Skip to main content

tv   [untitled]    January 25, 2013 4:00pm-4:30pm EST

4:00 pm
do. today on r t the sting ray is on the hunt but i'm not talking about fish in the ocean this is a new technology that allows police to track mobile phones in real time coming up we'll tell you which police department here in the u.s. is using the technology the government that's designed to be fairly reflective which means that he bounces off. trying to avoid surveillance a new york artist has come up with a clothing line to make the wearer invisible to drones we'll take a look at this creation just ahead. and washington d.c. is the home of democracy and freedom each year protesters flock to the city to voice their concerns and demands but an abortion protester is not feeling so well
4:01 pm
for him after a judge banned him from the district will question the move ahead. it's friday january twenty fifth four pm in washington d.c. i'm megan lopez and you're watching r.t. . starting off this hour after a long and tedious trial process former cia official john kiriakou was sentenced today to two and a half years in federal prison last october the forty eight year old pled guilty to violating the intelligence identities protection act by leaking the name of a covert official's name to reporter. something that u.s. district judge when they were in kemah says was not a form of whistleblowing the district judge said that if she had been given the choice she would have sentenced kiriakou to much more time behind bars than the relatively light sentence received kiriakou was also one of the first cia
4:02 pm
insiders to confirm reports that the agency used torture tactics like waterboarding in order to extract information from detainees now at an event honoring him curiosity was quick to point out the hypocrisy of prosecuting the whistleblower and not the people who actually performed the enhanced terror gay sions. i never tortured anybody but i got into prison while the tortures of the lawyers people who were and the people who deceived and the man who destroyed the proof of the tapes will never see justice no date has been set yet for when john kiriakou will report to present to begin his sentence. well we've told you before about the sting ray technology that the government and select law enforcement agencies are using to track people's locations based on their cell phones and that technology was only supposed to be used to monitor people that are expected of terrorist activities or suspected rather but it turns out that the los angeles police department has
4:03 pm
started using it in criminal investigations as well things like burglary drug and murder investigations most importantly the l.a.p.d. does not need the courts or the cell phone providers approval in order to use the device they don't even have to tell us or explain how it works or what information is capable of gathering in the first place for more on the latest developments coming out of l.a. are to correspondent ramon glendower joins me now. hey there ramona so i have to start off by asking how many times has the l.a.p.d. employed the use of this device in routine criminal investigations. new or newly obtained newly released records show that the l.a.p.d. has used this sting ray technology twenty one times in their investigations now when the department originally got this equipment they said that it would be used for counter terror practices in the money to get that came from the department of
4:04 pm
homeland security but these recently released documents show that it's being used in investigations for other crimes such as the ones you mentioned where burglary and murder murder were there crimes and terrorism ceremony is this a violation of the fourth amendment. right well. the l.a.p.d. says that any time that the ease drop or do any sort of wiretapping they need to get a search warrant however they haven't said whether or not they received a warrant in these cases pacifically where seeing where a was used but a lot of not just the l.a.p.d. but a lot of agencies around the country are able to get around this because they use laws that are dated in order to get a judge's signature to use or do a search warrant or some sort of core court order to surveil somebody but really the biggest problem is that while law enforcement may be legitimately keeping an
4:05 pm
eye on a criminal what people don't know is that while they're keeping an eye on this criminal sting ray is getting communication from all the mobile phone phones that are in that area so even if you're not in any way involved in a crime there is a strong possibility that the police has the ability to get information that's on your phone even if you're not talking on it. let me ask you this hour what types of processes do police go through in order to to use this device who has to sign off on it and in order to legally use are or is it just right now a matter of on that they want somebody to sign off on it. right well in the case of the l.a.p.d. they did not specifically say whether or not a judge signed off on the use of sting ray and this whole issue is being debated in another case where f.b.i. has use stings sting ray surveillance to catch
4:06 pm
a suspected hacker but theoretically they are still supposed to get some sort of warrant or court order from judge the problem is that many times law enforcement agencies are not completely forthcoming about the full capabilities of sting ray and don't let the judge know that besides being able to gather information on a specific subject they do also have the ability to get that information from people who have cell phones or other mobile devices in the other area in the information that the l.a.p.d. did provide however they said that in the investigations where they have used seeing ray they have an ease drop on any conversations however they didn't see what other information they were able to taint using the sting ray technology warm and i mean that's what i have to ask you there is a lot of things that we simply do not know about this device so why is the government and the l.a.p.d. and other law enforcement officials why are they being so secretive about this device. right was we mentioned earlier many times these surveillance devices that
4:07 pm
are on the cutting edge of technology are built in order to take on terrorism but as we see police departments around the country a lot of times surveillance technology is used well there's a very gray line on whether it's used on criminals and whether that is going to invade the privacy of civilians who are not committing the law in this case there is a gray area and simply said there aren't a lot of laws to address this sort of surveillance and this sort of what some perceive as an invasion of privacy rights and ramona as you mentioned a little bit earlier is not only the people that they are targeting for these drug and other robbery crimes it's also the people that are in the general area i mean one article actually equated this device to a general search warrant for anyone in the area and it's kind of like what they
4:08 pm
said as big as a big game of marco polo where they send out a signal and everyone's devices in that area kind of response back so can you explain how they first of all isolate the person that they're looking for that their information and also what do they do with information how can we trust that they believe the information of those innocent bystanders that just happened to be near that person right i mean the other try frontier foundation is called this sting ray technology the greatest technological threat to your cell phone privacy that nobody knows about and the thing is that the f.b.i. in the past have said that they don't keep any of this information that they get rid of it we've seen law enforcement agencies deny that the ease drop but not been forthcoming with the other information that the that they've been able to collect here so that's why there are still a lot of questions about you know why isn't the government more forthcoming about the information that they are gathering now. mentioned in the l.a.p.d.
4:09 pm
case they see that they have not. any sort of conversations but from security experts we know that this sting ray technology. has the capabilities of gathering quite a bit of information and like we said even if you have not committed a crime even if there's no suspicion that you've been involved in a crime potentially law enforcement has the capability to look through any information that's on your phone whether be text messages or voice mails that you've had on there whether you're using it or not and really quickly remember for we turn the conversation i do want to ask one more question is there any way to know if you're to buy devices being monitored with us with this technology you know and that's a really tricky thing because sting ray is pretty much a fake cell phone tower except that it's much smaller and usually on your cell phone you'll see a signal that says t. mobile verizon a.t.m. t. now the sting ray is able to connect to
4:10 pm
a normal cell phone towers so you don't see sting ray on your phone is still says either horizon eighty in c. or t. mobile so you have absolutely no idea that surveillance is going on anywhere in your vicinity and stay with me remote i want to bring in another element into this conversation well you might not be able to disguise your location from the l.a.p.d. short of taking the battery out of your cell phone but you can hide yourself from drones it's a project artist adam harvey has been working on he designed a line of clothing that will make the wearer nearly invisible to third thermal radiation and infrared scammers how well let's bring in ana stasia churkin our to correspondent in new york to explain ana stasia ramon was just telling us about how we can be surveilled by our cell phones but our bodies namely the heat our bodies in it help drones to spot us so how does this line of clothing prevent drone surveillance. well megan this is really
4:11 pm
a curious and innovative clothing line that has just been released to the public and basically the idea is the way that drones are able to detect a human being on the ground is that any human body emits heat through thermal imaging the drones are able to kind of zoom in and focus on a particular person and this innovative new york designer adam harvey whom we caught up with was able to come up with a material that he incorporated in this new clothing line that basically shields that thermal imaging between the drones and the human being making it almost impossible for the drone to see particular body parts that are covered with the pieces from the collection for more details let's take a look at our reports on this collection. keeping a close eye on civilians with a little help from drones. in a move approved by congress in seven years the u.s. will help thirty thousand mester drones monitoring its territory from the air that
4:12 pm
opens the door for a lot of duces of privacy. from not just the government but corporations and businesses too. in a fight for privacy this new york designer came up with a counter-surveillance clothing line intended to shield people from those watchful lenses a burka a scarf and a hoodie are the key garments in the collection this is a garment that's designed to be thermally reflective which means that he bounces off it and he does what's use for thermal imaging and particular this technology is used a lot on drones and he would use if there were drones harboring about manhattan anybody who is out on the streets is clearly traceable the idea of this collection is that putting on something like this. music but are. these parts of your body become very hard to detect. from a potential fashion statement to a technology that could eventually be used in rescue operations or even on
4:13 pm
a battlefield i think or just thing. a market hasn't been addressed yet it's a new area and it's sort of a crossover between tactical and fashion it adds a little extra coverage to the face out of harvey calls his consumer market unfashionably paranoid if you appear to me and i can see you i'm quite alright with that but if you hear an automated systems and how it becomes a little more to your disadvantage because this data can be easily mind tracked and identified another counter-surveillance item in the collection the off pocket for a phone once a mobile device is put inside there are no more signals going in and out the strength of the cell phone signal out of one. hundred goes down to zero in seconds the metalized fabric and that acts as a verdict to block the signals from the phone adam says this is a faster way to turn off your phone and block trucking since the introduction of the patriot act and since then there's been
4:14 pm
a large erosion of privacy i would say is not. confined to the us either this is a global problem to start a conversation and make people more aware of the growing trend of surveillance through fashion is adam's goal the designer admits the clothing line is not for everybody but those who want to adapt to these new realities could now be a step closer to avoiding the gaze of big brother and so if you're going to a party new york i want to bring our to correspondent honest and our t.v. correspondent among glendale back into the conversation ramon i know that real estate agencies have been fighting the f.a.a. for years to get their hands on you a visa in order to have a high resolution aerial photographs of different l.a. properties and the l.a.p.d. itself has a couple of drones that it's looking into starting to use so could l.a. residence use these drone i guess well it would be perfect for l.a.
4:15 pm
no there's a lot of fashionable people in new york but here you could be hipster inappropriate at the same time so i think it definitely speaks to the very. big brother attitude that we're seeing in both coasts and honest aasia what was the guy what was the drone hoodie like is that a very light from bracket would it keep you dry from rain isn't multi-functional. it is very functional as you can see it's not very big so it doesn't cover the entire body and the idea is the material is in fact very light it includes nylon and certain type of metals and that's exactly what makes it resistant to thermal imaging you know it's very light. it's pretty big i have to say it is multi-functional in the sense that the designer told us he intends it for it to be just a fashion statement or something to protect you from drones depending on what you're more interested in all right r.t. correspondent on a stasi a new york an hour to correspondent ramona lindo in l.a. thanks for joining us guys you bet. while some might hundred thousand people
4:16 pm
crammed into the front of the capitol building and spilled onto the national mall a select few had the chance to actually sit on the platforms that was specially and made it for president obama's inauguration those are said to be the best seats but one man claims he actually didn't have the best seat in the house for five hours reeves grogan clung to a tree forty feet above the ground holding on to nothing but an antiabortion sign now despite his actions the united nation went on as planned and he was soon arrested and charged with preventing authorities from preserving the peace and securing the capital defacement well magistrate judge karen house went further than that she actually banned reeves also known as pastor rick from washington d.c. on till his court hearing on feb twenty fifth you know banished like romeo was banished from verona in shakespeare's most infamous infamous play so is this a violation of free speech well joining me to discuss this is john w.
4:17 pm
whitehead constitutional attorney with the rutherford institute hi there john so when did we start kicking people out of our city. well you know banning someone for a particular city especially washington d.c. which is a center of free speech activity goes way beyond supreme court opinions from correspondent pretty clear that you cannot restrict the right to travel lester's been stripped due process required so as a full hearing and things like that where there was no full hearing here just to just summarily chase him out of the capitol but you know he's been very very active around the country as well so this is a guy that if you really want to plant down and keeping them being anywhere because he's. short of a baseball games running in the field carrying signs been chased off of the house of representatives in january fifteenth of this year and protested the assault weapons and abortion so he's pretty clear about what he means to do but i think this is a signal that. people are restricted in what they believe about the only way they
4:18 pm
speak these days a lot of the get out there and be a bit destructive basically what martin luther king was advocating shortly before he was assassinated and i have asked you how often do we kick people out of the district or out of any city in general not really not many times i think is activity on january fifteenth when he. stood up in the gallery and by the way the congressman already left in the charge him under a statute when i read the statute says anyway interfering with deliberations of congress when congress is in session they were in session so i think this guy's been targeted but i think this sends a signal that if you're really going to be aggressive in your free speech as to the nonviolent you're going to be put a stuff fact that he was up in the tree forty feet they actually put a ladder up in the tree and it's a good chance that it was the police that broke the tree he's been charged with defacing public property which is the tree so he has a trial february twenty fifth in d.c. but we're going to challenge it right away i don't think that we should be banning
4:19 pm
free speech protesters from anywhere if they're doing something that's roughly arrested on the spot find them but they should be allowed to come back and protest if they want so is this fair pending that he can't violate in constitution his constitutional rights that this. banning. well banning somebody entirely from a city to stay in washington d.c. is a free speech forum generally there's all kinds of protesters you know going off in to pick on this one guy we defended number of people up there that have been what they call disruptive but setting that three i mean what the police will call me and say what do you do i said pretty cold down pretty why would you drag him out of a tree when he's just making a statement he's nonviolent i mean if he was up there with a pistol or knife sure but what was the urgency of writing the tree and then banning him from the city got to be kidding me well another point that i have to
4:20 pm
bring up is the issue of security i mean luckily this man wasn't trying to hurt anyone hurt the president i'm surrounding public the capitol police knew that and they were allowed him to finish his protest rather than cutting down the tree or worse however that isn't always the case the reason these security protocols are in place is because that there are tangible safety risks so how do you suppose authorities that make this that can make this distinction between free speech and safety with that how can they take that into account i think they had to take that . as well known by the way they know who he is he's been nonviolent history he was up there with a sign like i say if it appeared to have a weapon or something sure but we go and we go back to the center poignant center point is they've actually banned him from the entire district of columbia because of his activities i mean if we can do that the remarks will take the first amendment flushed down the toilet i mean that's to me is like crazy but like i say
4:21 pm
the supreme court opinions on that i've read say really clearly we have a right to travel and you can't do this unless you have a trial and a full hearing some reason why this bill should be restricted i don't see why you can't do this activity it is doing so all of us at a rest of the spot when i'm in jail are funny. a decision like this is usually made after conviction so what's different in this case that that requires him to be banned from the city for at least a temporary amount of time or basically what he's been based on to a lot of trial i mean he's got it here and he thought had a lawyer i mean and that's what the court of said it was called due process the supreme court said you can't restrict solos right rob about due process i mean you have a lawyer you have a hearing you have none of it so we're going to challenge that immediately i thought if we start doing live. what we call free speech in washington d.c. it will come to an end now as you mention mr whitehead this man is a professional protester you had mentioned
4:22 pm
a couple of the instances but i do kind of want to reiterate some he was arrested just five days before the inauguration at a house chamber session for disorderly conduct on january second he was arrested for interrupting the senate session when he yelled out that sandy hook was caused by abortions you said mentioned that last october he was arrested on that and there will be a playoff game and that's where mitt romney had attended it he was also arrested in lima ohio for stopping at a campaign stop that president obama was at so he takes up a lot of the police force the time and their resources and attention as he you take things too far when where do we draw the line between free speech and somebody that's. wasting city resources where you are why the police are there you know you know a big hero martin luther king and he called for destruction he said make the government come out and use their resources that's the way you get in the news and good actions so this fellow is just practicing what
4:23 pm
a long one of the centers of don't you go back to gandhi did the same thing they were called disruptive they were employees they were terrorists or communists so this program fellows just did a lot of call dissenters you have something to say but here's the point is we've got a clue we have free speech so we have instead. these were people are pushed off into guardrails and they can't talk to their representatives and i think that's what we're seeing you have roaming free speech zones around public officials that you can't even walk up and talk to anybody in congress or whatever without getting arrested spring course actually a bill that so what you're seeing is a lot of frustration i think we should take this serious. and start providing for free speech but what i'm really concerned here is this ban i mean if we can ban somebody from a city especially washington d.c. because of what he believes to be free speech without a hearing we've moved into a new era a new paradigm which is i think very frightening now let me ask you this there's
4:24 pm
a huge demonstration today in washington d.c. it's the annual pro-life rally i mean there are thousands upon thousands of people that came out to protest to get attention and. they did attention on many of the mainstream networks i mean meanwhile grogan didn't really get that much attention on inauguration day i know i didn't hear about his case until a few days later so are there are happy better ways to have your message heard than climbing a forty foot tree. i would think you would be a better way than clive tree i agree with that but that's not the point i mean he's i guess they've been banned for what he perceived to be his way to speak out. so sure i wouldn't do that but for what james madison say if you wrote the first amendment he said the first amendment was written to protect the minority against the majority of the money already he was talking about are people like rogan who meet people because there are extremists and generally that's what the person is there for them protect you and me we wouldn't do such a thing so let me ask you what the next step in his trial process is where we go
4:25 pm
from here we're looking to follow a motion to make sure he can travel into the city before february if he can and then that we're moving forward and then there will be a trial on the merits of this case and basically whether or not what he did was really free speech in terms of the court or disrupt the balance to that i mean as i look at the game the law that he was charged under in the house of representatives gallery they were already out of session the law applies to congress in session so . again i'm worried i mean i've been in this area for forty years for plotting for free speech and i don't like the bans not a good idea or free speech. now robin says the most the time when he is arrested he gets usually he gets off with either no charges are really just a slap on the wrist or one of christ's to a slap on the west but i'm not sure that be the norm are is that the type president precedent that that the authorities want to set out in or would it be encouraging
4:26 pm
others to actually follow his behavior yeah i don't know that i think that what it shows is they don't they don't believe this is a serious offense that's number one it may courage others but again i don't see many people doing these kind of things that this guy's a rare bird. he takes it very seriously believes in it he makes no money off of it he willing to get offering get arrested i thought in america we protected the ship and i think it's very important we try to do that but he is a rare bird. there's no doubt about that so one final question what drew you to this case so adamantly other than is there anything other than the fact the plain and simple fact that he has been banned from a city and that is violating his constitutional rights. yes that he would be banned from the district of columbia where if you look back and you talk about the pro-life rallies today and then the great civil rights movement that also plays in washington d.c. i have a dream speech if the federal laws were put in force in birmingham alabama
4:27 pm
there might not have been a civil rights movement so we don't want to stand for this kind of thing he should have a right to travel where he wants as long as he's receiving a lot i mean he can drive into washington d.c. and eat a restaurant what in the country is in force those kind of laws. good point that john w. white had constitutional attorney for the rutherford institute i appreciate your time sir thank you. and that's going to do it for now for more on the stories we covered go to youtube dot com slash our to america are check out our website artie dot com slash usa you can also follow me on twitter at meghan underscore lopez see him back here in half hour. finally i want to. thank you i'm.
4:28 pm
sorry. say. wealthy british style sign. that's not on the title of. markets why not come to. find out what's really happening to the global economy
4:29 pm
with mike's cause or for a no holds barred look at the global financial headlines tune into kinds a report on our. me he. says.


info Stream Only

Uploaded by TV Archive on