Moon of Alabama Brecht quote
Back to Main

December 23, 2004
Terrorist007

In another thread barfly Pat (hat tip) pointed to a NBC news report "Web video teaches terrorists to make bomb vest".

Reluctantly using Internet Explorer, one can see the report online. The accompanying text says:

Posted in a militant Islamic chat room three days ago, a stunningly detailed 26-minute video on how to make a sophisticated suicide bomb vest, along with a demonstration of its kill range, using a mannequin.

…

The person who posted the note and video on the Internet called himself "terrorist007."

The 2:40 long report shows a few scenes from the video and has two experts commenting on it.

There are three chunks of thoughts and doubts I have about this report.

The first chunk is through the described posting of the video:

  • You can not post videos in a chatroom, not even in a "militant chatroom". You may, in theory, be able to post videos on messageboards, usenet or website comments. But do you know of any messageboard, usenet or website that would allow an anonymous commentator to post a 25 megabyte binary file?
  • If this was not posted by an anonymous commentator, it must have been posted by someone in contact with that site’s owner. That site does have an Internet Protocol address which you can see while downloading the video. Anybody can just ask here who has control of that IP number and site and who is the Internet Service Provider hosting it.
  • So where is that site, who is its owner and who did load up that video? Would this not be a good and easy-to-do story for the by-lined NBC investigative unit? Would not any secret service in this world step on the toes of that site’s owner within 24 hours?

Second thoughts go to the experts NBC uses to comment on that video:

  • Rick Francona is ex(?)-CIA and ex-Military. He is a seasoned Middle East culture expert:

Lt Col Francona traveled extensively in combat areas as an observer of Iraqi military operations against Iranian forces, and flew sorties with the Iraqi air force.

and sells a book. A review says:

Francona’s best anecdote involves his role as translator during Schwarzkopf’s negotiations with the Iraqis at the end of the war:

"Good morning, sir," Francona tells an arriving Iraqi general. "I am Major Francona from General Schwarzkopf’s staff. If you will step out of the car, I will take you to meet the general, and we can begin."

The Iraqi just sits there, glowering. So Francona, agitated by his recalcitrance, leans in closer and says, in Arabic slang, "Get out of the car, [expletive]."

  • Evan Kohlmann is a Terror Expert and has published a book and a few pieces for the neocon National Review. He has a certificate (four courses) from Georgetown University, was co-president of the Georgetown Israel Association and now has his own terror consulting shop at GlobalTerrorAlert.com. There he has also posted parts of the video not shown in the CBS news report (see the 12/20/04 entry).
  • Are these experts really experts on Middle East culture, or video making or suicide bomb fabrication? Are these experts CIA assets, or book sellers or NBC paid talking heads? Did Kohlmann, who posted parts of the video two days before NBC published the story, pass the video to them? Where did he get it from?

Third round of thoughts is to the video itself :

  • A man in a US(?) camouflage jacket shows how to put some stuff into a special vest, how to put some glue(?) from a can (with Latin letters on it) on a sheet of explosives(?) and metal balls and how to fix detonators(?) to that vest.
  • Large parts of both video excerpts are showing at least two test explosions with such vests. Each of the test explosions is filmed through at least three cameras. The tests involve some 30 human shaped targets made from metal sheets and a mannequin figure each.
  • Who, in camouflage, has the resources and need to make a video with such extensive, professional tests, with three-camera-test-documentation and special made metal dummy targets? Isn’t this more likely a counter-terrorist weapon analysis and damage evaluation video than an easy to distribute "how-to" paper on bomb making?

Could the video be a real terrorist video? Yes, it could be. Would a jihad trainer make a  traceable post of 25 megabytes professional made video with the pseudonym terrorist007? Well ahh, ehemm, may be.

But why is NBC underlying all of the report with some Sowjet sounding marching music? Why, when showing steps the video is alleged to describe, do they "smuggle in" a still picture about “mixing explosives” (the one without Arabic subtext)?

How, if your boss said "ultimately the Wild West [of the Internet] must give way to governance and control." and gave you unlimited resources, would this fit your (Dis)Information Warfare campaign and agenda?

So many questions. Where is my tin foil hat again?

Posted by b on December 23, 2004 at 23:46 UTC | Permalink
Comments

Excellent review Bernhard.
Some of us (you) see thru the bullshit but the objective it seems is to blanket the public’s receptors with as much of it as possible. Given the power of access they the bullshitters have at their disposal it may be a losing battle. OK maybe not losing losing as in we’re dead, but losing in the sense that it is impossible to confront these yokels face-to-face on what, Dan Rather’s show?
Must be done in a more subtle way. This is possible and it is working sort of but obviously it takes a lot of energy and commitment. I give a lot of credit to Mike Ruppert, for one, for doing this well. And you, but you have so much less exposure than he does. (And I know, less time and money and access too)
The point is it is absolutely necessary to keep up the pressure in every way possible; otherwise Wolfowitz wins, and that means losing as in we’re dead.

Posted by: rapt | Dec 24 2004 0:16 utc | 1

Bernhard- I would like to encourage you to cross post this over on DailyKos, if you have a journal account there. I think your questions should get out to as many people as possible.

Posted by: fauxreal | Dec 24 2004 1:21 utc | 2

Lest ye forget: Islamic terrorist websites based in Texas

Posted by: Uncle $cam | Dec 24 2004 1:30 utc | 3

@fauxreal
done – now please vote it up the recommanded list – Thanks!

Posted by: b | Dec 24 2004 1:34 utc | 4

b
strong & insightful post – you are awake late tonigh b – i wish you all the best for the coming times
still steel

Posted by: remembereringgiap | Dec 24 2004 1:46 utc | 5

FARKINN BREAKING NEWS:
Washington, DC
A little known U.S. insurgent group, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Strategic and International Studies (PFLSIS), has claimed responsibility for two explosions at the Pentagon, 5 minutes ago(10:10 PM, EST), vicinity Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s office.
A caller to FARKINN’s Washington bureau, identifying himself only as “Commandate Cordesman” wished Secretary Rumsfeld an “Ernst Rohm Moment” and a “Merry Christmas”.
Cordesman, while refusing to discuss the method of delivery, attributed the blast effect to the ultra high-explosive PDF.
As can be seen, damage to the Pentagon’s E-Ring was extensive:
PICTURE 1
PICTURE 2
A sad night in Washington tonight.
Back to you, Bernhard.

Posted by: Walter Crankcase | Dec 24 2004 3:20 utc | 6

For some time I have been expecting censorship of the blogosphere,
and it seems that the high priests and bonzes of the official media juggernaut are about to try to grind “us” into impotent ignorance.
Naturally we must resist. I would expect that another tactic in the same battle will be to emasculate the search engines, especially Google. I therefore propose that the Europeans who care about preserving freedom of information mount a campaign for a European Community sponsored search engine (even better if there are multiple
exemplars or “portals”). This is something that can and should be done.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Dec 24 2004 6:07 utc | 7

Censorship of the internet? It’s far too valuable a source to censor.
Ever heard of Internet Haganah?
“Internet Haganah is a small band of researchers, analysts, translators and consultants located in North America, Europe and the Middle East. We associate and collaborate with each other as necessitated by our common desire to do more than just watch Islamic extremists as they use the internet. We share an understanding that a jihad, or holy war, has been declared against the West, and these jihadists need to be met on whatever field of battle they may appear. Internet Haganah is also the 30,000 people who read this website each month and especially those readers who act on the information we provide here…
“What are those little blue things on the Internet page? They are little blue AK-47 assault rifles, and we adopted them a couple of years ago when we wanted a graphical way to represent the removal of a jihadist site from a webserver. Internet Haganah is responsible for many, but by no means all, of the Little Blue AK’s that have been posted on this site over the last two and a half years. We view this as a collective, global effort to defeat the global jihad. This is not about individual accomplishments.”
If I recall correctly, Internet Haganah and its most dedicated visitors were so successful in the mission to take down jihadist websites (over 600 at last count) that its owner was contacted over a year ago by a government agency that asked that they cease and desist. It’s not difficult to guess why. The owner of the website was unwilling to honor the request, and I do not recall whether or how this clash of aims was resolved.
The web is monitored in a variety of ways, its traffic and content scrutinized and analysed daily. One doesn’t, as a general rule, mess with a good thing.
As I understand it, Tenet was referring [in the link at the bottom of b’s post] to cybersecurity, of special concern to the intel and law enforcement community. This is not a content issue, but an information systems security one. It would be easier to discern either way with his full statement at hand. The quotes are ambiguous.
Government censorship is a serious issue. In a society such as ours, however, I think the growing cult of secrecy is a more potent threat.

Posted by: Pat | Dec 24 2004 10:57 utc | 8

From Pat’s Internet Haganah site comes a snippet that might be of interest.

From a Wall Street Journal story about the Marxist-Leninist Party of the Netherlands, which was a highly successful intelligence operation run by the Dutch secret service and dubbed “Operation Red Herring” by the CIA, we get the following:
In a country where erstwhile Maoists and other radicals have become pillars of the establishment, the exposure of the phony Marxist-Leninist Party of the Netherlands, or MLPN, has caused dismay and embarrassment. Frits Hoekstra, a former high-ranking security official, shocked former colleagues in September by publishing a book that described Project Mongol and other escapades. The interior minister ordered an investigation into whether state secrets were divulged. Former Maoists are aghast.
“I totally wasted 12 years of my life,” says Paul Wartena, an ex-MLPN member who was so dedicated to the cause he used to donate 20% of his salary to the fake party. He says he “had some doubts now and then” about the MLPN but stayed loyal because “I was very naive and Mr. Boevé was such a good actor.” Now a researcher at a university in Utrecht, Mr. Wartena wants Dutch intelligence to pay him back for all his donations.
Mr. Boevé, now 74, scoffs at his acolyte: “He was an idiot.”

Posted by: dan of steele | Dec 24 2004 11:19 utc | 9

Bernhard, your excellent questions definitely deserve wider attention.
It seems plausible that NBC has fallen for a hoax, crafted by people with access to professional counterterrorist footage. Of course, since such a hoax would serve Administration purposes, I doubt Lisa Myers would be subject to the same public shaming that Dan Rather endured.

Posted by: ralphbon | Dec 24 2004 22:38 utc | 10

maybe they’re trolling for takers at that site?
I think the internet is too valuable for (global) capitalism to interfere too much with various sites. I agree with Pat that, especially considering the history of those in power now, secrecy is the big issue…extra-constitutional actions, violations of treaties, violations of global standards of law, plus big money to friends, home and abroad.
other than that, no problem.
b- did you read what that guy wrote on your kos entry? what did you make of that?

Posted by: fauxreal | Dec 25 2004 0:42 utc | 11

I agree with Pat

The web is monitored in a variety of ways, its traffic and content scrutinized and analysed daily. One doesn’t, as a general rule, mess with a good thing.
….
Government censorship is a serious issue. In a society such as ours, however, I think the growing cult of secrecy is a more potent threat.

but do think that the “cult of secrecy” can not help but incline to
an attack on the greatest threat to government secrecy, not in the
sense of “communications security”, but rather of keeping the public at large ignorant about facts already “in the public domain”. I suspect that the search engine firms already have had “off the record” meetings with NSA, DSI, or CIA types, just as the telegraph companies cooperated with them (illegally) during and after WWII.
I assume that all traffic is indeed monitored, and that selected phrases of interest are “kicked out” of the mass of intercepts for the perusal of “the authorities”. I also assume that so far we haven’t talked about anything of sufficient interest to get us any
serious attention. John Young of Cryptome, however, has rather frequent dealings with “our guardians”.

Posted by: Hannah K. O’Luthon | Dec 26 2004 8:12 utc | 12

So how soon before a kid walks into his school and blows up his classmates with a suicide vest?

Posted by: stoy | Dec 27 2004 5:40 utc | 13

Back to Main