The other AOL

[varwoche]

Al-Qaeda Online that is. I find it curious that this sort of discussion occurs in plain sight...

Deepening speculation about the severity of battle injuries to Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, his followers Thursday squabbled on the Web over naming a new leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, exposing rifts and raising questions about how the insurgency may change.

If we were to learn the language and lingo, somehow I suspect that members of this forum would be quite effective at disrupting their debate. (How do you say "Evidence?" in Arabic?)

add: article

 

[pgwenthold]

Al-Qaeda Online that is. I find it curious that this sort of discussion occurs in plain sight... If we were to learn the language and lingo, somehow I suspect that members of this forum would be quite effective at disrupting their debate. (How do you say "Evidence?" in Arabic?)

Yeah, that sounds like a great idea. Let's go and torque off a bunch of al-qaeda members...

 

[aerocontrols]

I used to lurk and occassionally post on a webiste called ClearGuidance. Very pro-Osama crowd there. Muslims-only allowed to post, and I had to represent myself as a Muslim in order to get a login ID. To admit to being anything else would get you banned. Their server kept getting shut down, and they would pop back up on a different server in a different country. The moderators appeared to be Al Qaeda recruiters, or perhaps just posers.

Mostly I just played Devil's advocate by acting confused, but sometimes I would openly challenge their non-religious assertions.

I killed one thread where multiple posters had asserted both that Osama was a great hero for bringing down the WTC and that the Jews were behind it all using remote-controlled planes. That is, several posters believed both were true simultaneously, and when I suggested that the two explanations were mutually exclusive and that 'we' needed to determine which was the true explanation, the thread died, except that, as I recall, someone accused me of being a Christian.

There was also a thread about how the WTC couldn't have fallen due to a jet fuel fire because the temperature of burning jet fuel was lower than the melting point of steel (started by a moderator who claimed to know such things because he was an engineer) I pointed out that in my engineering classes we had been taught that steel gets soft long before it melts, and also that regular old building fires had brought down skyscrapers in the past.

Mostly, however, I found the forum members impenatrable to argument. Behavior such as reacting negatively to jokes about how the tikka or bindi are useful for target practice was nothing but a sure way of getting banned.

 

[BPSCG]

Re: Re: The other AOL

Yeah, that sounds like a great idea. Let's go and torque off a bunch of al-qaeda members...

From last week's Government Computer News:

Covering one’s tracks
The concept of cyberoperational security, or cyber-opsec, is both a thread running through every session and a standalone lecture during the course.

Many people don’t realize that investigating e-mail and Web sites also leaves identifying traces, unless you take steps to hide your tracks.

Consequently, in tracking terrorists, protecting one’s identity is paramount, especially for agents with families.

“Pedophiles won’t hunt you down, but these guys will—there have been documented cases,” Grubb warned the class. “Every time you sit down, use opsec.”

A detective with a large metropolitan police department in the Northeast was a guest lecturer for this segment. On the front lines of terrorist-hunting himself, he laid out the best way to approach the task.

“Buy a computer with no ties to you,” the detective said. “Buy one at a flea market,” then wipe the hard drive completely. Buy a bunch of network interface cards and swap them out, so the machine will look different each time, he suggested, and use a different operating system each time. Never use your home computer for investigative work.

Go to the library
Grubb added other suggestions: Go to different places, such as public libraries, to do the work. Use a safe house if you are conducting major operations. And most important, don’t become predictable.

There is software available that will configure a “virtual machine” within a computer, the detective said, so that transactions can’t be traced back to a real computer. He suggested setting up a virtual machine for every single case. Set up undercover Internet accounts and use anonymizers—free services available on the Internet to further cover one’s tracks.

There are a wide range of software applications, most of them shareware or freeware, that can be used for “network penetration,” actually peering into a suspect Web site or the contents of an individual’s computer.

Other tools can capture every action an agent takes as he probes cyberspace, recording keystrokes or caching Web pages as they are viewed, to allow for more leisurely examination later on. Yet other tools will capture e-mail traffic, even instant messages.

“All of these steps to date must be done before going to your first [suspicious] Web site,” Grubb told the class. “When you’re taking a ‘snapshot,’ be sure to be anonymous, because you’re actually finally touching them. ... When all of a sudden every single page is being hit, you’re lighting them up like a Christmas tree.”

The enemy’s tools
The agents in the class were given disks with many of these tools, and the detective directed them through some exercises so they could begin to get familiar with their use.

“This is our arsenal, and if you don’t think the bad guys have these, you’re dreaming,” he said.

 

[Mycroft]

Originally posted by aerocontrols
I killed one thread where multiple posters had asserted both that Osama was a great hero for bringing down the WTC and that the Jews were behind it all using remote-controlled planes. That is, several posters believed both were true simultaneously, and when I suggested that the two explanations were mutually exclusive and that 'we' needed to determine which was the true explanation, the thread died, except that, as I recall, someone accused me of being a Christian.

That’s not mutually exclusive. Osama is a great hero for maneuvering the Jews into bringing down the WTC with remote-controlled planes to strike a blow against the Great Satan that supports the evil Zionist Entity supposedly to incriminate and demonize Muslims but getting the tables turned on them when the Jewish conspiracy is revealed exposing them for the manipulative offal they are.

It only seems complicated. With a little practice you can get into it.

Okay, kidding aside, I take it this board is down for good now? I sometimes troll some Islamic boards that sometimes produce some wacky stuff, but not nearly as bad as what you describe.

Originally posted by aerocontrols
Mostly, however, I found the forum members impenatrable to argument. Behavior such as reacting negatively to jokes about how the tikka or bindi are useful for target practice was nothing but a sure way of getting banned.

That’s so sad.

 

[aerocontrols]

Okay, kidding aside, I take it this board is down for good now? I sometimes troll some Islamic boards that sometimes produce some wacky stuff, but not nearly as bad as what you describe.

I haven't been able to get to it the last few times I tried, though it may have been reborn with a different name.

 

[demon]

al-Zarqawi reaches the top of the career ladder...Rumsfeld likens him to Hitler...

The Don has promoted al-Zarqawi; the one-legged, semi-literate, feral Jordanian is now the Hitler du jour. How Team Bush comes out with this stuff and keeps a staight face is one of the biggest known unknowns of our time.

(05-26) 13:40 PDT Fort Bragg, N.C. (AP) --

In a pep talk to thousands of paratroopers Thursday, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld likened al-Qaida's reportedly wounded chief in Iraq to a cornered Adolf Hitler during the final days of Nazi Germany.

"Like Hitler in his bunker, this violent extremist, failing to advance his political objectives, now appears committed to destroying everything and everyone around him," Rumsfeld said.

Iraqi ministers said Thursday they have information verifying rumors that reputed terrorist mastermind Abu Musab al-Zarqawi had been wounded. Al-Zarqawi is Iraq's most wanted militant and has claimed responsibility for the country's deadliest attacks.

Rumsfeld addressed the Army's elite 82nd Airborne Division, which has had 42 soldiers killed and 450 wounded in action in Iraq and Afghanistan since 2001. About 1,500 division soldiers are in Afghanistan, and about 400 are in Iraq.

Like the Japanese kamikaze attacks at the end of World War II, the suicide bombings by the followers of al-Zarqawi are a sign of desperation, Rumsfeld said.

"The Zarqawis and the bin Ladens, like the tyrants and fascists before them ... tried to destroy things they could never build, and they tried to kill people they could never persuade," Rumsfeld said.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/n/a/2005/05/26/national/w113852D63.DTL

 

[Mycroft]

"The Zarqawis and the bin Ladens, like the tyrants and fascists before them ... tried to destroy things they could never build, and they tried to kill people they could never persuade," Rumsfeld said.

And your point is...?

 

[varwoche]

I used to lurk and occassionally post on a webiste called ClearGuidance. Very pro-Osama crowd there.

I lurked at such a site intending to participate but never did. I'm still interested in bouncing my world view off of an islamist or two to see if the fact that I'm harshly critical of US foriegn policy buys me any chits re my militant opposition to the islamist movement.

We do the fireworks thing pretty big on July 4. Every year we trapse to the nearby indian reservation and acquire the biggest, nastiest, most illegal explosives they offer (under the counter of course). With this indulgent activity on my resume, I'm not sure it's in my best interest to also be visiting islamist web sites.

 

[Mephisto]

Hmmmm

And your point is...?

Seems a bit ironic to me, especially in retrospect . . .

 

[Mycroft]

Re: Hmmmm

Seems a bit ironic to me, especially in retrospect . . .

How so?