Six Groups Said to Be Monitored in U.S. for Possible Qaeda Links

American law enforcement officials are monitoring the activities of at least six groups in the United States they suspect are linked to Al Qaeda, senior government officials in the United States and Europe said this week.

Most of the individuals whose movements and communications are being closely tracked are believed to be sympathizers of Osama bin Laden who may be engaged in low-level support activities for the Qaeda terror network, like raising money, relaying messages and recruiting new members, American and European officials said. The officials insisted that no evidence had emerged that any of the suspects were preparing an attack or posed any imminent threat.

more.................

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/23/international/worldspecial2/23TERR.html

.

MoveOn, AFL-CIO, NAACP, Seirra Club, ACLU and Democratic Underground. Do I win something?

of Osama bin Laden. Sympathizers being the operative word. Blacklist time!

How can they read your thoughts? Does having a poster of bin Laden make a person a terrorist, or a smartalec?

Does opposing the occupation in Iraq make you a terrorist sympathizer? Or opposing the war? Or speaking against the government?

I'd think they'd rate above aclu or sierra club.

Avid animal-lovers tend to be liberal, plus they have been known to break the law a time or two in their efforts to keep animals from harm.

I am not familiar with the elf organization, however.:shrug:

Welcome to DU, userdave2061! :toast:

My first warm welcome here. You do know I was only kidding about the orgs I mentioned. I found the first six to be so far from needed watching that I just had to add my two bits.

breaking the law is probably suspect, no matter how noble their intentions. If the tree-hugging Sierra Club is suspect, PETA certainly must be.

I'm sorry that mine is your first warm welcome, but I'm certain that it won't be the last. newyawker99 must be around here somewhere. She is usually the official welcoming committee and happened to catch me on my very first post. I remember how much that meant to me and how welcome it made me feel, that I have tried to follow her example. You will find a lot of camaraderie on DU, as well as intelligent discourse, information, support and just plain silliness. I'm so glad that you have joined us.:hi:

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

Both are sufficiently infiltrated by the FBI already.

Beware of eager beavers wearing inappropriate shoes...

...I'm a little surprised they just didn't list the names of the people they were watching.

:eyes:


My point being: what purpose is served, other than making political hay, by providing this information to the NYT? I think most of us already assumed (hoped) that they were doing at least *something* to infiltrate and foil any al Queda 'cells' inside the US (assuming they had any time left after busting bong sellers and porno actors).

What goal is furthered by boasting about it to the New York Times? Only one: to make us think that Bush is actually doing something to prevent another terrorist attack.

Note, also, of course, that the FBI engaged in investigations of this kind while Clinton was president, but they didn't feel the need to call up the Times and announce it every time.

(on edit)
Adding that I notice that the article was written by Don Van Natta. He's the guy that wrote that Presidential 'golf habits' book: "First Off The Tee".

That seems to be the name of the game in the news business these days.

You have a sharp eye to have reconnzed this guy's name. I am not familiar with the book, so thanks for the info.:-)

the good old boys were so proud they had busted this group. It made big news.

Yes FBI engaged in investigations of this kind while Clinton was president, unfortunately they then decided to impede their field investigators and couldn't prevent 9/11.

Inquiry into this DID establish field investigators WERE indeed impede, some how it failed to find out by WHOM and for what reason.

but it is good to be reminded they are on the job now.

One meant to merely warn Americans that their surveillance powers are growing and growing, without any end in sight, and are bound to eventually encompass EVERYONE if they have their way.

I think they hope to intimidate people who are NOT involved in anti-Bush actions, to scare the wits out of them, and prevent them from even considering joining any political non-Republican group, and even speaking out, eventually.

I take part in all sorts of e-mail campaigns to all and sundry, but the other day I found one that made me think twice. Starting 8/19, Ascroft is traveling all over the country, looking for support for his USA Patriot Act and his proposed expansions of it.:-(

I have contacted my senators and congressman to oppose the Patriot Act on numerous occasions. I know that they must receive thousands of e-mails and faxes, so I never worried about it before. I even received a letter from my freeper congressman in which he told me the reasons he supports it.:grr:

When Voice4Change asked me to send an e-mail directly to Ashcroft, I thought twice about it. Maybe my freeper mother isn't so far off the mark when she warns me that the CIA is going to show up at the door, who knows? I finally did send the e-mail, but really toned down my ``optional text.''
:scared:

If you have the courage to e-mail Ashcroft, here's the link. The more, the merrier.:-)

http://capwiz.com/voice4change/mail/oneclick_compose/?alertid=3142006

green, purple, brown, or whatever color
alert for some time now, maybe they just
want to let us know we need to continue
to be scared. They like us to be scared
so we don't become questioning citizens
who would like to have some accountability
in government.

of any group deemed "Al Queda" linked.

I would still like to know who these groups are, however.:shrug:

but that would be beyond Shrub.