Spies

[indago]

Journalist Matt Richtel wrote for The New York Times 15 March 2015:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A powerful new surveillance tool being adopted by police departments across the country comes with an unusual requirement: To buy it, law enforcement officials must sign a nondisclosure agreement preventing them from saying almost anything about the technology. ...The issue led to a public dispute three weeks ago in Silicon Valley, where a sheriff asked county officials to spend $502,000 on the technology. The Santa Clara County sheriff, Laurie Smith, said the technology allowed for locating cellphones — belonging to, say, terrorists or a missing person. But when asked for details, she offered no technical specifications and acknowledged she had not seen a product demonstration.

...The technology goes by various names, including StingRay, KingFish or, generically, cell site simulator. It is a rectangular device, small enough to fit into a suitcase, that intercepts a cellphone signal by acting like a cellphone tower. The technology can also capture texts, calls, emails and other data, and prosecutors have received court approval to use it for such purposes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/16/business/a-police-gadget-tracks-phones-shhh-its-secret.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0)

[Tyr-Ziu Saxnot]

Journalist Matt Richtel wrote for The New York Times 15 March 2015:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
A powerful new surveillance tool being adopted by police departments across the country comes with an unusual requirement: To buy it, law enforcement officials must sign a nondisclosure agreement preventing them from saying almost anything about the technology. ...The issue led to a public dispute three weeks ago in Silicon Valley, where a sheriff asked county officials to spend $502,000 on the technology. The Santa Clara County sheriff, Laurie Smith, said the technology allowed for locating cellphones — belonging to, say, terrorists or a missing person. But when asked for details, she offered no technical specifications and acknowledged she had not seen a product demonstration.

...The technology goes by various names, including StingRay, KingFish or, generically, cell site simulator. It is a rectangular device, small enough to fit into a suitcase, that intercepts a cellphone signal by acting like a cellphone tower. The technology can also capture texts, calls, emails and other data, and prosecutors have received court approval to use it for such purposes.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/16/business/a-police-gadget-tracks-phones-shhh-its-secret.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0)

Fifty bucks says our government and many of its gestapo departments are already using it on everyday john doe citizens and political opponents.

Does anybody think that Obama and his henchmen aren't using such devices to aid in their America destruction agenda??

If anybody does then they are ffing clueless, not smart enough to screw in a damn light bulb IMHO.
This is the most corrupt , anti-American administration in our history..
Fact...-Tyr

[indago]

From The Associated Press 2 June 2015:
--------------------------------------------------------------
The FBI is operating a small air force with scores of low-flying planes across the country carrying video and, at times, cellphone surveillance technology — all hidden behind fictitious companies that are fronts for the government, The Associated Press has learned. The planes' surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge's approval, and the FBI said the flights are used for specific, ongoing investigations. In a recent 30-day period, the agency flew above more than 30 cities in 11 states across the country, an AP review found.
--------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_FBI_SURVEILLANCE_FLIGHTS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2015-06-02-03-27-14)


http://userpages.monmouth.com/~spiro/eyeball.gif

[Jeff]

Cell phones are the easiest thing to track, My Ol lady and I where arguing one Sunday when I left out ( I was driving TT at the time so i would be gone at least a week ) well when I came home she had paper work of everywhere I was all week long, she was royally POed because it showed me stopped at a house for about 3 hours, after looking into it real well the house was right off I 81 in PA, where I had parked on a ramp to take a nap :laugh:

But I don't believe they need anything to special to track the phones, after all the Ol lady is smart but no rocket scientist for sure.

[indago]

From The Associated Press 7 February 2016:
----------------------------------------------------------------
When this Long Island village switched on its "ring of steel" last fall, it knew it was getting a potent policing tool. The system of 27 cameras would scan the license plate of every single vehicle that rolled into town. If a wanted criminal drove through, the system would sound an alert. If someone burglarized a house, the data could be mined to see who was on the road at the time. ...Since the scanners went live Nov. 2, they have been triggering an average of 700 alarms a day, mainly about cars on the road with expired or suspended registration stickers. Officers have impounded 500 vehicles. They've written more than 2,000 court summonses, mostly for minor violations. "It is a tremendous amount of workload that has been increased due to this new technology..."

...The use of license plate scanners has been proliferating at law enforcement agencies nationwide.
----------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_LICENSE_PLATE_SCANNERS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-02-07-10-56-57)

[Perianne]

From The Associated Press 7 February 2016:
----------------------------------------------------------------
When this Long Island village switched on its "ring of steel" last fall, it knew it was getting a potent policing tool. The system of 27 cameras would scan the license plate of every single vehicle that rolled into town. If a wanted criminal drove through, the system would sound an alert. If someone burglarized a house, the data could be mined to see who was on the road at the time. ...Since the scanners went live Nov. 2, they have been triggering an average of 700 alarms a day, mainly about cars on the road with expired or suspended registration stickers. Officers have impounded 500 vehicles. They've written more than 2,000 court summonses, mostly for minor violations. "It is a tremendous amount of workload that has been increased due to this new technology..."

...The use of license plate scanners has been proliferating at law enforcement agencies nationwide.
----------------------------------------------------------------

article (http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_LICENSE_PLATE_SCANNERS?SITE=AP&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2016-02-07-10-56-57)

They should be able to use those scanners to alert when a colored person enters a white neighborhood. You know the colored person has a warrant out for him/her, so it would be a good time to arrest AND protect the good neighborhood.

[indago]

They should be able to use those scanners to alert when a colored person enters a white neighborhood. You know the colored person has a warrant out for him/her, so it would be a good time to arrest AND protect the good neighborhood.

"a colored person"...

What "color" would that be? And besides, we can't be mixing up all these colors: after all, a new color might be found for the color spectrum...

[NightTrain]

They should be able to use those scanners to alert when a colored person enters a white neighborhood. You know the colored person has a warrant out for him/her, so it would be a good time to arrest AND protect the good neighborhood.
Perianne

Not cool, Peri.

[Perianne]

@Perianne (http://www.debatepolicy.com/member.php?u=2722)

Not cool, Peri.

We disagree. But I'll take it up somewhere else with someone else.

[NightTrain]

We disagree. But I'll take it up somewhere else with someone else.


That's fine.

I'd just like to ask you as a fellow member to back off that stuff a little bit. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing about any topic you can think of, and of course, you are free to speak your mind.

You know as well as I do that what you wrote above is hurtful and incredibly disrespectful.


What happened to your public announcement to try and be less offensive to Rev, and what looked like a heartfelt apology to him? That wasn't too long ago.

I know you have your own reasons for your views, and honestly I feel for you for having to go through that horrible ordeal. You have your own unique demons to wrestle, just as the rest of us do.


Saying that stuff above isn't true, and you know it. I've seen your reasonable side and I know you see that what you wrote isn't accurate. That statement was intended to spark a massive shitstorm thread and the end result is going to be every one of us covered in crap.

I'm just asking you - again, as one member to another - please try to filter and have at least a modicum of decency to other members.

[Perianne]

That's fine.

I'd just like to ask you as a fellow member to back off that stuff a little bit. There's nothing wrong with disagreeing about any topic you can think of, and of course, you are free to speak your mind.

You know as well as I do that what you wrote above is hurtful and incredibly disrespectful.


What happened to your public announcement to try and be less offensive to Rev, and what looked like a heartfelt apology to him? That wasn't too long ago.

I know you have your own reasons for your views, and honestly I feel for you for having to go through that horrible ordeal. You have your own unique demons to wrestle, just as the rest of us do.


Saying that stuff above isn't true, and you know it. I've seen your reasonable side and I know you see that what you wrote isn't accurate. That statement was intended to spark a massive shitstorm thread and the end result is going to be every one of us covered in crap.

I'm just asking you - again, as one member to another - please try to filter and have at least a modicum of decency to other members.

To you as a moderator and all others:

I have been publicly admonished, so I give my word that as long as I am here, I will never mention race - in any form - again.

[Black Diamond]

To you as a moderator and all others:

I have been publicly admonished, so I give my word that as long as I am here, I will never mention race - in any form - again.

He never mentioned anything about his mod status. He was clear about his request.. Member to member

[NightTrain]

To you as a moderator and all others:

I have been publicly admonished, so I give my word that as long as I am here, I will never mention race - in any form - again.


I said it twice in one post : I'm asking as one member to another. You are free to tell me to go to hell with my request. There would be exactly zero repercussions for doing so.


I also didn't say to never talk about race again. I just asked you to please consider other members - especially in light of your apologetic statements and pledge to do better. I'm just reminding you of those as gently as I possibly can.

I still like you and think you're a good person.

If I didn't like you, there would be absolutely no doubt in your mind and this would have had a very different tone. I guarantee it.

[Perianne]

I said it twice in one post : I'm asking as one member to another. You are free to tell me to go to hell with my request. There would be exactly zero repercussions for doing so.


I also didn't say to never talk about race again. I just asked you to please consider other members - especially in light of your apologetic statements and pledge to do better. I'm just reminding you of those as gently as I possibly can.

I still like you and think you're a good person.

If I didn't like you, there would be absolutely no doubt in your mind and this would have had a very different tone. I guarantee it.

I understand. Thank you for your kindness. Still, my promise stands: no race talk from me. The board will be a better place without my cynical views on the subject.

[indago]

To you as a moderator and all others:

I have been publicly admonished, so I give my word that as long as I am here, I will never mention race - in any form - again.

Well, I wouldn't go THAT far. Racial issues are in the news all the time, and as such, are discussable.

[indago]

I said it twice in one post : I'm asking as one member to another. You are free to tell me to go to hell with my request. There would be exactly zero repercussions for doing so.


I also didn't say to never talk about race again. I just asked you to please consider other members - especially in light of your apologetic statements and pledge to do better. I'm just reminding you of those as gently as I possibly can.

I still like you and think you're a good person.

If I didn't like you, there would be absolutely no doubt in your mind and this would have had a very different tone. I guarantee it.

But then, maybe she was being facetious...