Posted on 03/16/2006 6:39:27 PM PST by John Lenin
CHICAGO, March 16 (UPI) -- U.S. federal officials have confirmed they are investigating an incident where three men were seen studying and taking pictures of Chicago's Sears Tower.
The men were spotted outside the 110-story building by security guards about three weeks ago. The men were questioned and allowed to leave, but the guards notified the Chicago Police Department. They in turn notified the Joint Terrorism Task Force, the Chicago Tribune reported
The guards recorded the car's license plate and it was traced to a rental agency, which said the car was returned about an hour after the incident.
It was later determined it had been rented with a fictional name, sources told the newspaper.
Also within the last three weeks, WLS-TV reported a man was questioned about sketching the Boeing World Headquarters building.
Copyright 2006 by United Press International. All Rights Reserved.
BTTT with a hug of thanks!
I posted this on another thread, but it's applicable here too:
"Can you believe 3" of snow tonight?"
Uh...in Chicago? When does it start geting warm?"
Never. If we are lucky it may stop being cold after Memorial Day, that's if we are really lucky. I've known many a cold Memorial Day weekend here. Well, at least this article about the videotaping of the Sears Tower and Boeing Hdqtrs momentarily has taken my mind off the fact that once again snow has struck just to let us know that we aren't anywhere near home free yet weatherwise.
I used to work in the Sears Tower years ago, not that long after it was built. It was a great place to work when the Chicago Air Show was on, as the planes would come right past our windows (I worked on the 74th floor). You felt like you could reach your hand out and touch the pilots. Especially cool when the flying wedge would come by, the big Stealth one (new at that time). Only problem was, we were up so high up in the building that it was very noticeable when the building would sway. (The sway is built into the architectural design so you don't just snap off in a breeze and fly away). Some people would literally get seasick, as it could sway a foot or so back and forth. If the Sears Tower would have been hit on 9/11, it would have been the same scenario as the Trade Towers, as you had to go down embankments of elevators; you'd go down one series and then switch over to another series in order to get all the way down. Sure wouldn't want to be a worker there now. I understand they were having trouble getting tenants to rent the highest floors; don't know if that is still the case or not.
Chicago has a large Muslim population, and there are quite a few large Universities in the city where Muslim student radicals are enrolled, especially Palestinian students. I worked at UIC (Univ. of IL at Chicago), right next to the loop (downtown) area, and there were always Pali or Muslim demonstrations going on at the campus. One particularly disturbing experience, involving two Iranian grad students was, the day after 9/11 they were walking out of our building at the same time 2 of our Department employees (from my Dept.) were walking out. Both of the Iranians were grad students in our Dept. One of them said to the other, let's take a picture of the Sears Tower while it is still there, and a bit more along the same lines. Our Dept. employees overheard this and came to report it to me (I was Ass't to the Dept. Head) and wanted the Head to know what had been said. The Iranian students were confronted about it, and apologized, saying it had been a joke; however, the 2 Dept. employees who overheard them said the Iranian students did not say it in a joking manner at all.
The targeting of the Sears Tower by Al Qaeda was found out about when our troops in Afghanistan came across videotapes and computer info in one of the caves, showing the Sears Tower as a potential target. Ok, now back to watching it snow, ugh.
I saw your post and thats why I posted it to him, thanks much!
Pro-Bush said, "Spooky-sounds too familiar."
====
stepping back in time...
March 30, 2004
http://www.washtimes.com/world/20040330-120655-9785r.htm
"Chicago, L.A. towers were next targets"
By Paul Martin
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
ARTICLE SNIPPET: "LONDON — Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, al Qaeda's purported operations chief, has told U.S. interrogators that the group had been planning attacks on the Library Tower in Los Angeles and the Sears Tower in Chicago on the heels of the September 11, 2001, terror strikes."
You're very welcome JP.
I don't know and frankly I don't care. That is nothing more than a misdemeanor at the state level. But that won't stop the Department of Homeland Security from needlessly turning it into a federal case.
Ok chum. I stand corrected, but the huge replica on the in the National Post,March 16th, page A3, made it look a lot bigger.
There is a positive note for things American and Canadian is that now both enforcement bodies can criss-cross the borders at will. The only requirement is that an officer of the respective country is in control.
We have one tight border here. All to the good, in spite of the waiting times.
A few days before 9/11 a couple of Arabic men here in Detroit rented private piloted planes and spent a couple of hours circling the GM building, Chrysler Headquarters and the Ford Glass House taking pictures.
Just tourists, you think? And do you think we should always assume they are just tourists?
Sure. You're a good follower. As the GM building, Chrysler HQ, and the Ford Glass House were not attacked, sounds like a couple of guys taking pictures. Oh, but I forgot. It was the 'quick' thinking and action of Homeland Security that 'saved' those buildings. Of course DHS was under Republican leadership. Once a Democrat is elected President, partisans will claim DHS is the worst thing since sewage.
Just tourists, you think? And do you think we should always assume they are just tourists?
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
Tell you what though. Let's just search anyone and everyone that looks like 'that' (you know what I mean). Then it won't be so hard to accept when the next group of people are singled out eh?
No, the reason those three buildings weren't attacked was because the pilot called the FBI and those "picture taking tourists" are now in Gitmo. They were caught with evidence that showed they planned to slam jets into all three of those buildings.
The key word in your paragraph is "unreasonable". After 9/11 I would say that it is "reasonable" to suspect that someone may try it again. I assume from your post that you feel we should do nothing to protect ourselves from further attacks.
So they were tried in a court of law? Do you have access to this evidence?
After 9/11 I would say that it is "reasonable" to suspect that someone may try it again
That was the case before 9/11 as well. It is 'reasonable' to suspect that someone may commit a crime again. Again I ask. Do we lock up all 'those' people? Or do we make it a crime to take a picture of a building? Exactly what is your new cusp for suspicion? Since it's not the 4th Amendment I would just like to know.
They were not US citizens - therfore they are not entitled to the same rights in this country that you and I are.
Again I ask. Do we lock up all 'those' people? Or do we make it a crime to take a picture of a building? Exactly what is your new cusp for suspicion?
Just like I have to tell liberals - everything is not all or nothing. Of course we don't lock up all "those" people, nor do we just throw up our hands and do nothing. There is a reasonable "in-between". My personal "cusp for suspicion" would be anyone who fits the terrorist profile (young, male, muslim) who appears to be acting suspicious (studying and taking photos of landmarks, bridges, power plants, etc) should be checked out. If what they are doing is totally innocent - so be it. Sorry for the inconvenience. If what they are doing is NOT innocent and we do nothing - then thousands of more innocent Americans could be dead.
As I said, it's not "all or nothing". It's a fine line that has to be walked.
I don't see the answer being - let's just do nothing. Nor do I see the answer as "lock everybody up that looks Arabic". There is a middle road.
If I had all the answers - I'd be running Homeland Security!
Isn't that K-Mart Tower?
Oh well that's different. Let's just lock up all the furriners...
My personal "cusp for suspicion" would be anyone who fits the terrorist profile (young, male, muslim) who appears to be acting suspicious (studying and taking photos of landmarks, bridges, power plants, etc) should be checked out
So basically to be safe we should keep cameras out of the hands of young muslim males. What if they're a citizen? You've just ignored the 4th Amendment to make yourself feel 'safe'. I sure hope you feel that way when another administration down the road decides middle age Christian males are a threat to 'security'. Don't think it can happen? Look back 20 years and ask yourself if you would have a 'conservative' administration pushing pill bills, education spending, and spending money faster than Democrats could even dream. The FBI would have the power it would have? The government intervening into the affairs of the states? Nope you're right. Never will happen....
If I had all the answers - I'd be running Homeland Security!
And any conservative worth their salt would want 'homeland security' disbanded as it centralizes too much power within one government organization.
Oh well that's different. Let's just lock up all the furriners...
This is what I mean when I say you are arguing like a liberal. I did not say, nor did I imply that all "furriners" should be locked up. I said that due caution should be used when someone appears suspicious.
Sorry that you don't like the idea, but thank goodness the security of our citizens does not depend on you.
I sure hope you feel that way when another administration down the road decides middle age Christian males are a threat to 'security'. Don't think it can happen?
If middle age Christian males were slamming jets into buildings, then yes, I'd be all in favor of investigating a middle age Christian male who appeared to "casing" their next target. Any rational person would think the same.
No actually it depends upon the group mentality. And if the latest debacle on DPW is any example, I'd say the government has helped to instill it quite well. Report anything and everything. Especially Muslim related...
If middle age Christian males were slamming jets into buildings, then yes, I'd be all in favor of investigating a middle age Christian male who appeared to "casing" their next target. Any rational person would think the same.
Don't worry. When that time comes it will be something smaller, but still just as much of a 'threat'. But the government will ensure us it is even more of a concern.
'The Beast' almost looks human there.
It only makes sense that the, Sears Tower, would be the next target. Taking down the tower would be a HUGE moral boost for the terrorists. Everyone must remember that the Al-Quaeda folks need not be present to carry out terrorism. There's enough of the home-grown ones that will happily do their dirty work for them...
Murtha, Reid and Pelosi?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.