The enduring mystery of an aggressive FBI raid near Area 51
gizmodo.com
gizmodo.com
My point: If you make up stories, occasionally they might coincide with reality. The people tasked with protecting secrets cannot tell the difference. The only issue here imho is the violence of the raid, but that is part of the larger problems surrounding all police actions. What in WWII was a polite knock on the door, today is a swat team driving a tank though your living room.
I see what you did there ...
That doesnt seem to hold true for the ESL accents almost anywhere in the world, though. Most people's accents sound like their native tongue.
I really like running across a person developing an American Southern accent with their English learning.
Depends what you learn from. If you learn English from the British then sure. As you might in Europe.
But if you learn from Americans, or even from American TV, well, that's what you'll learn.
There's no one "British" accent though, people learning English in a region of England or Scotland do and should pick up the local accent. What works is correct, speaking like a local is what works.
I believe if you independently create a design for an atomic bomb, the government takes the position that it's automatically classified and you cannot distribute it, even if you have no connection to the government or already-classified information.
It will happen this way. You may be walking. Maybe the first sunny day of the spring. And a car will slow beside you, and a door will open, and someone you know, maybe even trust, will get out of the car. And he will smile, a becoming smile. But he will leave open the door of the car and offer to give you a lift.But then I read that story again and it was not nearly so coincidental as was reported back in the day when I first heard about it. It's actually an interesting lesson in opsec. The compiler was physically close to soldiers preparing for the operation, and his pupils were filling in the grid with names they were hearing on the streets. So not really coincidental at all.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D-Day_Daily_Telegraph_crosswor...
It is also an issue that this man's possessions have been seized without due process or any sort of explanation. He has not been indicted, let alone convicted of a crime, yet the government violently broke into his home and stole all of his computers and electronic possessions, including his private, sensitive medical and financial information. The idea that some secret judge can sign some secret warrant and a gang of armed men can break into your home, assault you, and steal your possessions without any recourse available to you should be incredibly chilling to everyone who believes in due process and a free society in general.
Maybe you don't live in a democracy, but in a democracy they call it "collecting evidence". The advantage of this method is that, even if they find nothing about your presumed crime, they might find things which might incriminate you for something else, or just plant evidence.
Can't you file a compliant against search warrants in the US? How are you supposed to file such a complaint if you don't even know what it's about?
Will You Help Me Repair My Door?
Why You Disconnecting My Video Camera?
Because the courts never do anything to hold the government responsible unless there's political pressure. Lucky for him he's in a position to generate publicity and pressure without dying in a bulldozer.
But it’s not, it’s feeding off Area 51 conspiracies for funzies and well I’m not so upset if that gets your raided by the FBI.
If you don’t want to legitimize and strengthen these over the top responses, don’t test the exact boundaries of things which are pretty defensibly legitimate. (Like details about a classified aircraft test facility)
(People vs Larry Flint)
But still, the analysis in the Mar a Lago case of the ‘Richey’ factors seems like it maybe could be argued that this guy has some merits to asking for his stuff back in precisely the ways the Trump case lacked (disregard for constitutional rights, with respect to his first amendment speech in particular; pressing need for access to the seized property, as demonstrated by his mention of tax records etc.; lack of a remedy at law, given that he hasn’t been given notice of any pending charges and is missing part of the warrant, etc). So maybe he has a case.
Whether he has the money to make that case is a different matter.
[1] https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23323316-11thcircuit
> Taking an unauthorized picture of a defense installation (such as a military base) is a federal misdemeanor offense—on par with hunting or fishing in a wildlife refuge. It carries with it a punishment of a $1,000 fine and up to a year in jail.
If he was getting a little too invasive then why not warn him first or charge him for the above?
I'm guessing he posted some public images pushing the limits, pissed off the feds who wanted more than a small fine, and they built up some narrative about spying which they sold to a judge for a warrant. Then they didn't find any evidence they were fishing for and left the case open.
IANAL, but perhaps one could give some insight into 18 USC 795 and 18 USC 797.
He denies that he was the one who took the photos in question …
Usually, self reporting of innocence isn't given much weight. Perhaps that's what they were trying to verify?
things was different then
But what struck me as remarkable was how everyone from randos helping with broken down car to people in restaurants and starbucks near by kept asking if I was trying to take pictures or spying or whatever. No one assumed I was looking for aliens, they were concerned if I might be a russian or chinese spy.
Watching Area51Rider’s YouTube channel might satisfy readers desire to wander about near the border, though.
It doesn't need to be blurred or manipulated, all that's needed to preserve the secrecy there is to only use the photos where the planes are inside the hangars.
But national security is a completely different world than regular law enforcement. To me this situation just screams "fuck around and find out"
I prefer that sentiment over:
It is probably difficult to have a Bill of Rights in a country that needs to do clandestine military aircraft research.
It's one thing to go to your city/county police/government and complain loudly about rights violations, provoke confrontation, etc. This is where due process matters most in my opinion, general rule of law and due process in day to day life.
It's another thing to provoke military and national security apparatus and assume you'll get the same basic response from law enforcement.
I think any wise adult would know its a touchy area, best to steer clear unless you have a good reason to provoke. The people that do so are usually (not always) spies or combative/mental/tinfoil hat people with some sort of imagined axe to grind. Fuck around and find out. Better them finding out than me.
I mean, yeah, it may be no surprise what happens to you, and maybe you want to not do it, but when you say "fuck around and find out", you are excusing them.
If you go poking around a restricted base, taking photos, flying drones, don't be surprised when men in black start showing up in your life and making things difficult. I mean, is he purposely trying to make it look like he could be a foreign intelligence agent? I don't see how he can act surprised when they knocked down his door.
> but when you say "fuck around and find out", you are excusing them
No, it's more like I'm not excusing Arnu. His actions created this sticky situation. It was totally avoidable.
From the article:
> the hobbyist researcher says that America’s UFO mythology is little more than a smokescreen to hide the much more mundane reality of what goes on at Area 51: the testing of classified military projects and aircraft.
OK so he openly admits that the classified stuff is why he's so interested in Area 51.
> Most of these photos were not taken by me, I just published them
"Not my fault"... really?
> He adds that they were “not classified photos” and that they “were not taken from inside the boundary
Yeah he's a genius and is confident he will get off on a technicality
> One of the first things they wanted to know was: “Are there any booby traps on the property?” To Arnu, it seemed like a pretty weird thing to ask.
Sounds like this guy was purposely digging for dirt, got right up to the line, then acted surprised when the national security apparatus responded.
> Of course, Arnu had one particular hobby that he felt might be of interest to federal investigators: he had spent the last two decades tending to a popular blog about “Area 51
Hmmm... yeah maybe that's what this is all about. SMH
I don't have sympathy for the guy in the article. He's an instigator. And an idiot. Play stupid games win stupid prizes.
There are much bigger violations of due process in this country worth paying attention to.
This is not a military autocracy. Neither the military nor law enforcement should have any special privileges with regards to violating the law or the established rights of the citizens. Too many supposedly intelligent people have given up on the fight to keep "the law" within the bounds of the law, and it's escaped those bounds like kudzu.
Only in a police state. In a free society governed by laws, it doesn't matter why the government claims it needs to do something. Your Constitutional rights are sancrosanct. If the government can simply ignore your rights, the law and the Constitution by simply saying "national security", then in reality you have no rights, there is no law and the Constitution is meaningless.
> According to Hellow, an agent present at the Vegas raid told her: “Your boyfriend took pictures of a military installation—that’s against the law.” In a blog post on Dreamland, Arnu similarly said that all he was told about the investigation was that it was “related to images posted on my Area 51 website.”
> Taking an unauthorized picture of a defense installation (such as a military base) is a federal misdemeanor offense—on par with hunting or fishing in a wildlife refuge. It carries with it a punishment of a $1,000 fine and up to a year in jail.
> However, Arnu maintains that he never broke the law and that the government’s case against him—whatever it is—has zero merit. “I had some photos [on my website] of Area 51 that were about two years old,” said Arnu, which he believes were the reason for the raid. “They were legally obtained. There’s absolutely nothing illegal about them,” he said. “Most of these photos were not taken by me, I just published them [on the site].” He adds that they were “not classified photos” and that they “were not taken from inside the boundary”—that is, the area inside the perimeter of the base that is off-limits to civilians. Arnu says the photos had already been widely circulated on other news websites and TV shows, making it inexplicable why the government would target him and him alone.
But what if it isn't? The oft-cited law doesn't actually forbid taking photos, rather their improper publication or distribution. The cops stretch "whoever reproduces" to include the taking and saving of a picture onto a memory card, but that is a huge stretch that hasn't properly been hashed out by the courts. Simply seeing something and photographing or sketching it, if standing in a public space, is very likely not a federal crime.
"...whoever reproduces, publishes, sells, or gives away any photograph, sketch, picture, drawing, map, or graphical representation of the vital military or naval installations or equipment so defined, without first obtaining permission of the commanding officer..."
Those are pretty squirrely words when you're flying a drone outside the fence but 1000' up.