TERRORIST SITES NO DANGER.

WHY THEY DO IT.

The gifted student jailed for life for trying to assassinate MP Stephen Timms told police she had wanted to die as a martyr after watching more than 100 hours of video sermons from the extremist cleric Anwar al-Awlaki which she had come upon on the internet.

The effect of listening to and viewing the cleric's video was such that, despite the fact that Choudhry never met or had any contact with him, she chose to withdraw from contact with her friends and ended her studies, quitting as the top student in her course at King's College London on 27 April this year before carrying out her attack on 14 May.

She began listening to his sermons in November 2009, and finished the last in the first week of May, days before she carried out the attack. "I downloaded the full set of Anwar al-Awlaki's lectures," Choudhry told police, saying that she listened to more than 100 hours of them.

Police believe Choudhry is the first Briton to be inspired by al-Qaida to try to assassinate a public figure on British soil.

SOURCE:

WHAT HAVE THEY DONE?

by Brian Michael Jenkins at RAND:



Between September 11, 2001, and the end of 2009, 46 publicly reported cases of domestic radicalization and recruitment to jihadist terrorism occurred in the United States;

13 of those cases occurred in 2009.

Most of the would-be jihadists were individuals who recruited themselves into the terrorist role. Some provided assistance to foreign terrorist organizations; some went abroad to join various jihad fronts; some plotted terrorist attacks in the United States, usually with little success because of intervention by the authorities. 

The threat of large-scale terrorist violence has pushed law enforcement toward prevention rather than criminal apprehension after an event — or, as one senior police official put it, “staying to the left of the boom,” which means stopping the explosions or attacks before they occur. 

This shift toward prevention requires both collecting domestic intelligence — always a delicate mission in a democracy — and maintaining community trust and cooperation.

Posted on 28 May 2010 @ 01:47

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

HOW ARE THEY CONNECTED?

JIHADI BLOG LINK ANALYSIS

The UK's Home Office recently posted the research paper Estimating network size and tracking information dissemination
amongst Islamic blogs. It is good as far as it goes, and well worth your time to read, though I would have liked to see more data about the linkage between each of the subject blogs. Inspired by it I took a quick look at the blog of Somali-Canadian shaheed Mohamed Elmi Ibrahim, examining which sites link to it, which sites link to those linking sites, and then which of the latter sites link or are linked to any of the other sites in the resulting list. The network that emerges looks like this:

4,000 videos of al Awlaki up at YouTube. JAWA

Where are they?

JIHADIS WHO USE BLACKBERRYS

In a recent sample of 411 IP addresses from a jihadi forum, 25 were found to be Blackberry users. These individuals were traced to the following countries (listed from high to low in order of occurance):

• Egypt
• Kuwait
• Morocco
• Sudan
• Libya
• Somalia

I think it safe to assume that at least some of these individuals are using Blackberrys so they may better avoid detection and identification. Those of you in the audience who have the capability will want to take a close look at traffic originating from the following netblocks:

217.20.243.1 - 217.20.243.63
41.95.0.0 - 41.95.255.255
41.91.0.0 - 41.91.255.255
41.152.64.0 - 41.152.127.255
41.206.144.0 - 41.206.159.255
41.153.64.0 - 41.153.127.255
196.12.254.0 - 196.12.254.255
41.208.82.0 - 41.208.82.127
213.132.255.0 - 213.132.255.255
94.128.0.0 - 94.129.255.255*
94.128.0.0 - 94.128.127.255*

* yes, I know, there's some overlap here. I'm just calling it as I see it - you sort it out.

SoFIR: The Poor Man's NSA™

Posted on 03 November 2010 @ 14:55

SOURCE:

Why US can't just take sites down?

By Devost

American officials have to convince their foreign counterparts that removing a particular site hosted in their territory is both legal under the host country’s laws and necessary. 


‘You have to make some pretty specific legal arguments,’ says Devost. These requests can run up against sensitivities over national sovereignty and complicated issues of free speech, a difficult issue even here in the United States. 


Some governments simply aren’t receptive to begin with. ‘You can’t go after every site in every country because some countries just won’t cooperate,’ Devost tells Danger Room.”

SOURCE:

WE ARE AT WAR: 

I WOULD ARGUE THESE SITES ARE LEGITIMATE TARGETS.
THEY CAN BE SHUT DOWN,
EVERY TIME THEY GO DOWN THEY LOOSE MEMBERS,
loose pages and hurts moral.
They can be effectively targeted by Cyber
forces. 


BUT THE TERRORIST SITES ARE STILL UP.


SEEMS SOMEONE THINKS:
TERRORIST SITES PRESENT NO DANGER.


ARE THE INTELLIGENCE AGENCYS 
CODEPENDENT ?
IS COLLECTING INTEL MORE IMPORTANT
THAN STOPPING ATTACKS?


COUNTER POINT Anyone?




Gerald
Anthropologist


.