{"id":297495,"date":"2024-10-28T08:22:56","date_gmt":"2024-10-28T08:22:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=297495"},"modified":"2024-10-30T08:53:10","modified_gmt":"2024-10-30T08:53:10","slug":"the-surveillance-state-has-arrived-and-its-being-implemented-by-our-cities-and-towns","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.thetruthseeker.co.uk\/?p=297495","title":{"rendered":"The surveillance state has arrived\u2026 and it\u2019s being implemented by our cities and towns"},"content":{"rendered":"

Leo Hohmann \u2013 leohohmann.com Oct 27, 2024<\/strong><\/h1>\n

Cities across the United States are installing hidden surviellance cameras that track everyone, everywhere, and nobody, not even Donald Trump, is talking about this. What are the Top 10 most surveilled cities in the U.S.? We\u2019ve got the list!<\/strong><\/p>\n

My old colleagues at World Net Daily<\/a><\/strong> have an interesting story up today about the city of Norfolk, Virginia. City officials have transformed Norfolk into a virtual lock-down surveillance society with more than 172 high-resolution, internet-connected cameras monitorying practically all human movement.<\/p>\n

Of course Norfolk is not terribly unique in this regard and we have a full report below, including a Top 10 list of most surveilled American cities.<\/p>\n

Multitudes of cities of all sizes across the U.S. are jumping on the technocracy bandwagon and setting up hidden surveillance cameras on every corner. They\u2019re on light poles, bridges and overpasses, stoplights, buildings, you name it. Some are equipped with speakers so they can also listen in on what\u2019s being said.<\/p>\n

They claim it\u2019s for our \u201csafety.\u201d<\/p>\n

What makes Norfolk unique is a group of citizens is fighting back. They\u2019ve filed a lawsuit against the city, which is something that needs to happen in every city that implements this technology.<\/p>\n

A lawsuit has been filed that accuses elected officials in Norfolk, Virginia, of using a network of 170 cameras to impose a warrantless surveillance scheme on residents and visitors.<\/p>\n

The Institute for Justice has filed the suit on behalf of several plaintiffs, charging that the actions violate Fourth Amendment rights protecting U.S. citizens against unwarranted searches and seizures.<\/p>\n

The system allows police \u201cto monitor the comings and goings of all drivers in the city,\u201d the legal team said.<\/p>\n

Lee Schmidt, one of the plaintiffs, said, \u201cI don\u2019t like the government following my every movement and treating me like a criminal suspect, when they have no reason to believe I\u2019ve done anything wrong.\u201d<\/p>\n

Another plaintiff, Crystal Arrington, stated, \u201cMy work requires me to drive around Norfolk very often, and it\u2019s incredibly disturbing to know the city can track my every move during that time.\u201d<\/p>\n

The Institute for Justice explained that in 2023, Norfolk police partnered with a private company called Flock Safety Inc. to install 172 automatic license-plate reading cameras all across town.<\/p>\n

The locations were chosen to provide a so-called \u201ccurtain of technology,\u201d which would allow police to watch anyone drive anywhere without knowing they\u2019re being watched.<\/p>\n

The Institute noted:<\/p>\n

\u201cUnlike traditional traffic cameras, which capture an image only when they sense speeding or someone running a red light, Flock\u2019s cameras capture images of every car driving by, which it retains for at least 30 days. Artificial intelligence then uses those images to create a \u2018Vehicle Fingerprint\u2019 that enables any Flock subscriber to both track where that vehicle has gone and identify what other vehicles it has been seen nearby.\u201d<\/p>\n

Institute for Justice lawyer Michael Soyfer stated:<\/p>\n

\u201cNorfolk has created a dragnet that allows the government to monitor everyone\u2019s day-to-day movements without a warrant or probable cause. This type of mass surveillance is a blatant violation of the Fourth Amendment.\u201d<\/p>\n

Making the violation worse, the Institute noted, is that since Flock \u201cpools its data in a centralized database, police across the entire country can access over 1 billion monthly datapoints. That means not just tracking drivers within a particular jurisdiction, but potentially across the entire nation.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cFollowing someone\u2019s every move can tell you some incredibly intimate details about them, such as where they work, who they associate with, whether or not they\u2019re religious, what hobbies they have, and any medical conditions they may have,\u201d said IJ lawyer Robert Frommer. \u201cThis type of intrusive, ongoing monitoring of someone\u2019s life is not just creepy, it\u2019s unconstitutional.\u201d<\/p>\n

The scheme gives police the ability to spy on people without any judicial oversight.<\/p>\n

Imagine walking into court to challenge a ticket when the only evidence is from a machine powered by artificial intelligence. We already know that AI allows for deep fake videos. Think of the potential for abuse here.<\/p>\n

The really sick part of this story is that the Agenda 2030 surveillance state is being implemented at the local level. And many cities are able to pay for the digital enslavement of their residents with federal dollars as the incentive. Why aren\u2019t more Republican political figures talking about this?<\/p>\n

Some abuses have already been documented, the Institute said, noting just a couple of examples:<\/p>\n