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.

 

In the interest of public safety. . . .

page: 1
15

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:11 AM
link   

BART officials acknowledged this afternoon that they shut down cell phone and wireless data service in its downtown San Francisco stations to disrupt a planned protest. Their announcement sparked denunciations from civil libertarians and the apparent threat of a cyber-attack on the BART website.
A statement posted on the transit agency's website said the communications blackout was ordered in the interest of public safety:

"Organizers planning to disrupt BART service on August 11, 2011 stated they would use mobile devices to coordinate their disruptive activities and communicate about the location and number of BART Police," the statement reads.

dailykos.com...

First off, I am NOT a fan of dally kos. But I visit just to get a handle on lib talking points.

This story, though, caught my eye.

From the same article. . .

The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) forbids jamming cellphones, but BART's move had a different legal context. Because the transit system contracts with five large telecommunications firms to provide underground and station service, BART did not use jamming technology, it simply turned off a service.


Now we've had tons of stories about London and how social media has played a part.

But the good ol' U. S. of A. is once again first in doing something about it.

Enjoy.




posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:29 AM
link   
Further on in the article it goes on to state...


Update: Not so fast on the great weekend. Looks more and more like the move is illegal, according to an update at SFGate:
...no person shall willfully or maliciously interfere with or cause interference to any radio communications of any station licensed or authorized by or under this Act or operated by the United States Government..."


So what thats trying to say is that if anyone ever turns on a cellphone tower, they're NEVER allowed to turn it off ever again. Even if its a privately owned company.

I dont believe it.

McDonalds for example, have a lot of stores with wireless internet capability.
What this article is saying is that they are NEVER allowed to turn it off for any reason ever again because that would be interfering with radio communications.

Again, I dont believe it.

I think what BART did may be a but unhelpful, but I cant see that its illegal to turn off their own equipment.
Its not like they ever have to provide that service in the first place.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by alfa1
 
Interesting point. Would this extend to wifi in the home as well? Or just commercial businesses? Where does this stop?

I think BART has started an ugly pecident, regardless.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:53 AM
link   
San Francisco has always done what they want. Many times they have thumbed their noses at the rest of the country. If they turn off their towers, then so be it. It will affect them more than us, and maybe it will shake up some of those shepple there.. Maybe they'll shut off power and other utilities next.
Bad thing.
There's a precedent that this administration would love to follow.
BTW, you read the KOS?
Now I know why your eyes water

SnF my friend.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 01:59 AM
link   

Originally posted by Violater1
San Francisco has always done what they want. Many times they have thumbed their noses at the rest of the country. If they turn off their towers, then so be it. It will affect them more than us, and maybe it will shake up some of those shepple there.. Maybe they'll shut off power and other utilities next.
Bad thing.
There's a precedent that this administration would love to follow.
BTW, you read the KOS?
Now I know why your eyes water

SnF my friend.

That's why I thought this story so important. It does set a scary precident One that will probably be adopted, regardess of the legality.

Appreciate the SnF, the KOS scares me but "fools tread. . . . . "



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 10:22 AM
link   
I just posted my responce on another thread to this topic.

How about just texting before you go down the stairs and getting on BART? We're talking about an extra five minutes of planning.

Ummmm Duh?

They won't shut down the whole communication system in Frisco. The Flash Mob protesters have to know which train and direction they're going to go BEFORE they hop on the train anyway..

What? They can't organize at the TOP of the stairs before they go down?

Besides...Whatever communication system mobsters use,it's being monitored anyway.

Cops just want to know how many officers to have ready to greet them.

As Adam once said to Eve "Better stand back honey,I don't know HOW big it'll get."

Cops just want to make sure they have the location and correct number of "greeters" on hand depending on crowd size.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 10:26 AM
link   
walkie talkies for the win! =P



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 10:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by niceguybob
I just posted my responce on another thread to this topic.

How about just texting before you go down the stairs and getting on BART? We're talking about an extra five minutes of planning.

Ummmm Duh?

They won't shut down the whole communication system in Frisco. The Flash Mob protesters have to know which train and direction they're going to go BEFORE they hop on the train anyway..

What? They can't organize at the TOP of the stairs before they go down?

Besides...Whatever communication system mobsters use,it's being monitored anyway.

Cops just want to know how many officers to have ready to greet them.

As Adam once said to Eve "Better stand back honey,I don't know HOW big it'll get."

Cops just want to make sure they have the location and correct number of "greeters" on hand depending on crowd size.







If it were just an issue of convenience, then I'd agree. But this is manipulation. This was a direct attempt at stopping a protest, free speech from occuring.
You don't want a protest? Call the cops.
But this draconian attempt at social manipulation is just plain wrong.

Just my humble, of course.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   
A great idea whose time has come...wake up people...figure out another way to do it...and forget aboutFRS/GMRS radios...those were INVENTED to channel you into a set number of frequencies and "channels"..those "private" channels they advertise?..anyone on that channel can hear everything you say...they just cant talk to you...."private" my a*s



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 10:47 AM
link   

Originally posted by beezzer
If it were just an issue of convenience, then I'd agree. But this is manipulation. This was a direct attempt at stopping a protest, free speech from occuring.




The move was made after BART learned that protesters planned to use mobile devices to coordinate a demonstration on train platforms.
'A civil disturbance during commute times at busy downtown San Francisco stations could lead to platform overcrowding and unsafe conditions for BART customers, employees and demonstrators,' BART officials said in a prepared statement.


Now of course I dont know if BART is lying here, but if true, that the protest was planned for peak hour times *on the platforms*, then I would have done evertying I could to stop it as well.
Free speech is one thing, stupidly putting peoples lives in danger is another.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Homedawg
 


Let me expand...if you pick "channel" 10 and "privacy code" 21,you can talk to anyone with that same setting...but anyone on 'channel"10 can hear anything you say...they just cant talk to you unless they have your privacy setting...its all a 1984 plot to make people think they are conversing in secret....ha



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 11:25 AM
link   

Originally posted by alfa1

Now of course I dont know if BART is lying here, but if true, that the protest was planned for peak hour times *on the platforms*, then I would have done evertying I could to stop it as well.
Free speech is one thing, stupidly putting peoples lives in danger is another.

Then you call the police. This is exactly the same argument TSA uses. It's all for safety.
Just ignore the fat sweaty guy pawing your wife in the security line.
It's all for safety.



posted on Aug, 13 2011 @ 02:24 PM
link   
note that these are the same assholes who shot a handcuffed black man who was on his subject last new years, which resulted in his death.

civil record = -2



new topics

top topics



 
15

log in

join