Fear the Special Services Group's Surveillance Devices

[kyonides]

https://www.linuxexperten.com/news/t...ompany-exposed
Surveillance cameras disguised as alarm clocks or plants and even rocks!? O_o? Visit a graveyard and you might be watched by police through the tombstone camera... Well, I think I can't feel safe anywhere ever again.

[oshunluvr]

What are you doing that makes you feel like the NSA or FBI are watching you? It's just as logical to feel more safe as those doing misdeeds might have a greater chance of being observed and caught.

Looks like pure FUD to me.

[GreyGeek]

Law and Order folks often claim that "If you do nothing wrong you have nothing to worry about". That couldn't be farther from the truth, as the FBI's use of the FISA courts over the last 5 years, and the abuse Conservative groups by the IRS prior to the 2008 and 2012 elections prove.

But, ignore major politics and look at the behavior of the LEO's at the local level. The RICO Act was created in 1970 as a tool to help poor FBI lawyers to fight against the Harvard graduate lawyers that the Mafia hired to protect them. It stripped the Mafia of money and assets that allowed them to afford those lawyers. However, over the years, the RICO Act has been used thousands of times a year at the local level, until the abuse was recently pointed out and curtailed, to extort money from innocent civilians.

As the article points out: "Much has been written about the RICO statute. Rather than a summary of this vast literature, we offer a view of RICO from another angle, examining how it has revolutionized federal criminal law and how it has been used—with federal judges, members of Congress, and the press acting as cheerleaders—to overturn the protections inherent in due-process guarantees of the U.S. Constitution. Overturn is not too strong a word in this regard, given that in a RICO case, those charged are treated as guilty until proven innocent. In tracing the development of RICO, we find that the law was little more than a “bait-and-switch” statute that has had little or no effect in stopping or inhibiting the crimes—murder, rape, robbery, and so forth—that most concerned the public in 1970. Instead, RICO has enabled federal prosecutors in effect to circumvent the constitutional separation of powers between the national and the state governments."

Read the article carefully and realize that the Feds have an entirely different definition of a crime than local law enforcement does.


Lots of local police departments used the RICO law to fund their departments and enhance equipment, salaries and bonuses. How? And example case: a man goes to his bank and withdraws $35K in cash and is driving on his way to the SUV dealer ship when he is pulled over for some vague reason. During a search of his car the police man notices the brief case, opens it and finds the money. He immediately declares it "drug money" and confiscates it. The man had to hire a lawyer, which cost him $10K and a year to get his $35K back. Many police departments realize that and limit their thefts to $10K each. Only a person suing for principle would spend $10 in legal fees and wait a year to get back just $10K.

"Under RICO, individuals who engage in what prosecutors allege to be extortion, illegal gambling operations, and the like are not charged with those specific crimes, but rather are accused of racketeering, which is a derivative catch-all term. Because RICO cases are tried in federal courts, U.S. attorneys do not have to prove to juries and judges that the accused engaged in the aforementioned crimes (which as a rule are violations of state criminal law); they must show only that it appears the defendants carried on those activities. Moreover, for a RICO conviction, the prosecutor must meet only the civil standard of “preponderance of the evidence,” not the higher standard of “guilt beyond a reasonable doubt” that historically has been required for criminal conviction."

I've posted this video on this forum before, but it deserves a repost for those who think that they can't be convicted of a crime for "doing nothing wrong":

And, below is a link to a set of webpage comics drawn by a lawyer that explains the law for non-lawyers.
The first is a link to a series of comic pages describing "strict liability" and the second is to a series describing the barriers placed in front of one expressing his "fifth amendment rights".

To summarize, it is NOT what you think you haven't done, it is what law enforcement thinks you are guilty of. With RICO you have to prove your innocence, they don't have to prove you are guilty. That's how vague RICO is. It is a prosecutor's paradise.

[jglen490]

Oh, Lord ...

[oshunluvr]