Slashdot Mirror
DC Inauguration Protestors Are Being Hit With Facebook Data Searches (citylab.com)
During the protests over the inauguration of Donald Trump, more than 230 protestors were arrested -- many of which were charged with rioting and had their phones seized by Washington, D.C., police. One of the individuals who was arrested received an email from Facebook's "Law Enforcement Response Team," which raises the question: Did D.C. police ask Facebook to reveal information about this arrestee? CityLab reports: In an emailed response to CityLab's request for more information, Rachel Reid, a spokesperson for the D.C. Metropolitan Police Department, responded that "MPD does not comment on investigative tactics." The District of Columbia United States Attorney's Office -- the agency leading the prosecution of Inauguration protesters -- has not yet responded to CityLab's inquiry. CityLab also asked Facebook about the email. "We don't comment on individual requests," company spokesperson Jay Nancarrow said. He referred CityLab to the site's law enforcement guidelines page and to its Government Requests Report database, where the public can see how many legal processes it receives from countries worldwide. According to this database, U.S. law enforcement requested information on the accounts of 38,951 users over January to June of 2016, and they received some type of data in 80 percent of cases. Which "legal process" authorities sent to Facebook for information on the protester matters considerably in terms of how much data they can seize for investigation. According to Facebook's legal guidelines, a search warrant, for example, could allow Facebook to give away content data including "messages, photos, videos, timeline posts, and location information." A subpoena or a court order would give authorities less information, but would still include the individual's "name, length of service, credit card information, email address(es), and a recent login/logout IP address(es)."
Setting cars on fire, assaulting people, and breaking windows isn't "protesting."
SJW: Someone who has run out of real oppression, and has to fake it.
it raises the question but does not beg.
This is based on a law pushed through by Obama. Trump just gets to use it. i.e. Just because your guy is in, don't let him pass bad laws. The next guy might not agree with you.
A number of crimes (including violent ones) have been committed, which the relevant law-enforcement agency(ies) are duly investigating. They have detained some suspects and are collecting evidence. What's so outrageous or even particularly newsworthy about this?
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
Part of the reason of that is the opacity with which government treats these things. That makes it hard as hell to be an informed populace and fight overreach. It is also something Obama promised and never delivered, he in fact often did the opposite. This is not a partisan statement, as I have nothing but disdain for or current administration and tend to lean pretty damn liberal. I mention it as a point of fact that few, if any of those in power have your or my interest at heart, regardless of the populist messages they spew.
Silence is a state of mime.
Stop using "begs the question" incorrectly, you clowns.
Further:
According to Facebook's legal guidelines, a search warrant, for example, could allow Facebook to give away content data including "messages, photos, videos, timeline posts, and location information." A subpoena or a court order would give authorities less information, but would still include the individual's "name, length of service, credit card information, email address(es), and a recent login/logout IP address(es).
What's the problem, exactly? One arrested individual is making this claim. Facebook says they do so with a court order, subpoena, or actual warrant. You need an actual warrant to get most info.
Now if you had evidence that Facebook was turning over tons of data on anyone who was simply at the protests without a warrant/subpoena/order, then we'd have a story.
https://i.ytimg.com/vi/M0KMM9W... Those are some strong words, AC.
I don't respond to AC's.
So now under Trump... protesting is illegal.
Hey look! Fake News from the Snowflake News Network.
Please explain, specifically, how you come to this conclusion. Or are you in the "arson is just protest" school of thought? You are? Great. Thanks for demonstrating (so to speak) exactly why liberals have been losing state legislative seats and governorships for the last six years, along with both houses of congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court. Please continue with your way of thinking in advance of the next legislative elections, so this trend can continue.
Don't disappoint your bird dog. Go to the range.
Until they start, they are _all_ asshole fascists.
John McAfee 'It was like that time I hired that Bangkok prostitute; to do my taxes, while I fucked my accountant'
Funny how, if we're all a bunch of racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, xenophobic, neo-nazi, fascist, greedy, evil, violent, intolerant bastards like you say we are, we didn't riot, burn shit, threaten to blow up the White House, dress up like vaginas, scream, whine, cry, bitch, moan, and boycott everything when Obama was elected (twice!). I mean, it's not like we AGREED with Obama's policies in the slightest, certainly no more so than you agree with Trump. Yet somehow the only time you see this behavior is when liberals lose. Conservatives...not so much.
It reminds me of the argument that gun owners are some sort of threat to the general public. We've got more than 300 million guns and several trillion rounds of ammunition. Trust us, if we were a threat, you'd know it by now.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
just because people object to Trump using overreaching laws, doesn't mean that they supported Obama - or more particularly Obama's signing of the enabling law. And even if they did, changing your mind about the proper scope of presidental powers as you see them used, or on any other political issue, being met with derision, "told you so" or "our turn now that we won, ha ha" is the opposite of helpful. It's just being an ass Also, the way you wrote that implies you are okay with Trump using this law, so you may want to be aware of that.
Your ad here. Ask me how!
Setting cars on fire, assaulting people, and breaking windows isn't "protesting."
Well, actually it can be a "protesting" tactic.
But being an "act of protest" doesn't make it any less a violent criminal act, or any less subject to prosecution and criminal sanctions.
It also doesn't make planning to do it in a group any less a felonious conspiracy.
= = = =
I'm waiting with bated breath for the new administration to follow the money back to Soros (busting people all the way along the trail) and find enough evidence to bust him as the kingpin of a criminal conspiracy. Wouldn't THAT cause consternation.
Bantam Dominique roosters crow a four-note song. Once you've heard it as "Happy BIRTHday" you can't NOT hear it that way
Protesters should just arrest Black Bloc assholes.
"You're a protester, you're under arrest!"
"I'm a vigilante, I'm arresting YOU."
"I protest you arresting me. Therefore I am a vigilante, too."
Setting cars on fire, assaulting people, and breaking windows isn't "protesting."
Actually, it depends on if the targets of destruction are incidental or purposefully selected. If they are incidental then it's a riot. However, if there is a reason behind their choice of targets, it's a violent protest.
Anons need not reply. Questions end with a question mark.
protesting is illegal.
No, but rioting is. You know - burning cars, hurting people, damaging property. Just like it was under Obama and every other president we've had. Protesting and rioting are not the same thing, obviously.
Protest Definition != Riot Definition
If every single marketing drone in corporate America with the right subscription can mine all this data to sell us useless plastic trinkets that we don't need, then why not let the police mine it to solve crimes that were committed during a large public gathering?
No one is saying they are going after the innocent granny holding a "i would have rather had Hillary" placard but if she happened to share a photo of some anarchists destroying property that can help the police identify them, then hell yes the police should be searching it so long as they had probable cause and got a warrant.
If you are protesting and have your phone on you with a social media app working..
Expect all that networking to be collected by some agency and later passed to law enforcement.
A US social media brand offering services in the USA has to respond when asked by courts in the USA.
If you want to protest having a device that broadcasts unique data about yourself is not going to go unnoticed by a long list of agencies given the day and event.
Know that all and any public comments on social media are been tracked. Friends of friends joining or showing support for local events and will be connected back by 2 or 3 hops of friends.
In the USA you have freedom of speech, freedom after speech. People can peaceably to assemble and petition the Government.
The protection of been compelled to be a witness is well understood. Any device found may not always enjoy the classic unreasonable searches and seizures protection.
Older cell phone would have unique International Mobile Equipment Identity as part of the device and would often be opened and noted by police as part of a battery protection offer. The request to avoid battery leakage would then allow that IMEI number to be matched over vast US wide call logs.
Modern devices might just work when police turn them on and show apps used.
Any account mentioned or found on the "net" to be public facing can be found or a court request made for more information.
Given the long history of tracking protests online in other nations e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... "1986, French university students coordinated a national strike using Minitel, demonstrating an early use of digital communication devices for participatory technopolitical ends" expect the same tracking in 2016/17 globally. Police around the world have been tracking people online for decades. Once something is public on line, expect all connections to that account to be tracked back for many hops.
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
It could also be the false flag operation. Police used fake protestors at Vietnam War protests to provoke violence and discredit the real protestors. I don't know if Trump supporters are smart enough to do the same, but these rioters are certainly discrediting the cause they nominally claim to support. When Trumpsters see these people rioting, looting, and waving Mexican flags, they feel their intolerance and xenophobia is even more justified.
I don't know if Trump supporters are smart enough to do the same, but these rioters are certainly discrediting the cause they nominally claim to support.
Funny, I saw the protesters as doing exactly what they said they'd do all along: act like a bunch of spoiled babies who didn't get their way and are now throwing a tantrum. They don't rationalize. They don't listen. They don't engage cognitive thinking skills. They distill it down to "you don't agree with me, therefore you are a hateful, mean, stupid, intolerant, bigoted, racist, sexist, homophobic, xenophobic Hitler lover and I'm completely justified in doing whatever my emotions lead me to do and you can't criticize me because criticism is racist, sexist, bigoted, homophobic, etc."
It's the logical endpoint of the "there is no truth and right/wrong is an illusion" ideology.
In the end they will lay their freedom at our feet and say to us, Make us your slaves, but feed us. - Fyodor Dostoyevsky
It's not right, but you still have to expect this crap.
That's why the masks are a good idea.
You can do face paint instead, with patterns designed to fool face recognition systems, and that's less suspicious-looking than a mask — if only slightly. But it's a hell of a lot harder to take off, and go back to looking normal.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
I have yet to see any actual evidence of that, unless you count pure conjecture by The Young Turks & co.
Meanwhile, I have seen a fair bit of evidence that someone employed by Berkley appears to have admitting to assaulting someone who was unconscious on Twitter, complete with pics of the guy. I suppose that person could've taken a picture of an unconscious person and claimed to have punched them for fun on Twitter without actually doing it, but that sounds even dumber.
I continue to be outraged at how MPD treats protesters. The phrase "no comment on investigative tactics" says a lot: Our government is using "tactics" against citizens. This is all leading somewhere tragic and dark.
I think pointing out that their silence helped lead to this can be helpful, as long as it's not done in a "haha, told you so" manner. If the partisanship isn't pointed out, people go back to ignoring it when their person is in power again.
Examine even your most deeply held beliefs. Nobody is always right.
Thanks for demonstrating (so to speak) exactly why liberals have been losing state legislative seats and governorships for the last six years, along with both houses of congress, the White House, and the Supreme Court. Please continue with your way of thinking in advance of the next legislative elections, so this trend can continue.
Gerrymandering, electorate manipulation through mechanisms such as Voter ID, DMV closures, and polling site elimination, along with lying to the public and refusing to do their sworn duty out of a partisan lie they can't even openly take responsibility for, but have to blame on others? That's right, not only could they not muster up the courage to reject Merrick Garland, however transparently, they couldn't even take responsibility for it.
There's a reason why the new elections were ordered in North Carolina,(which thanks to their stubbornness on the bathroom bill will likely cost the state even more) reforms in districts in Wisconsin, Florida, Alabama, and Virginia, (all drawn by what party? Hmm.), why the Republicans in Arizona lost their attempt to defy the will of the voters(who are supreme over the legislature), and why Trump lost the popular vote(his landslide claims a lie as obviously false as his fraud claims), only winning because the electoral college lets a candidate several million votes behind do so.
Yeah, and Mitch McConnell can't even afford to let Trump spend the money investigating the problem because just like the birtherism, he doesn't want an answer. It would burst all the tiny Republican hearts to know they truly lost even despite their cheating.
But yeah, let the right-wing continue their behavior. A few more hamfistedly handled executive orders like the immigration one, and even the most naive fool will realize what kind of incompetence is sitting in the Oval Office.
All the illusions of grandeur will wash away. The only question is if Trump will have the grace to resign, if they'll manufacture some medical issue, or if the CIA will take care of it. He's not savvy enough to just shut up and follow the script like Reagan. Sorry, but he is that kind of buffoon.
So thank you, keep doing that, and maybe convince yourself to support an oppressive dictatorship because of all the "civil unrest" that needs law and order to crack down on it. Wannabe authoritarians like you are so obvious.
I'm still laughing over the alternative facts. You are a funny bunch. The jokes write themselves.
Grand Moff Trumpkin will lead you to your defeat.
"Beg the Question" has one colloquial meaning that is wrong but 80-90% of people believe is correct and one actual meaning that is right but that 90-95% of people don't understand. As a practical result, you should never use "beg the question" in a sentence, except perhaps with a particularly intellectual friend.
Instead, use "raises the question" (the colloquial meaning) or "contains circular reasoning" (the actual meaning).
Posted without Karma bonus due to metapost.
Real lawyers write in C++
It makes sense when you have the "problem" in civilized countries that you cannot forcefully end a peaceful protest without looking like the bad guy. Or maybe you can't do it at all because people actually have a right to assemble and protest peacefully.
But if all you need is some to start rioting to get rid of the problem...
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Are they? Then why keep looking for "evidence"? The whole shit reeks of the school of Cardinal Richelieu and his famous "Give me six lines written by the most honest man, and I will find something there to hang him."
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
No evidence of such prayers being made was offered. But, even if they were — they are just that, prayers. Words.
Most people would have noticed that key point.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
6 Members of the press were arrested for 'rioting'... While I think the people who were actually rioting should be charged for such, I believe the police just arrested in many cases people who pissed them off...
They don't listen.
Seriously? Listen to what? You have a press secretary that doesn't respond to questioning, that spouts obvious bullshit about trivia, making anything he says about anything extremely untrustworthy. You want people to not assume the worst, you need to command trust.
"Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss"
"But we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it,..." - Nancy Pelosi
Right, As much as I hate seeing people get hurt I am hopeful this how the left with its us against them identity politics it always engages in finally burns itself out. Hopefully regular will wake up a look around in 2 years and realize that all the damage all the violence came about from left wing protesting and all of them reached their point of justification not from Trump but from supposedly respectable news media, entertainers, politicians and the like.
Trump does some peevish name calling but its almost always directed at an individual and its *usually* based on something they did or failed to do, got poor ratings, gained a bunch of weight, got hacked, etc. That is different than the left were they toss around words like bigot and fascist quite often with no real historical justification at least not in terms of scope, they will outright fabricate claims of bigotry and racism which they will than often level not at individuals but at entire groups; the whole things really translates as "I know you are but what am I".
Hopefully middle America and lots women especially who went Hillary because they bought into the lefts lies about the "war on women" will wake up and see that:
1) They are at least as safe from external and domestic terror threats as before (Albright/Rice/Bush/Obama/Clinton/Kerry) were not foreign policy savants.
2) Their darker skinned friends and neighbors have not been dragged away in the night
3) They still have access to healthcare similar in quality to what they got before
4) Public schools still exist and maybe someone is actually trying to make them better in a meaningful way besides just pumping in more money which has not worked for the last 30 years.
5) Taxes are lower and people have a little more in their pockets
If all that comes to pass hopefully many of the remaining leftists will be removed from the Senate. We can get back to group of well meaning sensible liberals and traditional ( Taft style ) conservatives.
Repeal the 17th Amendment TODAY! Also Please Read http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/right-to-read.html
You forgot transphobic and misogynistic , you cis-male hetero shitlord!
FTFY.
Yup, you are absolutely right that you usually don't see Conservatives doing this. Instead, you just all pile into your little places of worship and pray that hell-fire and brimstone will fall from the sky, kill all the vile evil non-believers and sinners who have either actively or passively decided to follow Satan and damn them to hell for all eternity until time itself stops.
The vast majority of Theist I know would denounce the sinfull actions, while praying for the immortal souls of the sinners to find salvation and avoid the coming hell-fire and brimstone and damnation to hell for all eternity.
The truth is once you separate out the rabid noisy radical elements, both Theist and Atheists tend to be moderate and excepting people.
Apocalypse Cancelled, Sorry, No Ticket Refunds
I agree. It begs the question, "Where was the original post?"
Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.
Title 22 of the U.S. Code, Section 2656f(d) defines terrorism as “premeditated, politically motivated violence perpetrated against noncombatant targets by subnational groups or clandestine agents, usually intended to influence an audience.” [1]
The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) defines terrorism as “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
https://www.nij.gov/topics/crime/terrorism/Pages/welcome.aspx