Skip to content
Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Sydney Morning Herald)   Problem: You, the FBI, have a really great fake encrypted phone that you're handing out to mobsters, but you're not legally allowed to monitor their communications in the US. Solution: Let the Aussies handle it and just pick up whoever they find   (smh.com.au) divider line
    More: Followup, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Organized crime, Law enforcement agency, United States, AFP Commissioner Reece Kershaw, use of an FBI, key role, FBI informant  
•       •       •

841 clicks; posted to Politics » on 09 Jun 2021 at 9:19 AM (7 days ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



85 Comments     (+0 »)
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2021-06-09 8:09:27 AM  
It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.
 
2021-06-09 8:56:01 AM  
"Aw, I'm sorry, did you get caught selling crack?"

media1.tenor.comView Full Size
 
2021-06-09 9:01:12 AM  

SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.


This is exactly the sort of thing the "5 Eyes" was created for.
 
2021-06-09 9:14:50 AM  

DoBeDoBeDo: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

This is exactly the sort of thing the "5 Eyes" was created for.


Interesting. I hadn't heard of 5 eyes.

Makes sense given that crime cartels are global.
 
2021-06-09 9:16:27 AM  
Reminds me of Echelon with UK, US and Canada all spying on each other and sharing the information to get around laws to spy on their own citizens
 
2021-06-09 9:20:41 AM  

DoBeDoBeDo: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

This is exactly the sort of thing the "5 Eyes" was created for.


I want to open a Five Guys franchise in the Pentagon food court and call it Five Eyes Guys.
 
2021-06-09 9:23:42 AM  
Though not nearly as extreme this is the same sort of mindset that led to extraordinary rendition.

It probably should be illegal.
 
2021-06-09 9:30:06 AM  
I'm fine with this. Please proceed.
 
2021-06-09 9:32:33 AM  
Yeah but since subby f*cked up the grammar the fbi is let off on a technicality.
 
2021-06-09 9:33:12 AM  
According to the articles I've read, these were specifically marketed to known members of criminal organizations, and they carried a hefty pricetag.  It seems that it should be fairly easy to get a valid warrant where needed.
 
2021-06-09 9:33:26 AM  
Turn's out the ANOM software was developed by a Canadian.  All just one big happy family.  Who says the British empire is dead.
 
2021-06-09 9:34:08 AM  

Prank Call of Cthulhu: DoBeDoBeDo: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

This is exactly the sort of thing the "5 Eyes" was created for.

I want to open a Five Guys franchise in the Pentagon food court and call it Five Eyes Guys.


Five Guys' Eyes?

/That would be ten eyes, total, though.
 
2021-06-09 9:34:15 AM  
That's why you don't buy phones from this guy

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2021-06-09 9:34:28 AM  

DoBeDoBeDo: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

This is exactly the sort of thing the "5 Eyes" was created for.


Remember when they still pretended it was about fighting terrorism?
 
2021-06-09 9:36:05 AM  

powhound: Yeah but since subby f*cked up the grammar the fbi is let off on a technicality.


"whomever"?

/oh, wait. "they're".
 
2021-06-09 9:36:33 AM  

SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.


I don't have mixed feelings at all. If I hire a contract killer, I'm still responsible for the murder. It's not all good if we outsource violations of civil liberties.

And I call bullshiat on the 21 murder plots foiled claim.
 
2021-06-09 9:37:56 AM  
I'm sure the FBI will never use this power for anything unethical.
 
2021-06-09 9:38:25 AM  

Dinki: That's why you don't buy phones from this guy

[Fark user image 850x575]


Next season reveals that he was working for the FBI the whole time!
 
2021-06-09 9:40:42 AM  
Why would they need to do this when Democrats and Republicans have already extended the power for warrantless wiretaps?

If there's one thing that Democrats and Republicans seem to agree on, it's that the surveillance state is awesome.
 
2021-06-09 9:41:17 AM  

Delc: I'm sure the FBI will never use this power for anything unethical.


"This power" is distributing tools for clandestine communications to criminals and monitoring them.

We already have agencies that are sweeping general communications.  I don't think this is the particular hill to die on.
 
2021-06-09 9:41:53 AM  

Delc: I'm sure the FBI will never use this power for anything unethical.


Difficulty: using this power is unethical.
 
2021-06-09 9:42:02 AM  

mrshowrules: Reminds me of Echelon with UK, US and Canada all spying on each other and sharing the information to get around laws to spy on their own citizens


Echelon infodump, for those who might care.
 
2021-06-09 9:42:02 AM  

DoBeDoBeDo: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

This is exactly the sort of thing the "5 Eyes" was created for.


Came to say this.

Bit of a mixed blessing, this.
 
2021-06-09 9:42:45 AM  
still trying to figure out why the FBI couldn't look at anything sent from the USA.  Beside getting a court order what law would say the FBI can't do it?
 
2021-06-09 9:44:18 AM  
Oh it works for each of the countries, locals cannot spy on citizens at home, so get a friendly nation to do the spying and then have them share information.

Yes I have a problem with this.  Maybe not so bad when it is nation state enemies we are spying on, but once other things like terrorists and drugs, etc are added to the list then basic rights are in danger.
 
2021-06-09 9:45:24 AM  

misanthropicsob: Why would they need to do this when Democrats and Republicans have already extended the power for warrantless wiretaps?

If there's one thing that Democrats and Republicans seem to agree on, it's that the surveillance state is awesome.


I'm a Democrat and I'm glad they took down these criminals, with hopefully many more to come. It's about damned time.
I don't get spooked by all the bullshiat hype about how they're pounding down my door next. Im not such an uber edgelord. I can appreiciate that we finally have people taking down criminals again. Thank you.
 
2021-06-09 9:45:30 AM  

AliceBToklasLives: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

I don't have mixed feelings at all. If I hire a contract killer, I'm still responsible for the murder. It's not all good if we outsource violations of civil liberties.

And I call bullshiat on the 21 murder plots foiled claim.


It's like the cops saying they could $3T worth of marijuana, and their find is actually just 2 bricks that have been in somebody's trunk for a few weeks.
 
2021-06-09 9:47:20 AM  

AliceBToklasLives: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

I don't have mixed feelings at all. If I hire a contract killer, I'm still responsible for the murder. It's not all good if we outsource violations of civil liberties.

And I call bullshiat on the 21 murder plots foiled claim.


I hear you and I pretty much agree.

My mixed thought were more a nod to how many criminal syndicates they hit (assuming the PR release is true).

But I think you are right. Laws should not be optional or circumvented.
 
2021-06-09 9:47:22 AM  

Jumbled: misanthropicsob: Why would they need to do this when Democrats and Republicans have already extended the power for warrantless wiretaps?

If there's one thing that Democrats and Republicans seem to agree on, it's that the surveillance state is awesome.

I'm a Democrat and I'm glad they took down these criminals, with hopefully many more to come. It's about damned time.
I don't get spooked by all the bullshiat hype about how they're pounding down my door next. Im not such an uber edgelord. I can appreiciate that we finally have people taking down criminals again. Thank you.


You sound naive.
 
2021-06-09 9:48:31 AM  

jumac: still trying to figure out why the FBI couldn't look at anything sent from the USA.  Beside getting a court order what law would say the FBI can't do it?


Possible they used the fig leaf of "They sent their data to Australia where the laws are different. We followed local laws"

It's sleazy, but might hold up in court.
 
2021-06-09 9:49:41 AM  

Jumbled: I'm a Democrat and I'm glad they took down these criminals, with hopefully many more to come. It's about damned time.
I don't get spooked by all the bullshiat hype about how they're pounding down my door next. Im not such an uber edgelord. I can appreiciate that we finally have people taking down criminals again. Thank you.


Besides, who needs law enforcement to follow the law and protect civil rights?!!?!?

Amirite?!?!?!
 
2021-06-09 9:50:47 AM  

Snapper Carr: Though not nearly as extreme this is the same sort of mindset that led to extraordinary rendition.

It probably should be illegal.


If cops don't need warrants, and need the money seized by civil asset forfeiture to find their salaries, pensions, and health care, and don't need to arrest anyone or convict them to take the property, then law enforcement becomes organized crime.

We need a constitutional amendment clarifying right to property, privacy, and a defined time the state is allowed to hold us without trial, no exceptions like Gitmo.
 
2021-06-09 9:51:04 AM  

SpectroBoy: My mixed thought were more a nod to how many criminal syndicates they hit (assuming the PR release is true).


Cops never lie.
 
2021-06-09 9:53:11 AM  
If you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide.


I say this unironically.  Stop breaking the law assholes.
 
2021-06-09 9:55:34 AM  
FYI, this is the same FBI that regularly eggs on weirdos to try to get them to do terrorist attacks, then arrests them for trying to carry out the attack the FBI planned. Well, arrests them if the weirdo is brown. If they're white, they'll get to it when they get to it.
 
2021-06-09 9:56:54 AM  

SpectroBoy: jumac: still trying to figure out why the FBI couldn't look at anything sent from the USA.  Beside getting a court order what law would say the FBI can't do it?

Possible they used the fig leaf of "They sent their data to Australia where the laws are different. We followed local laws"

It's sleazy, but might hold up in court.


No i am asking what law would prevent the FBI from getting a court order to be able to read the text message themself rather then have to have another country read them and give them the info.

How is this any different then getting a court order for them to tap a phone line or put a tracker on a car?
 
2021-06-09 9:57:13 AM  

SpectroBoy: AliceBToklasLives: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

I don't have mixed feelings at all. If I hire a contract killer, I'm still responsible for the murder. It's not all good if we outsource violations of civil liberties.

And I call bullshiat on the 21 murder plots foiled claim.

I hear you and I pretty much agree.

My mixed thought were more a nod to how many criminal syndicates they hit (assuming the PR release is true).

But I think you are right. Laws should not be optional or circumvented.


I'm glad they brought them down; I just want them to get a warrant and from a judge who actually evaluates the merits of the request.
 
2021-06-09 9:57:13 AM  

Dinki: That's why you don't buy phones from this guy

[Fark user image 850x575]


That's precisely why you buy from him.  Saul's ethics are odd - he wouldn't screw over a client or customer if he can avoid it.  Wish they would have had a couple more seasons.
 
2021-06-09 9:57:20 AM  

SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.


We already ship them to Cuba.
 
2021-06-09 10:01:19 AM  

Tremolo: FYI, this is the same FBI that regularly eggs on weirdos to try to get them to do terrorist attacks, then arrests them for trying to carry out the attack the FBI planned. Well, arrests them if the weirdo is brown. If they're white, they'll get to it when they get to it.


FBI is thousands. . .tens of thousands? of individuals.    Also the front line of policing police that violate people's civil rights (and apparently a bunch of crooked farking pigs were caught up in this too, so fark em.)

Needless to say, don't buy a phone *marketed* to commit crimes.  They're not even asking what crimes you plan on committing.
 
2021-06-09 10:02:22 AM  

DarnoKonrad: If you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide.


I say this unironically.  Stop breaking the law assholes.


There is nothing wrong with me pooping but I would prefer the three-letter agencies not spy on my while I poop. Plus the issue at hand is legality, not morality.
 
2021-06-09 10:06:17 AM  

SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.


This has been tried before and it led to "the exclusionary rule" for evidence seized in violation of the 4th amendment.  Back in the pre-1960's "bad old days"  it was clear that the 4th amendment applied to federal law enforcement, but less so that it applied to the states, so the feds would obtain evidence from an illegal wiretap, and then just pass it on to state law enforcement who would act on it.   A series of decisions culminating with Mapp v. Ohio (where a woman was charged with possession of pornography that was found during an illegal search of her home looking for fugitive boyfriend) created the idea that if the evidence is illegally obtained it CANNOT be used in a prosecution.   (the famous Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine).]

Despite the court's historic deference to "national security and "intelligence" matters, this my well be the bridge too far
 
2021-06-09 10:07:04 AM  

AliceBToklasLives: DarnoKonrad: If you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide.


I say this unironically.  Stop breaking the law assholes.

There is nothing wrong with me pooping but I would prefer the three-letter agencies not spy on my while I poop. Plus the issue at hand is legality, not morality.



Hey, you do you, but I don't take pictures or video of myself pooping either.   You guys need better material.  Seriously.  If you want to make this argument, really think about the context, circumstance, and legality.  You NEED to.

Because NO, we don't need to live in a surveillance state -- but that's a far cry from assholes buying devices  marketed to commit crimes anonymously.   Much  less people willing signing over their privacy to tech companies.
 
2021-06-09 10:07:04 AM  

SpectroBoy: DoBeDoBeDo: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

This is exactly the sort of thing the "5 Eyes" was created for.

Interesting. I hadn't heard of 5 eyes.

Makes sense given that crime cartels are global.


Ya, lets retcon the purpose of an illegal domestic surveillance program as something to be celebrated.
 
2021-06-09 10:08:53 AM  

jumac: SpectroBoy: jumac: still trying to figure out why the FBI couldn't look at anything sent from the USA.  Beside getting a court order what law would say the FBI can't do it?

Possible they used the fig leaf of "They sent their data to Australia where the laws are different. We followed local laws"

It's sleazy, but might hold up in court.

No i am asking what law would prevent the FBI from getting a court order to be able to read the text message themself rather then have to have another country read them and give them the info.

How is this any different then getting a court order for them to tap a phone line or put a tracker on a car?


IANAL but if Australian law allows decryption of private content in this manner and this was done in Australia it may be out of US jurisdiction. If the Australian agencies then share this "legally obtained information" with the us it may shield US law enforcement from the very laws they swore to uphold.
 
2021-06-09 10:10:21 AM  

Magorn: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

This has been tried before and it led to "the exclusionary rule" for evidence seized in violation of the 4th amendment.  Back in the pre-1960's "bad old days"  it was clear that the 4th amendment applied to federal law enforcement, but less so that it applied to the states, so the feds would obtain evidence from an illegal wiretap, and then just pass it on to state law enforcement who would act on it.   A series of decisions culminating with Mapp v. Ohio (where a woman was charged with possession of pornography that was found during an illegal search of her home looking for fugitive boyfriend) created the idea that if the evidence is illegally obtained it CANNOT be used in a prosecution.   (the famous Fruit of the Poisonous Tree doctrine).]

Despite the court's historic deference to "national security and "intelligence" matters, this my well be the bridge too far


Thanks.

I guess we will find out. Maybe.
 
2021-06-09 10:11:34 AM  

DarnoKonrad: AliceBToklasLives: DarnoKonrad: If you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide.


I say this unironically.  Stop breaking the law assholes.

There is nothing wrong with me pooping but I would prefer the three-letter agencies not spy on my while I poop. Plus the issue at hand is legality, not morality.


Hey, you do you, but I don't take pictures or video of myself pooping either.   You guys need better material.  Seriously.  If you want to make this argument, really think about the context, circumstance, and legality.  You NEED to.

Because NO, we don't need to live in a surveillance state -- but that's a far cry from assholes buying devices  marketed to commit crimes anonymously.   Much  less people willing signing over their privacy to tech companies.


I missed the context of your original claim, probably because you didn't provide any. "If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" provides no context.
 
2021-06-09 10:13:03 AM  

discoballer: SpectroBoy: It's kind of clever, but I have mixed feeling about US law enforcement using a technicality and another country to bypass our laws.

Next they will be shipping prisoners to UAE for interrogation.

We already ship them to Cuba.


No, we used to ship them there.  The last ones were transferred about 15 years ago.

/that being said, there are still 40 people held there without trial or due process
 
2021-06-09 10:15:18 AM  

AliceBToklasLives: DarnoKonrad: AliceBToklasLives: DarnoKonrad: If you're not doing anything wrong, you've got nothing to hide.


I say this unironically.  Stop breaking the law assholes.

There is nothing wrong with me pooping but I would prefer the three-letter agencies not spy on my while I poop. Plus the issue at hand is legality, not morality.


Hey, you do you, but I don't take pictures or video of myself pooping either.   You guys need better material.  Seriously.  If you want to make this argument, really think about the context, circumstance, and legality.  You NEED to.

Because NO, we don't need to live in a surveillance state -- but that's a far cry from assholes buying devices  marketed to commit crimes anonymously.   Much  less people willing signing over their privacy to tech companies.

I missed the context of your original claim, probably because you didn't provide any. "If you're doing nothing wrong, you have nothing to hide" provides no context.



Or you know, pretend to be stupid.  Whatever.
 
2021-06-09 10:21:20 AM  

SpectroBoy: jumac: SpectroBoy: jumac: still trying to figure out why the FBI couldn't look at anything sent from the USA.  Beside getting a court order what law would say the FBI can't do it?

Possible they used the fig leaf of "They sent their data to Australia where the laws are different. We followed local laws"

It's sleazy, but might hold up in court.

No i am asking what law would prevent the FBI from getting a court order to be able to read the text message themself rather then have to have another country read them and give them the info.

How is this any different then getting a court order for them to tap a phone line or put a tracker on a car?

IANAL but if Australian law allows decryption of private content in this manner and this was done in Australia it may be out of US jurisdiction. If the Australian agencies then share this "legally obtained information" with the us it may shield US law enforcement from the very laws they swore to uphold.



point.  but based on the story the fbi could read the stuff that was not sent from or to the USA.  but can't see the stuff that was sent from to the USA.

So what law prevents the FBI form getting a court order to do so?  They run stings all the time in the USA for other stuff how is this any different?

This kinda stuff always peaks my interest?  ie why is one thing legal but not another when they are so close and such.  or when we get into new areas that gota be worked out.
 
Displayed 50 of 85 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking




On Twitter


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.