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.

 

Federal Reserve Police Tells Reporter to Stop Filming

page: 1
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:28 PM
link   
Federal Reserve Police Tells Reporter to Stop Filming



First off I am a long time lurker of ATS but just recently signed up so forgive me if I put this video in the wrong section.

This video was recently posted on Youtube and depicts a reporters run in with the Federal Reserve Police while filming the Federal Reserve.

I find it interesting that the reporter had no problems filming any other government buildings including the White House but could not even get a minute of film before he was stopped at the Reserve. The reason given was that you can't take film of ANY government building without permission and considering the Federal Reserve is not a government entity I can't see how it could be a government building.

With the recent storys about banning photos and film taking of law enforcement this does not really surprise me.

[edit on 12-2-2009 by TooManyHumans]




posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:43 PM
link   
reply to post by TooManyHumans
 


This person needs to bring suit against this officer and the department that supports his actions. This is illegal.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   
First of all, let me clarify that I am staunchly anti- NWO/Shadow Govt./FEMA, etc.

But couldn't filming federal buildings truly be considered intelligence gathering/recon? I mean, this reporter COULD be a potential terrorist doing recon.

It doesn't seem THAT un reasonable to stop the reporter.

I know, I know, you are supposed to be allowed to film everything in public, but we DO live in a different world now.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:51 PM
link   
This country gets scarier by the second



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:54 PM
link   
Yeah as mentioned before I wonder what the law would be regarding the FED as it is not a government institution. Maybe as a loophole the building they operating in is a federal building and the FED employees are just tenants? I would like to see this law where it specifically states that you cannot photograph federal buildings with the exception of one or two shots.

Speaking from some law enforcement experience, I thought that officer was actually pretty nice relative to some others. She actually took the time to answer some question and was overall professional if not a little stern.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:55 PM
link   
They'd have to prove that this person was there on an intelligence/recon mission for some terrorist group. It's called due process, something American authorities forgot all about.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 04:57 PM
link   
reply to post by TooManyHumans
 


Here is the deal Some rules the government enacts and enforces actually make sense, it doesnt happen often but when it does there is a clear cut reason why they made that rule.

This is a perfect example, you cant film government buildings you wouldnt be able to walk up and film a military base would you? The federal reserve is where a great deal of the nations money comes from. If the wrong people were filming this building to get a sense of the layout they could bust in rob the place and make off with the cash.

So it makes sense that they would want to have control of any filming of the building and its contents. Even from public grounds. Also its a high security building they wouldnt have to prove anything about why they were filiming its simple, dont film the building unles you have gone through the steps to do so. It makes perfect sense, if this was the local KFC there would be a big problem with that but it isnt its the FED where tha nations money is printed. Think it through people, use logic not emotion.


[edit on 12-2-2009 by caballero]



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:01 PM
link   
I thought she was very polite etc and helpful to the reporter (????). Over the years I gone out to cars in our neighbourhood that have been parked there to see if anything is wrong etc.

Im sure in hindsight if a security guard at the Oklahoma Building had asked Timothy McVeigh what he was doing.................... they would be a hero............



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:06 PM
link   
reply to post by MajesticJax
 


That's the jist of it right there.

Thanks for beating me to the punch.

Cheers.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by TooManyHumans
 


Since the Federal Reserve is just a big bank and you cant take pics INSIDE of a bank for security reasons that I would understand. But you cant be stopped for taking pics OUTSIDE of a building and obviously from what, like 20-40' away from the front doors???



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:17 PM
link   
reply to post by MajesticJax
 


I would agree if it wasn't a fact that they sell pictures of the building and every other building in DC at any of the inhouse stores of the various agencies! Filming buildings in DC has been legal forever. I know of no order to stop the filming of a government building unless its considered a secret facility. Not too many of those that have big signs saying what it is on the facade of the building! They film the Pentagon all the time for news shows. What makes the thieves in the Fed so uptight?????

Zindo



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by projectvxn
 


Thank you and God Bless I could not agree with you more



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 05:26 PM
link   
I've always heard the expression that the Federal Reserve is no more "Federal" than Federal Express. That the Federal Reserve is NOT a part of the Government of the United States. So how is the Federal Reserve a "Government Building" it's owned by Private Bankers. So do they really have their own Police or just security.

"Taze / Mace / shock / whack the Private Bankers Police are back!"

Also I thought money was printed in the U.S. Mints (We have one here in Denver) not in the Federal Reserve Building.

You can't walk into a Military Base with a camera but thousands of soldiers use webcams everyday.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 07:23 PM
link   

Originally posted by cynical572
I've always heard the expression that the Federal Reserve is no more "Federal" than Federal Express. That the Federal Reserve is NOT a part of the Government of the United States. So how is the Federal Reserve a "Government Building" it's owned by Private Bankers. So do they really have their own Police or just security.

"Taze / Mace / shock / whack the Private Bankers Police are back!"

Also I thought money was printed in the U.S. Mints (We have one here in Denver) not in the Federal Reserve Building.

You can't walk into a Military Base with a camera but thousands of soldiers use webcams everyday.


The Federal Reserve is a private corporation. This is from their website:


Are the Federal Reserve Banks private companies?

The Federal Reserve Banks, created by an act of Congress in 1913, are operated in the public interest rather than for profit or to benefit any private group.

Commercial banks that are members of the Federal Reserve System hold stock in the Reserve Bank in their region, but they do not exercise control over the Reserve Bank or the Federal Reserve System. Holding stock in a regional Reserve Bank does not carry with it the kind of control and financial interest that holding publicly traded stock affords, and the stock may not be sold or traded. Member banks do, however, receive a fixed 6 percent dividend annually on their stock and elect six of the nine members of the Reserve Bank's board of directors.

Although they are set up like private corporations and member banks hold their stock, the Federal Reserve Banks owe their existence to an act of Congress and have a mandate to serve the public. Therefore, they are not really "private" companies, but rather are "owned" by the citizens of the United States.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 07:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajesticJax
First of all, let me clarify that I am staunchly anti- NWO/Shadow Govt./FEMA, etc.

But couldn't filming federal buildings truly be considered intelligence gathering/recon? I mean, this reporter COULD be a potential terrorist doing recon.

It doesn't seem THAT un reasonable to stop the reporter.

I know, I know, you are supposed to be allowed to film everything in public, but we DO live in a different world now.



Yes, it could be considered Intel gathering. Just like if you hang around the gate of a Military base and do not try to enter or leave,they have all rights to stop you and question you for safety and security reasons.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 08:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by MajesticJax[/i

I know, I know, you are supposed to be allowed to film everything in public, but we DO live in a different world now.



I see where you are coming from with your statement but this kind of thinking is what is getting the American citizen in trouble. We live in a "different world" now so new rules must be set and freedoms need to be removed etc... When does it stop?

This reporter was told he could not film even when he was on public property and that is wrong. He has the right to do so and his rights are being encroached upon.

[edit on 12-2-2009 by TooManyHumans]

[edit on 12-2-2009 by TooManyHumans]



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:04 PM
link   
Although they are set up like private corporations and member banks hold their stock, the Federal Reserve Banks owe their existence to an act of Congress and have a mandate to serve the public. Therefore, they are not really "private" companies, but rather are "owned" by the citizens of the United States.

Typical FRB prattle. Or more to the point , a bold face lie. The guard is just that, an employee of the bank with no powers of arrest. Federal buildings pay no tax on their buildings. The Denver Mint pays no tax, The FRB does. They are a private enterprise. As the fellow stated above , they do not print money but place an order with the B of Printing & engraving. They ONLY exist through the grace of Congress and the amendment that brought them into being. There is also a stipulation that allows the Federal Government to purchase the FRB for I believe 200 million. If you do but a little research it becomes acutely obvious that they do not serve the public interest. 100% of their monetary policy outside of the States is not ( by law ) divulged to Congress. They are beyond doubt the primary instigating factor of our current economic problems. For the first time ever, the last Congressional over site hearing stated on numerous occasions, the enormous unbridled monetary power of the FRB. If I had been the fellow filming I would of ignored her. For you folks that believe there is an alleged terrorist behind every bush with a camera, please get a grip.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:06 PM
link   
reply to post by MajesticJax
 



That is the lamest excuse I have ever heard. "Live in a different world now." Please.



posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:29 PM
link   
That is so lame. It is legal to take pictures of anything from a public location. Photography is not illegal. The Federal Reserve Board shouldn't care about people taking pictures of that Fed building, it's this building they don't want people to know about. It's outside Richmond Virginia and is the Federal Reserve site that replaced the Mount Pony functions.







posted on Feb, 12 2009 @ 09:37 PM
link   
reply to post by Jack Jouett
 


Yeah, I wonder about that one myself, the last time I check I was still in the US, and we still have a Constitution, so I wonder what new world some are referring here.

I believe I am still an American, but you never know, in this new world I may be wrong.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join