A few more articles on abuses a Government (local or federal) power, if i tried to post all of them i would have to quit my job and hire about ten people to help and work with me. Some of the reasons sound so good. But Americans must resist the temptation to inform on fellow citizens.
As terrorism plots evolve, FBI relies on Agent John Q. Public
By Josh MeyerMay 12, 2007
The FBI has hailed the breakup of an alleged plot to kill soldiers at Ft. Dix, N.J., as a major success story. But federal authorities acknowledge that the case has underscored a troubling vulnerability in the domestic war on terrorism.
They say the FBI, despite unprecedented expansion over the last 5 1/2 years, cannot counter the growing threat posed by homegrown extremists without the help of two often unreliable allies. One is an American public that they lament is prone to averting its attention from suspicious behavior and often reluctant to get involved. The other is a small but growing army of informants, some of whom might be in it for the wrong reasons – such as money, political ax-grinding or legal problems of their own.
Such dependence on amateurs is “not something that we would like. It’s something that we absolutely need,” said Special Agent J.P. Weis, who heads the FBI’s Philadelphia field office and the South Jersey Joint Terrorism Task Force, which conducted the Ft. Dix investigation.
Weis and other FBI and Justice Department officials acknowledged they probably never would have known about the six men and their alleged plans had it not been for a Circuit City employee who reported a suspicious video.
And, they said, an FBI informant was instrumental in gathering evidence to file criminal charges by infiltrating the men’s circle for 16 months as they allegedly bought and trained with automatic weapons, made reconnaissance runs and discussed plans.
Weis and others said the bureau had to rely on the public and on informants in domestic counter-terrorism investigations because of the changing nature of the global jihad and the threat it posed within the United States.
Militants who have associated with known Al Qaeda figures or spent time in training camps have for the most part been identified and either arrested, deported or placed under surveillance, senior FBI and Justice Department officials said.
The primary threat now comes from individuals with no criminal backgrounds and few if any ties to militants overseas, officials say. Operating locally without the need to travel or send communications overseas, these people can evade security nets such as international wiretaps and travel surveillance.
Weis – like other federal law enforcement, counterterrorism and intelligence officials – described them as “lone wolves, cells that stay below the radar screen.”
“Nobody really knows about them. They’re not affiliated with any major group but held together by a common ideology,” Weis said. “So to try and infiltrate them, some of the traditional means may not be effective.”
FBI officials estimate thousands of these disaffected individuals could be in the United States, from radical Muslims to individuals who sympathize with the global jihad for nonreligious political reasons, such as opposing the war in Iraq.
Counter-terrorism officials say FBI agents and local police cannot possibly be everywhere they need to be in order to identify potential terrorists. And even the FBI’s most expert counter-terrorism profilers have no foolproof way of predicting which individuals might turn radicalized thoughts into deadly acts of violence, the officials say.
“When does a person who has been a passive supporter of the cause cross over and become an operational person? That’s the tough question,” said one senior FBI counter-terrorism official who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not permitted to discuss ongoing investigations. “It’s risk management, where the stakes are as high as they can possibly be.
“As we saw in the Virginia Tech shooting, it doesn’t take more than the will to do something to actually be able to pull it off.”
Since the Sept. 11 attacks, authorities have arrested about 60 such individuals in the United States and charged them with terrorism, according to the FBI official and other sources. Dozens of others have been deported or are under surveillance.
The men arrested this week in and around Cherry Hill, N.J., are all foreign-born Muslims. But five of them – Mohamad Shnewer, Serdar Tatar and brothers Shain, Dritan and Eljvir Duka – were described by friends and family as not being religious radicals and rarely, if ever, discussing anti-American views.
They were arrested Monday night when two of them allegedly tried to buy automatic weapons from the FBI informant. Shnewer, Tatar and the Dukas have been charged with conspiracy to kill U.S. military personnel.
The Dukas, ethnic Albanians from the former Yugoslavia allegedly in the United States illegally, also were charged with violations of federal gun laws.
A sixth man, Agron Abdullahu, was charged with aiding and abetting illegal immigrants in obtaining weapons.
At a news conference after the arrests, Weis saluted the unidentified Circuit City store clerk in Mount Laurel, N.J., as the “unsung hero” of the case. “That’s why we’re here today, because of the courage and heroism of that individual,” Weis said.
Authorities were alerted in January 2006 after the clerk said he saw a video that the men allegedly wanted copied onto a DVD. An FBI affidavit says the video shows the six men and four others shooting assault weapons “in a militia-like style while calling for jihad” and yelling extremist slogans in Arabic.
Another man has said that he notified the Pennsylvania Game Commission of suspicious behavior by the men at a shooting range, and others may have done so as well.
But according to some neighbors, acquaintances and law enforcement officials, many other suspicious signs went unreported, such as the alleged acquisition of illegal firearms and the surveillance of several military bases.
Federal authorities say they have disrupted “homegrown terrorist” plots in recent years in Lodi, Calif.; San Diego; Los Angeles; Houston; Dallas; Toledo, Ohio; Miami; northern Virginia; and New Jersey. Few if any of the arrests resulted from a private citizen reporting suspicious activity, according to interviews with authorities and court records of their prosecutions.
Bureau officials said they are disappointed that more people don’t come forward with tips. “In some ways, it’s human nature,” Weis said. “A lot of times people think that someone else will report it. But now, with the changing times, you can’t take that chance.”
The FBI has spent millions of dollars cultivating a wide range of paid informants, particularly in Muslim communities.
“We’ve got to put eyes and ears on the street,” said the senior FBI counter-terrorism official. He said he could not disclose the number of paid informants being used by the FBI in domestic counter-terrorism cases, but he said the bureau had blanketed cities and small towns alike with them in recent years. “It’s very fair to say that we have significant numbers of people who are working with us,” the official said.
The bureau has been accused in some cases of not vetting its paid informants, or of allowing them to pressure some suspects into committing illegal acts or even entrapping them.
In one highly publicized case, the FBI paid an informant $230,000 to infiltrate a suspected terrorist cell in Lodi, only to learn that many of his claims about the Pakistani immigrants arrested in the case were unfounded.
FBI officials used two confidential informants in the Ft. Dix case; the main one allegedly is a former Egyptian military officer. The FBI affidavit filed in the case indicates the main informant was intimately involved in many aspects of the alleged plot, including going on at least two surveillance missions. At one point, the affidavit says, the informant had grown so trusted that one suspect asked him to lead the plot.
Rocco C. Cipparone, Shnewer’s court-appointed lawyer and a former federal prosecutor, said he suspected the informant might have crossed the line from “legal normal prodding” of the suspects into entrapment.
Cipparone said informants could be the most valuable weapon against domestic terrorism. “But it also comes with a lot of risks
The senior FBI official said the bureau acknowledged problems with some informants and their motivations, and said it did its best to exercise quality control.
Weis said the FBI and federal prosecutors in the Ft. Dix case worked closely with the informants to make sure they were behaving appropriately.
“This was clearly a case where the cooperating witness was very good, very capable and above all, was able to be extremely credible to these individuals, to be able to insinuate himself into their thinking and their environment,” said Michael Drewniak, a spokesman for U.S. Atty. Christopher J. Christie in New Jersey. “These individuals, well before our cooperating witness became involved, had the propensity and desire to carry out an attack on America.”
http://articles.latimes.com/2007/may/12/nation/na-terror12
Moles Wanted
In preparation for the Republican National Convention, the FBI is soliciting informants to keep tabs on local protest groups
By Matt Snyders
Published on May 21, 2008
Paul Carroll was riding his bike when his cell phone vibrated.
They were looking for an informant to show up at "vegan potlucks" throughout the Twin Cities and rub shoulders with RNC protestors.Once he arrived home from the Hennepin County Courthouse, where he’d been served a gross misdemeanor for spray-painting the interior of a campus elevator, the lanky, wavy-haired University of Minnesota sophomore flipped open his phone and checked his messages. He was greeted by a voice he recognized immediately. It belonged to U of M Police Sgt. Erik Swanson, the officer to whom Carroll had turned himself in just three weeks earlier. When Carroll called back, Swanson asked him to meet at a coffee shop later that day, going on to assure a wary Carroll that he wasn’t in trouble.
Carroll, who requested that his real name not be used, showed up early and waited anxiously for Swanson’s arrival. Ten minutes later, he says, a casually dressed Swanson showed up, flanked by a woman whom he introduced as FBI Special Agent Maureen E. Mazzola. For the next 20 minutes, Mazzola would do most of the talking.
“She told me that I had the perfect ‘look,’” recalls Carroll. “And that I had the perfect personality—they kept saying I was friendly and personable—for what they were looking for.”
What they were looking for, Carroll says, was an informant—someone to show up at “vegan potlucks” throughout the Twin Cities and rub shoulders with RNC protestors, schmoozing his way into their inner circles, then reporting back to the FBI’s Joint Terrorism Task Force, a partnership between multiple federal agencies and state and local law enforcement. The effort’s primary mission, according to the Minneapolis division’s website, is to “investigate terrorist acts carried out by groups or organizations which fall within the definition of terrorist groups as set forth in the current United States Attorney General Guidelines.”
Carroll would be compensated for his efforts, but only if his involvement yielded an arrest. No exact dollar figure was offered.
“I’ll pass,” said Carroll.
For 10 more minutes, Mazzola and Swanson tried to sway him. He remained obstinate.
“Well, if you change your mind, call this number,” said Mazzola, handing him her card with her cell phone number scribbled on the back.
(Mazzola, Swanson, and the FBI did not return numerous calls seeking comment.)
Carroll’s story echoes a familiar theme. During the lead-up the 2004 Republican National Convention in New York City, the NYPD’s Intelligence Division infiltrated and spied on protest groups across the country, as well as in Canada and Europe. The program’s scope extended to explicitly nonviolent groups, including street theater troupes and church organizations.
There were also two reported instances of police officers, dressed as protestors, purposefully instigating clashes. At the 2004 Republican National Convention, the NYPD orchestrated a fake arrest to incite protestors. When a blond man was “arrested,” nearby protestors began shouting, “Let him go!” The helmeted police proceeded to push back against the crowd with batons and arrested at least two. In a similar instance, during an April 29, 2005, Critical Mass bike ride in New York, video footage captured a “protestor”—in reality an undercover cop—telling his captor, “I’m on the job,” and being subsequently let go.
Minneapolis’s own recent Critical Mass skirmish was allegedly initiated by two unidentified stragglers in hoods—one wearing a handkerchief over his or her face—who “began to make aggressive moves” near the back of the pack. During that humid August 31 evening, officers went on to arrest 19 cyclists while unleashing pepper spray into the faces of bystanders. The hooded duo was never apprehended.
In the scuffle’s wake, conspiracy theories swirled that the unprecedented surveillance—squad cars from multiple agencies and a helicopter hovering overhead—was due to the presence of RNC protesters in the ride. The MPD publicly denied this. But during the trial of cyclist Gus Ganley, MPD Sgt. David Stichter testified that a task force had been created to monitor the August 31 ride and that the department knew that members of an RNC protest group would be along for the ride.
“This is all part of a larger government effort to quell political dissent,” says Jordan Kushner, an attorney who represented Ganley and other Critical Mass arrestees. “The Joint Terrorism Task Force is another example of using the buzzword ‘terrorism’ as a basis to clamp down on people’s freedoms and push forward a more authoritarian government.”
http://www.citypages.com/2008-05-21/news/moles-wanted/
Congress looks at Md. police surveillance July 24, 2008 - 10:15am
WASHINGTON - Federal lawmakers are looking into Maryland State Police surveillance of protest groups.
Mississippi Congressman Bennie Thompson is the chairman of the House committee that oversees the Department of Homeland Security. He has sent a letter to the department asking it to reveal what it knows about Maryland State Police surveillance of war protesters and death-penalty opponents.
The letter also asks the department for information about any federal homeland security funds that go to the Maryland State Police.
Documents detailing the surveillance activities in 2005 and 2006 were released last week, after a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.
Thompson believes the surveillance was politically motivated. His letter calls the surveillance of peaceful groups with no ties to terrorism "a deplorable use of taxpayer funds."
I recieved this absolutely facinating email last week. I'm no fan of the main-stream media, but they are miss leading the public. If you listen to them President Bush has caused the death of more service men then any president from time and memorial. Anyway i thought it was facinating, i could not wait to pass it along. As i have said in previous posts, i don't agree with the way the war is being prosucuted. If you are going to send our fighting forces into harms way, let them fight and win and get it over with. But know one asked my opinion.
Subject: Military losses may surprise you! Just the facts, not trying to be political.... The totals below include 2007 if you add them up under each President, not just 2006. Military Losses, 1980 thru 2006 Whatever your politics, however you lean, however you feel about the current administration, this report should open some eyes. Military losses, 1980 through 2006 As tragic as the loss of any member of the US Armed Forces is, consider the following statistics: The annual fatalities of military members while actively serving in the armed forces from 1980 through 2006:
1980 ......... 2,392 (Carter Year)
1981 ........ 2,380 (Reagan Year)
1984 ......... 1,999 (Reagan Year)
1988 .......... 1,819 (Reagan Year)
1989 ........ 1,636 (George H W Year)
1990 ......... 1,508 (George H W Year)
1991 ........ 1,787 (George H W Year)
1992 .......... 1,293 (George H W Year)
1993 .......... 1,213 (Clinton Year)
1994 ..... ... 1,075 (Clinton Year)
1995 .......... 2,465 (Clinton Year)
1996 ......... 2,318 (Clinton Year)
1997 ............ 817 (Clinton Year)
1998 .......... 2,252 (Clinton Year)
1999 ......... 1,984 (Clinton Year)
2000 .......... 1,983 (Clinton Year)
2001 .......... . 890(George W Year)
2002 .......... 1,007 (George W Year)
2003 ......... 1,410 (George W Year)
2004 .......... 1,887 (George W Year)
2005 ........... . 919 (George W Year)
2006........ ..... 920 (George W Year)
2007........ .. .899 (George W Year)
Clinton years (1993-2000): 14,000 deaths
George W years (2001-2006): 7,932 deaths
If you are surprised when you look at these figures, so was I. These figures mean that the loss from the two latest conflicts in the Middle East are LESS than the loss of military personnel during Bill Clinton's presidency when America wasn't involved in a war! And, I was even more shocked when I read that in 1980, during the reign of President Jimmy Carter, (Nobel Peace Prize winner), there were 2,392 US military fatalities! Consider the latest census of Americans. It shows the following FACTS about the distribution of American citizens, by Race:
European descent .......... ......... .... . 69.12%
Hispanic .......... ......... ......... ......... .. 12.5%
Black............ ......... ......... ......... ....... 12. 3%
Asian ............ ......... ......... ........ .... 3.7%
Native American ............ ......... ......... 1.0%
Other .......... ......... ......... ......... ........ 2.6%
Now... here are the fatalities by Race; over the past three years in Iraqi Freedom
European descent (white) ........... . 74.31%
Hispanic ............ ......... ........ ..... 10.74%
Black ............ ......... ......... ......... .. 9.67%
Asian .......... ......... ......... ......... .. 1.81%
Native American ............ ......... ...... 1.09%
Other ............ ........ ......... ......... ..... 0.33%
It's all about politics and some politicians, are now famous > for turning American against American for a vote. The Hillary-Obama campaigns say the current administration does not 'listen' to anyone and continues the war, costing precious American lives. The Clinton administration, without having an actual war, sent more soldiers to death than the Bush Administration, in addition, Clinton also forced the military to release Osama Bin Laden when we actually had him detained. I hope that during the time between now and November, that intelligent Americans can decipher the facts from the spin and the spinners from the leaders; those who seek even more power from those that seek justice, the dividers from the uniters. Over the next months let's be good listeners and see and hear who tries to divide our nation; and who wants to unite our nation. Who wants to control how our money is spent and who wants our money spent the way we would spend it. Who seeks power and who seeks justice? Who spins the facts and who is genuine? These statistics are published by Congressional Research Service, and they may be confirmed by anyone at: http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/natsec/RL32492.pdf
Switching gears for a second.
Came across this website, this is so typical indecator of our society as a whole. No one what to take responsibily or blame for anything. It is called "sly dial" what it does basically is lets you dial directly into someones email, so you don't have to talk to them.
I always wonder how people would leave me a message on my phone with me hearing it ring, now i know. Now i know
http://www.slydial.com/ Here are some of the some of the reason people use it according to their website.
Just tell your side of the story
You just partied hard last night and going to work is just not on your radar today. You dread having to call your boss and answering any awkward questions he may have. Instead just leave him a simple voicemail letting him know that you won't be coming into work today.
Have your cake and eat it too
You desperately need to call your girlfriend but she is a talker and you don't want to spend an hour on the phone with her because you would much rather watch the game with your buddies. Leave her a sweet voicemail and get a hall pass for the night.
Buy yourself some time.
You go to a week long convention for work in Las Vegas and blow $5,000 the first night at the roulette table. You need to call your wife and tell her why she should hold off on making the monthly mortgage payment. Her voicemail will be much more understanding then she will.
With fuel coming back down this might not be as important as it was a few weeks ago, but here it is anyway.
Pat Goss, with advice about using the fuel saving devices
Cool Gas July 22, 2008 - 2:02am
There is no need to get up at sunrise to fill your car's fuel tank. (AP)
I believe the saying is "I do declare," what I don't believe is when that phrase was coined, it had anything to do with gasoline. But no matter, because "I do declare" there is a lot of garbage being printed and spoken about gasoline.
Apparently everyone who can surf the internet or can speak has somehow become a gasoline expert. The reporters who last week couldn't spell gasoline are churning out information this week as if they were engineers and utterly conversant in all matters revolving around gasoline. Unfortunately, these folks are often less informed than before they searched the Internet. They have become part of a huge problem created by pitiful wannabes, idiots, and pranksters on the Internet.
A bunch of slop found being reported on the internet talks about what time of day to buy gas. The stories suggest you should buy your gas early in the morning or late at night, because the gas will be cooler and denser. Although colder gas is denser than warm gas, and therefore provides more energy per gallon, temperature doesn't apply to time of day.
There is no best time of day to buy gas. It's shocking that so many people no longer take the time or have the ability to analyze information. Think back - were you awake and paying attention during fifth grade science class? If so, you may remember that ground temperature doesn't change by the hour. Actually ground temperature doesn't change daily or even weekly, it changes by season. So, because gasoline is stored in underground tanks buried in non-temperature-changing earth, gas temperature doesn't change.
Idiots, pranksters and non-thinking reporters keep telling us we can save money by filling up at a certain time of day due to the temperature of the gasoline in underground tanks. It's bad information that probably originates either in the minds of cyber-punks who think deceiving folks is great sport, or those who slept through science class. Otherwise they would know the obvious. They would know that ground temperature changes with the change of seasons, and even then, it's well into the colder or warmer season before there is any substantial change in ground temperature.
Also, it takes days for the temperature of thousands of gallons of liquid to change. Even without the insulating and stabilizing qualities of the earth around the underground storage tanks, the thousands of gallons of gasoline in the tanks would not change on an hourly basis.
There will be a slight difference in energy content per gallon if you fill up while the tank truck is unloading, but only in the summer. Because the tanker has been out in the sun for an extended period of time, the gas going into the ground may be warmer and therefore less dense. The warmer gas will have a slight effect on the general temperature of the gas in the ground but even then the difference is so negligible that at today's prices driving to another station will use more gas than you could ever save.
So, you can quit trying to plan your life around when to fill your fuel tank. It really doesn't matter!
A few jokes
A little boy wanted $100.00 very badly and prayed for weeks, butnothing happened .... Then he decided to write God a letter requesting the $100.00. When the postal authorities received the letter to God , USA , they decided to send it to the President. The president was so amused that he instructed his secretary to sendthe little boy a $ 5.00 bill. The president thought this would appear to be a lot of money to a little boy. The little boy was delighted with the $5.00 bill and sat down to writea thank-you note to God, which read:
Dear God: Thank you very much for sending the money. However, I noticedthat for some reason you sent it through Washington D.C. and those a-holes deducted $95.00 in taxes.
Subject: The Donkey
Young Chuck moved to Texas and bought a donkey from a farmer for $100.00. The farmer agreed to deliver the donkey the next day. The next day he drove up and said, 'Sorry son, but I have some bad news, the donkey died.' Chuck replied, 'Well, then just give me my money back.' The farmer said, 'Can't do that. I went and spent it> already.' Chuck said, 'Ok, then, just bring me the dead donkey.' The farmer said, 'What ya gonna do with him?' Chuck said, 'I'm going to raffle him off.' The farmer said, 'You can't raffle off a dead donkey!' Chuck said, 'Sure I can, watch me.. I just won't tell anybody he's dead.'
A month later, the farmer met up with Chuck and asked, 'What happened with that dead donkey?' Chuck said, 'I raffled him off. I sold 500 tickets at two dollars a piece and made a profit of $898.00.' The farmer said, 'Didn't anyone complain?' Chuck said, 'Just the guy who won. So I gave him his two dollars back.' Chuck now works for the government.
Some thoughts on ethanol, give it a read if it interests you at all.
Our view on energy: Ethanol production soars, but its allure plummets
Diversion of corn crop to fuel raises food costs, stokes instability abroad.
For the past quarter-century, U.S. energy policy has been generally non-existent. To the extent there has been one, it has been to keep gasoline cheap. But one element stands out as a dramatic exception to this minimalist approach. Through a series of generous tax subsidies and production mandates, the use of corn-based ethanol has soared.
Already, some 23% of the American corn crop goes into ethanol. In acreage, that's equivalent to the combined farm land of Pennsylvania, New York, New Jersey, Maryland and Delaware. In 14 years, under current federal mandates, about 40% of America's corn crop would be heading for its gas tanks.
The more and more ethanol that's produced, however, the less and less it looks like a solution.
Ethanol hasn't prevented gas prices from topping $4 a gallon. Instead, the diversion of so much corn into fuel has contributed to rising prices for everything from corn oil to beef. Overseas, higher food costs are increasing hunger and generating political instability.
Turning America's breadbasket into a fuel pump, it seems, is looking like one of the dumbest ideas of recent years.
It is time to acknowledge that the ethanol lobby, thanks largely to the political muscle of corn farmers and Iowa's importance in the presidential nominating process, has hijacked U.S. energy policy, such as it is.
Texas Gov. Rick Perry, who hails from a state full of cattlemen struggling with high feed prices, has recognized this and called for cutting back the ethanol mandates by half. Food Before Fuel — a coalition of agricultural, environmental, retail, hunger-prevention and other groups — is urging Congress to revisit the issue. Others will no doubt follow as consumers begin to grasp the implications of what's in store.
A few numbers tell the story: U.S. taxpayers are subsidizing ethanol to the tune of 51 cents a gallon. This year, the government wants 9 billion gallons of ethanol and other plant-based fuels in people's gas tanks. By 2022, that number is to quadruple, to 36 billion gallons. Even that would replace only 15% of the nation's gasoline consumption.
Ethanol supporters say removing ethanol from the equation would cause gasoline prices to rise even more. Perhaps. But that merely argues for capping or gradually reducing the 9 billion gallons, rather than eliminating them overnight.
Ethanol supporters also argue that its effect on food prices is overstated. In fact, several factors, ranging from higher fuel and fertilizer prices, to the recent flooding along the Mississippi River, have played a role. How much each of these factors is to blame is a matter of debate. But common sense says the ethanol impact is significant.
While it's a laudable goal to reduce oil consumption, it is better accomplished through efficiency and development of alternatives to gas-powered engines. That's food for thought and, perhaps eventually, more food for the table.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment