Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

Al-Qaeda Hacker Caught

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 8 years ago | from the caught-by-accident dept.

349

anaesthetica writes "The Washington Post is carrying a story on a young man suspected to be the al-Qaeda hacker 'Irhabi 007'. From the article: 'Celebrated for his computer expertise, Irhabi 007 had propelled the jihadists into a 21st-century offensive through his ability to covertly and securely disseminate manuals of weaponry, videos of insurgent feats such as beheadings and other inflammatory material... The Internet has presented investigators with an extraordinary challenge. But our future security is going to depend increasingly on identifying and catching the shadowy figures who exist primarily in the elusive online world.'"

cancel ×

349 comments

Wonderful. (5, Funny)

ImaNihilist (889325) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996956)

Now we have to worry about people driving car bombs into ISPs. It's like DDoS attacks, evolved.

Re:Wonderful. (-1)

Firehed (942385) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996999)

Yeah. Instead of the denial that's distributed, it's the service itself after it goes kablooey.

Hacker? How about script kiddie? (3, Insightful)

Nomihn0 (739701) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996960)

As he provided seemingly limitless space captured from vulnerable servers throughout the Internet, Irhabi was celebrated by his online followers [From TFA]

That's fascinating and all, but where is the cyber-terrorism we are quivering over? When is it going to be an offensive move rather than mere proselytizing?

Re:Hacker? How about script kiddie? (1, Insightful)

ZuperDee (161571) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997121)

I for one hope we NEVER get to see those al-Qaeda slime make an "offensive move rather than mere proselytizing." I cannot seriously believe you're suggesting that we should wait for a serious attack before we try to do anything to stop it. I for one am thankful that this guy was stopped before it escalated much further.

Re:Hacker? How about script kiddie? (2, Insightful)

SetupWeasel (54062) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997143)

If the guy actually exists.

Re:Hacker? How about script kiddie? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997173)

he exists, i just talked to him yesterday at the NSA

Re:Hacker? How about script kiddie? (5, Funny)

SetupWeasel (54062) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997214)

Good. Too bad you haven't caught that Osama guy or that #2 guy we almost catch every time Bush's polls are down.

Re:Hacker? How about script kiddie? (3, Insightful)

tciny (783938) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997267)

I think the actual reason for him being such a threat is his ability to dodge censorship. Seeing how much media attention the videos he (supposedly) spreads recieve, you can kind of guess of what importance he is. This will, of course, again be used to push forward with laws cutting down on internet anonymity. Cause why would you want to be anonymous if you're not a commie/terrorist?

Irhabi 007 (5, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14996968)

Goat's milk. Shaken, not stirred.

Re:Irhabi 007 (3, Interesting)

OutOfMyTree (810249) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997177)

Oh, come on, moderators, that goat's milk joke is funny...

And it makes a legitimate point that has been ignored in other posts -- calling himself 007 indicates interesting things about his view of himself.

MOD PARENT UP! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997179)

Holy fuck, does none of these so-called moderators possess any sense of humor? Fucking gays.

your rights online (5, Insightful)

pintomp3 (882811) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996969)

this should be filed under your rights online, since that is what will be disappearing soon. the terrorists are on the interwebs now. start up the survillence at the ISP level. if we happen to catch a people downloading music and movies, doubleplus good. osama is laughing his ass off watching us burn up our own constitution.

Re:your rights online (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997005)

Sorry to tell you, but he's a bit preoccupied with tearing apart the Iraqi attempts at one right now.

Now go monkey up someone else's ass, troll.

Shame on whoever modded this flamebait up as insightful. You should loose your mod privileges for it.

Re:your rights online (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997016)

Why should anyone "loose" their moderator privileges for modding up truth?

Re:your rights online (1)

pintomp3 (882811) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997029)

i guess your not concerned about online privacy, AC. btw, al-queda didn't have any influence in iraq til we showed up there.

Re:your rights online (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997144)

Actually, I am AC because I am lazy. TFA has nothing to do with rights. It doesn't even deal with my country or the constitution. So eat my shit, fucktards. The OC is still flaimebait.

Re:your rights online (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997128)

Or the Bush administration is (laughing its arse off). The accumulation of evidence of some level of conspiracy (cover-up ---> planning) in 9/11 is quite compelling by now. Summary from The New Pearl Harbour by David Ray Griffin (I suggest you read the book if you want to assess the evidence properly):

1. Evidence that the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq were already planned for geopolitical reasons, so that 9/11 provided not the reason for the wars but merely the pretext.

2. Evidence that men with connections to al-Qaeda were allowed into the United States in spite of regulations that should have kept them out.

3. Evidence that men with connections to al-Qaeda were allowed to train in US flight schools.

4. Evidence that the attacks of 9/11 could not have succeeded without an order from the highest level of government to suspend normal operating procedures for responding to hijackings.

5. Evidence that US political and military leaders made misleading and even false statements about their response to the hijackings.

6. Evidence in particular that the presently accepted official account, according to which jet fighter planes were scrambled but arrived too late, was invented some days after 9/11.

7. Evidence that the collapse of the WTC buddings was brought about by explosives, so that participation by the US government in the prevention of an adequate examination of the debris, especially the steel, constitutes evidence of its participation in a cover-up.

8. Evidence that someone in authority sought to ensure that there would be deaths in the attacks on the second WTC tower and the Pentagon by not having these buildings
evacuated.

9. Evidence that what hit the Pentagon was not a Boeing 757 but a much smaller aircraft, such as a guided missile.

10. Evidence that Flight 93 was shot down after authorities learned that the passengers were gaining control of it.

11. Evidence that Secretary of Defense Rumsfeld revealed advance knowledge of two of the attacks.

12. Evidence that President Bush on 9/11 feigned ignorance of the occurrence and seriousness of the attacks.

13. Evidence that President Bush and his Secret Service knew on 9/11 that he would not be a target of attacks.

14. Evidence that the FBI had specific knowledge of the time and targets of the attacks at least a month in advance.

15. Evidence that the CIA and other intelligence agencies would have had very specific advance knowledge of the attacks by means of the put options purchased shortly before 9/11.

16. Evidence that the Bush administration lied about not having had specific warnings about the attacks.

17. Evidence that the FBI and other federal agencies prevented investigations prior to 9/11 that might have uncovered the plot.

18. Evidence that US officials sought to conceal evidence of involvement by Pakistan's ISI in the planning of 9/11.

19. Evidence that US officials sought to conceal the presence of the ISI chief in Washington during the week of 9/11.

20. Evidence that the FBI and other federal agencies blocked investigations after the attacks that might have revealed the true Perpetrators.

21. Evidence that the United States did not really seek to kill or capture Osama bin Laden either before or after the attacks.

22. Evidence that figures central to the Bush administration had desired a "new Pearl Harbor" because of various benefits it would bring.

23. Evidence of motive provided by the predictable benefits that this event, called by Bush himself "the Pearl Harbor of the 21st century," did bestow on the Bush administration.

24. Evidence against the alternative explanation--the incompetence theory--provided by the fact that those who were allegedly guilty of incompetence were not fired but, in some cases, promoted.

Re:your rights online (1)

MrTufty (838030) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997154)

If you believe any of this crap, you're pretty much totally gullible. I'm not even going to try to refute your points because they are quite simply, not worth my time.

Conspiracy theorists the world over are all the same, looking for connections that simply aren't there in the first place! And of course since this one comes from a 'published' author, he's obviously out there to make money in any case - best way to do that is to be as controversial as possible.

If this was true, the Bush administration would never have allowed the book to be published, freedom of the press or not.

Re:your rights online (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997184)

The evidence of a coverup are overwhelming. We know for a fact that practically every part of the "official" story is a lie. We know for a fact that the crime scenes of both the WTC and Pentagon were scrubbed almost completely making any sort of forensic analysis of the physical evidence impossible.

How can you honestly believe that there is a coverup without a conspiracy underneath? What other reason was there for the deliberate destruction of nearly all physical evidence?

You should start by watching this video [google.com] . It's the best video compilation of the unanswered questions of 9/11. You should really watch it and read some more on the subject. I don't know that any of these guys has come up with exactly how 9/11 was perpetuate, but it's a pretty thorough account of what is known.

It is a fact that 9/11 did not happen how the bush government has claimed and it was covered up by this same government. If you think otherwise you are a fool. Just as much for dismissing a theory of a conspiracy (which we know happened on some level) with a tin foil hat wearing "conspiracy theory".

Re:your rights online (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997186)

Which means you have to be a subscriber to the "coincidence theory", believing all the following are simply coincidences (who is the more gullible?):

1. Several FAA flight controllers exhibited extreme incompetence on 9/11, and evidently on that day only.

2. The officials in charge at both NMCC and NORAD also acted incompetently on 9/11, and evidently on that day only.

3. In particular, when NMCC-NORAD officials did finally order jet fighters to be scrambled to protect New York and Washington, they ordered them in each case from more distant bases, rather than from McGuire and Andrews, respectively.

4. After public statements saying that Andrews Air Force Base had no jet fighters on alert to protect Washington, its website, which had previously said that many jets were always on alert, was altered.

5 Several pilots who normally are airborne and going full speed in under three minutes all took much longer to get up on 9/11.

6. These same pilots, flying planes capable of going 1,500 to 1,850 miles per hour, on that day were all evidently able to get their planes to fly only 300 to 700 miles per hour.

7. The collapse of the buildings of the World Trade Center, besides occurring at almost free-fall speed, exhibited other signs of being controlled demolitions: molten steel, seismic shocks, and fine dust were all produced.

8. The video and physical evidence suggesting that controlled demolition was the cause of the collapse of the Twin Towers co-exists with testimony from people in
these buildings that they heard, felt, and saw the effects of explosions.

9. The collapse of WTC-1 and WTC-2 had some of the same features as the collapse of WTC-7, even though the latter collapse could not be attributed to the impact and jet fuel of an airplane.

10. Both the North Tower and the South Tower collapsed just as their respective fires were dying down, even though this meant that the South Tower, which had been hit second, collapsed first.

11. Governmental agencies had the debris, including the steel, from the collapsed WTC buildings removed without investigation, which is what would be expected if the government wanted to prevent evidence of explosives from being discovered.

12. Physical evidence suggesting that what hit the Pentagon could not have been a Boeing 757 co-exists with testimony of several witnesses that the aircraft that
did hit the Pentagon was far smaller than a 757.

13. This evidence about the aircraft that hit the Pentagon co-exists with reports that Flight 77 crashed in Kentucky or Ohio.

14. This evidence co-exists with the fact that the only evidence that Flight 77 did not crash was supplied by an attorney closely associated with the Bush administration.

15. Evidence that Flight 77 did not return to Washington to hit the Pentagon coexists with the fact that when the flight control transcript was released, the final 20
minutes were missing.

16. The fact that the aircraft that hit the Pentagon did so only after executing a very difficult maneuver co-exists with the fact that it struck a section of the
Pentagon that, besides containing none of its leaders, was the section in which the strike would cause the least death and destruction.

17. On the same day in which jet fighters were unable to protect the Pentagon from an attack by a single airplane, the missiles that normally protect the Pentagon also failed to do so.

18. Sounds from cell phones inside Flight 93 suggesting that the plane had been hit by a missile were matched by many reports to this effect from witnesses on the
ground.

19. This evidence that Flight 93 was shot down co-exists with reports from both civilian and military leaders that there was intent to shoot this flight down.

20. The only plane that was evidently shot down, Flight 93, was the only one in which it appeared that passengers were going to gain control.

21. The evidence that Flight 93 was shot down after the passengers were about to gain control co-exists with the fact that the flight control transcript for this flight
was not released.

22. That coincidence co-exists with the fact that when the cockpit recording of Flight 93 was released, the final three minutes were missing.

23. Evidence showing that the US government had far more specific evidence of what was to occur on 9/11 than it has admitted co-exists with evidence that it actively blocked investigations that might have prevented the attacks.

24. Reports of obstructions from FBI agents in Minneapolis co-exist with similar reports from Chicago and New York.

25. Reports of such obstructions prior to 9/11 co-exist with reports that investigations after 9/11 were also obstructed.

26. These reports of obstructionism co-exist with multiple reports suggesting that the US government did not really try to capture or kill Osama bin Laden either prior to or after 9/11, with the result that several people independently suggested that the US government must be working for bin Laden--or vice versa.

27. All these reports co-exist with reports of hijackers being allowed in the country in spite of known terrorist connections or visa violations.

28. These reports about immigration violations co-exist with evidence that some of these same men were allowed to train at US flight schools, some on military bases.

29. This evidence of training at various American flight schools co-exists with reports that US officials tried to conceal this evidence.

30. The traumatic events of 9/11 occurred just a year after a document published by the Project for the New American Century, an organization whose founders
included several men who became central figures in the Bush administration, referred to benefits that could come from "a new Pearl Harbor."

31. The "unifying Pearl Harbor sort of purple American fury" produced by the 9/11 attacks did benefit the Bush administration in many ways.

32. A credible report that spokespersons for the Bush administration had earlier announced that the US government was planning a war on Afghanistan, which
would begin before the middle of October, co-exists with the fact that the attacks of 9/11, by occurring on that date, gave US military forces time to be ready to
attack Afghanistan on October 7.

33. Ahmad Masood, whose continued existence would have posed problems for US plans in Afghanistan, was assassinated, reportedly by ISI operatives, just after the head of the ISI, General Mahmoud Ahmad, had been meeting in Washington for several days with the head of the CIA.

34. In the White Houses version of the recording of Condoleezza Rice's press briefing on May 16, the only portion that was inaudible was the portion in which the
person under discussion, mentioned as having been in Washington on 9/11, was identified as "the ISI chief."
35. Evidence of official efforts to conceal General Ahmad's presence in Washington co-exists with evidence that, after it became known that General Ahmad had ordered $100,000 wired to Mohamed Atta, US leaders exerted pressure on the ISI to dismiss him from his post quietly.

36. Evidence of these attempts to conceal General Ahmad's involvement in 9/11 co-exists with evidence that the FBI and other federal agencies sought to obscure
the fact that Saeed Sheikh, the man who wired the money to Atta, was an ISI agent.

37. The fact that agents in FBI headquarters who presided over the alleged intelligence failure that allowed 9/11 to happen, widely called the biggest
intelligence failure since Pearl Harbor, were promoted instead of fired or otherwise punished co-exists with the fact that other intelligence agencies also reported that there had been no punishments for incompetence related to 9/11.

38. This evidence of lack of punishment for poor performance co-exists with reports that intelligence officers who were diligendy trying to pursue investigations related to 9/11 suffered negative treatment from superiors.

Re:your rights online (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997297)

I doubt that Bush would've banned a book implicating his administration, it would've been to obvious an approach. Better to just tell the "big lie" and then rely on people like you, and more importantly the mainstream media and policios, to demonise those who sift the evidence and suggest such outrageous things... It's called the chilling effect and we know all about it on Slashdot!

hold on hold on hold on (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14996978)

So, let me get this straight, if you're a propagandist for a terrorist group, you're a terrorist?

Yay. I wonder where this slippery slope ends up?

Also, I find it odd that this alleged hacker chose a moniker that would sound more familiar to Republican voters than to someone who would wholeheartedly reject Western ideals (ie: your average terrorist).

Re:hold on hold on hold on (5, Insightful)

tealover (187148) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996994)

Goebbels never killed anyone directly, but he was still a Nazi.

You can play semantics if you want, the rest of us will live in the real world.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0, Troll)

scum-e-bag (211846) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997025)

Goebbels never killed anyone directly, but he was still a Nazi.

You can play semantics if you want, the rest of us will live in the real world.

...and by that logic, we should kill nearly every German who was alive during WWII as they were nazis too.

You can continue to live in your fantasy world, i'll remain in the real world. :P

Re:hold on hold on hold on (2, Insightful)

tealover (187148) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997079)

No, not all Germans were Nazis. History books don't exist in your world ?

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

lintux (125434) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997147)

I doubt that every German from back then supported the nazi regime... Sounds a bit unlikely to me, don't you think?

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

chamenos (541447) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997187)

There're plenty of self-proclaimed armchair historians who conveniently equate German conscripts with willing volunteers, and one's nationality with political orientation, so as to justify their opinions. It's always easy to take a piss on the little details when preaching to the ignorant and stupid.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

Cal Paterson (881180) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997155)

Let's be fair; Goebbels was in the Nazi party. He was the official that organised the censorship of german news.

He's a bad example. (either way; you should invoke Godwin's Rule of Nazi Analogies as soon as someone uses a Nazi analogy)

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997175)

I just got mod points for the first time. I could mod you down. You certainly deserve it. But I think it would be more useful to reply and explain to the IDIOT MODERATORS who mod you INSIGHTFUL that you're full of shit.

Saying every German who was alive during WWII as a nazi is like saying every American alive today is a republican (since our leader is a republican and the republicans have the majority of control in our government currently). And 8 years ago, every American was a democrat.

At the time of WWII, nazis were a political party. Today, the word "nazi" has evolved into much, much more than that. In both cases, you would be incorrect to suggest that every German was a nazi. Apparently the average /. user doesn't know that you're an idiot. They appear to be idiots as well.

Idiots should sit down and shut up. Apparently they're exalted in this day and age.

This mass of idiocy is depressing.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997176)

In the real world the Allies did follow that logic and killed, raped or ethnically clensed over 20 million Germans. The Real World doesn't always appear in your school text book.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997277)

hey, do you have a citation?

Or, what, did you see it first hand?

Re:hold on hold on hold on (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14996998)

It says in the writeup he distributed their weapon manuals, was involved in a bomb plot, and had stolen credit card information.

So shut the fuck up and read it before you jump to conclusions.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997004)

Posting weapons manuals makes you a terrorist?

Infocrimes?

Re:hold on hold on hold on (-1, Troll)

SQL Error (16383) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997027)

Which part of So shut the fuck up and read it before you jump to conclusions. did you not understand?

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997031)

I read it before you got irrationaly righteous and uppity and I still don't get how posting weapons manuals makes you a terrorist.

Please try again.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

cflannagan (870780) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997049)

Are you a terrorist-sympathizer? Newflash: posting bomb-making and weapons manual is AGAINST THE LAW. Get that through your thick terrorist-sympathizing head.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

dunkelfalke (91624) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997063)

no it is not [gunmanuals.ch]

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997065)

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997117)

Cite the law or shut up.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997051)

Well, to start with, conspiracy is a crime. Aiding and abetting criminals is also a crime. How and ever...

While you might argue (strawman alert!) that he is no more guilty of anything than for the sake of argument, the average NRA member. I would argue thatthe average NRA member is not providing information about weaponry for the express purpose of killing persons known and unknown. This specific Al-Quaeda member (seemingly) was. The NRA is not a proscribed organisation. Al Qaeda is. The NRA is not waging a war against civilization. Al Qaeda is. etc. etc.

While his actual physical actions may technically be no different to some NRA member's physical actions, actions don't take place in a vacuum. Everything has context, and you can't expect even the most reasonable and fair minded people to ignore the context of those actions.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (3, Interesting)

eyeye (653962) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997030)


So, let me get this straight, if you're a propagandist for a terrorist group, you're a terrorist?

Yay. I wonder where this slippery slope ends up?


He was arrested in the UK. IIRC it is now illegal to even say anything that could even be construed as "glorifying" terrorism, we are already slipping down that slope. You can now be imprisoned for 3 months without even being charged with anything.

What a country.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

nutshell42 (557890) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997074)

As scary as that slippery slope may be, suicide terrorists make traditional methods of dealing with criminals problematic.

Your only chance generally is to either convict them for shady reasons (Moussaoui, death penalty for not telling about an imminent crime seems a bit harsh in just about every context) or total surveillance (your honor, right after the part on the tape where he disobeys the Quran by fucking his fellow sucide bomber's girlfriend we can hear how he explicitly sings in the shower about blowing himself up)

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997114)

And in the process destroy your justice system? Is it worth it for a bunch of terrorists that don't even bother you daily? Justice generally favors judging a guilty person not guilty, than putting an innocent man in prison. How many innocent people will go to jail by such laws, just because they disagree with the government? Just a thought...

Re:hold on hold on hold on (5, Insightful)

SetupWeasel (54062) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997169)

You create terrorists by wrongly imprisoning people. Preventing crime is not about putting people behind bars. It is about improving people's environment and standing so that they are less compelled to commit crimes. You have to be pretty damned pissed off about something to blow yourself up and kill innocent people. Maybe we ought to work on what is pissing said people off.

It is funny that the city actually involved in the 9/11 attack is one of the most liberal cities in the country.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (3, Insightful)

maelstrom (638) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997288)

There are some people that are going to be pissed off no matter what. If we followed this attitude, we would still have Jim Crow laws because people like you would be trying to placate the KKK.

Instead of coddling the KKK (terrorists), let us make sure that these groups have a ready outlet to protest the discrimination and poverty they undoubtably face. We need less Bin Ladens and more MLK Jrs from the Middle East, and no more Western apologists.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

Profound (50789) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997105)

Australia under the new sedition laws is even worse.

In sport, it has been traditional for Australians to if not support, then at least show some sympathy for the underdogs, especially if they were the home team. In war, that can get you locked up.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (4, Informative)

arkhan_jg (618674) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997122)

Close. Scarily, the "glorification of terror" is indeed an offence now, though the suspicion is that they wanted to be able to nail people like Abu Hamza, who stood up in the centre of london and praised al-Qaeda.

However, the 90 day extension of the holding powers was stopped [bbc.co.uk] by parliament in Blair's first Commons defeat; instead the previous 14-day holding period (without charge) was extended to 28 days, which is still a dangerous piece of legislation for a liberal democracy IMHO.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

arkhan_jg (618674) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997132)

Oh, I nearly forgot - there's also supervision of the holding orders by a High Court Judge, so at least there's some oversight of the process outside the police.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (4, Insightful)

gad_zuki! (70830) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997162)

>IIRC it is now illegal to even say anything that could even be construed as "glorifying" terrorism, we are already slipping down that slope.

Oh come on. Google his name.
(A) Younis Tsouli, 22, of Richmond Way, Shepherd's Bush
  he had in his bedroom a video, on a computer hard drive, showing how to make a car bomb
  he possessed a video, on a hard drive, showing a number of places in Washington DC and including a CRBN (chemical, radiological, biological and nuclear) vehicle.
  before October 31 this year he, with Mughal and others, conspired together to murder a person unknown
  he "unlawfully and maliciously" conspired together with Mughal and others to cause an explosion of a nature likely to endanger life in the United Kingdom
  he conspired to dishonestly obtain property from credit cards belonging to others
His name came up after they arrested another guy with a working suicide belt. This isnt a case of the slippery slope, this is how you bust terrorist cells.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997033)

If you go to a "terrorist" website you're a terrorist! Several people in my department who were doing research on Hezbollah and Hamas (which are incidentally majority parties in two governments in the Middle East now, and thus have geopolitical implications beyond "terrorism") got a visit from the feds and have been made to feel very insecure about their ability to stay out of jail if they continue to visit related websites or write about them, even if its in the interest of academics or international political science. There appears to be a kind of zero tolerance policy for any online contact at all to these groups, no matter how innocuous (i.e. visiting their website to read their statements) or well-intentioned.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997259)

Gee that is too bad. Oh, by the way, go check out Brittney Spears naked [moqawama.net] that chick is so cool!

Re:hold on hold on hold on (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997047)

as i recall the original story this guy hacked into a number university networks which were rated as having good security and used them to mirror al-qaida manuals/newletters.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (4, Insightful)

killjoe (766577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997081)

"Also, I find it odd that this alleged hacker chose a moniker that would sound more familiar to Republican voters than to someone who would wholeheartedly reject Western ideals (ie: your average terrorist)."

The worst thing is that we will never know what actually happened, what this guy did, how he did it, why he did it.

There will not be a trial, the guy will be shipped off to some godforsaken place and be held forever under who knows what kinds of aweful conditions getting regular "pressure" from the CIA or the egyptian intelligence or whatever.

It's sick what has happened to our country. It's really really sick and aweful. The worst thing is that nobody really cares. Everybody will simply accept what the press and the president tells them. For all we know this could just be some high school student who thinks he is l33t. The president will call him a terrorists and the public will just buy it without any further evidence. We will never know.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

tealover (187148) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997136)

i don't care what happens to him. he picked the wrong side.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (4, Insightful)

killjoe (766577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997153)

"i don't care what happens to him. he picked the wrong side."

Unfortunately many americans feel like you do. They have lost their all common sense. "I don't care what happens to him" justifies all kinds of torture and evil.

I do have one question for you though. How do you know? How do you know if anything they say about this guy is true? How do you even know if he exists or not? Do you even care? I suspect not. All somebody has to do is to say is that he is a terrorist and you believe it.

Unfortunately there are too many americans like you.
 

Re:hold on hold on hold on (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997086)

So, let me get this straight, if you're a propagandist for a terrorist group, you're a terrorist?

TFA: "The savvy, English-speaking, presumably young webmaster taunted his pursuers, calling himself Irhabi -- Terrorist -- 007.... Scotland Yard arrested a 22-year-old West Londoner, Younis Tsouli, suspected of participating in an alleged bomb plot. In November, British authorities brought a range of charges against him related to that plot....British investigators eventually confirmed to us that they believe he is Irhabi 007."

So he called himself "terrorist", and he was allegedly involved with a real-world bomb plot. So not so sensationalist.

Re:hold on hold on hold on (2, Interesting)

hazem (472289) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997151)

So he called himself "terrorist", and he was allegedly involved with a real-world bomb plot. So not so sensationalist.

Back in the old BBS days, I often went by the name Necromancer - not very original, but I was a teenager. In spite of that name, I never did try to raise the dead or anything like that. Just because I called myself a thing did not make me that thing.

RTFA (1)

Chuck Chunder (21021) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997191)

He was arrested for suspected participation in a bomb plot. He himself adopted the terrorist moniker with "Irhabi -- Terrorist -- 007".

Nor is the 007 part of the moniker all that surprising given the fact that he is British (or at least based in England) and could also be taken as a name chosen so as to be understandable and resonate with westerners and thus instill fear in them (though I grant you it is likely pure childishness). Of course it could also appeal to potential terrorists familiar with western culture (ie those in western countries).

familiar to Republican voters? (1)

commodoresloat (172735) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997287)

In what way is "irhabi" more familiar to Republicans than potential terrorists? Oh, you mean 007... news flash -- this kid is British. And 007 is familiar to people around the world regardless of religion or politics, much less "terrorist" affiliation. Also, the kid was busted for participating in a bomb plot, not for spreading hacking propaganda; it is only after they busted him that they figured out he had anything to do with this 007 character. But the moniker is not surprising at all. A lot of terrorist recruits in western countries -- and even a lot of them from the middle east -- have grown up being exposed to western popular culture, including cowboys and action/adventure movies. And James Bond is a decades-old popular cultural institution who simply rules the world of undercover intrigue -- he was the ultimate spy long before anyone even heard of Iran-Contra. Many terrorists probably see themselves as James Bond type characters, so there is really nothing at all surprising about this.

The Net is SO scary! (5, Insightful)

STDOUBT (913577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996980)

"But our future security is going to depend increasingly on identifying and catching the shadowy figures who exist primarily in the elusive online world.'" Bullshit. If my future security depends on the governments ability to destroy online anonymity, I want a different government. Make the borders secure. Packets of data don't scare me.

Re:The Net is SO scary! (1)

thedletterman (926787) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997012)

I agree with this, i mean seriously, terrorist and anti-iraqi forces launch mortar rounds at me on a daily basis. i'm not scared of their websites. It all comes back to the idea that military effectiveness will not win this war. There is a war of ideas and ideals out there that needs to be fought as well. Not that we need to go to war against allah or anything, but I'm talking about fighting people who are recruiting people to throw bombs at us is just as important as fighting the people who are throwing the bombs.

Re:The Net is SO scary! (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997073)

Also, unless he's kept in prison for his whole life in solitary confinement, or murdered, it's hard to see how he can be prevented from passing on all his information to others.

Re:The Net is SO scary! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997111)

unless he's kept in prison for his whole life in solitary confinement, or murdered

I would imagine that the US miltary is capable of both of these things. Trial? Who gets a trial these days?

Re:The Net is SO scary! (1)

killjoe (766577) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997090)

This is the govt admitting that ideas are the most dangerous things in the world. THis guy is (supposedly) disseminating knowledge and ideas. We can't have that.

Re:The Net is SO scary! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997131)

I'm extremely worried about the loss of free speech on the internet, and that the day may come when an FCC-like body keeps individuals from buying a domain name and setting up a site the same way you can't start your own TV or radio station. That's the freedom we're in danger of losing most, and don't think it can't happen-- after all, we can't let the terrorists and pedophiles to continue to run loose setting up their meeting places on the web, can we?

I should add to that, IMO the general public is shooting themselves in the foot by going hog-wild downloading gig upon gig of copyrighted movies, music and software just because they can. Not because I think copyright law is fair, not that I think the RIAA is in the right, but "piracy" is pushing the system to the breaking point as much as any government fearmongering.

Re:The Net is SO scary! (5, Funny)

Milton Waddams (739213) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997204)

Packets of data don't scare me.


You've obviously never seen tubgirl before.

1 down, quite a few more to go (2, Interesting)

Anne Thwacks (531696) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996982)

If they can get him, then they should be able to get a few more of the spammers.

Re:1 down, quite a few more to go (1)

saleenS281 (859657) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996986)

If they can get him, then they should be able to get a few more of the file swappers.
br. fixt! (P2P makes baby jesus cry and supports terrorism and kills innocent children)

Oh yEss (1, Insightful)

Delifisek (190943) | more than 8 years ago | (#14996991)

Another Muslim Terrorist was caught, those pesky videos injures o eye candy...

And of course, 100.000 of civillian death in iraq just coterral damage and they have to pay this price for freedom and democracy...

Hacker? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14996992)

Posting beheading videos and uploading traning manuals makes you a hacker?

Boy the bar really has been lowered, hasn't it.

Re:Hacker? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997003)

I was ABOUT to say that. Then I RTFA. The guy did more than just that. He broke into some servers and used them as hosts for the propoganda. Hacker? I don't know. Digital criminal? Surely.

Has anyone... (1)

tqft (619476) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997000)

read the documents 007 authored on hacing and security ?

Anyone have the links to hand?

Do they have any useul information?

The article doesn't give the links and I haven't been able to get much from google as yet - 5 mins - yes I am lazy on a Sunday night.

Re:Has anyone... (1)

1u3hr (530656) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997112)

These sound interesting at least:

"Irhabi posted a 20-page message titled "Seminar on Hacking Websites," to the Ekhlas forum. It provided detailed information on the art of hacking, listing dozens of vulnerable Web sites to which one could upload shared media.

"Irhabi released his will on the Internet. In it, he provided links to help visitors with their own Internet security and hacking skills in the event of his absence."

Re:Has anyone... (1)

mboverload (657893) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997137)

He sound more like the punks on the various message boards I visit than some terrorist.

He's just some lamer who wanted the attention and a place to get porn.

Don't tell Bush... (0, Troll)

netguardianii (955452) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997007)

...or he just might plan an invasion of online forums!

elusive online world? (1)

ReagansUndeadBrain (807163) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997018)

"... our future security is going to depend increasingly on identifying and catching the shadowy figures who exist primarily in the elusive online world."

They shall never penetrate the security of the Shadow Council, aye, so as long as Gul'dan draws breath!

yep, so they caught him... (3, Insightful)

zappepcs (820751) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997021)

But I bet he's glad he wasn't caught by the *AA !!!

Kidding aside, its interesting how the PR against him makes him sound evil incarnate... Next, this will be used to hobble our on-line rights so they can catch more of the terrorists... not a good thing IMO. Of course, I can't speak for everyone, but the PR is a bad sign. Criminals are criminals, no matter how bad they are. Sensationalizing the story, or the criminal, only serves nefarious purposes IMO.

Al Qaeda = GNAA (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997196)

And weapons of mass destruction = weapons of ass destruction (you know which site I mean).

It's just the 'demonize the enemy' approach.

Just great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997034)

What really irks me are the lengths to which guys these guys would go just to hurt us. First, they sacrifice their own lives just to be able to bomb us, then they kidnap non-combatants indiscriminately, and now they're trying to hack their way in. What's next?

Re:Just great. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997067)

Ever wonder why they do this?

The truly elite... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997041)

...are the ones that don't get caught.

"Hacker" (1)

Shohat (959481) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997052)

The term "Hacker" is used in the media to portray almost anyone with enough technical knowledge to use a vulnerability , due to the fact that it allows the "hacker" to execute an attack . And that's mighty stupid. It's like saying that a person with the ability to read a Microwave manual and operate it successfully is an engineer .

Re: "Hacker" (1)

brpr (826904) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997148)

Do you have any idea how few people are able to read a microwave manual and operate it correctly? I know several engineers who can't.

just copyright one of the recordings (5, Funny)

bxbaser (252102) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997057)

and let the riaa go after him.

The new standard ? (2, Insightful)

Eivind (15695) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997058)

Is that the new definition of "terrorist" ? Soemone who; covertly and securely distribute inflammatory material ?

Weaponmanuals and if you like, training using them is available perfectly openly. I suppose if you partake in such while looking Arabic you get looked at strangely these days. Still, there's nothing even remotely illegal about either.

It is true that secure, anonymous communication is a benefit to those with criminal intentions. But that's a small price to pay for the benefit they provide to the rest of us.

The fact that cellphones, the post, cars, guns, ski-masks, maps and electricity is an enabler for certain kinds of crime, is just an example of the fact that anything can be used for good or evil, the tools are mostly quite neutral, it's the user who decides.

Personally I'm a lot more worried about the freedoms that the government will take away to "protect" us than I am about anything the terrorists are likely to manage.

WoW (1)

mOOzilla (962027) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997059)

Did he get banned from WoW?

So, what does this look like. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997061)

Right on the heels of ``9/11'' there were a bunch of ``cyber'' laws pushed through. Like the almost painfully contrived and afterward suspiciously unsubstantiable WMD reports, this is just one more attempt at FUD and justification of what is to follow. Note that any achievements and connections, real or imagined, of this criminal, are quite besides the point of the report and its spin. Soon, we'll see more hot anti-cyber action.

The ACTUAL charges. (5, Insightful)

Bob Cat - NYMPHS (313647) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997077)

Before anymore of you spout off about how this guy's use of his free speech rights is what got him into trouble, RTFA!

"Tsouli has been charged with eight offenses including conspiracy to murder, conspiracy to cause an explosion, conspiracy to cause a public nuisance, conspiracy to obtain money by deception and offences relating to the possession of articles for terrorist purposes and fundraising. So far there are no charges directly related to his alleged activities as Irhabi on the Internet, ..."

LOOK! No Internet-publishing charges! They found out who he (allegedly) was by accident!

My only question is where are the Internet spooks who should be hunting these guys? They break into servers in the US and put beheading videos on them, and no one bothers to check the logs? Where are the honeypot jihadi forums? Is anybody looking into wtf http://www.whois.sc/irhabi007.com [whois.sc] is all about? Is the owner a fan or an identity theft victim?

Re:The ACTUAL charges. (2, Insightful)

AfricanImpi (879572) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997158)

Yeah, exactly. Way too many people here just assumed that he was being charged for "propaganda", without bothering to RTFA. Hey, if you could be arrested for propaganda in support of the enemy, I can think of quite a few people who'd also be eligible for prosecution. Except the Feds haven't touched them...

The internet spooks are hunting these guys, more than most of us will know. Except most of that evidence will likely never see the inside of a courtroom. It's used instead to build up a picture of the terrorist organisations, identifying its leaders and attempting to track its plans. After all, the guys who generally send the messages via the net tend to be the low-level sort, not worth arresting immediately unless there's a very good reason. Intel agencies much prefer to leave them be, while watching their every move in order to be led further up the ladder to their leaders and commanders. Then they try either send a capture team or a Predator with Hellfires to deal with the latter, depending on whatever's practical.

You can never defeat a terrorist group by killing its footsoldiers, there'll almost always be more where they come from. But a terrorist group without its leaders is just another mass movement, with no organization and leadership to make it a dangerous one.

Irhabi 007 ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997083)

"Celebrated for his computer expertise, Irhabi 007 had propelled the jihadists into a 21st-century offensive..."

This sounds like an Onion article.

There is no real terrorist threat (0, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997102)

These terrorists are nothing but a tool used by our hijacked government to control the people with fear while they loot and plunder the American people.

Meanwhile Americans are apathetic and ignorant while their food supply is being poisoned, their liberties are being eroded and the executive branch weilds power that goes unchecked.

Most of what really happened on 9/11 will eventually become public knowledge (the information is out there [google.com] if you look for it). The Bush administration will take the fall for this while the true perpetrators consolidate even more power and wealth.

Both Republicans and Democrats are in on this. Do not trust any Democrats to help the people (except for a select few). Hillary Clinton's adminstration will be little different than the Bush adminstration. She will succeed in taking away more liberties from the people (2nd amendment).

Expect "terrorist" attacks, massive internet control and censorship, mandatory (bird flu) vaccinations, national ID cards, unwarranted monitoring/tracking, FEMA detention camps and declining liberties.

Resistance is NOT futile. They will make it seem hopeless. It is never hopeless. In reality, they fear the people. We should not fear them. Fear, anger and conflict are their most powerful tools to manipulate the masses. We must fear nothing (but God), love all that share this world with us and make peace with one another. It is for the sake of our children and their children.

We must not be remembered as the generation that was idle while this was happening to us right under our noses. Take advantage of the information and personal networking we have access to on the internet while it lasts.

Translation (1)

The Mgt (221650) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997103)

'But our future security is going to depend increasingly on identifying and catching the shadowy figures who exist primarily in the elusive online world.'

'Our desire to introduce repressive new laws is going to depend increasingly on pretending we're up against S.P.E.C.T.R.E.'

Criminal? Yes. (4, Insightful)

AfricanImpi (879572) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997129)

RTFA, not only did this guy hijack servers for his own use (which is most surely a criminal act), but he did so in order to disseminate weapons manuals and the like not only propaganda material. It is a common and long-standing principle in Western countries that providing aid and comfort to the enemy, most especially in terms of technical assistance, is a crime. It would be wrong to view the arrest of this man as "one more erosion of our rights", because the right to support the enemy has never existed. Save your energy to defend real victims, not this guy.

Re:Criminal? Yes. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997299)

I always knew this free speech thingy was a lie. Only counts if it's your opinion, right? Land of the cowards, land of the slaves.

Benjamin Franklin (1)

El_Muerte_TDS (592157) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997134)

Everytime I read an article like this the following quote from Ben Franklin pops up in my head:

Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety.

Celebrated hacker? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 8 years ago | (#14997170)

Sounds like a pretty crappy hacker, he got caught... what a noob

One more reason to strip away my rights... (1, Funny)

freedom_india (780002) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997182)

This ONE hacker is enough for the Bush Regime to further reduce my already reduced privacy and civil rights.

As in the "Enemy of the State", what privacy exists is only within my mind.

Whenever i browser the internet looking at "interesting" sites, talk to my wife over the mobile, call my sister, withdraw money; i know the NSA is watching me.

Iam not interested in wholesale misuse by the Govt: There are too many good people still remaining who will prevent some extent of it. Iam worried about misuse by people like Ashcroft, right-wing nuts who think abstination and religious crap are going to cure AIDS, and that our society will go back to the old 1872's era of nice moral women and gentlemen.

Bush has a dream: no doubt: Of a benevolent govt., looking over our shoulders when i copulate with my wife...

This is exactly what the Founding Fathers tried to prevent...

Unfortunately Al-Qaueda is a god-sent to these right-wing nuts to take away my life.

In a sense Hollywood was pretty ahead of its time: Enemy of State and Siege were very good movies...

The world i leave to my son, would be a world, where if the NSA wants, can tap into all the SIX points of his body to look, see, touch, smell and feel what he feels.

Iam sick !

'Kiddies (2, Funny)

t_allardyce (48447) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997203)

When are they going to catch all the dirty little script kiddies who mass-defaced Danish websites with death threats? These people are most likely the suicide-bomber wannabes who were told to stay home by their big brother because they were too young.

I expect its not so much about catching them, more about using them as keys into cells. Every-time they do something online they are providing an opportunity to be traced and hopefully this will lead to some big busts. Trading a few weapons manuals and videos online is no big deal really - if you want to see the beheading videos go to one of the countless 'hardcore-gore' sites out there or watch Al Jazeera. Weapons manuals have been traded ever since school kids put the anarchists cook book on school network shares.

I hope our governments are actually getting off their asses and using this intelligence to catch daka-dakas.

Oh no! (1)

miffo.swe (547642) | more than 8 years ago | (#14997226)

An evil terrorist has a website up that shows completely open manuals for weapons, oh the horror! Quick, put the NRA in jail this very instant!

And even more evil, hes not on the side of the US and write bad things about it. Off to the thought ministery and reprogram him, cant have that can we?

Its pretty darn sad how little value the word terrorrist has theese days. Nowadays ot seems to mean smalltime criminal punk with the wrong skin colour. Racism? You bet it is.

Take a look at the numbers, how many of your friends died in a car accident and how many died from a terriorist act....
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...