Friday, February 3, 2012

Dan Rea and ACLUM's Kade Crockford Discuss High Tech Surveillance

On Feb 2, 2012 Kade Crockford (ACLU Massachusetts, Privacy Rights Coordinator) appeared on Dan Rea's Nightside WBZ radio show broadcast from Boston MA. She noted that the ACLU's focus is on government abuses of technology, referring concerns of private abuses to other consumer privacy groups. Query, How much difference is there between government and private in 2012? The FBI and police use informants who are often private criminals. Crime families, corporations and Communists have associates in and out of government. They talk to one another. Police ask crime families to do them favors, and vice versa. Likewise the FBI.

Ordinary citizens cannot defend themselves against technology to protect their rights and privacy. Crockford expressed curiosity that local, state and federal politicians, who she described as high profile, did not work to protect themselves from such technological abuses. Today's politicians work with, if not for, the police and the FBI. They are weak persons (often described as spineless) with relaxed rectitude, like their corporate contributors. They do not defend the Constitution as per their oaths of office. They go along to get along. They encourage technological abuses of citizens who criticize them too enthusiastically. Police and the FBI are unable or unwilling to enforce the few laws that do exist regarding technology. Mentioned on air was the use of thermal imaging by police and by private citizens. Local police claim ignorance of how to enforce the few laws that exist. They are, if their leadership is to be believed, clueless on how to enforce laws on technological abuses. That is negligent training, which is actionable. A US law prohibits exposing citizens to radiation, and carries a $2 million fine. How do civilians get that law enforced?

Crockford said the uses of red spotlights in East Orange, NJ should be discussed within the context of what else is going on in society with surveillance technology.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/technology/news/9064107/Talking-CCTV-cameras-to-be-turned-off.html

Talking CCTV cameras to be turned off
Camden Council has said its new generation of talking, closed-circuit TV cameras were 'activated by mistake' and will have their voices turned off.
By Matt Warman, Consumer Technology Editor
2:23PM GMT 06 Feb 2012

The same argument must be made regarding the use of technology by both government and by private criminals, who are unlikely to respect Constitutional Rights of citizens they target. Massachusetts has a Civil Rights statute that makes acts of private individuals a felony if they intimidate a person in the free exercise of a constitutionally protected right. Technological abuses by police and the FBI must be discussed recognizing the blurring of the line between public and private. Police and crime families cooperate. The FBI and crime families cooperate. The FBI and Communists cooperate. Police and the FBI cooperate with corporations e.g., drug companies. Working with psychiatrists and psychologists using technology, drug corporations target critics of their dangerous drugs and taxpayer funded programs forcing drugs on civilians.

They all use the same technology. Crockford noted the difference between public and private saying the government can put you in jail. But crime families, corporations and Communists can also have police or the FBI put you in jail. Is the ACLU clueless about that happening? That is an unpleasant fact in the United States today. What is the difference whether technology is used by private criminals or police criminals to violate a person's rights? Police or the FBI can legally refuse to stop criminal abuses of technology because it suits them. There is no legal obligation which forces police to act. The effect is the same. The ACLU should reconsider its focus to include when the government uses private persons to avoid Constitutional protections, and when government refuses to stop the same private abuses of technology. video

No comments: