Skip to comments.
FBI WARNED D.C. IT WAS A TARGET
New York Post ^
| 9/25/02
| BRIAN BLOMQUIST
Posted on 09/25/2002 12:56:02 AM PDT by kattracks
Edited on 05/26/2004 5:09:01 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
September 25, 2002 -- WASHINGTON - A Minnesota FBI agent investigating Zacarias Moussaoui testified yesterday that he notified the Secret Service weeks before Sept. 11 that a terror team might hijack a plane and "hit the nation's capital."
The FBI agent said that evidence in the case pointed to a broader hijack attack, but added that investigators were largely in the dark because they were blocked from getting access to Moussaoui's computer and handwritten notes.
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
TOPICS: Extended News; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: bushknew
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
1
posted on
09/25/2002 12:56:02 AM PDT
by
kattracks
To: kattracks
IS IT SUSTAINABLE, AS A PRACTICE OF HOMELAND DEFENSE AND NATIONAL SECURITY, FOR THE UNITED STATES TO ENTER INTO A SERIOUS WAR WITH A WMD PRODUCING AND HOLDING REGIME, AT THE SAME TIME THAT NEARLY 100,000 ILLEGALS OF MIDEAST ORIGIN ARE INSIDE THE UNITED STATES?
To: AmericanInTokyo
Good point.
It's doubtful the INS is up to the task though when the Mexican border still leaks like a tea strainer.
To: kattracks; OKCSubmariner
A Minnesota FBI agent investigating Zacarias Moussaoui testified yesterday that he notified the Secret Service weeks before Sept. 11 that a terror team might hijack a plane and "hit the nation's capital." I missed this the first time around. Is it just me, or is this a major revelation that deserves an answer from the White House? I just wish someone would have passed this warning to the initial target of the hijackings, the pilots in the cockpits.
Thanks kattracks and OKCSub for bringing this information forward.
4
posted on
10/17/2002 5:51:59 AM PDT
by
honway
To: honway; glorygirl
BTTT
To: MizSterious
bump
6
posted on
10/17/2002 8:00:15 AM PDT
by
honway
To: kattracks
....they were rebuffed by FBI lawyers....
Who were the lawyers...... specifically, what are thier names??
7
posted on
10/17/2002 8:03:28 AM PDT
by
bert
To: Fred Mertz; glorygirl; thinden; Uncle Bill; backhoe; rwfromkansas
Does anyone know how to find the name of a webmaster for a website?There is an "anti-freerepublic" website that I would like to find out more about. They spend considerable bandwidth bashing BlueDog and OKCSub, ironically, both of whom have been banned here.
8
posted on
10/17/2002 8:51:01 AM PDT
by
honway
To: honway; Registered; HAL9000; AppyPappy
I think Registered or HAL9000 or AppyPappy might be able to assist you - hopefully they'll reply to you in private. But I know what you're referring to.
To: honway
To: honway
Does anyone know how to find the name of a webmaster for a website? If the owner of the website also owns the domain name, you can check the "whois" information. Of course, if the domain name is something like yahoo.com or geocities.com, that will not get the information you are looking for.
Tracking down whois information can be tricky, but you might try searching at www.betterwhois.com, www.domainsurfer.com or www.whois.net.
When searching whois information, omit the "www" part - for instance, search for "democrats.com", not "www.democrats.com".
Another technique is to Google search for the email address of the webmaster. Sometimes it can be found by looking at the HTML code.
11
posted on
10/17/2002 9:15:04 AM PDT
by
HAL9000
To: HAL9000; Dixie Mom
Thanks for your help.
This is the site and I am not having any luck with the tools, but I will continue.
http://conaf.alliedconservatives.com
12
posted on
10/17/2002 9:18:30 AM PDT
by
honway
To: honway
13
posted on
10/17/2002 9:36:30 AM PDT
by
backhoe
To: backhoe
Found it. Thanks.
Venturesonline.Com
5870 Greenwood Plaza Blvd
GREENWOOD VILLAGE, CO 80111
14
posted on
10/17/2002 10:00:36 AM PDT
by
honway
To: kattracks
To bad the perp wasn't also suspected of using drugs or been a home grown right wing radical or posssesing a 1/4" short shotgun, they would have kicked in his door and shot him if he looked funny at them and confiscating all his assets and searched his computer and tapped his phones....priorities you know the WOD and controlling dissension and unpopular laws in the US takes precedence over Terrorists killing us......where was ATF when we needed them?
To: backhoe
http://www.americasvoices.org/archives/ReynaldsJ/ReynaldsJ_071202-IV.htm
Update on Terrorist Websites in the U.S.
Venturesonline is a dead end.I guess anybody can use the server Venturesonline.com. It appears to be the server of choice for terrorists. From the link:
"Both www.al-sakher.com and www.arab3online.com are located on servers owned by Colorado-based www.venturesonline.com. A company spokesman said that he would keep an eye on the sites, but he was unable to do anything unless the sites violated the terms of service.
The Gainesville FBI has been notified about these sites."
16
posted on
10/17/2002 10:29:53 AM PDT
by
honway
To: rolling_stone
Well said, sir.
17
posted on
10/17/2002 10:33:21 AM PDT
by
honway
To: honway
network-tools.com
type in teh domain name (without the www)....I think you are supposed to select "whois" btw. Anyway, whoever registered the website (which has to be the person running it almost assuredly unless it is on geocities or an online webhost) will appear, with phone, e-mail sometimes, and address. You should be able to find the webmaster.
To: honway
Glad to help... I don't have them linked, but here are web addies where you may find more help & info about tracking stuff across the web:
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/663510/posts
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/fr/597871/posts
http://www.samspade.org/ssw/
http://network-tools.com/
19
posted on
10/17/2002 11:21:04 AM PDT
by
backhoe
To: All
EFF Analysis Of The Provisions Of The USA PATRIOT Act
That Relate To Online Activities (Oct 31, 2001)
Executive Summary
Chief Concerns
The EFF's chief concerns with the USAPA include:
Expanded Surveillance With Reduced Checks and Balances. USAPA expands all four traditional tools of surveillance -- wiretaps, search warrants, pen/trap orders and subpoenas. Their counterparts under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) that allow spying in the U.S. by foreign intelligence agencies have similarly been expanded. This means:
Be careful what you put in that Google search. The government may now spy on web surfing of innocent Americans, including terms entered into search engines, by merely telling a judge anywhere in the U.S. that the spying could lead to information that is "relevant" to an ongoing criminal investigation. The person spied on does not have to be the target of the investigation. This application must be granted and the government is not obligated to report to the court or tell the person spied up what it has done.
ISPs hand over more user information. The law makes two changes to increase how much information the government may obtain about users from their ISPs or others who handle or store their online communications. First it allows ISPs to voluntarily hand over all "non-content" information to law enforcement with no need for any court order or subpoena. sec. 212. Second, it expands the records that the government may seek with a simple subpoena (no court review required) to include records of session times and durations, temporarily assigned network (I.P.) addresses; means and source of payments, including credit card or bank account numbers. secs. 210, 211.
New definitions of terrorism expand scope of surveillance. One new definition of terrorism and three expansions of previous terms also expand the scope of surveillance. They are 1) § 802 definition of "domestic terrorism" (amending 18 USC §2331), which raises concerns about legitimate protest activity resulting in conviction on terrorism charges, especially if violence erupts; adds to 3 existing definition of terrorism (int'l terrorism per 18 USC §2331, terrorism transcending national borders per 18 USC §2332b, and federal terrorism per amended 18 USC §2332b(g)(5)(B)). These new definitions also expose more people to surveillance (and potential "harboring" and "material support" liability, §§ 803, 805).
Overbreadth with a lack of focus on terrorism. Several provisions of the USAPA have no apparent connection to preventing terrorism. These include: Government spying on suspected computer trespassers with no need for court order. Sec. 217.
20
posted on
10/17/2002 6:10:54 PM PDT
by
honway
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-30 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson