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 : If we told you the truth about warrantless spying, you would sue

page: 1
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 12 2011 @ 04:52 AM
link   
Finally ``some`` truth from the constitution rapists at the FBI.

FBI: If We Told You, You Might Sue

Often when the government tries to suppress information about its surveillance programs, it cites national-security concerns. But not always.

In 2008, a few years after the Bush administration's warrantless-wiretapping program was revealed for the first time by the New York Times, Congress passed the FISA Amendments Act. That act authorizes the government to engage in dragnet surveillance of Americans' international communications without meaningful oversight. As we've explained before (including in our lawsuit challenging the statute), the FISA Amendments Act is unconstitutional.

In 2009, we also filed a Freedom of Information Act request to learn more about the government's interpretation and implementation of the FISA Amendments Act. Last November, the government released a few hundred pages of heavily redacted documents. Though redacted, the documents confirmed that the government had interpreted the statute as broadly as we had feared and even that the government had repeatedly violated the few limitations that the statute actually imposed.

Two weeks ago, as part of our FOIA lawsuit over those documents, the government gave us several declarations attempting to justify the redaction of the documents. We've been combing through the documents and recently came across this unexpectedly honest explanation from the FBI of why the government doesn't want us to know which "electronic communication service providers" participate in its dragnet surveillance program. On page 32:




So there ya go.... FBI admitting they are totally violating the constitution and if people really knew about it, they would sue their ISP and the government because of their violation of fourth amendment right.

Hell if someone brought this before a federal judge, the judge could bring down the whole warrantless spying program by pushing it to the Supreme Court and they would declare it unconstitutional. (if they do the right thing, yeah I know I'm dreaming) And it would have standing since the companies have actually caused ``harm`` to their customers and have probably broken the contract you signed with them in the first place.

Or you could just do it for MONEY...

Anyone wants to try?
edit on 12-5-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 12 2011 @ 05:23 AM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


The way I read this was..."The Government don't want people to know what they are doing in relation to invading peoples privacy, because this would mean these Major ISP's would lose money"...

Surely Constitutional Rights are more important than a company profiting?....Aaaaah wait!!!...it is America!...my bad =P



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 06:20 AM
link   
Well with the way the economy is, how could we possibly afford lawyers?


It should say "You would sue if you had any money".

Also, I tend to think I already know the truth about this topic.

I lean towards this scenario : Every email, phone, fax, text message, etc etc; is 'spied on' passively, and fed through a automated computerized machine that searches for 'key words'. When a specific keyword is pegged, it's not such a big deal. But when multiple 'keywords' are pegged, the incident is flagged and actual human investigators take a look at the information much closer.

If you don't believe that scenario is possible, I would have to consider you 'unimaginative'.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 06:30 AM
link   
reply to post by muzzleflash
 


I suppose I better start running then?...=P Im sure there are more than a few "keywords" that I have on my PC, emails AND phone that would flag up. Mostly relating to the same "subject matter" haha =]



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 06:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by muzzleflash
Well with the way the economy is, how could we possibly afford lawyers?


It should say "You would sue if you had any money".

Also, I tend to think I already know the truth about this topic.

I lean towards this scenario : Every email, phone, fax, text message, etc etc; is 'spied on' passively, and fed through a automated computerized machine that searches for 'key words'. When a specific keyword is pegged, it's not such a big deal. But when multiple 'keywords' are pegged, the incident is flagged and actual human investigators take a look at the information much closer.

If you don't believe that scenario is possible, I would have to consider you 'unimaginative'.


That's exactly how it works. Google fairly openly participates in this practice as well.

Say Kill the president, Kill gets picked out, president gets picked out, you get looked at, they investigators realize it was sarcastic and drop it.

You say,

Kill, President, Bomb, Rifle, Shiite, Muslim, to any one person, in any short breath of time, and you have officially been flagged on the no fly list.

That's pretty much exactly how it works.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   

Originally posted by Laokin

That's exactly how it works. Google fairly openly participates in this practice as well.

Say Kill the president, Kill gets picked out, president gets picked out, you get looked at, they investigators realize it was sarcastic and drop it.

You say,

Kill, President, Bomb, Rifle, Shiite, Muslim, to any one person, in any short breath of time, and you have officially been flagged on the no fly list.

That's pretty much exactly how it works.


You have been officially flagged on the no fly list. You used all the key words.

Sorry, couldn't resist. Your statement is very true. Freedom of speech? Gone.....



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Here is the kicker for me;

The sworn duty of any public servant clearly specifies that upholding and defending the constitution are central to their mandate.

Elected or otherwise, this does not change.

And yet, through some apparent mental gymnastics, they have completely disregarded that key principle of service to conduct the consumption of public resources to violate that mandate. The proverbial salt on the wound, is that those private corporations who conducted activities in complete violation of law not only were granted retroactive immunity for the crime, but we were also denied the freedom to request a public hearing or trial on the matter.

The Supreme Court operated to effect this departure from the declared nature of the government to which we have all been asked to pledge allegiance.

When all three branches of government are complicit in the usurpation of the rule of law, and the mandate of the citizens.... isn't somebody supposed to "do" something about it?

In a capitalist society I would have expected all of us to vote with our money and stop using private services which conducted themselves criminally. After all, redress to the government is virtually gone.

The trends as they seem to be, indicate that nothing short of a national general strike will slap these power drunk fools into sobriety.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by Maxmars

And yet, through some apparent mental gymnastics, they have completely disregarded that key principle of service to conduct the consumption of public resources to violate that mandate.


Science fiction is loaded with stories of bureaucrats and authorities seeking to maintain things like freedom and respective constitutions who take it too far and essentially establish "for your own good" police states.

There was even an episode of Adventure Time about it.

It isnt a new idea. It's ancient. Unfortunately nobody learns from the past or from stories anymore.

We're all so vain that we constantly think this time here is different than any other time past. It never is.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:40 AM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Science fiction is loaded with stories of bureaucrats and authorities seeking to maintain things like freedom and respective constitutions who take it too far and essentially establish "for your own good" police states.



Maybe Mr. Obama(if thats even his REAL name =P haha) has been watching/reading too much Judge Dredd? and is getting all "AIII AAAYYUUUM THE LAAAAW!!!"



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:41 AM
link   
ya if you knew what we did people might be held accountable...
worked for the nazies...

crazy how far gone the US system is thx for the thread FnS for the OP



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 01:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


I dont understand the part where the FBI gets their authority from the FAA.
Can someone explain this to me?



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 05:54 PM
link   
In the UK almost any Gov department can use our RIPA (Regulation of Investigatory Powers Act) law to spy on us

www.legislation.gov.uk...

It known by those who use it as the snoopers charter.

nnet-server.com... - This is just one area of london.

Do we all have laws like this to allow almost anyone to snoop?



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 06:35 PM
link   
reply to post by Glz00
 


I bet most every nation's general population (which merits definition) is no freer than any other in this regard.

We are not setting a bad example in governance, we are following many bad examples... which the political careerists should be dedicated to avoid.... if they weren't for politically expedient "sale."

I think the whole "globalist" movement is for THEIR convenience, not our well-being.

I also expect that since the Interpol can operate with full force of international law and complete diplomatic immunity within the US, we will be undergoing surveillance and other law enforcement activities which most of us expect would merit Constitutional challenges. But of course, we won't ever know since they have no obligation to our nation, they don't even HAVE to cooperate with local law enforcement. Yet if our law enforcement runs across Interpol, they HAVE to cooperate with them.

But I digress on the whole living in a world of suspicious fear.....



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 07:38 PM
link   

Anyone wants to try?
edit on 12-5-2011 by Vitchilo because: (no reason given)


Haha no thanks, ill let the others bite first.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 07:47 PM
link   
i felt like someone was watching when i was talking dirty when i was talking to my lady friend in hong kong

there are people who get paid $9.99 a minute for that.

i feel cheated in more ways than one.



everyone knows that the feds and telcom and isps are in bed with each other.


edit on 12-5-2011 by neo96 because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 08:58 PM
link   
reply to post by Vitchilo
 


Even if the truth came out that they were watching us and providing information to the FBI it would not matter to me or probably anyone else. We have nothing to hide. I go to work, out to dinner, and watch TV. What is there to hide? They must have so much non-important information it must have their heads spinning. Like all the people who watch that annoying Glee show.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 09:07 PM
link   
Sigh. There was a time when Americans would have raised arms against the government and those businesses for these sorts of atrocities.

It's a good thing we have become so progressive that we can simply roll over peacefully and surrender our freedom.



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 09:37 PM
link   
It would be a cool business to have: Customer comes in off the street with CASH, pays you to purchase a product online (you get say, 10% on top of final price, or $10, whichever is more), you give them ticket receipt, they leave and come back to pick up product when it arrives (which they can find out using special online encrypted tracking system).

They never have to give name, address, phone number, credit card, etc., to ANYONE. Totally Anonymous. The only caveat is your business has to make sure that product purchased is not illegal. Business is *not* under video surveillance (except back alley & non-customer areas).



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 10:10 PM
link   
Automated Video Surveillance is a reallity now and will END public anonymity.

www.infowars.com...



posted on May, 12 2011 @ 10:14 PM
link   
reply to post by afw2121
 


Believe me - it will matter all right when the NWO are up and running - that's why they putting all this surveillance in place so that when you escape from you corral or leave your designated area they will easily find you.

And God Forbid if you find something you feel goes too far and decide to protest about it.

This Link will show you how you won't have ANYWHERE to run.
www.infowars.com...



new topics

top topics



 
17
<<   2 >>

log in

join