Slashdot Mirror
Uncloaking Terrorist Networks
atlantageek writes "First Monday has an article called 'Uncloaking Terrorist Networks'. The author Valdis E. Krebs discusses his attemps to unravel the terrorist network using social and organisational network theory."
Since the terrorists accomplished so much with so little, they are obviously not stupid [insane - sure, but not stupid]. The next atrocity will be carried out by a bunch of people with good old whitebread names. Anybody called Mohammed Al'whatever is under too much suspicion these days to fart in public. The next big thing will be carried out by a bunch of people with names [possibly changed by deedpole] like Joe White, Billy Bob Bobbit etc.
http://rareformnewmedia.com/
They can't change what they are, but they can change their names. For years they have been doing a lot of work with prison inmates. Look for trouble from ex-cons under the direction of Islamic groups.
Yeah, well, I knew a guy named O'Halloran who looked (and sounded) just like Apu, straight out of the Kwik-e-mart. Evidently he had some ancestor who brought the name to India, and a few generations later, that was about all that was left.
Don't read too much into names.
One thing that should not be overlooked... For the terrorists to get new recruits, they have to make sure they are not spies. So any old fanatic wont due because the US has stepped up its human infiltration.
100% Insightful
Mapping social networks has been done before 9/11, of course. Same with biometry, retinal scans ("Retinal scan, Xander!") and similar things.
But since 9/11, the T word is placated over anything to further interest into particular subjects, independent of the practicality of the idea or its actual field of use.
The german term for this is "modewort" ("in word"?).
I'm a leaf on the wind. Watch how I soar.
Yeah, them terrorists are really clever. They started littering every US airport with clueless people dressed in an intimidating uniform, who boldly search you, frisk you and detain you at the drop of a hat. They forced a honest woman to drink her own breast milk, they pulled a women from a plane coming back from Vegas because of a sex toy...
Their cluelessness and hardnosedness turns even the shortest travel into a horrendous wasted-day experience, from which exhausted, humiliated passengers emerge swearing they'll drive next time.
And it's working too. Look, three US airline companies are currently under Chapter 11. The damage to the US economy is staggering. Airline losses are piling up, already amounting to tens of billions of dollars.
Oh, wait. The people who turned fast-food joint rejects into unfireable Federal agents are actually the gummint, not Muslim mujahidins. Ahem. Never mind.
--
Mad science! Robots! Underwear! Cute girls! Full comic online! http://www.girlgeniusonline.com/
Anybody called Mohammed Al'whatever is under too much suspicion these days to fart in public. The next big thing will be carried out by a bunch of people with names [possibly changed by deedpole] like Joe White, Billy Bob Bobbit etc.
Nah, their names are much more likely to be more like "John Aschcroft," "Dick Cheney", and "George Bush." Or are jackbooted thugs breaking down your door in the middle of the night and 'detaining' you indefinitely without charges, right to counsel, or the ability to contact your family not something you would consider "terrorizing?"
They say the road to hell is paved with good intentions, but a more accurate metaphore would be something on the order of:
The tools by which a flurishing democracy is turned into a living, authoritarian hell are built from good intentions.
The Future of Human Evolution: Autonomy
The conventional view of historians is that the US has historically supported Israel because there is a huge Zionist block vote in this country. Truman made some remarks to that effect - he said there were lots of Jewish votes and damn few Arab ones. (Falling into the classic trap of equating Judaism with Zionism, when the two are actually quite distinct - Judaism is not intrinsically tied to killing people for their land, after all).
However, this guy is claiming that the earlier poster is right, that Truman initiated his policies based on his Judeo-Christian beliefs.
Anyway, I find it interesting that the post that initiated this debate is missing. Anti-Zionist posts, and posts that criticise Israel's continuing campaign of international terrorism, seem to get edited out of Slashdot rather frequently.
This reminds me of the days in University when me and my friends tried to map the University's internal computer network to figure out how to get Internet e-mail and outside connections. :-)
(Please forgive me referring to people as nodes; it makes it easier for me to explain it)
So, how do you detect the networks?
First believe they are out there. You have an approximate idea of the kind of roles needed and the places people have to be in (like near an airport or in flight schools), so you can profile people to come up with a likely set of nodes. Once you've got the nodes surveiled, rattle the network. Bring in a few of the more skittish members of the potential network in for a polite round of questioning (and I do mean POLITE -- no violence, threats or intimidation). Then watch what he does. He will activate the secret links and you will see the network sparkle into life to deal with this close call.
As you find more nodes and connections, you can begin to de-prioritize the nodes who show no signs of activity or direct connection. In your emerging network graph, you can make hypotheses about node functions which can be tested. See what happens when you try sending in an deep cover agent to talk to suspected resource network. Try offering resources which would make people interested, and see if they bite or refer you to someone else. If you can get trackable resources into the network, you can follow them to find more connections.
Another thing is to find a node (a suspect) who can be leveraged, like an invalid student visa. Bring them in and pressure them to either turn (unlikely) or expose the network and goals he knows about. Using the previous Slashdot articles on p2p networks being compromised, you can probably bring the the terrorist network to its own tipping point where they will either reorganize or disband it.
Problems with this method:
Of course the best way to prevent terrorism is to remove the social conditions that encourage it. Encourage better economic opportunities for everyone and freedom from persecution and oppression. Support democracy, instead of shoring up corrupt dictatorships like Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and China. Wherever there are the disaffected and miserable, the terrorists will find a home.
The bitter lessons of a veteran coder: http://bitterprogrammer.blogspot.com
I agree as far as needing to get rid of Israel. The only reason the US is involved is because our Judeo-Christian beliefs obligate us to protect "the holy land." For pete's sake, people, it's a fucking hunk of dirt! There's nothing "holy" about it. It's fucking DIRT! Let the Arabs have it, it was theirs to begin with.
Ya, but where will the israelis go? Here in the US? Do you really want a population that willingly voted a mass murderer into office immigrating to the US? You can be damn sure noone else in Europe wants them.
The government has a defect: it's potentially democratic. Corporations have no defect: they're pure tyrannies. -Chomsky
Isn't wilful "evil" a form of insanity? Anyway, the parent comment did not reference Islam at all, but the terrorists themselves. I think we can safely call them madmen with no fear of belittling them.
Any sufficiently well-organized community is indistinguishable from Government.
> 1. All the money we give out every year to keep most 3rd world countries from colapsing?
The percentage of foreign aid as a percentage of total GNP by the US actually ranks among the lowest of all developed nations and is almost less than a tenth of the UN-recommended minimum. European countries such as Denmark and Sweden do far better. And of the paltry US aid amount, fully two-thirds of it goes to Israel and Egypt.
> 2. The constant military help we give countries who need it?
See point 1 above.
> 3. A government run by the people for the people? Granted it could be better.
The US political system is hidebound and locked in this weird two-party timewarp. You have no proportional representation and an unresponsive government almost totally controlled by special interests and lobbyists. Most social democricies evolved more inclusive political systems in the 20th century but the US system definitely dates from the early 19th. Where are your coalitions, your multi-seat districts, your party lists? Your political system scores abusmally on issues of transitivity and concordance.
> 4. Having our women on equal ground with our men in every aspect of our lives?
The gender gap for wages in the US is still pronounced. It is much less in European countries, such as Sweden, where State-sponsored universal child care facilties and generous statutory maternity and paternity leave enable women to pursue their careers with less disadvantage.
> 5. Having most of our diverse religous and ethnic backgrounds get along together?
Your US system is born of low population -- rather than deal with an interlocking, complex, mannered society you thrive on isolation and reclusiveness. European social systems are born of a much more densely inhabited continent where different cultures do not have the luxury of withdrawal or migration. It will take the US another century or two to reach European levels of social complexity.
> 6. Having a country where a "common" class person can become the richest person in the world? Granted I don't like Bill Gates.
US social mobility now ranks in the second-tier of developed nations, along with such luminaries as France and Italy. Northern European countries, less Latin in character (such as the UK and Germany) actually feature higher social mobility than the US.
> 7. A country where EVERY child has the ability to get an education?
The cost for US college education as a percentage of the average salary is far higher than in any other EU country.
> 8. A country that thoughsands of people are fleeing to every year?
All developed countries feature high immigration, or a desire for high immigration. The US has long used immigration as a strategy to fill the desolate wastes left after the genocide of the native populations. Additionally, the input of cheap immigrant labour retards the growth of salaries and wages in the US and undermines the progress of unions and collective bargaining and social compacts.
In the United States, the median real wage is about the same today as it was 28 years ago.This means that the majority of the labor force has failed to share in the gains from economic growth over the last 28 years. That is drastically different from the previous 27 years, during which the typical wage increased by about 80% in real terms. I note that this retardation of wages correlates with a dramatic increase in immigration.
> 9. A country that produces enough food to not only feed themselves but a large part of the world?
Using manifestly wasteful aquifer-draining agricultal systems that are massivley subsidized by the US taxpayer. If US food was costed to actually reflect its real inputs, it would not be able to be dumped so cheaply on international markets.
> 10. A country where people could protest against the government and ANY political official and NOT get shot or have family members killed?
Tell that to the family of MLK. There is freedom of speech in the US, but there is also repression and political assassination. In this regard, the US seems little different from the rest of the developed world.
Da Blog
I remember reading an article from May in the WSJ about a NYC artist named Mark Lombardi who did this type of mapping in his head.
m l
He would read newspapers about criminal links, copy to index cards, memorize the links, and then build up his masterpiece.
He did works about various financial scandals, mapping the BCCI, Vatican Bank, and other criminal networks relating to the Savings and Loan Scandal.
He committed suicide (allegedly) in March of 2000, although some continue to speculate that someone didn't appreciate his art. His family disagrees, pointing out that he only worked from public sources, so why would anyone have a motive to kill him? (Valdis' work (no relation) shows that he was actually doing something --- running a map-generating algorithm in his head and putting the output in art galleries!)
Post 911, the FBI got interested and ask galleries for copies of his art. It seems that his work showed links between BCCI, various Saudis, and bin Laden's financial network.
Incidentally, recent articles in the Washington Post and on Stratfor suggesting that bin Laden has gotten cooperation again from his hidden bank accounts in Switzerland and managed to smuggle his gold out to Sudan are disturbing. Wars are fought with golden bullets, as one philosopher noted and as the Nazis new. The Nazis were obsessed with getting their hands on gold reserves, gold teeth of their victims, &c, because they realized gold was a strategic resource. Through banks in Switzerland, Rome, and possible even the U.S. (?) they were able to obtain financial for their war effort by moving gold onto the international market.
So, it would be interesting to see bin Laden's financial network mapped out.
The article ran on page 7 of section D of the May 1,2002 Wall Street Journal and discusses Lombardi's work, the circumstances surrounding his death, and the FBI interest. I don't have a link or a copy. Lexus Nexus also shows the July 5, 2002 New York Times as mentioning his work going on display at the CUNY art gallery.
Here are some links I get by doing a Google search on Mark Lombardi, including gifs of his work:
http://www.pierogi2000.com/flatfile/lombardi.ht
http://www.ps1.org/cut/Gny/mlombardi.html
I wrote to Valdis Krebs (no relation) about this, and he also thought this was cool.
Why is it that the proponents of "one nation under God" are so eager to get rid of "liberty and justice for all"?
You forgot Riyadh. People danced in the streets of Saudi Arabia, as well as the streets of other Arab allies. Why did we only bomb Afghanistan, and perhaps Iraq, the latter having fuck-all to do with 9/11, and the former bombed to smithereens with no indication that we've found bin Laden or anybody worth a shit in al Qaeda except a fucking white boy from Marin County?!
Yeah there were people celebrating 911 all over the Arab world, and in parts of the non-Arab world; at least give the dancing Arabs credit for showing their feelings publicly, while the Russians and Chinese snicker behind (mostly) closed doors.
Look, the mass indoctrination of Arab Muslims with hardcore ideology that teaches them that God smiles on suicide bombers as martyrs is beyond sick -- I'm not going to argue with that. But I think it's a cynical and calculated strategy on the part of the Arab leaders this benefits -- especially the Saudis -- rather than a sign of an "evil culture" (which is a construct that has no validity from any perspective).
What have we learned from extreme Islamic fundamentalism? That greedy and tyrannical assholes in positions of power in corrupt incestuous dictatorships can use a perverse bastardization of a widespread religion in order to manipulate a large group of people (whom they openly conspire to keep poor and uneducated) to cheer on a few suicide-murderers? Are we really that surprised?
There has never in human history been an entire people who publicly revel in mass murder like the current Islamic Arab/Palestinian fuck-head idiots.
Bullshit. It happens frequently after military actions, and we have to understand that they interpret 911 as a military action. Americans danced and celebrated during the inordinately one-sided Gulf War; which in spite of our precision bombing, was probably indistinguishable from mass murder from the ground. Hell, Americans celebrated the nuclear attack on Japan, when we incinerated 100,000 people in seconds. Everyone celebrates their team's military victory. Even more so if they see their (civilian) family members die every day under Israeli gunfire. So I'm not surprised Palestinians in particular celebrated, even in New York.
That's hogwash. The US supports many of the totalitarian nations that surround it. The US, like any other nation-state, makes its decisions about whom to support based on perceptions of rational self-interest (however misguided) rather than on the basis of ideology, no matter what our leaders say in their speeches.
Yeah, no thanks. MUCH better to appease them by kowtowing to their regimes directly, like we do with Saudi Arabia, or by turning a blind eye to their gross abuses of human rights, like we do with Egypt and Pakistan among others.
If you think we're defending democracy in the Middle East you're a fool. The Israelis are not so dumb; they know that American support depends upon perceptions of American self interest as well as a well-funded and vocal lobby. And the Turkish are not so stupid as to believe their nation "free, democratic, and open." Especially not the Kurds in Turkey.
You obviously know little of Islamic history. Today, perhaps you have a point, though I disagree still (look at Algeria, Morocco for example - hardly democracies but not the bastions of torture and genocide that Turkey has been over the years. And while these places were hardly free, open, and democratic, Egypt, Iraq, Iran were all more progressive regimes than present-day Turkey before the US got involved mucking around with their internal affairs. The fact is the US doesn't want democracy in these countries, because democratic regimes might allow the people to decide how much to sell oil for, and, more importantly, whether to develop different ways of modernizing their societies. The fact is that tyrannical Arab regimes like Saudi Arabia are good for US economic interests. If we really wanted a "regime change" in Iraq we would have supported the Iraqi democratic opposition - which existed and was quite strong and credible - back in 1990 after we got pissed off about Kuwait. But we don't want a regime change; we just want a different dictator to deal with (in one state dept official's words of the time, we want "an iron fisted junta without Saddam Hussein."
OK if we start with the really big fish (Iraq and Iran, for example), though?
Actually, Iran is modernizing and democratizing, or at least it was before we put them in the "axis of evil." And Iraq is small potatoes. They had zero to do with 911, and they're in no position to do anything but sell us cheap oil and bitch about their sovereignty being violated by no-fly zones. It's a terrible regime, and Hussein is a miserable thug, but I could say the same of our ally Musharraf. The really big fish is Saudi Arabia, and we won't stop kissing their asses until America wakes up and begins to see past all this clash of civilizations bullshit. It's not a clash of civilizations; it's a clash between rich powerful men who cynically manipulate the populations they rule.
Regarding Iraq, I haven't seen a credible report of Iraqi involvement in 911, and if there has been such a report, the US Administration is doing an alarmingly nice job of keeping it quiet, which seems to be completely contrary to the desire to get some of our allies to support an invasion. The meetings with Atta have not been confirmed, and US officials don't even seem to believe them. About the WMD stuff, yeah, Iraq wants WMD, but the evidence of a real nuclear threat is severely lacking. But even if they were pursuing nukes -- get real. Iraq has as much right as any regime to pursue whatever policy its statecraft dictates. Why would we feel threatened by Iraqi nukes? They could never develop a capability that could seriously threaten American interests, not even indirectly; as self-aggrandizingly cruel as Saddam Hussein is, he is neither suicidal nor stupid. Keep in mind too his regime is secular - he has about as much reason to fear the al Qaeda types as we do; more in fact, since the Iraqi citizens are far more likely to take up his call to overthrow their government than American muslims, Chicago gangbangers and Marin county white kids included.
Finally, I don't know why you want to let Mr. binLaden dictate the terms of our conflict with him. Of course he says it's a "clash of civilizations" - but we don't have to buy into that; it only helps him. If we want to defeat him and his kind we need to make sure the rest of the Arab Muslim world doesn't believe it's a clash of civilizations. We won't be able to do that by bombing them to kingdom come.
The US shouldn't do this to appease anybody like Bin Laden, besides the fact that he's too extreme.
Instead, the US should try doing more of "the right thing." Stick up for world peace and democracy, less for money. Stop bullying other countries, and giving bad ones guns. Let dictators be replaced by their people, instead of using military to hold them there.
Pull the US troops out of places where they're not wanted, like Saudi Arabia, and Al Quaeda will crumble under its lack of issues.
well, you could argue that the Catholic IRA was quite pleased that they wiped out scores of Protestants.
Or how about the Communists in China massacring the Tibetan monks?
Or the Hindus in Gudjarat raping and killing innocent Muslim women and children?
Excellent question.
Well, in the hours that followed the bombing, the FBI speculated in the media that they were actively searching for "Muslim terrorists." Quickly after that, several mosques were burned down by arsonists.
True, Timothy McVeigh was caught in pretty short order, but the FBI never retracted their claims. McVeigh just corrected what they believed, and people forgot about the accusation (except the Muslim-American community, who wanted an apology).
We may never know if there was a second person, or maybe McVeigh denied it and I didn't hear it. Or it could be the FBI tossed around the "possible middle-eastern" description as a way to show they weren't totally off base with the Muslim terrorist idea.
"The US supports Israel becuase it is a Western Liberal Democracy smack in the middle of a geographic area surrounded by totalitarian nations."
Oh, COME ON.
So we support a parlimentary system that declares war on their entire geographic location, then seizes land belonging to other people, sets up troops, and throws people off their own land?
On top of that, Israel is in trouble with the UN for human rights violations, throwing Palestinian dissenters in prison for complaining about losing their homes.
So, Nobel Peace prize winner Yasser Arafat is elected by the Palestinians to negotiate the return of lands. Many Palestinians consider him way too gentle, and an obstacle in the way of an all-out war to get land back. On top of it, Isreal nearly assasinates him, a DEMOCRATICALLY elected Leader. That would have been horrifying, but the US might have still supported Isreal because of the high number of voters in the US supporting Isreal. (Don't forget, Hillary Clinton got her senate job by pandering to the Jewish population in NY, among other things)
The US wants to support Israel, but they don't want to anger Saudi Arabia and OPEC again. On the other hand, Israel just bombed an entire apartment building, killing a terrorist leader, AS WELL AS innocent families and children.
In short, the Palestinians are going about this like impatient children, while the Israelis are whining about how they're in the right, and doing the wrong thing by hurting people.
The US wants to stop ETA, the Basque separatists in Spain. ETA has no designs on the US. They are officially a terrorist group according to the State Dept., and giving money to them is a felony. So, is there some massive Spanish conspiracy to secretly control the US? Or do you have a double standard when it comes to terrorist groups that threaten Jews rather than Europeans?
-jon
Remember Amalek.
I don't know if the US government has always been about doing "the right thing."
I'm tempted to bring up Vietnam, but that was another time and administration. Instead, look at the Gulf War. I don't think the US really cared much about the Kurds, it was more about creating stability in the area, so we could continue our Oil purchases. Leaving the US military in Saudi Arabia is what makes Bin Laden personally mad, they're holding him back from reforming the government there. I haven't heard much about the poor Kurds, even though Hussein wants to kill them off. Did we forget them?
Sure, our economy is strong, but look how much it ground to a halt during the Oil Crisis a while back.
If you're asking me, I don't think we should be wasting our money and resources in either case. We're better off trying to encourage democratic initiatives in these places. We're never going to completely stop terrorism but the real goal should be to eliminate the conditions that make so many people sympathetic to terrorists. And I think that is true whether the terrorists threaten Jews, Spaniards, or anyone else.
Spain is a democracy, you fuckwit. And so is Israel. Israel has been trying to give back the West Bank and Gaza since August, 1967. Look it up. Problem is, the Arabs don't want peace; they want to kill Jews. Jews are tired of being killed whenever someone in the world is looking for a scapegoat, and are fighting back. This makes the Arabs mad and confuses the Europeans, who want to know what happened to their favorite punching bags.
You are suffering under the all-to-common belief that terrorists are some sort of misguided Robin Hoods, out to redress wrongs. They're not. They are cold-blooded murdering thugs who want to impose their beliefs on a world that would never voluntarily agree to their insane ideas. So they intimidate fools like you into believing that if you just give in to their demands, then they'll go away.
the real goal should be to eliminate the conditions that make so many people sympathetic to terrorists.
Shutting down Berkeley would be a good first step.
-jon
Remember Amalek.
As for the post above, let me say that today it isn't the facts. Today I agree with all your calls to fact. It's just your conclusions today.
And even the conclusions are leading in the right direction. Follow the money my friend, follow the money. You're almost there!
And with that cryptic and entirely too "deep throat" sounding post, my time in this crappy internet cafe is up. Apologies. I have more and will post it another time. I have enjoyed our discussions! Being on "holiday" in a part of the world that demonstrates simply by walking out the door much of what you and I have discussed (no secret which side of the argument the real world illustrates here) makes me magnanimous! *grin*