Big Brother is watching & listening....

xoxoxoBruce · 01-06-2007, 04:51 AM

Big Brother is not only watching, he's listening on your cell phone. No, not only your calls, your conversations with the people around you....on your phone.
What? No way, I turn my phone off. Wrong, ring tone breath....

Quote:

ABC News; Cell phone users, beware. The FBI can listen to everything you say, even when the cell phone is turned off.

A recent court ruling in a case against the Genovese crime family revealed that the FBI has the ability from a remote location to activate a cell phone and turn its microphone into a listening device that transmits to an FBI listening post, a method known as a "roving bug." Experts say the only way to defeat it is to remove the cell phone battery.

"The FBI can access cell phones and modify them remotely without ever having to physically handle them," James Atkinson, a counterintelligence security consultant, told ABC News. "Any recently manufactured cell phone has a built-in tracking device, which can allow eavesdroppers to pinpoint someone's location to within just a few feet," he added.

According to the recent court ruling by U.S. District Court Judge Lewis Kaplan, "The device functioned whether the phone was powered on or off, intercepting conversations within its range wherever it happened to be."

The court ruling denied motions by 10 defendants to suppress the conversations obtained by "roving bugs" on the phones of John Ardito, a high-ranking member of the family, and Peter Peluso, an attorney and close associate of Ardito, who later cooperated with the government. The "roving bugs" were approved by a judge after the more conventional bugs planted at specified locations were discovered by members of the crime family, who then started to conduct their business dealings in several additional locations, including more restaurants, cars, a doctor's office and public streets.

"The courts have given law enforcement a blank check for surveillance," Richard Rehbock, attorney for defendant John Ardito, told ABC News.

So you see, 1984 is here, now, and in your face. Keep in mind, as these things come to light, the government doesn't let us in on this stuff unless they absolutely have to. You can be assured they have other tricks you don't know about, yet.

I listened to a guy that lives in Philly, today. He was expounding loudly, how Philly should have red light cameras at every intersection and monitored video cameras on every block.
He actually welcomes the Civil Servant Overlords. Good grief.

Phil · 01-06-2007, 05:10 AM

this doesnt surprise me at all, but i'm sure someone who believes all the bullshit we're spoon fed by the media will call you a paranoid conspiracy lovin', tin foil hat wearin' goddam commie.
do you have "listening stations" out there? like this :

bluecuracao · 01-06-2007, 05:13 AM

I recall reading an article not too long ago that certain local municipalities do not have the technology to locate 911 calls from cell phones, and won't for quite some time. Not a priority, apparently.

xoxoxoBruce · 01-06-2007, 05:33 AM

I would think it would depend on what phone company they have, as it's the phone company does all the 911 stuff and phone tracking.
You can be assured, however, the FBI, CIA, Justice Dept, have access to the technology.
Frontier, in Lancaster County, doesn't even provide caller ID info, or a least they didn't two years ago.

bluecuracao · 01-06-2007, 06:06 AM

Then they should share, so peoples' live can be saved. Oh, wait, 'homeland security' doesn't encompass that, does it?

Phil · 01-06-2007, 06:22 AM

orthodoc · 01-06-2007, 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by xoxoxoBruce

Snip ~
I listened to a guy that lives in Philly, today. He was expounding loudly, how Philly should have red light cameras at every intersection and monitored video cameras on every block.
He actually welcomes the Civil Servant Overlords. Good grief.

Red light cameras and video cameras are the norm in most Canadian cities now. People are under constant surveillance. We were there for two years, and I found it crazy-making - talk about feeling paranoid. We were hit with a fine for 'running a red light', too, when a red light camera malfunctioned. We were sent the photos in the mail with a demand for $200. Included in the fine print was a notice that 'malfunctioning of the camera is not grounds for defense'!!! We could not beat the charge, even though the photos clearly showed problems with the camera's timer (they didn't even show the red light, natch).

Good grief is right, or maybe something stronger.

xoxoxoBruce · 01-06-2007, 06:51 AM

I don't know how it works in Canada, but here, every red light camera is installed and operated by private contractors, who take the lions share of the proceeds.
I'm agitated by the fact that the government and my employees have no hand in this process. I've seen several studies that show the same reduction in red light violations, the cameras claim to produce, can be achieved by adding 2 or 3 seconds to the yellow light. But, 1 - that produces no revenue, and 2 - it's a violation of the camera company's contract. They had to renegotiate any time a change was made in the light set up.

orthodoc · 01-06-2007, 07:19 AM

Yep, it's a revenue-grabber. A camera does nothing to stop the behavior it records ... a maniac driving at 100 mph and blowing through every red light in town is free to continue doing so. He/she just gets a bunch of fines in the mail two weeks later. The cameras are used to justify drastic cutting of the police force. Government lackeys have confused recording violations of the law with enforcing it. Too bad for the law-abiding.

I've also read about the studies that confirm that adding a couple of seconds to yellow lights would solve the problem ... and not result in the increased number of rear-end collisions seen after cameras are installed.

Shawnee123 · 01-06-2007, 08:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phil

this doesnt surprise me at all, but i'm sure someone who believes all the bullshit we're spoon fed by the media will call you a paranoid conspiracy lovin', tin foil hat wearin' goddam commie.
do you have "listening stations" out there? like this :

What's par?

Spexxvet · 01-06-2007, 08:39 AM

This is a difficult issue for me. I'm relatively law-abiding. I often ask myself "if someone saw me do this, would I be proud of my behavior?", and the answer guides my actions. But...

I want the bad guys punished.
I believe that most people don't pay attention to laws because they feel that they won't get caught, and in most cases, they don't.
I don't want high taxes to pay for law enforcement.
I want my privacy.
I want oversight of "homeland spying".
I believe in the concept of probable cause.
I don't want to have to injure or kill to defend myself or my family.
I want to be safe.

In summary, it's not a black-and-white issue for me.

yesman065 · 01-06-2007, 08:55 AM

About 3 years ago the first ones were installed in Delaware and a "friend" borrowed my car one day to drive to the DMV and take care of a couple traffic violations. Two weeks later I get 2 citations in the mail for running red lights and I wasn't even in the car!
Oh, and yes I am still responsible for the fines no matter what, although they don't count against my driving record or increase my insurance. as far as I know anyway.

On the other hand, at the intersection of Rt.202 & 92 in Northern DE there are 10 cameras! You can drive 5 miles either way on either road and not see another. I must say though there are a lot less accidents or people running lights there, which used to be a major problem. I still don't like 'em though.

Clodfobble · 01-06-2007, 11:11 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by orthodoc

I've also read about the studies that confirm that adding a couple of seconds to yellow lights would solve the problem ... and not result in the increased number of rear-end collisions seen after cameras are installed.

I'd question whether that's a permanent fix, however. Once everyone got used to the longer yellow-light time, they would start to push the limits of running them again.

wolf · 01-06-2007, 11:47 AM

I piss a lot of people off, but I rarely run a yellow.

Just the occasional left on red when you've thrust yourself in traffic when it's busy.

yesman065 · 01-06-2007, 01:41 PM

What about the "right on red from a one-way to a one-way" or is that just around here?

01-06-2007, 05:10 AM	#2
Phil Hoodoo Guru Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 304	this doesnt surprise me at all, but i'm sure someone who believes all the bullshit we're spoon fed by the media will call you a paranoid conspiracy lovin', tin foil hat wearin' goddam commie. do you have "listening stations" out there? like this : __________________ Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is unable to believe things for which there is no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of a convenient means of feeling superior to others.

01-06-2007, 05:33 AM	#4
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	I would think it would depend on what phone company they have, as it's the phone company does all the 911 stuff and phone tracking. You can be assured, however, the FBI, CIA, Justice Dept, have access to the technology. Frontier, in Lancaster County, doesn't even provide caller ID info, or a least they didn't two years ago. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

01-06-2007, 06:22 AM	#6
Phil Hoodoo Guru Join Date: Dec 2006 Posts: 304	__________________ Atheist n A person to be pitied in that he is unable to believe things for which there is no evidence, and who has thus deprived himself of a convenient means of feeling superior to others.

01-06-2007, 06:51 AM	#8
xoxoxoBruce The future is unwritten Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 71,105	I don't know how it works in Canada, but here, every red light camera is installed and operated by private contractors, who take the lions share of the proceeds. I'm agitated by the fact that the government and my employees have no hand in this process. I've seen several studies that show the same reduction in red light violations, the cameras claim to produce, can be achieved by adding 2 or 3 seconds to the yellow light. But, 1 - that produces no revenue, and 2 - it's a violation of the camera company's contract. They had to renegotiate any time a change was made in the light set up. __________________ The descent of man ~ Nixon, Friedman, Reagan, Trump.

01-06-2007, 07:19 AM	#9
orthodoc Not Suspicious, Merely Canadian Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 3,774	Yep, it's a revenue-grabber. A camera does nothing to stop the behavior it records ... a maniac driving at 100 mph and blowing through every red light in town is free to continue doing so. He/she just gets a bunch of fines in the mail two weeks later. The cameras are used to justify drastic cutting of the police force. Government lackeys have confused recording violations of the law with enforcing it. Too bad for the law-abiding. I've also read about the studies that confirm that adding a couple of seconds to yellow lights would solve the problem ... and not result in the increased number of rear-end collisions seen after cameras are installed. __________________ The greatness of a nation and its moral progress can be judged by the way its animals are treated. - Ghandi

01-06-2007, 05:13 AM	#3
bluecuracao in a mood, not cupcake Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 3,034	I recall reading an article not too long ago that certain local municipalities do not have the technology to locate 911 calls from cell phones, and won't for quite some time. Not a priority, apparently.

01-06-2007, 06:06 AM	#5
bluecuracao in a mood, not cupcake Join Date: Jun 2005 Location: Philadelphia Posts: 3,034	Then they should share, so peoples' live can be saved. Oh, wait, 'homeland security' doesn't encompass that, does it?

01-06-2007, 08:39 AM	#11
Spexxvet Makes some feel uncomfortable Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 10,346	This is a difficult issue for me. I'm relatively law-abiding. I often ask myself "if someone saw me do this, would I be proud of my behavior?", and the answer guides my actions. But... I want the bad guys punished. I believe that most people don't pay attention to laws because they feel that they won't get caught, and in most cases, they don't. I don't want high taxes to pay for law enforcement. I want my privacy. I want oversight of "homeland spying". I believe in the concept of probable cause. I don't want to have to injure or kill to defend myself or my family. I want to be safe. In summary, it's not a black-and-white issue for me. __________________ "I'm certainly free, nay compelled, to spread the gospel of Spex. " - xoxoxoBruce

01-06-2007, 08:55 AM	#12
yesman065 Banned - Self Imposed Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,847	About 3 years ago the first ones were installed in Delaware and a "friend" borrowed my car one day to drive to the DMV and take care of a couple traffic violations. Two weeks later I get 2 citations in the mail for running red lights and I wasn't even in the car! Oh, and yes I am still responsible for the fines no matter what, although they don't count against my driving record or increase my insurance. as far as I know anyway. On the other hand, at the intersection of Rt.202 & 92 in Northern DE there are 10 cameras! You can drive 5 miles either way on either road and not see another. I must say though there are a lot less accidents or people running lights there, which used to be a major problem. I still don't like 'em though.

01-06-2007, 11:47 AM	#14
wolf lobber of scimitars Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Phila Burbs Posts: 20,774	I piss a lot of people off, but I rarely run a yellow. Just the occasional left on red when you've thrust yourself in traffic when it's busy. __________________ wolf eht htiw og "Conspiracies are the norm, not the exception." --G. Edward Griffin The Creature from Jekyll Island High Priestess of the Church of the Whale Penis

01-06-2007, 01:41 PM	#15
yesman065 Banned - Self Imposed Join Date: Dec 2005 Posts: 1,847	What about the "right on red from a one-way to a one-way" or is that just around here?

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)