FBI behind mysterious surveillance aircraft over US cities

a few over your back yard? lol whatcha hiding

In all seriousness a few years ago I had one circling my house. Figured it was State Police or some other local agency. It was so close I could see the pilot, I figured it was becuase I have hoop houses on my front lawn in an area where no one else farms or does large scale gardening. I also do hydroponics on the second story of my house, figured someone reported that I was growing weed or something. a reply to: Rosinitiate

originally posted by: nepatitan
a few over your back yard? lol whatcha hiding

In all seriousness a few years ago I had one circling my house. Figured it was State Police or some other local agency. It was so close I could see the pilot, I figured it was becuase I have hoop houses on my front lawn in an area where no one else farms or does large scale gardening. I also do hydroponics on the second story of my house, figured someone reported that I was growing weed or something. a reply to: Rosinitiate

He was probably in violation of FAA Regs...

Sec. 91.119 — Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface—

(1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and

(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.

[Docket No. 18334, 54 FR 34294, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Amdt. 91–311, 75 FR 5223, Feb. 1, 2010]

-- www.risingup.com...

originally posted by: hotel1
If your a sensible terrorist or criminal you wouldn't carry a phone, and since the most dangerous criminals and terrorists are the sensible ones, this will probably not prevent major acts of terrorism or the big crimes being committed.

Yeah, and let's not forget that we knew about the terrorists that were in on 9/11. Forget any other conspiracy stuff regarding 9/11...The FBI knew about them and they were on several lists. And what did we do with all of that information? NADA.

So more information won't really help us, in fact it will make it harder to drill down to what's really going on.

a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

who are they really working for?

It's obvious by now they work for the plutocrats, the oligarch, and the mega-corporations. It sure as hell ain't the citizens.

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

It sure as hell ain't the citizens.

Amen.

I heard this news on radio this morning, it kind of reminded me of that surveillance scene from Wachowski's "V for Vendetta" movie.

But following link on OP article just made my day - this is somewhat funny irony...



For poor people who can't pay for their phone, - Low income Cell program - so we can monitor you better.

Well done advertising campaign...

Yea, we got this story rolling over here..

www.abovetopsecret.com...

originally posted by: tanka418
Perhaps it is time to fight back, and, here is something you can do...

Don't use "Cell" technology...

I know it nearly ubiquitous, but, "Cell" technology isn't used exclusively any more in cell phones...Where I live I can't get a cell signal...not sure why. but I get "no bars"...

I have a Galaxy 4, and it has the ability to use my private LAN to place and receive calls, completely bypassing the "Cell" circuitry, and radio sets. It is possible, in my phone to completely shut off the Cell aspect and only use wify...the police will have greater trouble "hacking" the wifi...especially IF you set up you your LAN, and phone correctly.

This feature exists in virtually ALL cell phones currently in use and, in all of the more advanced devices.

If they want to use technology against you; turn the tables and use that technology against them!

What you are referring to is VoIP (Voice over IP), which is the technology that pretty much paved the way in monitoring voice communications. It's not nearly as secure as you think it is.

originally posted by: tanka418
a reply to: InverseLookingGlass

Your phone must be older than mine...I can tell mine to NOT use the Cell infrastructure, and only use Wifi.

There are plenty of unsecured Wifi LANs to take care of you in an Urban environment...even in a small Texas town.

It doesn't matter what you tell it. Both cell signals and wifi signals communicate via radio. Even when you tell the phone to not use a cell tower it's still transmitting to the tower. All cell phones made for atleast the past 20 years do this even when powered off. The only way for them to not do so is to disconnect the battery, and in new phones they still continue to transmit through the use of a secondary battery for a period of time.

originally posted by: jrod
This reminds of a scene from Casino when the FBI surveillance plane runs out of fuel and has to land of the golf course.

Casino was a (mostly) true story, it was based on Frank Rosenthal. The FBI plane landing on a golf course actually happened even, though it was due to mechanical difficulties rather than running out of fuel.

just because they're in your neighborhood doesnt mean the fbi is spying on you personally, it might be a neighbor or someone in the area maybe someone linked to isis or another terrorism group

a reply to: blacktie

While that is certainly true, these Bozo's have a real bad track record IMHO and cannot be trusted to aim their weapons in the right direction far too often. We had a bank robbery that was going to go down in our county a few years ago and as all the LE types raced into position, two carloads of F'ing Brainless Idiots opened fire upon each other by mistake and wound up killing one of their own. The risk of collateral damage in itself rises whenever these people gather, and frankly I don't trust them to get it right. Remember 911 and the "incompetence" defense!

originally posted by: tanka418

originally posted by: nepatitan
a few over your back yard? lol whatcha hiding

In all seriousness a few years ago I had one circling my house. Figured it was State Police or some other local agency. It was so close I could see the pilot, I figured it was becuase I have hoop houses on my front lawn in an area where no one else farms or does large scale gardening. I also do hydroponics on the second story of my house, figured someone reported that I was growing weed or something. a reply to: Rosinitiate

He was probably in violation of FAA Regs...

Sec. 91.119 — Minimum safe altitudes: General.
Except when necessary for takeoff or landing, no person may operate an aircraft below the following altitudes:

(a) Anywhere. An altitude allowing, if a power unit fails, an emergency landing without undue hazard to persons or property on the surface.

(b) Over congested areas. Over any congested area of a city, town, or settlement, or over any open air assembly of persons, an altitude of 1,000 feet above the highest obstacle within a horizontal radius of 2,000 feet of the aircraft.

(c) Over other than congested areas. An altitude of 500 feet above the surface, except over open water or sparsely populated areas. In those cases, the aircraft may not be operated closer than 500 feet to any person, vessel, vehicle, or structure.

(d) Helicopters, powered parachutes, and weight-shift-control aircraft. If the operation is conducted without hazard to persons or property on the surface—

(1) A helicopter may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (b) or (c) of this section, provided each person operating the helicopter complies with any routes or altitudes specifically prescribed for helicopters by the FAA; and

(2) A powered parachute or weight-shift-control aircraft may be operated at less than the minimums prescribed in paragraph (c) of this section.

[Docket No. 18334, 54 FR 34294, Aug. 18, 1989, as amended by Amdt. 91–311, 75 FR 5223, Feb. 1, 2010]

-- www.risingup.com...

Like obeying laws is their top priority?

Fox picked it up, too.
htt p://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/06/02/fbi-flying-surveillance-aircraft-over-us-cities-planes-traced-to-fake-companies/?intcmp=latestnews
a reply to: Blackmarketeer

I believe I have seen these planes around here many times.Where they watching some protests? This form of surveillance has been goin on for years now.We were all told that Cointellpro was terminated in the 70's.

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

Big waste of resources.

They definitely need lessons in stealth and surveillance.
Criminal JustUs $Y$TEM at its finest.

originally posted by: blacktie
just because they're in your neighborhood doesnt mean the fbi is spying on you personally, it might be a neighbor or someone in the area maybe someone linked to isis or another terrorism group

By the governments own admission our domestic spying program hasn't prevented a single terrorist plot, and that's despite them even trying to prod people into doing so so they can later catch them. The program has a 0% success rate on that front.

Domestic spying is almost exclusively used for drug enforcement. If they're flying in your area they're probably trying to catch someone who bought drugs (since they rarely go after suppliers these days).

a reply to: Aazadan

If they're flying in your area they're probably trying to catch someone who bought drugs (since they rarely go after suppliers these days).

Why would that be?
Because arresting the buyers puts far more people in their for profit prisons!

Perhaps they are taking the ISIS threats seriously. Or trying to catch whoever keeps calling in bomb threats at Los Angeles International Airport.

originally posted by: lordcomac
Yep.

We need to put an immediate stop to our governments shinanigains.

HA! ironic because this spy plane bill passed with almost NO RESISTANCE. do americans just like being spied on? or are they just so docile that they dont care anymore?

a reply to: Blackmarketeer

The local news here in Seattle reported that in May 2015...the FBI had 2 flights that surveyed 2 specific areas.

a reply to: JourneymanWelder

Far too many Americans do not care at all, that is for sure. Add in those that are consumed by the rat race of their own fragile lives along with those that are consumed with consumption and endless entertainment and those in charge are free to do whatever it is they want to do to feed their machines. Those of us who see it for what it is also realize that it is the natural progression of a decaying and collapsing Empire because there is nothing in this world that only goes up, it all comes down sooner or later. It is America's turn now to do what all those empire before it have done, fall apart and perish.