Threat Matrix: Daily Terror Threat - Thread Thirty-Six

[Smartass]

"Believe it or not, the inner city schools are ripe Jihadi recruiting grounds for those not already close to Christ. So much anger. So much hate. So much violence."

I fully agree. Add the already grownups anger, and hate in the state and federal prison systems. Where there is heavy recruiting, and converting to Islam going on. Scary stuff alright!

[Smartass]

I know. It's liken to the courts closing down the popular free music download site "Napster." Other sites quickly opened. The same, would no doubt happen with Myspace. We love our children, but it's gotten more and more difficult to insulate them from the evils of the net. Whatever is done, won't be an easy solution to solve.

[LucyT]

Here's something interesting.

Disaster Map:

http://visz.rsoe.hu/alertmap/woalert.php?lang=eng

[Rushmore Rocks]

Thanks LucyT. That was fascinating. I bookmarked it.

[Cindy]

THANK YOU stillproud2befree.
I appreciate the additional info.

[Cindy]

Thank you Smartass.
We were just discussing this here with Laura Mansfield.

[LucyT]

You're welcome, RR.

New 9/11 video made public

Video showing American Airlines Flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, was officially released to the public today.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/US/05/16/pentagon.video/index.html

[Smartass]

Laura Mansfield is a good one.

 

[Cindy]

ON THE NET...

http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0974670170/qid=1147813152/sr=1-5/ref=sr_1_5/104-6805626-4731163?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

"War of the Web: Fighting the Online Jihad (Hardcover)"
by Jeremy Reynalds
List Price: $25.95
Price: $16.35 & eligible for FREE Super Saver Shipping on orders over $25. Details
You Save: $9.60 (36%)
Availability: This item has not yet been released. You may order it now and we will ship it to you when it arrives. Ships from and sold by Amazon.com.
Editorial Reviews
SNIPPET: "Book Description
Few Americans realize to what extent the Internet aids and abets terrorism. In this fascinating and timely book, online terrorist hunter Dr. Jeremy Reynalds introduces us to a profoundly disturbing digital world, where killers troll for money and weapons and recruit new supporters at an alarming rate. Reynalds’ true-life infiltration of these shadowy online networks makes for compelling reading.
* Reynalds documents several on-line terrorist ring "busts," run in conjunction closely with the FBI and law enforcement.

* Uncovers a world where anything is for sale, from weapons to drugs to access, with proceeds going to kill Americans and our allies.

* Provides exceptionally keen insight about how major terrorist organizations manipulate Western technologies to destroy us.

Product Details
Hardcover
Publisher: World Ahead Publishing (May 30, 2006)"

===
===

http://www.usip.org/pubs/catalog/terror_internet.html
"Terror on the Internet
The New Arena, the New Challenges"
by Gabriel Weimann
Forward by Bruce Hoffman

SNIPPET: ""Read this book to understand the future of terrorism! In this cutting-edge analysis, Weimann examines the new psychology of terrorists and how they use the internet for their goals."
—Marc Sageman, author of Understanding Terror Networks"

===
===

http://www.terrortracker.co.uk

(Note: This book is also available on Amazon.com)

Note: The following text is a quote:

http://www.mainstreampublishing.com/more.php?id=1020

Detail...


Doyle, Neil

First Page:

WEB WAR ONE Al-Qaeda has been active in cyberspace since the early 1990s, although Western propaganda in the build-up to the Afghanistan war made no distinction between the terror network and the Taliban. Most people were left with an image of this new enemy as a ridiculously turbaned, quasi-Stone Age group who got around in wrecked cars pulled along by donkeys. People in caves surely couldn't be sending emails? That was the misconception, even thoguh Bin Laden's network had been using email to distribute jihad manuals, for example, for over a decade. Much of the planning for the 9/11 attacks took place on a covert website, where the hijackers and the coordinators interracted via coded, seemingly innocent messages in a guest book. Al-Qaeda's counter-attack to the West's propaganda, I quickly discovered, was being broadcast from the UK, from a website run by an outfit called Azzam Publications. The clue was in whom the website was named after: Sheikh Abdullah Azzam was regarded as the godfather of the modern global jihad and the founder of what is now known as al-Qaeda. Its output was carried on a number of key militant websites, as it promised it was 'the source of authentic news about the jihad and the Mujahideen'. It was a bit of a surprise to discover that al-Qaeda's media operation was being run from Britain - Birmingham, to be exact. We were on the brink of war, yet this group appeared to be running without any interference from officialdom. Of course, I wondered why, and set out to judge just how authentic this 'news agency' was.
Reviews:

'Neil Doyle has pioneered a new and vital form of Internet-based investigative journalism which has enabled him to penetrate the dark heart of online fundamentalism' - Sunday Times

'Neil Doyle is the finest investigator of the shady world of terror we have today. He is an inspiration' - Daily Star Sunday

'This is a sobering but informative read - ***' - The Glasgow Herald

'...a disturbing chronicle of al Qaeda's plans for Britain' - The Good Book Guide

'Doyle does what no journalist can be bothered to do and what the security services should be doing. He spends his time trawling the Internet to find out what al Qaida operatives and supporters are saying to each other' - Tribune Books

'Neil Doyle has done it again, knocking out another work of Internet journalism that will almost certainly harden your views on journalism . . . this is 'wake up and smell the coffee' reading of the first order' - Loaded

Back

Pagination: 336
ISBN: 1 84018 994 0

Cost:£10.99

[Cindy]

Thanks to a Special E-Mailer for this article:
---

http://www.inatoday.com/americasborders51606.htm

"MORE THAN MIGRANTS...
DRUG LORDS, TERRORISTS, AND RUSSIAN BOMBERS CROSS U.S. TERRITORY"

May 16, 2006

International News Analysis Today
www.inatoday.com
or
www.internationalnewsanalysis.com
Toby Westerman, Editor and Publisher


ARTICLE SNIPPET: "Along with drugs and illegal immigrants come those who have a purely political dislike of the U.S. From Communist Cuba to Al Qaeda, individuals seeking to undermine or destroy American society and government are coming across our borders.

Robert Spencer, author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and several other important books on militant Islam, stated in a soon to be published interview with International News Analysis that American landowners on the Arizona-Mexican border have found evidence of Al-Qaeda infiltrators crossing their land.

Several militant Islamic networks are known to be working with Marxist Cuba and Venezuela. Both Havana and Caracas support Al-Qaeda, Hamas, and the uranium-enriched Islamic Republic of Iran. Cuban intelligence, which directs its activities primarily against the United States, has already explored vulnerable points along the U.S. seacoast. Cuban agents are constantly attempting to monitor the movements of U.S. ships and military personnel in the Caribbean."

[Cindy]

Yes she is.

[Cindy]

Note: The following text is a quote:
---

http://www.jihadwatch.org/archives/2006/05/011450print.html

May 16, 2006

UK: University courses on Islam encouraging jihad and Sharia supremacism

British officials are shocked (not "shocked! shocked!," but really shocked) to find out that young Muslims are learning "radical teaching" in their university courses on Islam.

Here are the fruits of the official willful ignorance of Islam and jihad. Blair (and Bush, and so many others) insist that jihad violence does not stem from Islam, and has nothing to do with Islam. British (and American) officials cannot conceive -- are not allowed to conceive -- of the possibility that an ordinary course on Islam might not have to be subverted or infiltrated in order to teach the necessity to wage jihad in order to impose the Islamic social order over the world. If that course is not a whitewash designed to please and/or bamboozle Westerners, it is actually likely that it will teach that in one form or another.

If British officials had been aware of all that, if they had allowed themselves to be aware of it, they might not be so surprised by this. They might even have nipped it in the bud.

"Universities face review of Islam course: Ministers fear terrorism is condoned," from the Yorkshire Post, with thanks to Bryce:

YOUNG Muslim students at some British universities are being exposed to radical teaching that explicitly condones terrorism, a senior Minister warned yesterday.
Higher Education Minister Bill Rammell ordered an urgent review of university Islamic courses after claiming there was evidence that "narrow and unhelpful" interpretations of Islam were available to "many" young people.

He admitted there was worry at the highest levels of Government about the effect such teaching could have in the wake of last year's suicide bombings in London.

Mr Rammell's intervention comes after a report by an academic at Brunel University published last year claimed extremist groups, including the British National Party, had been found active at 24 universities.

"...including the British National Party..." This is completely irrelevant to this story, unless the BNP is teaching jihad to university students. It seems to be in the story just to prove that the Yorkshire Post is not "Islamophobic," and is not siding with white racists.

The study has since come under sustained criticism but yesterday Mr Rammell demanded an improvement in the way Islam is taught at higher education level.
He said: "There are weaknesses in the way young Muslims are educated about what their faith really requires.

"There is a concern that the teachings which the great majority of Muslims would want to stress about living in peace, protecting the vulnerable, avoiding harm to others, are sometimes sidelined.

Where is the Great Majority of Peaceful, Law-Abiding Muslims™ we keep hearing so much about? Why is it evidently not only a Silent, but a Powerless Majority?

"There is reason to think that in some cases students are being exposed, more than any of us would like, to wrong-headed influences, under the name of religion.
"In particular, exposed to teachings that either explicitly condone terrorism, or foster a climate of opinion which is at least sympathetic to terrorists' motivation."

"I am worried about this, so are colleagues in Government, so above all are Muslims that I have spoken to."

Of course, Rammell. What do you expect them to say to you? But why could they not or did they not prevent the Tiny Minority of Extremists™ from taking control of these university courses?

Mr Rammell announced a review of Islamic education at universities by a leading scholar, Dr Ataullah Siddiqui, who will be asked to make sure courses are not restricted to narrow interpretations of Islam.
I hope well-informed people will be watching his work closely.

Posted at May 16, 2006 07:04 AM

[Revel]

Protected free speech...Hah...All of these pages should be shut down. It is terroism in the making. We hear all about everything else about myspace from the media except that we don't hear about this.

[WestCoastGal]

Do you have to download that to see it?

[LucyT]

Usually one click brings it up; but last time I checked it didn't appear, so maybe their server is overloaded right now, or they could be updating the map.

[Godzilla]

Video showing American Airlines Flight 77 crashing into the Pentagon on September 11, 2001, was officially released to the public today.

If you look real close about one frame prior to the explosion you can see the plane on the right at nearly the ground level. The explosion seems to initiate just prior to the side of the building, then progressing to the left, suggesting that it hit the ground infront of the building first. That may have saved many lives in the Pentagon that day.

[Smartass]

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Stop Federal Regulation of Internet
Dave Eberhart, NewsMax.com
Wednesday, May 17, 2006
WASHINGTON -- A group of 24 conservative organizations have announced the formation of the Internet Freedom Coalition (IFC, www.internetfreedomcoalition.org) to oppose "net neutrality" regulations, which the groups say mark the first major attempt by Washington to regulate the Internet.

"We're proud to join with other leading free market and faith-based organizations to ensure that the Internet remains driven by the free market, not by Washington bureaucrats and politicians," said Jason Wright, president of the Institute for Liberty and IFC co-director.

At issue is a brewing battle that pits cable and telephone companies that provide Internet service – including AT&T and Verizon – against major Internet players such as Google and Amazon and large-scale users like the left-wing MoveOn.org, who support the net neutrality regulations opposed by the IFC.

The Internet providers are lobbying to create a two-tiered Internet in which Web sites that pay them large fees would get priority, including the all-important boon of faster loading. Last year phone companies spent $60 million lobbying at the federal level, and Verizon alone contributed more than $81 million to Congress between 1998 and 2005.

What the users like MoveOn want is the so-called net neutrality legislation, which would require all Web sites to continue to be treated equally.

While that may appear to many to be a desirable move, the conservative groups warn that it would open the door to U.S. government regulation of the Internet, allowing the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to use this likely popular issue to sink its claws into the currently unfettered Internet.

MoveOn recently sent out an e-mail asking its 3 million-plus e-mail contacts to sign a petition asking Congress to vote for "meaningful and enforceable net neutrality laws," saying such legislation "prevents AT&T from choosing which Web sites open most easily for you based on which site pays AT&T more."

The IFC's Wright has countered: "The big government, pro-regulation crowd wants the government to regulate the Internet. Speaking on behalf of our collective membership of over 3 million citizens, we oppose network neutrality and any other form of regulation or taxation of the Internet.

"Make no mistake: network neutrality is the first giant leap toward government regulation of the Internet."

The current featured player in the dispute is Ted Stevens, R-Ala., chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, who has released a 135-page draft telecommunications bill – a re-write of the Telecommunications Act of 1996.

Absent from the legislation, however, are any regulations related to net neutrality, which means there is nothing in the bill to grant the FCC power to enforce net neutrality concepts.

Currently, the Internet is regulated by a U.S.-based, non-governmental organization, the Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers. If MoveOn and its allies have their way, a federal agency, the FCC, would gain unprecedented control over the Internet.

In the House, in more bad news for MoveOn and company, a bid by Democrats to get extensive net neutrality regulations hammered into law failed recently.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., is a strong proponent of net neutrality laws. She has said the legislation with no provisions for net neutrality "would block the FCC from restoring meaningful protections for Internet consumers and entrepreneurs, and from prohibiting the imposition of bottleneck taxes and other discriminatory actions on the part of broadband network operators, such as AT&T and Verizon."

But Rep. Joe Barton, a Texas Republican and chairman of the Commerce and Energy Committee, pressured his fellow GOP members to vote against an amendment addressing net neutrality, arguing that neutrality proponents were overstating their case.

"I don't think all the Draconian things they predict will happen if we don't adopt their amendment," he said.

Mike McCurry, co-chair of the group Hands Off the Internet and former press secretary for President Bill Clinton, agreed: "Hypothetical problems are no justification for giving the FCC and other government regulators the power to decide how the Internet will evolve."

The proponents of net neutrality claim that with Web sites paying service providers, minor sites would be harder to access and slower to navigate as the paying clients get the bulk of the bandwidth.

But the major broadband providers downplay such fears, and say it will be economically feasible to invest in higher-speed links only if some bandwidth can be reserved for paid content.

For example, in a recent interview with CNET News.com, Verizon Chief Technology Officer Mark Wegleitner said movie-quality video could be delivered to DSL subscribers if the copyright owner would pay.


Writing in the Washington Post, Robert E. Litan, a senior Fellow at The Brookings Institution, explains why the issue is coming to a head. Litan notes that until recently, traffic congestion on the Internet was not a problem.

"There was so much excess capacity in the fiber optic cables and other parts of the complex telecommunications network that heavy traffic delivered from one site did not threaten the reliability of traffic delivered from other sites and routed through the Net."

Litan maintains that existing networks are rapidly running out of excess capacity.

"We need new cyber-highways if the brave new world of movies, fast Google searches and telemedicine - to take a few examples - is to become at all viable."


The big question, he says, is who will pay for these higher-speed networks.


And the big question for the Internet Freedom Coalition and others who oppose net neutrality laws, according to Wright, is: "Will a Republican Congress really allow MoveOn and liberal allies to turn back the clock on the greatest innovation and wealth-building enterprise to come along in a generation? We certainly hope not."





Editor's note:
Get your Web site listed on NewsMax.com – reach millions for pennies! Click Here Now!
Shop NewsMax.com's store for the best deals on books, tapes, videos and more! Click Here Now!
You Can Profit from Globalism and Technology Advances - click here now!


103

[potlatch]

Thanks Lucy!

[nicmarlo]

"Hypothetical problems are no justification for giving the FCC and other government regulators the power to decide how the Internet will evolve."

Bump!

[Smartass]

 

Reprinted from NewsMax.com

Chat Rooms Help FBI Hunt for Pedophiles

NewsMax.com Wires
Tuesday, May 16, 2006

CALVERTON, Md. -- Seconds after she announces her presence in an online chat room, the girl is besieged by a half-dozen men who want to know more about her.

"r u a virgin?" one man asks, after about a dozen quick exchanges that begin with her age (13) and why she is home on a school day (illness).

The edgy online banter is taking place in an AOL chat room ostensibly for women who like older men, but known as a forum for men who want to make contact with girls. The supposed 13-year-old in this case, though, is not a child, but an undercover FBI agent who is working out of the bureau's main child pornography unit in a suburban Washington office park.

The demonstration for an Associated Press reporter was intended to show off the FBI's growing effort to fight child pornography, which has yielded increases of more than 2000 percent in arrests and 350 percent in federal prosecutions over 10 years.

Agents use chats and other more private exchanges to seek out potential pedophiles and pornographers. Another man who believed he was talking to a 13-year-old asked how old she likes her men, then, "virgin?" The agents save transcripts of the online conversations, photographs that get exchanged and telephone numbers that are revealed, intentionally or not.

These introductory conversations, in some cases, lead to illegal activity; but the ease with which they're made show how large a problem looms. Child pornography is frighteningly easy to find on the Internet - images are traded freely, children are lured into dangerous situations and sexual abuse of children as young as infants is available on demand.

Finding people who want child pornography "is like shooting fish in a barrel," said Stacey Bradley, an FBI supervisory agent in the Innocent Images unit.

One out of every five children ages 10 to 17 receive sexual solicitations online, according to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.

"The Internet is a great place, but there are certain parts of town you don't want to be," said Arnold Bell, chief of the FBI's Innocent Images unit.

There is wide agreement that images are proliferating and that peddlers of child pornography are becoming more savvy to counter the enhanced police effort to combat it.

Orin S. Kerr, a George Washington University law professor and expert on computer crime, said investigators posing as children typically steer clear of unfairly entrapping people on the other end of their online conversations by taking a passive approach.

"If agents are careful, entrapment never needs to come up. They take a suggestive screen name, go into a chat room and wait to be contacted. The screen will light up," Kerr said.

He said he was aware of only one case that was tossed out of court in which a state investigator, posing as a mother, was found to have improperly lured the defendant by aggressively pushing him to get involved with her children.

More often, authorities struggle to keep pace with the availability of sexually explicit pictures of children and a lingering view among the public that what advocates and police call child pornography often is women dressing up to appear younger, said Ernie Allen, the missing and exploited children center's president.

The real danger that child pornography presents, shown in several recent cases of sexual abuse that have come to public attention, "is a phenomenon that American and the world has only begun to understand, " Allen said.

Attorney General Alberto Gonzales recently called attention to the issue in a speech filled with graphic images that he said was necessary to get the nation's attention.

On a recent day in the FBI unit, a working group that includes police officials from several countries was working a major investigation that appeared to reach into most states and dozens of countries, according to pins that were stuck into maps on the wall. Bell, the unit chief, would not discuss the investigation.

Several agents acknowledged that they can get discouraged by the volume of images and the number of people who appear eager to see them. Bradley, the FBI supervisor, estimated that 80 percent of the customers for child pornography are in the United States.

"But even if I stop just one person from getting molested, it makes a difference," she said.

The undercover agent chatted with one man for more than an hour. She tried to stay in character with frequent use of the word "like" and alternate spellings that produced "kewl" for cool.

This man sent a photograph, ostensibly of himself, showing a balding man with a mustache and beard. He said he had three grandchildren and asked whether the 13-year-old had a computer in her bedroom, a setup that would allow her easier access with less parental interference.

While this man mainly avoided risque questions and answers, the undercover agent regarded him as the most promising prospect for engaging in darker, possibly illegal exchanges, should they meet again online.

© 2006 Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

Editor's note:
Get your Web site listed on NewsMax.com – reach millions for pennies! Click Here Now!
Shop NewsMax.com's store for the best deals on books, tapes, videos and more! Click Here Now!
You Can Profit from Globalism and Technology Advances - click here now!

103