View Full Version : FBI flying surveillance aircraft over U.S.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/02/fbi-flying-surveillance-aircraft-over-us-cities-planes-traced-to-fake-companies/
What could possibly go wrong? I'm sure it's all on the up-and-up. They would NEVER lie would they? We're talking the G-men here folks! Integrity uber alles. :rolleyes:
Yeah, I know this type of thing has gone on for some time but the newer technology (like ID'ing cellphones of thousands of people) begins to stink up the place. Oh, I did notice no warrants either. Hmmm....
The whole thing about using "front companies" to hide this shit is also more than a bit disturbing. If you or I created a fake company with all the included fake paperwork we'd likely end up in prison.
Eurodriver
06-02-15, 09:37
I love that, when questioned about their ability to collect vast amounts of information from anyone with a cell phone in their surveillance area, they respond that the use is "rare".
"Rare" is how much? 1% of the population? 0.01%?
SomeOtherGuy
06-02-15, 10:03
From the story:
A federal budget document from 2010 mentioned at least 115 planes, including 90 Cessna aircraft, in the FBI's surveillance fleet.
That's a HUGE fleet. HUGE. This is apparently not something used for an occasional investigation, but a massive surveillance program. And very expensive, even with Cessnas.
The FBI does not generally obtain warrants to record video from its planes of people moving outside in the open, but it also said that under a new policy it has recently begun obtaining court orders to use cell-site simulators. The Obama administration had until recently been directing local authorities through secret agreements not to reveal their own use of the devices, even encouraging prosecutors to drop cases rather than disclose the technology's use in open court.
1) Although in general anyone can take photos or video of public spaces and the people in them, that rule was not made with airborne video surveillance in mind. There is a major creepiness factor, and of course from aloft you can see into many places that are fenced off and considered private.
2) The cell-phone interception is likely illegal without specific search warrants, and interception of all calls in a neighborhood may be illegal even with a search warrant, as an overbroad search that violates the basic Fourth Amendment guarantees.
Local LE had a c 26 flying flying around here a few years ago.
Like the fbi cares about what's legal......ppfffff.
Wait in 20 years when some of this stuff starts to get declassified. I can't even imagine what kind of antics are taking place.
Yep.
And here I thought J. Edgar was dead.
If are old enough and you believe the 'we don't look at what we aren't supposed to' then you no doubt thought the guys processing the nude pictures of your wife didn't look, either or, make their own copies if she was hot enough.
Moose-Knuckle
06-02-15, 16:35
The NRO had developed camera lenses that could read the manufacturers name off a golf ball laying on the ground from an orbiting satellite back in the 70's. Satellites, UAVs, SIGINT, HUMINT, et al. the concept of privacy is a bygone notion.
As one of the pioneers of information security told me at a lecture back in '98; "We are so far beyond Big Brother it's not even funny".
Things that just make you feel all warm and fuzzy on the inside ya know.
And how is the FBI's surveillance fleet any different than the thousands of news and traffic aircraft the AP and other news outlets have at their disposal?
What difference is a FBI guy flying and following a bad guy in an airplane than a FBI following a bad guy in a car?
They consider this "news?" Laughable
Same program, I guess. Created a small ruckus in Minneapolis.
http://stmedia.startribune.com/images/02118fbe1c1e439cb1fc2e4c4f911ca8.jpeg
http://www.startribune.com/nighttime-flight-circles-low-over-twin-cities-for-hours/305398901/
And how is the FBI's surveillance fleet any different than the thousands of news and traffic aircraft the AP and other news outlets have at their disposal?
What difference is a FBI guy flying and following a bad guy in an airplane than a FBI following a bad guy in a car?
They consider this "news?" Laughable
They (the FBI) get to define a "bad guy". They have to legal authority to kill you (in an extreme) or take away your freedom, whereas the new media doesn't. More than a little different.
The DoJ just announced they are funding a "study" of "right-wing extremist groups". God forbid they study Islamic extremist groups or [shudder] a left-wing one. Remember, a government entity with the powers to ruin your life---or end it---work at the behest of the people in charge at the time. Nowadays that's Obama and his fellow shitstains. Like, I dunno , the friggin' IRS for example.
Naw, this isn't news. Don't sweat it. :rolleyes:
I think you missed my point.
The one organization I trust less than the politicians is the news media. News outlets and the politicians alike on both sides pander to their bases. How many articles have been written about guns, gun owners etc. that full of inaccuracies and are nothing but B.S.? As a pilot, when I read these and other articles about aviation, I can tell you 90% of the time, the media gets it wrong and much of it is flat out B.S.
Lets look at the headline linked by Hmac. "Mysterious low-flying plane...." First, what the hell is so mysterious about a Cessna 206 flying in controlled airspace sqawking the correct transponder code? Nothing. Second, "low-flying?" I'm sorry but KMSP is at 841 feet MSL. This "low flying" Cessna is roughly 5-6000 feet above ground level or about one mile in the air. No, that isn't "low-flying."
Next, the media acts like they stumbled upon some big government conspiracy. The FBI has airplanes? No shit, tell me something I didn't know. I would expect an agency tasked with investigating organized crime and terrorists would have airplanes. I'd expect the FBI to do surveillance. I doubt FBI agents drive around in cars with "FBI" painted on the sides, I'd expect their cars to be registered to someone other than the FBI. Again, the media acts like its found a huge government cover-up that the FBI's planes don't come back registered to the J Edgar Hoover building. Here is a fact..... many planes flying in the U.S. don't come back to their true owner be it .gov, personal or corporate owned.
Another article on this topic I found discusses the ACLU who is demanding information about FBI or other .gov flights over Baltimore during the riots. Really? If law enforcement WASN'T flying over the city during that time, I'd find it pretty inept.
The media plays this like it's some tin foil hat operation, and it really isn't.
And how is the FBI's surveillance fleet any different than the thousands of news and traffic aircraft the AP and other news outlets have at their disposal?
What difference is a FBI guy flying and following a bad guy in an airplane than a FBI following a bad guy in a car?
Well for starters the FBI and local law enforcement have a greater capacity to track specific individuals than news or traffic helicopters. As for the difference between planes, helos and drones vs. a car with regard to privacy on your property, that one should be pretty easy.
As for the difference between planes, helos and drones vs. a car with regard to privacy on your property, that one should be pretty easy.
Ok, so you're cool with a news helicopter hovering over your house filming you, or me in my airplane, so long as the FBI doesn't do the same?
The whole private property thing is laughable. What, you get a pass at committing crimes because it's on private property? Well crap! First thing tomorrow I'm loading my cows (beef prices are crazy!) and I'll open either a jihad or ELF training camp (or commit any other crime) on my ranch because it is private property and while anyone can look through my fence and plainly see what I'm doing the .gov shouldn't be able to because it is private property!
Ok, so you're cool with a news helicopter hovering over your house filming you, or me in my airplane, so long as the FBI doesn't do the same?
The whole private property thing is laughable. What, you get a pass at committing crimes because it's on private property? Well crap! First thing tomorrow I'm loading my cows (beef prices are crazy!) and I'll open either a jihad or ELF training camp (or commit any other crime) on my ranch because it is private property and while anyone can look through my fence and plainly see what I'm doing the .gov shouldn't be able to because it is private property!
If there is actually NEWS happening in front of my house...sure. It's happened before.
And I don't think anyone "committing crimes" is getting a pass. If I'm currently engaged in criminal activity I think I have bigger problems coming at me than privacy issues.
I just don't want the FBI to put up a drone net the same way the NSA decided to just record all cell phones.
Because when that day happens, I swear I am going to buy a zebra print thong and start sun bathing on the roof. IT WILL COME TO THAT. And I really don't think anybody wants that to happen.
If there is actually NEWS happening in front of my house...sure. It's happened before.
And I don't think anyone "committing crimes" is getting a pass. If I'm currently engaged in criminal activity I think I have bigger problems coming at me than privacy issues.
I just don't want the FBI to put up a drone net the same way the NSA decided to just record all cell phones.
Because when that day happens, I swear I am going to buy a zebra print thong and start sun bathing on the roof. IT WILL COME TO THAT. And I really don't think anybody wants that to happen.
Great, now I have images of a thonged SteyrAUG running around the roof of his house in my head! I hope at least you have sunscreen.
I think we are both in agreement that it becomes a slippery slope balancing our freedoms and privacy rights. The argument of "well if you're not doing anything wrong so you don't have anything to worry about" doesn't fly with me. I don't want our law enforcement to have free access to every aspect of our lives. BUT I don't think flying surveillance in a Cessna 206 crosses that line.
You mention the NSA and with it goes along the Patriot and USA Freedom Act. I don't know all the facts about what the NSA can and cannot collect. Again, I don't trust the information fed to us by the news media, but most info I've found reports that using the Patriot act, the NSA collects the metadata of who you called, who called you and when the call was placed. It does not record every single telephone conversation. Now, under the USA Freedom Act instead of the NSA collecting the data, the telephone company will need to keep the data for a minimum of 6 months and provide the info to the .gov if requested. I'm not sure where I stand on this. I certainly want our LE guys to know who people like the Boston bombers were talking to for the 6 months proceeding their attacks. I also see the potential for abuse. Tough topic.
FWIW, out of curiosity I searched mosque, minneapolis, mn on google. Three popped up extremely close to the circle flight paths on the posted map.
Just Sayin
Fwiw regarding the DOJ analysis of right wing extremism in the article I had read they specifically mentioned radical islamists as being a segment of the targeted population.
The FBI/DEA/ATF/DHS have some really invasive technology on their aircraft, and other vehicles. They are looking into homes with this technology. It is all part of the very lucrative (for the agencies) war on drugs, and war on terror. These alphabet agencies operate more than Cessnas also. I have no problem with surveillance, but the technology has become invasive, imho.
Moose-Knuckle
06-03-15, 10:49
The FBI/DEA/ATF/DHS have some really invasive technology on their aircraft, and other vehicles. They are looking into homes with this technology. It is all part of the very lucrative (for the agencies) war on drugs, and war on terror. These alphabet agencies operate more than Cessnas also. I have no problem with surveillance, but the technology has become invasive, imho.
Nothing new, in the 80's we had Blue Thunder . . .
But yes on a more serious note:
L3 Range-R
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2015/01/19/police-radar-see-through-walls/22007615/
Was front page today in the Minneapolis paper
http://www.startribune.com/mystery-surveillance-plane-that-circled-twin-cities-was-part-of-secret-fbi-fleet/305929791/
A small airplane recently spotted circling several Twin Cities locations, including the Mall of America, has been identified as part of a fleet of FBI surveillance planes flying over targets across the country.
The flight path and ownership records of the plane in Minneapolis made it conspicuous to aviation buffs, and a Star Tribune story last week compared it to known surveillance flights by single-engine, propeller-driven aircraft over other cities.
The link was confirmed in an Associated Press investigation published Tuesday that said the FBI has been operating scores of planes carrying video and, at times, cellphone surveillance technology. The planes are registered to fictitious companies set up by the government.
The Cessna 182T Skylane that circled downtown Minneapolis and then the megamall for several hours on a recent night is among those traced back to the FBI by Associated Press reporters. The plane, N361DB, was modified with a German-made silencing muffler and carries an infrared surveillance camera, according to government records obtained by the Star Tribune.
The planes’ surveillance equipment is generally used without a judge’s approval, and the FBI said the flights are used for specific, ongoing investigations, according to the Associated Press. The agency said it uses front companies to protect the safety of the pilots and aircraft. It also shields the identity of the aircraft so those on the ground don’t know they’re being watched by the FBI.
The Cessna 182T Skylane that circled downtown Minneapolis and then the megamall for several hours on a recent night is among those traced back to the FBI by Associated Press reporters. The plane, N361DB, was modified with a German-made silencing muffler and carries an infrared surveillance camera, according to government records obtained by the Star Tribune.
UNREGISTERED SUPPRESSOR!!!!!!
:jester:
Y'all are crazy. It's for our safety.
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-03-15, 14:14
South side on MN/SPL near the airport? Flying around that SuperAmerica gas station next to the cab stand? I might know what they were looking at....
So they have mufflers, does that mean that they are going with out lights?
How would people feel if they put a surveillance van on every block?
Another article on this topic I found discusses the ACLU who is demanding information about FBI or other .gov flights over Baltimore during the riots. Really? If law enforcement WASN'T flying over the city during that time, I'd find it pretty inept.
I got your point, that's why I responded. I don't like the secrecy and warrantless shit involved. And I have news for you: if the FBI was flying surveillance over Baltimore during the riots it wasn't in support of the police. It was to monitor their activities. As per my response, remember who is currently in charge.......
Hey, I'm cool with the Fibbies flying around in their James Bond 007 spy planes as long as they are cool with me developing my directed EMP generator (or other high-energy discharge type experiments). And if some experimental device should hypothetically release a pulse while they're buzzing around over my house ogling my wife/daughter, well, I guess it sucks to be them, now doesn't it?
Hey, I'm cool with the Fibbies flying around in their James Bond 007 spy planes as long as they are cool with me developing my directed EMP generator (or other high-energy discharge type experiments). And if some experimental device should hypothetically release a pulse while they're buzzing around over my house ogling my wife/daughter, well, I guess it sucks to be them, now doesn't it?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TVC6wbWsq3I
FromMyColdDeadHand
06-04-15, 02:14
Hey, I'm cool with the Fibbies flying around in their James Bond 007 spy planes as long as they are cool with me developing my directed EMP generator (or other high-energy discharge type experiments). And if some experimental device should hypothetically release a pulse while they're buzzing around over my house ogling my wife/daughter, well, I guess it sucks to be them, now doesn't it?
I was wondering if the recent reports green laser pointers at aircraft had anything to do with this.
It would be awesome to get a plane and follow around with an "Undercover FBI" tow banner with an arrow....
sarcasm on :)
I have nothing to hide :) why should I care ! only people hiding something are paranoid :)
This thread needs JP or Lissie, which ever version you fancy...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yMVV_HsHcX0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BruyQHzQ2Jo
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.