| Submit your comments on this article |
| Science & Technology |
| Stopping Al-Qaeda With the Click of a Mouse? |
| 2012-04-20 |
| See video at link. When five of the most trafficked Islamic jihadist websites went down in late March and into April, it derailed Al-Qaeda's ability to communicate and post information to supporters. The Internet is a vital tool for terrorists to spread propaganda around the world, share instructions on how to build bombs, and even raise money, all the while staying relatively anonymous. So when the sites go down for an extended period of time it's a major setback in their pursuit of global Jihad. Not only does it cut off communication, it gives the international community the impression that they're behind in Internet technology. American authorities and other western governments have denied any involvement, even though they would seem to have the most incentive to shut down the sites. However, monitoring Al-Qaeda's online communication gives the American military insight into the psyche and technical ability of terrorists- information that they wouldn't otherwise have access to. For insight into the coded world of cyber attacks, Christiane speaks with the foremost authority on the topic, former Counter Terrorism Czar under the Bush and Clinton Administrations, Richard Clark. Richard Clark? Stop, that's all I need to know that the entire piece is going to be nonsense. My take on this: Shut it down. If Al Qaeda thinks it's a net good for them, then it's probably a net bad for us. Don't we have folks who can figure them out? Can jihadi wannabees actually connect to Al Qaeda without the experts finding them? It makes no sense. We don't need weak-minded fence-sitters and financial supporters to be exposed to this crap any more than necessary. |
| Posted by:gorb |
| #4 I wouldn't form a conclusion without knowing a lot more details and I don't believe Christiane Amanpour is going to help with that. But it's still an interesting debate and it's interesting to speculate about what happened to those websites even though we'll probably never know. I think if I was an investigator and I only needed a little more time to crack the case I'd want the time. But if you're a decision maker and think you've heard that story too many times to risk any more damage you might be inclined to just shut 'em down. Or somebody could just be testing some new hacking techniques. It's hard to say. |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-04-20 16:59 |
| #3 Interesting debate. It's not a debate when you've already formed your conclusion. |
| Posted by: Pappy 2012-04-20 14:45 |
| #2 I heard this same kind of debate a few days ago WRT botnets. It seems Microsoft shut down some compromised servers to stop the spread of the malware but in the process angered some law enforcement types who wanted a clandestine investigation to try to find the perpetrators. It was argued that while the internet |
| Posted by: Ebbang Uluque6305 2012-04-20 11:38 |
| #1 However, monitoring Al-Qaeda's online communication gives the American military insight into the psyche and technical ability of terrorists- information that they wouldn't otherwise have access to. An unstated, but valuable second order effect is that it pushes Al-Qaeda communications into venues which are even more susceptible to monitoring and exploitation. Utilizing our technological advanage to wage Computer Network Attack (CNA) is a good thing. More please, and more often. |
| Posted by: Besoeker 2012-04-20 06:21 |