Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 98
  1.    #1  
    Surely the internet is the most traceable medium (as any teenager who has downloaded bootleg music and been sued). How do terrorists manage to have websites and otherwise use the Internet to communicate?

    Sure, this requires the cooperation of ISP and other countries, but I doubt that any country will put up serious obstacles when confronted with proof of the activities. Besides US should have pretty good control over the technology (routers, DNS) and capability to hack the sites or use Denial of service against these sites.

    Why haven't we infiltrated their internet behavior better? Infiltrating their humans messengers would be tough. I figured that the terrorists were exposing themselves by using the internet to communicate or distribute their propaganda ..
    Last edited by aprasad; 04/14/2007 at 06:49 AM. Reason: mostly spelling mistakes
    --
    Aloke
    Cingular GSM
    Software:Treo650-1.17-CNG
    Firmware:01.51 Hardware:A
  2. #2  
    Two possible answers:

    1. The level of infiltration and listening is greater than we know. (I.e., the intelligence services are listening but don't discuss how much they are listening).

    2. The ability of terrorists to anonymize themselves is greater than we imagine. (I.e., through use of throwaway accounts, internet cafes, etc. they can become much more difficult to find).

    No. THREE possible answers. (Sorry Monty Python and Spanish Inquisition).

    3. The terrorists aren't using the internet nearly as much as we think, or at least not in ways that lead to intelligence paydirt in ways that we'd think. (E.g., some dude with a rant who puts up a website may well be a dead-end for intelligence).

    I don't know. Al Gore invented it. Why not ask him?
  3. #3  
    Probably principally a huge base of support. Likely too many people who are not terrorists support the terrorists, and you cant monitor or trace them all.

    Remember, its an ideological battle, and one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter.

    Surur
  4. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #4  
    ^ Exactly. Just ask these yokels.

  5. #5  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    ^ Exactly. Just ask these yokels.

    BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAA !!!!!!

  6. #6  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad View Post
    Surely the internet is the most traceable medium (as any teenager who has downloaded bootleg music and been sued). How do terrorists manage to have websites and otherwise use the Internet to communicate?

    Sure, this requires the cooperation of ISP and other countries, but I doubt that any country will put up serious obstacles when confronted with proof of the activities. Besidesm US shouls have pretty good control over the technology (routers, DNS) and capability to hack the sites or use Dinal of service against these sites.

    Why haven't we infiltrated their internet behavior better? Infiltrating their humans messengers would be tough. I figured that the terrorists were exposing themselves by using the internet to communicate or distribute their propaganda ..

    You have heard of a proxy right?
  7. tirk's Avatar
    Posts
    810 Posts
    Global Posts
    918 Global Posts
    #7  
    Quote Originally Posted by aprasad View Post
    Surely the internet is the most traceable medium (as any teenager who has downloaded bootleg music and been sued). How do terrorists manage to have websites and otherwise use the Internet to communicate?

    Sure, this requires the cooperation of ISP and other countries, but I doubt that any country will put up serious obstacles when confronted with proof of the activities. Besidesm US shouls have pretty good control over the technology (routers, DNS) and capability to hack the sites or use Dinal of service against these sites.

    Why haven't we infiltrated their internet behavior better? Infiltrating their humans messengers would be tough. I figured that the terrorists were exposing themselves by using the internet to communicate or distribute their propaganda ..
    Perhaps the record companies think there's money to be made/saved in catching kids sharing music, whereas western governments think a certain level of terrorism keeps voters from worrying about their inability to sort out the economy/health/education system?
    PalmPilot Professional...Palm Vx...Treo 600...Treo 680...HTC Touch HD...iPhone 4S...
  8. #8  
    I believe that the US (and other developed nations) have a complete grasp of everything that is happening around the world (both technologically and socially)... and post-911, everything that the terrorists are up to.

    They merely choose not to reveal this information so as not to jeopardize their operations. Besides, there needs to be a substantial long-term strategic or economic (Capitalism has prevailed, in the end) advantage in embarking on any type of operation (and not just against terrorists).

    Sometimes, keeping the ghost of terrorism alive may be to an advantage. (that same old conspiracy theory, but there is some modicum of truth in it.)

    We do live in sophisticated times... to rephrase a great curse.
  9. #9  
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenHex View Post
    I believe that the US (and other developed nations) have a complete grasp of everything that is happening around the world (both technologically and socially)... and post-911, everything that the terrorists are up to.

    They merely choose not to reveal this information so as not to jeopardize their operations.
    One would think so, but "bumbling bureaucracy" has never gone out of fashion.

    Surur
  10. #10  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    "bumbling bureaucracy"
    Hey surur!

    That is quiet a misconception, us common-folk have been tutored to believe. It is to their advantage for us to continue believing that, so they are happy to let us do so. Some of the brightest individuals are part of the bureaucracy (sure, they may not know how to use a Treo). Above them all are the politicians. I'm in awe of them and would never berate them.

    They have the (dangerous) ability to grasp (with "depth") the true nature of things and play their cards with insufficient or "soft" information and power to forecast and mold the future, not to mention, they literally control the destiny of us teeming millions; bureaucrats and politicians (in any country) are truly the blessed.

    We have our toys...

    .
    Last edited by GreenHex; 04/14/2007 at 06:40 AM.
  11. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #11  
    Quote Originally Posted by surur View Post
    One would think so, but "bumbling bureaucracy" has never gone out of fashion.

    Surur
    Agreed. Even at the most fundamental, and supposedly capable elements of governmental action.

    Summation: KATRINA!
  12. #12  
    A few years back, we captured al Qaeda's "webmaster," and used his information to track down other terrorists.

    They used private websites, which aren't exactly going to show up on Google, and which in effect become like private phone calls. Only when we identify one side can we find the others.

    And according to the press, terrorists use codewords in public and private to avoid suspicion.

    And as others pointed out, we don't know the extent to which we've infiltrated their networks. We just hear about a cell being busted occasionally.
  13. #13  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    Summation: KATRINA!
    Katrina is an example of apathy, insensitivity and irresponsibility, not of incompetence. "Incompetence" is just a politically correct and acceptable "cover" for a deeper malice.
  14. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #14  
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenHex View Post
    Katrina is an example of apathy, insensitivity and irresponsibility, not of incompetence. "Incompetence" is just a politically correct and acceptable "cover" for a deeper malice.
    And how do you define the malice which is the Department of Homeland Security / Michael Chertoff, under which National Disaster [Katrina] response lies?
  15. #15  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    And how do you define the malice which is the Department of Homeland Security / Michael Chertoff, under which National Disaster [Katrina] response lies?
    I meant, not mailice as in "wishing evil to others" but "problem." I'm just not getting the proper word for it.

    Sorry for the miscommunication on such a delicate topic.

    Of-course, I don't know much about what happens in the USA, and such things are always open to interpretation. But I was commenting on politicians and bureaucrats in general, and Katrina just popped-up. Closer to home, I'd probably have taken some other example, of which I have better information.

    Why disasters, even simple planning decisions are tinged with greed and selfishness by people to whom you have handed the keys. It so happens that sometimes it is the best way!
  16. #16  
    Quote Originally Posted by GreenHex View Post
    Katrina is an example of apathy, insensitivity and irresponsibility, not of incompetence.
    Unless, of course, you're talking about the actions of the Corps, Me-maw, and Willy Wonka et al. That's not even touching the surface of the flat-out incompentence in dealing with it _before_ the national response, or lack thereof. Nothing that happened during Katrina was unexpected or hadn't been predicted. That it happened from systemic levee failures after the storm was the only unexpected twist.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  17. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #17  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    That it happened from systemic levee failures after the storm was the only unexpected twist.
    “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” Is this what you're saying?
  18. #18  
    Quote Originally Posted by backbeat View Post
    “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees.” Is this what you're saying?
    AAMOF, that oft-quoted Bushism was accurate. No one expected the levees to be breached, i.e. broken through. The expectations were that if the storm had not taken the late turn that it did that the levees could easily be overtopped by a combination of storm surge and rainfall from a large, slow-moving storm.
    ‎"Is that suck and salvage the Kevin Costner method?" - Chris Matthews on Hardball, July 6, 2010. Wonder if he's talking about his oil device or his movie career...
  19. backbeat's Avatar
    Posts
    55 Posts
    Global Posts
    138 Global Posts
    #19  
    Quote Originally Posted by Toby View Post
    AAMOF, that oft-quoted Bushism was accurate. No one expected the levees to be breached, i.e. broken through. The expectations were that if the storm had not taken the late turn that it did that the levees could easily be overtopped by a combination of storm surge and rainfall from a large, slow-moving storm.
    Never heard of LSU? How about the Army Corps of Engineers? Both had produced models depicting a Cat3 hurricane's impact on the levee system, specific to New Orleans taking the primary force, which clearly showed the extent of catastrophy.

    When were these models produced? 10+ years prior to Katrina, even including models identical to the reality of how Katrina made landfall!

    “I don’t think anybody anticipated the breach of the levees” is sadly farcical.
  20. #20  
    Source?
Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast

Posting Permissions