PDA

View Full Version : FBI can hear you, when your cell is off!



ScubaGir1
09-06-2007, 23:04
This is a news story about how the FBI can turn your microphone on in your cell phone on and listen to you WHEN YOUR PHONE IS OFF...and you wouldn't even know it!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O61YfvPZGJs

I mean, I understand they need to keep peace, and listen for terrorist plots and stuff. And I hope they aren't just picking people at random, but its just sort of scary :smiley5:

Osprey
09-06-2007, 23:22
I'm pretty sure that's illegal.. not that it would stop them lol

finflippers
09-06-2007, 23:27
WOW I never knew they could do that. Makes you wonder just how much spying they are really doing on all of us without us knowing.

scuba Widow
09-06-2007, 23:34
Just another example of big brother watching and listening to way too much of our business. As the clip says our freedom is slipping away.

DolphinDreams
09-07-2007, 00:14
that's pretty scary. but I'm still freaked out about them using GPS to keep tabs on people too.

scuba Widow
09-07-2007, 00:15
When are we going to learn that Americans are not free.

ScubaToys Larry
09-07-2007, 02:51
My brother is an assistant DA in Wisconsin... they use that type of stuff all the time. GPS Tracking, recording conversations in cars using on star.. all kinds of neat stuff. Really, they are a bit too busy trying to stop guys from running cases of guns into gangs, and folks moving trucks full of cocaine to much worry about your conversations. Would you really rather he doesn't have that ability to bust the drug and gun runners?? So you could be "safe" from government? Or would you rather be "safe" from the people he puts away on a weekly basis using this technology?

cgvmer
09-07-2007, 06:57
Larry, that is not as easy a question to answer as you might think. Remember the old saying it is better to let 100 criminals go free than to jail one innocent. This may not be the sentiment today, but it should be.

mm_dm
09-07-2007, 07:22
I'm with Larry on this one. I really couldn't care less if the gov't wants to spy on me, it wouldn't change anything about my life. Just my .02

cgvmer
09-07-2007, 07:38
At least the courts are in agreement with me on the need for diligence when it comes to the privacy rights of indivuals: U.S. District Judge Victor Marrero said " the recently rewritten Patriot Act "offends the fundamental constitutional principles of checks and balances and separation of powers."

http://www.forbes.com/feeds/ap/2007/09/06/ap4089011.html

creggur
09-07-2007, 08:03
I don't have a problem with using technology to track down criminals, terrorists, etc.... The Patriot Act essentially gave the feds the ability to do things that law enforcement has been doing for years to combat drugs, and organized crime...
I don't feel my civil rights have been eroded at all, really nothing has changed. If some over-zealous fed really wants to hear my wife and I talk about what's for dinner over the cell-phone so be it....

I'm more concerned with the Supreme Court's ruling on Eminent Domain last year. When our private property rights are gone, then we are really screwed. Glad Florida is working on a law to take care of that one...

cgvmer
09-07-2007, 08:08
Well at least we can agree on part of this. The erosion of rights at the federal level has been accelerating.

The ugly part of the eminent domain ruling is that it gives governments the ability to prefer 'business' over personal property.

greyzen
09-07-2007, 08:23
My brother is an assistant DA in Wisconsin... they use that type of stuff all the time. GPS Tracking, recording conversations in cars using on star.. all kinds of neat stuff. Really, they are a bit too busy trying to stop guys from running cases of guns into gangs, and folks moving trucks full of cocaine to much worry about your conversations. Would you really rather he doesn't have that ability to bust the drug and gun runners?? So you could be "safe" from government? Or would you rather be "safe" from the people he puts away on a weekly basis using this technology?

I'm going.. bust drug and gun runners?

Personally I'm of the mindset that I am not nearly important enough for the government much care what I do.

And the neat thing is, once you ARE important enough... you have better access to thingies to help you fend 'em off.

cgvmer
09-07-2007, 08:35
The problem is mistakes are made and it cost a lot for individual citizens to recover. One of my friends travels 2-3 times a month for his job, he has a very common Irish name. His name, not him, is on the do not fly list. I have traveled with him when he was pulled off planes, strip searched, his carry on "dumped" out. He is treated like a criminal. He carries a US passport, he carries a NJ driver's license, he is not from Ireland, where the other person was a IRA "terrorist".


He has booked flights under the name bill rather than william (which is not fully legal), sometimes it works sometimes not, but it pushes an innocent person, to push the envelope of the law.

BTW: There is NO way to get off the no fly list!!!!! Guilty even when proven innocent.

greyzen
09-07-2007, 08:44
The problem is mistakes are made and it cost a lot for individual citizens to recover. One of my friends travels 2-3 times a month for his job, he has a very common Irish name. His name, not him, is on the do not fly list. I have traveled with him when he was pulled off planes, strip searched, his carry on "dumped" out. He is treated like a criminal. He carries a US passport, he carries a NJ driver's license, he is not from Ireland, where the other person was a IRA "terrorist".


He has booked flights under the name bill rather than william (which is not fully legal), sometimes it works sometimes not, but it pushes an innocent person, to push the envelope of the law.

BTW: There is NO way to get off the no fly list!!!!! Guilty even when proven innocent.

Though inconvenient you can't make laws/rules for the minority and I'm sure even your friend understands he is a unique exception.

I wonder, would it be possible, to contact the FAA personally (during a time of not being searched/etc.) and ask for a special ID card or something showing him that he has already been searched and validated? I would assume that if he talks to enough people long enough something could be arranged.

creggur
09-07-2007, 08:45
The problem is mistakes are made and it cost a lot for individual citizens to recover. One of my friends travels 2-3 times a month for his job, he has a very common Irish name. His name, not him, is on the do not fly list. I have traveled with him when he was pulled off planes, strip searched, his carry on "dumped" out. He is treated like a criminal. He carries a US passport, he carries a NJ driver's license, he is not from Ireland, where the other person was a IRA "terrorist".


He has booked flights under the name bill rather than william (which is not fully legal), sometimes it works sometimes not, but it pushes an innocent person, to push the envelope of the law.

BTW: There is NO way to get off the no fly list!!!!! Guilty even when proven innocent.

A lot of this is because the word "profiling" incites such ire from civil rights groups. The can't screen those who are most likely to cause a threat because it would be considered racial profiling.
When we brought over Israeli security experts to consult on airline security they said basically our system is set up to harass people, not actually look for potential bad guys. I mean when they are pulling 80 year old grandma's out of line because they have to "randomly" screen people instead of profiling those who are most likely to be the problem something is not right.

Are all young males of middle-eastern descent terrorists? No, but a vast majority of terrorist activity is carried out by these people so why not profile them???? The one thing that Govt. does really, really well is remove common sense from any given equation!!

greyzen
09-07-2007, 08:54
A lot of this is because the word "profiling" incites such ire from civil rights groups. The can't screen those who are most likely to cause a threat because it would be considered racial profiling.
When we brought over Israeli security experts to consult on airline security they said basically our system is set up to harass people, not actually look for potential bad guys. I mean when they are pulling 80 year old grandma's out of line because they have to "randomly" screen people instead of profiling those who are most likely to be the problem something is not right.

Are all young males of middle-eastern descent terrorists? No, but a vast majority of terrorist activity is carried out by these people so why not profile them???? The one thing that Govt. does really, really well is remove common sense from any given equation!!

That is something that has always drove me nuts. I personally think it is ridiculous that "No fly" lists are indiscriminate (IE: if your name is William McWhatever, then all William McWhatever's are no-fly) but they have to 'randomly' search people.
When you profile a criminal cell as being from the middle-east, it is safe to assume and NOT RACISTS TO DO SO that the majority of the criminal cell will most likely be... Middle-Eastern!

If there is a lot of IRA activity in your area, guess what? The profile changes to include the Irish.

If I am in Beverly Hills, I can assume that there are most likely famous celebrities in the area. If I am in Harlem, I betcha I find me some black people.

Is it racists? NO, it's common sense.

cgvmer
09-07-2007, 09:01
Greyzen, because he travels for business and he is pretty high up in his company, his company's lawyers where asked to pursue a way for him to stop being harassed. They were told NO...he will have to put up with it.

In the recent GAO report 7 of 17 Aviation security areas went "not achieved" include 3 that would help him:
Establish procedures for implementing biometric identifier systems for airport secured areas access control.

Develop and implement an advanced prescreening system to allow DHS to compare domestic passenger information to the Selectee List and No Fly List.

Develop and implement an international passenger prescreening process to compare passenger information to terrorist watch lists before aircraft departure.

Basically, he is screwed! And no he isn't unique, some very common names including 2 US Senator's name are on the list. They fingerprint international passengers, but they won't allow him to be fingerprinted and preauthorized.

No Misses
09-07-2007, 09:17
I'm not sure which is the better source for factual information; YouTube or Fox TV? I think you better follow that up by searching the National Inquirer database:smiley36:

Kingpatzer
09-07-2007, 09:21
My brother is an assistant DA in Wisconsin... they use that type of stuff all the time. GPS Tracking, recording conversations in cars using on star.. all kinds of neat stuff. Really, they are a bit too busy trying to stop guys from running cases of guns into gangs, and folks moving trucks full of cocaine to much worry about your conversations. Would you really rather he doesn't have that ability to bust the drug and gun runners?? So you could be "safe" from government? Or would you rather be "safe" from the people he puts away on a weekly basis using this technology?


The government can not keep me, you, or anyone else safe.
Government authority only comes at the expense of citizens' liberty.

We keep eroding our freedoms and rights, expanding government authority, while militarizing our police. It's not a good combination.

I grew up laughing at the lack of privacy and rights enjoyed by the eastern European block, and I spent my time in the military and government service to protect the free world from the corrosive effects of totalitarianism. It's sad and ironic that we're destroying that which made us great so willingly.

We went from "there's nothing to fear but fear itself," to "please keep us safe . . ."

Pathetic.

Kingpatzer
09-07-2007, 09:23
I'm with Larry on this one. I really couldn't care less if the gov't wants to spy on me, it wouldn't change anything about my life. Just my .02

How utterly naive.

lucidblue
09-07-2007, 09:24
Though the big brother stuff freaks me out a bit, I agree with Larry. I doubt they have time to listen to my conversations and even if they do, it's not really going to effect my life, because I'm not doing anything wrong. I'd rather have them catching criminals and terrorists than worry about whether they are listening to me talk on the phone.

Capt Hook
09-07-2007, 09:32
Doesn't bother me, of course I have nothing to hide. Do you?

greyzen
09-07-2007, 09:37
Greyzen, because he travels for business and he is pretty high up in his company, his company's lawyers where asked to pursue a way for him to stop being harassed. They were told NO...he will have to put up with it.

In the recent GAO report 7 of 17 Aviation security areas went "not achieved" include 3 that would help him:
Establish procedures for implementing biometric identifier systems for airport secured areas access control.

Develop and implement an advanced prescreening system to allow DHS to compare domestic passenger information to the Selectee List and No Fly List.

Develop and implement an international passenger prescreening process to compare passenger information to terrorist watch lists before aircraft departure.

Basically, he is screwed! And no he isn't unique, some very common names including 2 US Senator's name are on the list. They fingerprint international passengers, but they won't allow him to be fingerprinted and preauthorized.

Well, having two Senators sharing the same name doesn't make it "common" I see your point :/

Guess I'm lucky, my name is associated to like three doctors who all have radio or television shows! :)

cgvmer
09-07-2007, 09:40
Of course I do. I have my private thoughts and expressions to hide. I have my personal life to hide. I have the right and privilege of living in a country where these things are mine and should remain mine, unless I choose to make them public. I really think you should read and embrace the U.S. Constitution.

OH and please don't make comments about 911 here is where I was that day.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=4+world+financial+center,+nyc&sll=40.712329,-74.012275&sspn=0.00771,0.014591&ie=UTF8&ll=40.714362,-74.011717&spn=0.007709,0.014591&z=16&om=1

finflippers
09-07-2007, 09:42
Would you really rather he doesn't have that ability to bust the drug and gun runners?? So you could be "safe" from government? Or would you rather be "safe" from the people he puts away on a weekly basis using this technology?

Our laws are supposed to protect our liberties and freedoms not imped them. As far as drugs go, legalize them. If someone wants to kill them self on drugs that is their personal problem not mine. Once you take the law out of it the price drops 1000% and it is no longer profitable for the dealers to make a living at it and they will move on. Take a look at this video. http://www.leap.cc/cms/index.php?name=Content&pid=28

scuba Widow
09-07-2007, 09:46
"Though inconvenient you can't make laws/rules for the minority and I'm sure even your friend understands he is a unique exception."


Haven't we already made those type laws? These laws were not in effect until the attacks happened. We won't travel by plane because of the extra security measures because you never know who they are going to strip search in the name of national security. If the government is going to spy on Americans why do they need to strip search innocent people at airports. The problems don't start in our homes its starts at our borders, so the answer lies with immigration laws, make them stronger and up hold them. People need to stop screaming about racial profiling and being political correct, call an ace an ace.

cgvmer
09-07-2007, 09:48
Nice post FinFlippers

Harshal
09-07-2007, 09:58
I agree somewhat with Larry, yes you do that type of ability to keep a tab on law breaker, but then you cannot let any agency cut lose either, there has to be a check and balance, like they might need a court order.
But what the Patriot Act did was give them a free pass, they can do whatever they want to, without anyone’s permission, would that type of information misused, yes………

Kingpatzer
09-07-2007, 09:58
Doesn't bother me, of course I have nothing to hide. Do you?

Are you so certain?

There's a story in the paper the other day about a high school kid, 16 years old, being charged with a felony because someone, not him, left a swiss army pocket knife in the glovebox of his car and he happened to drive onto school property with it.

Those cops you think are going to make you safe aren't interested in you . . they don't know you . . they're interested in their careers . . . and busts = promotions. The same is true of the DA's and everyone else involved.

They are willing to ruin anyone's life -- even 16 year old honors students -- on technical violations of the law. They don't care about a law's intent or person's status.

Which is why people are being charged with terrorism offenses for, for example, growing marijuana for personal use. Regardless of if that should be legal or not, it's hardly the intent of the anti-terrorism laws to be applied that way. But they are so being applied because it is convenient to do so.

If you are willing to give away you liberty so cheaply, you are a poor citizen, and your children will reap the reward of you civic sloth. Sadly, mine will to, and for that, I loathe you.

Everyday more and more laws are passed making more and more common actions, such as keeping a pocket knife in your car, not only illegal, but major crimes. And there are people working to enforce those laws.

Are you absolutely certain you didn't accidentally pack a plastic knife in your kids lunchbox foretting that doing so makes them a criminal in some states?

finflippers
09-07-2007, 10:12
Doesn't bother me, of course I have nothing to hide. Do you?

I've got nothing to hide but I do have everything to loose.

finflippers
09-07-2007, 10:16
Of course I do. I have my private thoughts and expressions to hide. I have my personal life to hide. I have the right and privilege of living in a country where these things are mine and should remain mine, unless I choose to make them public. I really think you should read and embrace the U.S. Constitution.

OH and please don't make comments about 911 here is where I was that day.
http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&geocode=&q=4+world+financial+center,+nyc&sll=40.712329,-74.012275&sspn=0.00771,0.014591&ie=UTF8&ll=40.714362,-74.011717&spn=0.007709,0.014591&z=16&om=1

Well said!

mm_dm
09-07-2007, 10:16
I'm with Larry on this one. I really couldn't care less if the gov't wants to spy on me, it wouldn't change anything about my life. Just my .02

How utterly naive.


You don't know me well enough to make a statement like that.

Harshal
09-07-2007, 10:21
That’s sure; most of us have given up our liberty and freedom so easily, in name of terrorism.
Especially the administration has done very good job of using the scare tactics, get every law they want approved in name of terrorism. There is no difference between US and China, Chinese spy on their citizen they want to know where they are going what they are doing and they tell their citizen that govt is spying on them.
Ours do the same, they just don’t tell us that openly, that the only diff.

Kingpatzer
09-07-2007, 10:28
I'm with Larry on this one. I really couldn't care less if the gov't wants to spy on me, it wouldn't change anything about my life. Just my .02

How utterly naive.


You don't know me well enough to make a statement like that.

Actually, I do. You believe liberty is meaningless -- you just said it wouldn't change your life to lose it. That is all I need to know to know that you are utterly naive.

scuba Widow
09-07-2007, 10:29
My brother is an assistant DA in Wisconsin... they use that type of stuff all the time. GPS Tracking, recording conversations in cars using on star.. all kinds of neat stuff. Really, they are a bit too busy trying to stop guys from running cases of guns into gangs, and folks moving trucks full of cocaine to much worry about your conversations. Would you really rather he doesn't have that ability to bust the drug and gun runners?? So you could be "safe" from government? Or would you rather be "safe" from the people he puts away on a weekly basis using this technology?

No, I would not rather them have that ability. I feel that there is way to much time spent on the war on drugs. If you legalize them the infatuation goes away from them. Take a minute to look back to the time before you turned 21, for most of us we wanted the liquor bad before we were legal to drink, once we could legally get it wasn't fun anymore. Alot of times the things that are illegal are only fun because they are illegal. Use the opportunity to legalize them to tax them, as you do with cigarettes, then tell people when and where they can us them...seems to work for cigarettes and alcohol. I think if you are going to use the technology for catching criminals makes sure that you get the bad ones, like child molesters and sexual predators. With the money that is spent to keep the world safe from our own evils we could protect the children more efficiently.

Do you realize that in this country we spend more time looking for a stolen cars, drug dealers and hookers than we do looking for a missing child or a sexual predator? How wrong is that? Websites are full of children that are in danger and I have to listen to some member of law enforcement or politician talk about the gram of crack they found on some lowlife.

The government has there hands into the personal business of all Americans too much already. Look at the laws:

1. I have to wear a seat belt or get a ticket...it's my life if I want to fly through the car during an accident, let me!

2. I can't have a beer until I'm 21, but I can go fight for my country at 18.

3. I can shoot somebody that is breaking into my home...but only if I can figure out how to keep my gun.

4. I can have a dog as long as it isn't a pit bull.

And this is only to mention a few. Come on guys we need to ban together and keep the laws in the hands of Americans for Americans to stay free!

Just like all of these police stings for catching drug addicts, drug dealers, hookers and johns...if someone wants to spend there hard earned money on drugs let them it's their money, they are free to spend it how they want. If someone wants to sell drugs to make there living...I say great at least they are not on welfare spending my money. If an adult wants to sell their body to make a living and an adult wants to spend their money to buy sex...let them, after all they are two consenting adults and is their business.

mm_dm
09-07-2007, 10:32
I'm with Larry on this one. I really couldn't care less if the gov't wants to spy on me, it wouldn't change anything about my life. Just my .02

How utterly naive.


You don't know me well enough to make a statement like that.

Actually, I do. You believe liberty is meaningless -- you just said it wouldn't change your life to lose it. That is all I need to know to know that you are utterly naive.

I said it wouldn't change anything I do if the gov't was spying on me. You seem to have imagined an entire scenario and projected it onto someone you have never met. You seem to be having an argument with either yourself or someone you have imagined.

Kingpatzer
09-07-2007, 10:36
Actually, I do. You believe liberty is meaningless -- you just said it wouldn't change your life to lose it. That is all I need to know to know that you are utterly naive.

I said it wouldn't change anything I do if the gov't was spying on me.

Exactly -- you place no value upon your privacy, which is fundamental to your liberty. It's your claim, not mine.

mm_dm
09-07-2007, 10:46
Actually, I do. You believe liberty is meaningless -- you just said it wouldn't change your life to lose it. That is all I need to know to know that you are utterly naive.

I said it wouldn't change anything I do if the gov't was spying on me.

Exactly -- you place no value upon your privacy, which is fundamental to your liberty. It's your claim, not mine.

Where did I say I didn't place a value on my privacy? You're projecting again.

MEL-DC Diver
09-07-2007, 11:56
People on this thread are expounding upon a subject based purely on emotion rather than rationalization and facts. Presuming the worst, and expecting it, in the context of the Patriot Act, FBI listening to phone calls, dossiers, etc. is ludicrous on its face. It demonstrates nothing more than a lack of understanding of world events, present threats, and our own judicial system. You bemoan these measures, yet demand safety, without ever offering up viable alternatives.

Many cite inconvenience as the biggest issue of the day. Others state a lack of privacy. Frankly, neither should be great concern in the current context. Our system doesn’t exist on a premise that mistakes won’t ever be made and that innocent people won’t ever be accused of doing wrong. These things will occur and we have systems in place that are intended to right those wrongs, be they appellate courts, DNA testing, or even public forums. Many of you presume to believe that the FBI/CIA/NSA/DIA really gives a damn that you’re shagging your secretary or cheating on your taxes. I would presume that you really are thinking too highly of yourselves.

Should these things be debated – absolutely! But the level of vitriol espoused here toward our government and the state of our country is a bit over the top. It’s almost as if you assume that speaking badly of the President will get you shipped to the gulag. It does happen, just not in our country:

http://www.cpj.org/news/2007/americas/cuba21aug07na.html

http://www.guardian.co.uk/korea/article/0,2763,1136483,00.html


For those of you that think it does, well you are just too far gone to help.

“One of the great problems with Americans is that – being a decent people – they assume that everyone else is equally decent.” Meir Kahane

Kingpatzer
09-07-2007, 12:43
You bemoan these measures, yet demand safety, without ever offering up viable alternatives.


You'll note that up-thread I stated specifically that I do not believe any claim that the government can make us safe.



Many cite inconvenience as the biggest issue of the day. Others state a lack of privacy. Frankly, neither should be great concern in the current context.


Actually, both should be of paramount concern. Our government has two jobs -- to provide an infrastructure for commerce and to not over-step their authority.

Violating privacy oversteps their authority, and disturbing travel impinges upon the ease of commerce.

quarrydiver
09-07-2007, 13:34
What if the technology is used to harass someone with a different political ideology. It doesn't matter whether you are for or against the war but our administration has labeled those against it as terrorists. When you have to be careful about voicing your opinions, whatever they are, something is wrong.

Harshal
09-07-2007, 13:42
Mel – you made some good point, but mostly what you are saying is that all these acts that are passed in shadow of Sep 11….. com on bottle of water is now security threat, bottle of milk for infant is security threat.
Wakeup…… how much govt spent on that so called security…… and then in wee hrs there is not even guard you can take in and take out any thing out of terminal (Phoenix airport) I am sure most of you must have heard about it.
Mel – you are right govt does not care if you shag your secretary or not, but when they want to build a case against you, all the information can be effectively used.

Talking about international matters, what’s happening around the world…….how many of us read any international news….. most of our news channels are politically biased either one… only source so far I think left is and is a good one is National Public Radio (NPR). If you are aware of the events in world there are bunch of country who sees such attacks everyday and life goes on.

If they were looking for real solution, they should had come up with something better, when any agency had lead how to follow it up and not burry it in bureaucracy.

ScubaToys Larry
09-07-2007, 13:45
I guess the thing that you must keep in mind... is freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose... Ok forgive that...

But stop and think about it. What is freedom. The problem is when your freedom imposes on someone else's.. which always happens - so then someone has to make a judgment call.

Should you be free to bear arms? How about building a nuclear weopon in your kitchen? Should you be free to drive 150 miles an hour through a school zone? Should you be free to carry a gun on a plane? Should you be free to raise pigs in a downtown high rise penthouse? Should people be "free" to use profanity on this board?

It's a fine line to figure out when one persons freedom infringes on someone elses. So for me... my opionin only... I'm not right or wrong... I have no problem with the police, or FBI, or whoever listening to my cell phone calls if they might be stopping the drug dealer shooting up my neighborhood, or bringing cocaine into the schools.

I have no problem taking off my shoes and having my bags x-rayed if it might stop someone from downing the plane I'm taking on my trip.

I have no problem with a traffic law that says I need to wear a seat belt, because the injuries that occur are many times paid for by me - my tax dollars paying doctors to try to save a guys life who did not wear a seat belt, or have insurance.

Perhaps one day my take will change, but at this point, it seems to me that the "freedoms" I'm giving up and compensated by the "freedoms" I'm gaining.

But again... just an opinion.

dmdoss
09-07-2007, 13:58
Kinda bring's that feeling of Big Brother back.

MEL-DC Diver
09-07-2007, 14:01
You'll note that up-thread I stated specifically that I do not believe any claim that the government can make us safe.

Then you'll have to pardon me that I don't defer to terrorists to determine what level of safety I should have. Let's just sit back and see what those outside of our borders determine our fate to be.



Actually, both should be of paramount concern. Our government has two jobs -- to provide an infrastructure for commerce and to not over-step their authority.

Violating privacy oversteps their authority, and disturbing travel impinges upon the ease of commerce.

Actually, I believe defense of the country to be one of those. I think we have fought a few previous wars due to this belief - or were the states making those decisions and mobilizing independently?

And you are forgetting, without a safe environment one cannot provide infrastructure and there is an impact on commerce. I will concede that privacy is a balancing act, one can go too far. Our Republic has weathered storms much larger than this and I fully expect us to weather this one. The perfect solution rarely is revealed overnight - we have to expect it take time to be sorted out to what is most appropriate.

quarrydiver
09-07-2007, 14:20
We seem to be in a "McCarthy" era. Anyone who is disturbed about their invasion of privacy "has something to hide". I understand that many of us aren't worried about these technologies being used to catch criminals. I don't mind having my shoes checked at the airport either, but what if your business or personal life is affected because of an overly zealous prosecution?. The government doesn't always do the right thing (ask a NC LaCrosse player)

MEL-DC Diver
09-07-2007, 14:32
What if the technology is used to harass someone with a different political ideology. It doesn't matter whether you are for or against the war but our administration has labeled those against it as terrorists. When you have to be careful about voicing your opinions, whatever they are, something is wrong.

If it is used as a premise to question someone who has provided vocal or material support for Hamas (for example), I have no problem with it. The State Department has classified Hamas as a terrorist organization and I would fully expect these individuals or individuals associating with them to be followed up on.

If you are suggesting that if I have a Vote Obama '08 bumper sticker on my car I am now considered a terrorist (he is very much against the war) and I should be monitored, then I would agree with you. However, nothing like this is happening.

Who is careful about voicing their opinions? I certainly am not.

MEL-DC Diver
09-07-2007, 14:37
We seem to be in a "McCarthy" era. Anyone who is disturbed about their invasion of privacy "has something to hide". I understand that many of us aren't worried about these technologies being used to catch criminals. I don't mind having my shoes checked at the airport either, but what if your business or personal life is affected because of an overly zealous prosecution?. The government doesn't always do the right thing (ask a NC LaCrosse player)

Right, and the NC Lax guys were able to be vindicated and the DA went to jail for his abuses. What started out horribly ended correctly. This kind of correction doesn't happen most places in the world. A perfect system is an impossibility, but as long as there are good people trying to do the right thing most of injustices have a tendency to be worked out.

Bonus points: Define the "McCarthy Era". No googling.

MEL-DC Diver
09-07-2007, 15:18
Mel – you made some good point, but mostly what you are saying is that all these acts that are passed in shadow of Sep 11….. com on bottle of water is now security threat, bottle of milk for infant is security threat.

I frequently travel with my kids, a toddler and infant, so I know this is a hassle. Imagine two small kids, 4 carry on bags, a laptop, regulators, kids food bag, and removal of everything in your pockets and taking off 4 pair of shoes. I also know that the people who complain about this are the ones most likely to criticize when a bombing occurs about why it wasn't stopped when there was an attempt in London using just these means.


Wakeup…… how much govt spent on that so called security…… and then in wee hrs there is not even guard you can take in and take out any thing out of terminal (Phoenix airport) I am sure most of you must have heard about it.
Mel – you are right govt does not care if you shag your secretary or not, but when they want to build a case against you, all the information can be effectively used.

They can only put forward evidence gathered in the context of that investigation. In otherwords, the NSA cannot put forward evidence that they happened to overhear Steve Johnson talking about child porn in Iowa. The FBI and local authorities have to go through all of their "normal" procedures. Anything out of bounds tends to get thrown out by our judicial system. To say nothing of exposing our methods of gathering information.


Talking about international matters, what’s happening around the world…….how many of us read any international news….. most of our news channels are politically biased either one… only source so far I think left is and is a good one is National Public Radio (NPR). If you are aware of the events in world there are bunch of country who sees such attacks everyday and life goes on.

I live in international news, both for personal interest and for my work. Really, the only left leaning news organization you can think of is NPR? How about the BBC, AFP, AP, Reuters, CNN (particularly International), the New York Times, Washington Post, Le Monde, The Independent, The Guardian... the list goes on.

With regard to your last sentence above, why on earth would I consider daily attacks acceptable? Of course life goes on, but it's the quality of that life that is in question.


If they were looking for real solution, they should had come up with something better, when any agency had lead how to follow it up and not burry it in bureaucracy.

Fair enough.

Harshal
09-07-2007, 16:03
Mel – you made some good point, but mostly what you are saying is that all these acts that are passed in shadow of Sep 11….. com on bottle of water is now security threat, bottle of milk for infant is security threat.

I frequently travel with my kids, a toddler and infant, so I know this is a hassle. Imagine two small kids, 4 carry on bags, a laptop, regulators, kids food bag, and removal of everything in your pockets and taking off 4 pair of shoes. I also know that the people who complain about this are the ones most likely to criticize when a bombing occurs about why it wasn't stopped when there was an attempt in London using just these means.


Wakeup…… how much govt spent on that so called security…… and then in wee hrs there is not even guard you can take in and take out any thing out of terminal (Phoenix airport) I am sure most of you must have heard about it.
Mel – you are right govt does not care if you shag your secretary or not, but when they want to build a case against you, all the information can be effectively used.

They can only put forward evidence gathered in the context of that investigation. In otherwords, the NSA cannot put forward evidence that they happened to overhear Steve Johnson talking about child porn in Iowa. The FBI and local authorities have to go through all of their "normal" procedures. Anything out of bounds tends to get thrown out by our judicial system. To say nothing of exposing our methods of gathering information.


Talking about international matters, what’s happening around the world…….how many of us read any international news….. most of our news channels are politically biased either one… only source so far I think left is and is a good one is National Public Radio (NPR). If you are aware of the events in world there are bunch of country who sees such attacks everyday and life goes on.

I live in international news, both for personal interest and for my work. Really, the only left leaning news organization you can think of is NPR? How about the BBC, AFP, AP, Reuters, CNN (particularly International), the New York Times, Washington Post, Le Monde, The Independent, The Guardian... the list goes on.

With regard to your last sentence above, why on earth would I consider daily attacks acceptable? Of course life goes on, but it's the quality of that life that is in question.


If they were looking for real solution, they should had come up with something better, when any agency had lead how to follow it up and not burry it in bureaucracy.

Fair enough.
Mel –
The London attack you are talking about was never proved, most of the suspects in those cases were let off.
They(Govt) has never proved or explained to general public what was the threat from bottle of water, or bottle of milk. I fly every other week for work and just to avoid the hassle of pulling out all shampoo and soap etc I check in my bag. Last week some reason I could not check in my bag and I had normal size hair conditioner tube (half used), my hair conditioner was threat………lol I had to ask TSA person to dispose it off safely……..lol.

I think you missed my point in Phoenix Airport case, apparently the gate which are guarded by TSA for the whole day were left totally unguarded during late nights and early morning. There used to be nobody at the doors anyone can just walk in.

I did not say NPR was leftwing, I meant NPR was the only new channel left that was neutral neither leftwing now rightwing, yes BBC is another one in foreign news media. AP personally I feel is too big they do good reporting but check and balance is kinda missing. (They had some doctored pictures published sometime back).
CNN is not neutral and was never neutral.

quarrydiver
09-07-2007, 17:49
We seem to be in a "McCarthy" era. Anyone who is disturbed about their invasion of privacy "has something to hide". I understand that many of us aren't worried about these technologies being used to catch criminals. I don't mind having my shoes checked at the airport either, but what if your business or personal life is affected because of an overly zealous prosecution?. The government doesn't always do the right thing (ask a NC LaCrosse player)

Right, and the NC Lax guys were able to be vindicated and the DA went to jail for his abuses. What started out horribly ended correctly. This kind of correction doesn't happen most places in the world. A perfect system is an impossibility, but as long as there are good people trying to do the right thing most of injustices have a tendency to be worked out.

Bonus points: Define the "McCarthy Era". No googling.

They were vindicated only because they had the resources to fight it.

quarrydiver
09-07-2007, 18:00
What if the technology is used to harass someone with a different political ideology. It doesn't matter whether you are for or against the war but our administration has labeled those against it as terrorists. When you have to be careful about voicing your opinions, whatever they are, something is wrong.

If it is used as a premise to question someone who has provided vocal or material support for Hamas (for example), I have no problem with it. The State Department has classified Hamas as a terrorist organization and I would fully expect these individuals or individuals associating with them to be followed up on.

If you are suggesting that if I have a Vote Obama '08 bumper sticker on my car I am now considered a terrorist (he is very much against the war) and I should be monitored, then I would agree with you. However, nothing like this is happening.

Who is careful about voicing their opinions? I certainly am not.

I agree that these technologies can be valuable. I'm just against the blank check. I'm glad you aren't afraid to voice your opinions. I, however, do think about what people will think when I select certain books at the library or when I make political statements in a forum.

RECDiver
09-07-2007, 18:07
I think there was an article in the paper this morning about a judge striking that down.

scuba Widow
09-07-2007, 18:08
I think the bottom line here is everyone has a different opinion on just how far government should go. I personally do see how having certain liquids on a plane can form a problem. I also don't see how having your name on the no fly list is going to help the fight for National security, this is the age in the internet. What makes anyone think that list cannot be alter by the terrorist? In the age of identity theft anyone can make anybody a terrorist. The terrorist that were involved with the attacks on 9/11 were not in it alone, they had some major money backing them and that major money can back other as well no matter how much National security you have. You know the saying money talks and.....

MEL-DC Diver
09-07-2007, 19:57
Mel –
The London attack you are talking about was never proved, most of the suspects in those cases were let off.

[FONT=Times New Roman][SIZE=3]I think you missed my point in Phoenix Airport case, apparently the gate which are guarded by TSA for the whole day were left totally unguarded during late nights and early morning. There used to be nobody at the doors anyone can just walk in.


As far as I am aware, those cases haven't gone to trial yet. And I am pretty sure that most of the people involved are still in custody. If you've got a supporting source, I'd like to see it.

As far as the TSA leaving a post un-manned, they gotta fix that thing.

MEL-DC Diver
09-07-2007, 20:01
I agree that these technologies can be valuable. I'm just against the blank check. I'm glad you aren't afraid to voice your opinions. I, however, do think about what people will think when I select certain books at the library or when I make political statements in a forum.

I tend to not worry so much about what people think, I care more for what people do. Read the books you want, make the statements you want, but also be prepared to stand up for (and defend) what you believe.

scuba Widow
09-07-2007, 20:18
I agree that these technologies can be valuable. I'm just against the blank check. I'm glad you aren't afraid to voice your opinions. I, however, do think about what people will think when I select certain books at the library or when I make political statements in a forum.

I tend to not worry so much about what people think, I care more for what people do. Read the books you want, make the statements you want, but also be prepared to stand up for (and defend) what you believe.

Very well said...when I make a statement I truly believe it and will defend it to the end, regardless of what people may think.

MEL-DC Diver
09-07-2007, 20:19
They were vindicated only because they had the resources to fight it.

This is one of those statements that can't be disproved anymore than it can be proved. I happen to believe that their resources helped, but the offenses made by the DA's office were so egregious that even a first year law student should have been able to figure it out.

Suther2136
09-07-2007, 20:45
Don't believe everything you hear, while evesdropping on a cell phone. Even if the the technology is real, they would have to know your phone code and have some reason to list to our babbling.

quarrydiver
09-07-2007, 21:37
I agree that these technologies can be valuable. I'm just against the blank check. I'm glad you aren't afraid to voice your opinions. I, however, do think about what people will think when I select certain books at the library or when I make political statements in a forum.

I tend to not worry so much about what people think, I care more for what people do. Read the books you want, make the statements you want, but also be prepared to stand up for (and defend) what you believe.

Very well said...when I make a statement I truly believe it and will defend it to the end, regardless of what people may think.

We're talking about two different things here. Talking and defending yourself and your position to someone who reciprocates (which is a good thing), and being listened to by someone that is judging you based upon what you say or read without the opportunity to explain the "why" (bad thing). There's a difference between being afraid to post your opinion online for fear someone will verbally attack you and being afraid to check a book out of the library because you might be labeled a terrorist.

dmdoss
09-08-2007, 23:59
I've started taking mine to bed with me, hope they get a kick out of that. Total silence....:smilie39:

gtjason2000
09-09-2007, 10:59
I work on classified information and we are not allowed to have cell phones in the classified areas for these reasons. Without you knowing someone could turn your cell phone into a recorder.

ScubaToys Larry
09-09-2007, 11:31
Here... toss in a little perspective. How many cell calls are made in a day in the US? I know some guys in charge of wire taps... In one major city right now... they have 3 working taps... 3. In a city of millions. And it takes multiple people working throughout the day to track each one. They are understaffed - and no one really has the manpower or resources to bother listening to anyones calls unless they really feel it is very important... Me... I'm not too important.

Charlotte Smith
09-09-2007, 11:43
Here... toss in a little perspective. How many cell calls are made in a day in the US? I know some guys in charge of wire taps... In one major city right now... they have 3 working taps... 3. In a city of millions. And it takes multiple people working throughout the day to track each one. They are understaffed - and no one really has the manpower or resources to bother listening to anyones calls unless they really feel it is very important... Me... I'm not too important.

Very well put Larry...I am not too important either....if they listen to mine they will probably just get bored ......

scuba Widow
09-09-2007, 13:19
I agree that these technologies can be valuable. I'm just against the blank check. I'm glad you aren't afraid to voice your opinions. I, however, do think about what people will think when I select certain books at the library or when I make political statements in a forum.

I tend to not worry so much about what people think, I care more for what people do. Read the books you want, make the statements you want, but also be prepared to stand up for (and defend) what you believe.

Very well said...when I make a statement I truly believe it and will defend it to the end, regardless of what people may think.

We're talking about two different things here. Talking and defending yourself and your position to someone who reciprocates (which is a good thing), and being listened to by someone that is judging you based upon what you say or read without the opportunity to explain the "why" (bad thing). There's a difference between being afraid to post your opinion online for fear someone will verbally attack you and being afraid to check a book out of the library because you might be labeled a terrorist.

I do understand the difference between the two and I think being able to voice our opinions on here is a good thing. I care less if someone thinks less of me because of what I read or say,because I am American, I live in America and I am free to do so. As far as the statement of the difference of posting and checking out a book, you can be labeled a terrorist either way. It just depends on who is doing the labeling.

ScubaGir1
09-09-2007, 14:41
Here... toss in a little perspective. How many cell calls are made in a day in the US? I know some guys in charge of wire taps... In one major city right now... they have 3 working taps... 3. In a city of millions. And it takes multiple people working throughout the day to track each one. They are understaffed - and no one really has the manpower or resources to bother listening to anyones calls unless they really feel it is very important... Me... I'm not too important.

Very well put Larry...I am not too important either....if they listen to mine they will probably just get bored ......
Yeah, they'd probably get pretty bored listening to my life as well. :smiley36:
Then again, they'd probably hear a lot of silence, as I rarely keep my phone with me when I'm home, and its normally in my purse...or stuck between the sofa cushions... :smiley5:
This whole situation does make me think twice though. Not much we can do about it either, except take the battery out if we really want to...

Flatliner
09-09-2007, 14:54
Of course I do. I have my private thoughts and expressions to hide. I have my personal life to hide. I have the right and privilege of living in a country where these things are mine and should remain mine, unless I choose to make them public. I really think you should read and embrace the U.S. Constitution.



http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html

I read it, I must have missed the part about a right to privacy???

pnevai
09-09-2007, 17:57
Rlelax just a little. The FBI can not open the mike on any cellphone and eaves drop. This is a myth carried over from the wired telephone. On wired telephones it was possible to open the circuit on the phone to eaves drop but tven then the quality was so bad as almost unuseable.

A owner of a basic cell phone has nothing to worry about being intercepted when the phone is NOT in an active conversation. Owners of Phone enabled PDA type devices like black berries, Iphones, bluetooth enabled and other data devices are at far greater risk. On these phones it is possible to hack the phone as one would hack a PC, once the phone is hacked a virus or worm can be uploaded allowing all sorts of control over the device. And in these cases you have far more to worry about from indentity theives, or Bot herders and the hacking community than from the FBI. Bottom line is the more bells and whistles your phone has the more vulnerable it is to compromise, from the GOVT and Hackers. A simple modern cell phone is notoriously difficult to eavesdrop on because they ar by design frequency agile, mobile and encrypted to a degree. Of course this fact is not unknown to would be terrorists. In cases like this sometimes old tech is the most secure form of communication.

Classiffied facilities are rated according to Tempest secure facility standards. The Tempest standards dictate what level of RF, Audible and other transmission is acceptible in a facility. Tempes go all the way down to the physical seperation of secure and non secure (Red/Black) communications cables, telephones, data terminals etc. These standards were written well before the advent of Blackberries and other cutting edge electronics. The reason cellphone use is prohibited in a Classified facility such as a SCIF (Secure Classified Information Facility) is based criteria other than the ability of your phones microphone being activated remotely.

pnevai
09-09-2007, 18:09
Of course I do. I have my private thoughts and expressions to hide. I have my personal life to hide. I have the right and privilege of living in a country where these things are mine and should remain mine, unless I choose to make them public. I really think you should read and embrace the U.S. Constitution.



http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.overview.html

I read it, I must have missed the part about a right to privacy???


Err it falls under the Illegal search and seizure, bill of rights?

Vercingetorix
09-09-2007, 18:33
Rlelax just a little. The FBI can not open the mike on any cellphone and eaves drop. This is a myth carried over from the wired telephone. On wired telephones it was possible to open the circuit on the phone to eaves drop but tven then the quality was so bad as almost unuseable.
Not an urban legend. I just checked snopes.com. It points to this Article (http://news.com.com/FBI+taps+cell+phone+mic+as+eavesdropping/2100-1029_3-6140191.html)

kyfriedchipper
11-15-2007, 13:45
I'm w/ Larry on this one - the government needs these kind of things to keep us safe - its not a problem if you're not doing anything wrong

TRACI
11-15-2007, 14:42
The goverment can spy on me, I live a pretty boring life.

BouzoukiJoe A.K.A. wrecker130 AKA Chuck Norris AKA joeforbroke (banned)
11-15-2007, 15:06
I'm all for goverment eavesdropping... It's nice to know someone is listening! :smiley2:

loudgonzo
11-15-2007, 15:35
I can only hope they will listen to one of my phone conversations. Let's see, some of the things I've said on the phone:

telemarketer..." how are you this evening, i've got an offer for you...."
me..." I was just having sex with my dog and you interrupted"

telemarketer..."I'm calling from such and such research center..."
me..."hold on a just a second..." put phone down and go watch tv

marchand
11-15-2007, 16:27
The sad thing is that you only have the rights that the government lets you keep.

Puffer Fish
11-15-2007, 16:31
Wow, I missed this one... ok. Cell phones can be activated as long as they are "on". If they are off, they cannot receive a signal to know they should turn on..it has a lot of valuable reasons, besides looking at bad guys. They can locate you with any GPS phone, without you knowing it also (again, if on).

They could modify the software to make the phone look off, when it was actually on (not hard to do that), and I would guess that is what they did.

Don't forget Onstar can listen in anytime on their system.

kenmendes
11-15-2007, 16:33
That is so crazy. Im sure that is illegal but they are the FBI and i guess that they think that they can do whatever they want

teog
12-12-2007, 20:21
Rlelax just a little. The FBI can not open the mike on any cellphone and eaves drop. This is a myth carried over from the wired telephone. On wired telephones it was possible to open the circuit on the phone to eaves drop but tven then the quality was so bad as almost unuseable.
Not an urban legend. I just checked snopes.com. It points to this Article (http://news.com.com/FBI+taps+cell+phone+mic+as+eavesdropping/2100-1029_3-6140191.html)

Im also calling this roving bug b.s. I worked for one of the large wireless companies for 11 yrs as a tech manager( I left in 06). We utilized a GSM/GPRS network. These are two independent systems, voice and data. Im not saying this could never happen, but at this current time with this type of a wireless network I have very high doubts.

The only case that involves the roving bug is this mofia case. I have not been able to find any other cases on google.

Here is a quote from this article you pointed to
Details of how the Nextel bugs worked are sketchy. Court documents, including an affidavit (p1 (http://www.politechbot.com/docs/fbi.ardito.affidavit.p1.120106.pdf)) and (p2 (http://www.politechbot.com/docs/fbi.ardito.affidavit.p2.120106.pdf)) prepared by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan Kolodner in September 2003, refer to them as a "listening device placed in the cellular telephone." That phrase could refer to software or hardware.

Further it implicates it was possiable that an actual bug was placed on the phone than later remotely activated. So even within this news story there is doubt about the so called "roving bug"

Now do I agree with it if it was true? I could careless as others mention I dont do any illegal to have to worry about it.:smiley20:

teog
12-12-2007, 20:28
Rlelax just a little. The FBI can not open the mike on any cellphone and eaves drop. This is a myth carried over from the wired telephone. On wired telephones it was possible to open the circuit on the phone to eaves drop but tven then the quality was so bad as almost unuseable.
Not an urban legend. I just checked snopes.com. It points to this Article (http://news.com.com/FBI+taps+cell+phone+mic+as+eavesdropping/2100-1029_3-6140191.html)
Im also calling BS on the roving bug. I worked for ATT Wireless for 11yrs (left in 06) as a manager of tech and data. We utilized a GSM/GPRS network. Two independent networks that we integerited , but still two independent networks.

I googled roving bug and all articles came to the mafia story. I couldnt find anyother story about it. And even in the article you posted there was doubt of this actualy working.
Heres the quote

Details of how the Nextel bugs worked are sketchy. Court documents, including an affidavit (p1 (http://www.politechbot.com/docs/fbi.ardito.affidavit.p1.120106.pdf)) and (p2 (http://www.politechbot.com/docs/fbi.ardito.affidavit.p2.120106.pdf)) prepared by Assistant U.S. Attorney Jonathan Kolodner in September 2003, refer to them as a "listening device placed in the cellular telephone." That phrase could refer to software or hardware.

I wont say that this could never happen because it could one day as technology progresses, but not now. If it ever did it would not impact me since I dont do anything illegal anyways.

Howeve if it would prevent a school shooting, or a mall shooting or even another attack Im all for it.:smiley20:

scubajane
12-12-2007, 20:54
This is a news story about how the FBI can turn your microphone on in your cell phone on and listen to you WHEN YOUR PHONE IS OFF...and you wouldn't even know it!

Now I know why my battery keeps running down so quickly. :smiley2:

You guys amaze me!! I love hearing all opinions and the way you express yourselves. You are intelligent caring people. you each bring more information to the surface. I see many resources of info. Our freedom Is important to us and we fight fiercely for the right to express ourselves.

remember that in a forum you can't see body language or hear a voice inflection. some of us can't even spell, much less type. a face to face conversation may make this type of conversation easier. then again when I type I can take my time and formulate an answer. I can edit to my hearts content. but...I still might be misunderstood. and I can always find someone to disagree with me.

wheelman
12-12-2007, 20:59
Just another example of big brother watching and listening to way too much of our business. As the clip says our freedom is slipping away.

No one makes a better slave than a person who thinks they are free.

adv_diver1
12-12-2007, 21:10
The OnStar system had a little "bug" in it a few years ago. Seems the FBI was listening into the vehicles of known mobsters that had new Caddy's with the OnStar system. They could turn on the mic and listen to conversation in the vehicle, which of course is illegal, but intelligence gathering is a gray area and mostly the laws don't apply because if they did you would not get squat.

Support waterboarding, sleep depravation, loud music and all other forms of "accepted" extraction practices!

USA!

teog
12-12-2007, 21:14
This is a news story about how the FBI can turn your microphone on in your cell phone on and listen to you WHEN YOUR PHONE IS OFF...and you wouldn't even know it!

Now I know why my battery keeps running down so quickly. :smiley2:

You guys amaze me!! I love hearing all opinions and the way you express yourselves. You are intelligent caring people. you each bring more information to the surface. I see many resources of info. Our freedom Is important to us and we fight fiercely for the right to express ourselves.

remember that in a forum you can't see body language or hear a voice inflection. some of us can't even spell, much less type. a face to face conversation may make this type of conversation easier. then again when I type I can take my time and formulate an answer. I can edit to my hearts content. but...I still might be misunderstood. and I can always find someone to disagree with me.

Well I know I cant spell, please accept my appolgies in advance.lol

scubajane
12-19-2007, 17:25
apology accepted :) please be sure to think

reeldive
12-19-2007, 19:32
This is a news story about how the FBI can turn your microphone on in your cell phone on and listen to you WHEN YOUR PHONE IS OFF...and you wouldn't even know it!

YouTube - CELL PHONE (FBI can listen even when phone is turned off) (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O61YfvPZGJs)

I mean, I understand they need to keep peace, and listen for terrorist plots and stuff. And I hope they aren't just picking people at random, but its just sort of scary :smiley5:

I've only been electronics and radio for 50 yrs so I'm probably not an expert, but hey OFF is OFF. No power to the receiver or transmitter section of your cell phone (read two way radio - digital or analog) nothing get in or out. Come on now. the only thing this points out is how totally gullible people are and willing to belive anything no matter how out landish

FOUNDATIONER
12-19-2007, 21:11
I've only been electronics and radio for 50 yrs so I'm probably not an expert, but hey OFF is OFF. No power to the receiver or transmitter section of your cell phone (read two way radio - digital or analog) nothing get in or out. Come on now. the only thing this points out is how totally gullible people are and willing to belive anything no matter how out landish


And there's aliens at area51, and all the communists just disappeared when they tore down the wall in Berlin, and they didn't really land on the moon, and Howard Hughes and Elvis and Hoffa and Walt Disney ARE still
alive!

Good God we're toast:smiley13:

Shortyman801
12-19-2007, 21:34
[/quote]And there's aliens at area51, and all the communists just disappeared when they tore down the wall in Berlin, and they didn't really land on the moon, and Howard Hughes and Elvis and Hoffa and Walt Disney ARE still
alive!

Good God we're toast:smiley13:[/quote]


Don't forget 2pac!

Hoffa lives!!!!


http://www.geocities.com/peteargiro/hoffa.html (http://www.geocities.com/peteargiro/hoffa.html)

teog
12-19-2007, 21:48
apology accepted :) please be sure to think

Thinking is the easy part, its spelling it on a post that gets me.:smiley36:

marchand
12-20-2007, 00:08
Cell phones are only off when the battery is out. Think about how you turn the phone on for a sec. You have to hold the button down which means there is a chip that has power to it that can sense how long the button is being pushed. Also, on my phone there is a green light that blinks ever 30 sec or so which means that something in there is getting power. Off doesn't necessarily mean off.

mitsuguy
12-20-2007, 00:09
I've only been electronics and radio for 50 yrs so I'm probably not an expert, but hey OFF is OFF. No power to the receiver or transmitter section of your cell phone (read two way radio - digital or analog) nothing get in or out. Come on now. the only thing this points out is how totally gullible people are and willing to belive anything no matter how out landish

what you are not taking into consideration is that many electronic devices never really turn themselves off...

for instance, my blackberry... it's never "off" unless the battery is taken out of it... and just because the screen goes dark and the lights turn off doesn't necessarily mean its entirely off as well... about the only guaranteed way would be to take the battery out every time you wanted to turn it off... switches in new phones are not on/off switches really, they work more like the power button on the front of a newer computer - they tell something that is already awake to be "ready" instead of "asleep"

bmp51
12-20-2007, 03:28
Lol this thread cracks me up… the NSA has been capturing email \ internet traffic, cell phone, Lan lines etc for as long as we have been using them…

I am more worried about they guy who builds the Bluetooth gun to take over my cell just to jack with me.. (yes easy to build, and they work great..) depending on the cell model and how you build the gun, you can listen to calls, or interrupt them… that bugs me more than the govt.. after all, there are checks and balances if they decide that my conversation to my wife on how my daughters “mommy n me” group went is so important to national security, well they have to justify (and I get the chance to bring the act of listening to me to light)… but the jack ass who is just waiting for you to call your credit card company, or wants to download your addy book, etc… That guy\gal pisses me off more than any government agency who is too busy, too understaffed, and too lazy to actually give a crap about what I am doing…

If the Govt wanted to make your life their business by listening to your registered, credit checked, indexed, and logged, cell phone that is the least of your issues… by the time they are listening to even our LAN line your life is already hooked….

And on the TSA name list thing… yeah that sucks I have an Irish name, and often am “randomly searched” (never been striped searched…) I can’t use e-ticket check-in, and despite my attempts I am always forced to “Try” e-ticket check-in then take my “rejection” slip to the teller, who takes my passport\id and disappears for 3 or 4 min… then comes back and lets me go on my way…

And no the TSA will not “Remove my name” you know because if a terrorist were going to fly, I am sure they would use their legal name, since they follow laws and are good people ( sarcasms) …

So yeah we have some messed up situations, so I get to the airport a little early, and I get over it… the only way to “stop” the govt from having the option to look in on your activities is to not use any of the services that the govt has access to \ provides \ regulates… (good luck with that..)…

teog
12-20-2007, 11:11
Lol this thread cracks me up… the NSA has been capturing email \ internet traffic, cell phone, Lan lines etc for as long as we have been using them…

I am more worried about they guy who builds the Bluetooth gun to take over my cell just to jack with me.. (yes easy to build, and they work great..) depending on the cell model and how you build the gun, you can listen to calls, or interrupt them… that bugs me more than the govt.. after all, there are checks and balances if they decide that my conversation to my wife on how my daughters “mommy n me” group went is so important to national security, well they have to justify (and I get the chance to bring the act of listening to me to light)… but the jack ass who is just waiting for you to call your credit card company, or wants to download your addy book, etc… That guy\gal pisses me off more than any government agency who is too busy, too understaffed, and too lazy to actually give a crap about what I am doing…

If the Govt wanted to make your life their business by listening to your registered, credit checked, indexed, and logged, cell phone that is the least of your issues… by the time they are listening to even our LAN line your life is already hooked….


And on the TSA name list thing… yeah that sucks I have an Irish name, and often am “randomly searched” (never been striped searched…) I can’t use e-ticket check-in, and despite my attempts I am always forced to “Try” e-ticket check-in then take my “rejection” slip to the teller, who takes my passport\id and disappears for 3 or 4 min… then comes back and lets me go on my way…

And no the TSA will not “Remove my name” you know because if a terrorist were going to fly, I am sure they would use their legal name, since they follow laws and are good people ( sarcasms) …

So yeah we have some messed up situations, so I get to the airport a little early, and I get over it… the only way to “stop” the govt from having the option to look in on your activities is to not use any of the services that the govt has access to \ provides \ regulates… (good luck with that..)…

Wow your one paranoid guy.

Goober
12-20-2007, 15:26
Since there is a photo pass that has to be issued any were in the plant any time engineering has to look at anything and take a pic, and all cell phones now have cams, all employees are required to register make, model and serial # of their cell phone with Gulfstream. Industrial espionage is serious with these people. One is even instructed on how and when as well as whom you discuss work with. Their listening....I'm sure of it, along with those friggin' squirrels. Not to mention what home land security is capable of.

MSilvia
12-20-2007, 15:54
If the FBI wants to listen to what goes on in my pocket, more power to them. You wouldn't want my loose change and car keys plotting anything.

Goober
12-20-2007, 16:48
If the FBI wants to listen to what goes on in my pocket, more power to them. You wouldn't want my loose change and car keys plotting anything.

:smilie39::smilie39::smilie39::smilie39::smilie39: :smilie39::smilie39::smilie39::smilie39::smilie39:

Now that is what we call witty!

bmp51
12-20-2007, 23:04
If the FBI wants to listen to what goes on in my pocket, more power to them. You wouldn't want my loose change and car keys plotting anything.


I thought I saw your keys and quarters at the post office... WANTED!

paintsnow
12-21-2007, 00:37
in defense of bmp and myself ( i know bmp personally)

its not called being paranoid if their actually out to get you...

^ thats the motto i live by ^

I ate nemo
12-21-2007, 13:54
wow never knew that thats scary although dont change me at all

bmp51
12-22-2007, 19:33
Lol this thread cracks me up… the NSA has been capturing email \ internet traffic, cell phone, Lan lines etc for as long as we have been using them…

I am more worried about they guy who builds the Bluetooth gun to take over my cell just to jack with me.. (yes easy to build, and they work great..) depending on the cell model and how you build the gun, you can listen to calls, or interrupt them… that bugs me more than the govt.. after all, there are checks and balances if they decide that my conversation to my wife on how my daughters “mommy n me” group went is so important to national security, well they have to justify (and I get the chance to bring the act of listening to me to light)… but the jack ass who is just waiting for you to call your credit card company, or wants to download your addy book, etc… That guy\gal pisses me off more than any government agency who is too busy, too understaffed, and too lazy to actually give a crap about what I am doing…

If the Govt wanted to make your life their business by listening to your registered, credit checked, indexed, and logged, cell phone that is the least of your issues… by the time they are listening to even our LAN line your life is already hooked….


And on the TSA name list thing… yeah that sucks I have an Irish name, and often am “randomly searched” (never been striped searched…) I can’t use e-ticket check-in, and despite my attempts I am always forced to “Try” e-ticket check-in then take my “rejection” slip to the teller, who takes my passport\id and disappears for 3 or 4 min… then comes back and lets me go on my way…

And no the TSA will not “Remove my name” you know because if a terrorist were going to fly, I am sure they would use their legal name, since they follow laws and are good people ( sarcasms) …

So yeah we have some messed up situations, so I get to the airport a little early, and I get over it… the only way to “stop” the govt from having the option to look in on your activities is to not use any of the services that the govt has access to \ provides \ regulates… (good luck with that..)…

Wow your one paranoid guy.

I work in network security... its my job to be Paranoid... and nosey... ;)