Wednesday, October 31, 2007

Homegrown Terror Bill and bogus Terrorist Websites

It is disturbing reading that the Violent Radicalization and Homegrown Terror Bill Passes House. Clink the link to read thought provoking editorial on the implications of this bill of what is essentially a fascist bill that gives the green light to target ANYONE: an extract:

"By all appearances the bill is designed to label those who speak out against the government's proven lies, deceit and ever increasing fascist tendencies and allows the government and law enforcement agencies to strongly and rapidly stifle any and all dissent. Said otherwise, the bill - should it become law - removes your right to disagree with anything the government says or does and places you at extreme risk of becoming arrested and possibly "disappeared", or to use the Bush government's euphemism, "rendered"."

US intelligence spent $43.5 Billion in 2007, how much specifically on the war in cyberspace isn't clear, however, The bill deemed the internet to be a key threat:

"SEC. 899B. FINDINGS.
(3) The Internet has aided in facilitating violent radicalization, ideologically based violence, and the homegrown terrorism process in the United States by providing access to broad and constant streams of terrorist-related propaganda to United States citizens."An image from Jihadunspun.net, It supports a holy war against the West but is created by who?.
The methods used so far by counter terrorism units have been deemed creative. an AFP article in May 2007 entitled US gets creative in online battle against Al-Qaeda is quite revealing: It begins:

"US officials championing freedom and democracy are well aware that they cannot try to silence Islamist militants by censoring or blocking the burgeoning number of Al-Qaeda related web sites."
Are there any US officials championing freedom and democracy? Only 6 out of Some 432 representatives voted against the bill which seems to be aimed at eliminating freedom and democracy! Surely censoring and blocking websites would be an effective method of diluting their impact?
"Lieutenant Colonel Joseph Felter, director of the Combating Terrorism Center at the United States military academy at West Point said that attempts to close down the sites have proven futile. "Attempts to shut down websites have proven as fruitless as a game of whack-a-mole.""

But at least you end up with one less mole each time, so instead:

Frank Cilluffo, director of the Homeland Security Policy Institute at George Washington University outlined a number of tactics for tapping into the online community and using its very nature to US advantage.

For one, "it is possible that an intelligence officer posing as a sympathizer could infiltrate an online extremist community," he said.

"Seeds of confusion, doubt and distrust could then be planted in order to chip away at the ties that bind individual extremists into a cohesive and dangerous group."

If you come home from work and find that someone has laid a turd in your living room wouldn't the most sensible response be to scoop it up and flush it down the loo? Then secure the locks and tighten the windows to make sure that the offender doesn't revisit. The 'creative' solution of fighting like with like, seems to be to akin to laying your own turd next to the unwanted guest in the vague hope that you might defeat it by rendering it 'confused'. Felter continued:

"Exploit enemy vulnerabilities made publicly available on the Internet. One of the most effective ways to hurt the jihadis is to use their own writings, discourse and web postings against them,"

"We can monitor them ... follow the networks and assess their operational capacity. We can sabotage them by infiltrating their networks and flooding the web with bogus information."

So not just one turd, a whole sewer in your own living room to solve the problem! in researching this it was reported that over 75% of alleged terrorist websites were registered in US. To account for this anomaly it was suggested that proxy's were used. Is it possible that many of these websites are in fact the products of the creative war of terror?

How many so called "terrorist websites" are actually in fact the product of US intelligence agencies? Flooding the web with bogus information to perpetuate the necessity for The Mega Lie called the war on terror?

No comments: