Pentagon's Fake Jihadists

[spooked911]

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/07/sunday-review/after-911-an-era-of-tinker-tailor-jihadist-spy.html

"Or consider what American computer specialists are doing on the Internet, perhaps terrorist leaders’ greatest safe haven, where they recruit, raise money and plot future attacks on a global scale. American specialists have become especially proficient at forging the onscreen cyber-trademarks used by Al Qaeda to certify its Web statements, and are posting confusing and contradictory orders, some so virulent that young Muslims dabbling in jihadist philosophy, but on the fence about it, might be driven away.

And in a classified tactic used multiple times across the Middle East, American military and intelligence officers have hacked the cellphones of terrorist leaders using computer code, to lure them into an ambush or spread the word that fellow cell members were embezzling money or plotting against their comrades. Distrust of secure communications disrupts and even deters action."

Supposedly, this just started after 9/11. Riiight.

More importantly, is there any doubt that this set-up is asking for trouble, and can be easily altered to inspire real terrorists????

[Flatulo]

1. If the US government was screwing with Jihadists before 9/11, they

were doing a strikingly poor job of it, considering the long list of successful al Qaeda attacks.

[spooked911]

2. the point is, they were promoting those attacks

to further their own ends

[Flatulo]

3. Oh, I see.

[LARED]

4. The "Pentagons Fake Jihadist" is not the title of the article

The srticles does not even hint at what you are speculating.

It's just more wild eyed silliness from you.

[spooked911]

5. hardly silly

it's clear this program can lead to unwanted consequences and it is a reasonable question whether they were doing something like before 9/11.

[LARED]

6. A program run by the government (or any entity) may lead to

unwanted consequences. Did you figure that out yourself? In the real world almost any program can lead (and often does) to unwanted consequences.

So what? Unintended consequences is quite different than what your are implying.

[spooked911]

7. for chrissakes, surely you can see that this can lead to disaster much more easily than

other govt programs!

[zappaman]

8. really?

http://www.cracked.com/article_16852_5-government-programs-that-backfired-horrifically.html

[spooked911]

9. That's a good article but a list of 5 bad govt ideas over the years, mostly from a different era

and 2 from other countries, hardly negates my point.

[zappaman]

10. Your point was that somehow

this particular program can lead to disaster much more easily than other govt programs!
I showed that not to be true.

[LARED]

11. How? nt