It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

FOX says Internet beeing used more and more by Al Qaeda

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 11:56 AM
link   
I think we have really reached the end of the Internet now. I just heard on Fox there has to be a way to CONTROL users. With the porn, Al Qaeda, Radicals, etc.

I dont have a link, but beware. Internets demise is on its way.




posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 12:12 PM
link   
Good thing that crackpot Alex Jones said this about 2 years ago. I would have believed him if there was some proof....... Ohhhh wait there has been proof all over the place.. DOHHH!!!!

And a lesson to people who thing things can get better as bush is in office. Prove it to me.

Lets see our amendments are disappearing, 1st amendment will be dead soon, 7th amendment well lets see. "There's bombs in London lets search everyone in NYC."

Anyway no news flash for me. Good thing for hackers.. remember now everything on a computer program can be broken. so... it wont last long if at all.



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 04:05 PM
link   
I wonder how they know AQ is using the Internet more. Do they know who's in the club and their IP addresses and everything?



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 04:08 PM
link   
It's just an excuse to put restrictions on the net in the US. Did China also tell it's people that they were being protected through restriction? I wouldn't be surprised.



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 04:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by Jonna
It's just an excuse to put restrictions on the net in the US. Did China also tell it's people that they were being protected through restriction? I wouldn't be surprised.


Oh I know that...I was just being sarcastic.

That should beg the question--if you can track people down through their ISP, why do you have to hunt for them in Iraq? Like DUH!


Then again, anyone that doesn't agree with the government nowadays is a potential terrorist....



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 04:29 PM
link   
Fox news loves to stirr the cauldron, dont they?


By saying this on air they are basically planting the seed, or fertilizing it, or watering it and giving more cause for the government to clamp down on the Internet. Such bastards.


They'll sell their own soul.



posted on Apr, 6 2006 @ 04:59 PM
link   
Hi all,

Just wondering if Al Quaida gets DSL in their caves over in Afghanistan. Either that or are they worried about the ones who have infiltrated the US? I know with the Patriot Act the gov. can limit certain things, but best of luck to them censoring the internet. There are way too many smart computer people out there who will figure out how to get around it (I hope). I'm all for taking away underage porn, but the legal porn is absolutely necesarry. Without it I'd have to leave my basement and actually try to talk to females.



And a lesson to people who thing things can get better as bush is in office. Prove it to me.


One good thing about Bush's presidency is that it was woken up a lot of people to the fact that our gov. isn't acting in the interest of the people. I see more people trying to figure out how the system really works and they can see the pitfalls of being apathetic to the whole thing. Not enough people have see in yet but I try to be optimistic.

Thank You



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 01:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
Fox news loves to stirr the cauldron, dont they?


I don't watch Faux News. I call it the Neo-Con Channel.



They'll sell their own soul.


Assuming they have one to sell!



posted on Apr, 11 2006 @ 01:36 PM
link   
Yeah...

Control users and get them to start subscribing to cable!

Oh... and stop pirating shows that appear on Fox!

What exactly do they mean by control, anyway?
I mean, like, internet licenses or something? For the whole world??



posted on Apr, 12 2006 @ 04:39 PM
link   

What exactly do they mean by control, anyway? I mean, like, internet licenses or something? For the whole world??

I'm not sure, koji, but I do know that it just bugs the hell out of O'Reilly that there isn't more "control" over the internet. He always seems to slip in a "protect the children" from the big bad internet tirade about once a month. I have no doubt that is where dg heard this from.

The only clue I have as to O'Reilly's desire for control is something that happened concerning the last election. I remember him railing on about the damage done by "the bloggers" at that time.

And I'm sure that the exposure of his sexual peccadiloes that was broadcast all over the net really teed him off, since he couldn't totally control the spin.



posted on Apr, 13 2006 @ 09:36 PM
link   
I'm not the most intelligent person in the world on computer matters. But can't you track something from a website or a person who posted on it. I know the with my internet security software you can track an attack and it will travel the route the ping came from and tell you where it originated. Could we track and or shut down these terrorist sites? Especially if we got thier IP addresses unless they were using dynamic IP's which wouldn't give us much help.



posted on Apr, 13 2006 @ 09:43 PM
link   
I think this is just the fed's way of saying "hi" to all of us conspiracy nutters, along with others.



posted on Apr, 13 2006 @ 09:56 PM
link   
blah blah blah, thats all I hear. Linux + Boxes (computers for the non-geek) / Wireless = pwnz0ring the feds with a looser attitude readjustment tool. Seriously people if you believe they could just wipe it out over night you got another thing coming, and if you do then by all means go out and buy a spool of cat5, a crimper, couple hundred RJ45 ends and start burning every distro on LinuxISO.org.

As for tracking the evil terrorists I guess you could do that if they played nice and didnt use proxies, 'borrowed' wireless connections or other various tricks to obscure the true source of an attack or whatever.

Look at it this way, if the mighty RIAA and MPAA can't stop the pseudo-terrorist-filesharers with their tentacles that seem to dip into every ISP around the world then how will the goverment bust some terrorists who probably are alot more concered about not getting caught than a bunch of college students downloading the latest movies and albums?



posted on Apr, 13 2006 @ 10:14 PM
link   
AL Gore invented it.
AL Queda will put it to sleep.

Very Conspiritori-AL



posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 04:02 AM
link   

Originally posted by sambo5us
I'm not the most intelligent person in the world on computer matters. But can't you track something from a website or a person who posted on it. I know the with my internet security software you can track an attack and it will travel the route the ping came from and tell you where it originated. Could we track and or shut down these terrorist sites? Especially if we got thier IP addresses unless they were using dynamic IP's which wouldn't give us much help.


The server that host any website can track them if they arent routing through anony proxies, however most of these websites are owned by countries or people sympathetic to their cause. besides that I doubt the IP addresses are static anyway, but you can still find out who is leasing those ranges.

and as for the US government and their computer monitoring, they are so far behind they dont have a clue trust me. the government, not the scientific community and they do not see eye to eye lol.

they outsource their IT to india


[edit on 14-4-2006 by XphilesPhan]



posted on Apr, 14 2006 @ 04:10 AM
link   
Link Down

Can anyone provide a link to a source article for this?



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 07:46 AM
link   

Originally posted by dgtempe
They'll sell their own soul.


Would someone please name for me a politician or a 'news' channel
or even a major TV religious figure that wouldn't?

*crickets chirping*

Talk about mission impossible, eh?

btw - I put 'news' in quotes like that because I don't believe
that the 'news' is news ... it's ALL spin and propaganda.
Finding truth these days is nearly impossible.



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 08:59 AM
link   
Anyone ever wondered why, when the newsies tell us about terrorist articles on Al CIAda or Islamic websites, they never give the URL? Maybe it's to protect us from nasty Islamic propaganda, we just have to take their word for it


Mr Murdoch is also losing a lot of money from greatly dwindling newsprint and media to the internet and bloggers who are not under the control of the big corporate machine. It doesn't suit the governments either if their propaganda is undermined and their misdemeanors reported on to a widening national and international audience. Knowledge is power... apparently


They'll always throw in the "must protect the kiddies" angle but that's about as transparent as any election promises they make. They really do think we are all dumb and will believe them.

[edit on 26-4-2006 by Britguy]



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 10:12 AM
link   

Originally posted by jsobecky


And I'm sure that the exposure of his sexual peccadiloes that was broadcast all over the net really teed him off, since he couldn't totally control the spin.
I see you are using the same dictionary O"Reilly does.

If he cannot control it, he wants it gone.



posted on Apr, 26 2006 @ 01:56 PM
link   

Originally posted by Britguy
Anyone ever wondered why, when the newsies tell us about terrorist articles on Al CIAda or Islamic websites, they never give the URL? Maybe it's to protect us from nasty Islamic propaganda, we just have to take their word for it

This goes for all news sources, including Al-Jazeera


Mr Murdoch is also losing a lot of money from greatly dwindling newsprint and media to the internet and bloggers who are not under the control of the big corporate machine.

Yes. This is true of nearly all print news sources. They haven't yet realized that their new role will be limited to reporting the facts and serving as a reference source. The more accurate they are, the more they will be in demand. But who wants a news source that is out of date before the ink dries anymore?


from dgtempe
I see you are using the same dictionary O"Reilly does.


I've been noticing a sudden increase of posts from you that refer to Fox News, dg. What can we glean from that?



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join