break any law in their adult life. Remember just one MPH over the posted limit is breaking the law and is a ticketable offence. But if your one who does not agree with elected officials it could become even more of an offence.
Also ignorance of a law is not a reasonable excuse for breaking of said laws. Look up every law on the books in your area an look what you could be charged with if those laws were to be enforced. In some areas you are not to have sex with the woman on top or the lights on. Just a few examples of crazy laws a quick google will find more.

So ask yourself do you realy have absolutely nothing to hide or would you rather be free?

Raist



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:14 PM
link   

Originally posted by jbondo
If someone supports a "terroristic viewpoint", you bet I want them monitored!



I will like for you to enlighten us here and tell please what you consider enough of a Terrorist view to the point that we citizens of this nation be monitored.

Did you remember why Nixon had to resign from the presidency?

Well, do you know that Bush is a fan of Nixons to the point that he surrounds himslef with people from that era?

So tell us please what is you opinion of terroristic view point.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jessicamsa
A big problem with the attitude of 'if someone has nothing to hide the person has nothing to worry about' is that it trains people to infer/assume guilt on anyone whom is arrested or accused of anything.



It only trains those in that way who are actually guilty of doing anything.

What's laughable to me is that a whole bunch of nobodys are sitting around thinking the government wants to listen to their conversations or know what they are up to, and they really aren't doing anything very important at all. They just want to think they are important without having done anything. Except for you guys that are downloading porn.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by ANOK

Originally posted by jbondo
If someone supports a "terroristic viewpoint", you bet I want them monitored!


The point wasn't whether someone actually had terroristic viewpoints, but whether their viewpoint was considered terroristic by the government.

Which could be anyone who is against the war for example.


Can you provide 1 example of someone being labled a terrorist for merely disagreeing with the war? Just 1 will suffice. It's when people say that Bush should be killed, etc.... when the government starts taking more interest in an individual. It is a crime to threaten the president.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:21 PM
link   

Originally posted by marg6043

Originally posted by jbondo
If someone supports a "terroristic viewpoint", you bet I want them monitored!



I will like for you to enlighten us here and tell please what you consider enough of a Terrorist view to the point that we citizens of this nation be monitored.

Did you remember why Nixon had to resign from the presidency?

Well, do you know that Bush is a fan of Nixons to the point that he surrounds himslef with people from that era?

So tell us please what is you opinion of terroristic view point.


FWIW, Nixon's crime was covering up Watergate, once he found out about the break in. He played no role up till that point. John Dean on the other hand would be more interesting as far as his role in the matter.



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:23 PM
link   
Well lets keep the eardroping in Americans while at the same time, taggin the people American terrorist with views and let it just add to Gonzales views of enemy combatant. . . and we are going to have a lot of enemies of the state in this country with people that disagree with bush.

What can I say A.G. Gonzales: Constitution Doesn't Guarantee Habeas Corpus, I wonder what else can this administration do to us that they has not done already.

www.abovetopsecret.com...'



posted on Jan, 25 2007 @ 02:27 PM
link   
Who says the government is tracking/monitoring you. There is something much bigger then any government that has to gain with this monitoring. By the way computers can easily recognize thousands of words. For instance, my apple response very well to voice commands. And that's the technology a simple guy as me can buy in the apple store, imagine what they could have. They can record your conversation and make a profile of each and any person with a cellphone. The computer can do that. No employees needed besides some IT personel. They know where you are, who you call, what you like and dislike.

And some people who even admid this is being done still think this is for the good of you, me and the rest. Do you know who they are and why they need this abbility?



new topics

top topics



 
1
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join