Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Why US Should Be Wary of Attacking Cyberradicals, Including Al Qaeda

Newspaper article The Christian Science Monitor

Why US Should Be Wary of Attacking Cyberradicals, Including Al Qaeda

Article excerpt

The first issue of Al Qaedas online magazine Inspire, released in June 2010, included articles aimed at youngsters, such as How to Build a Bomb in the Kitchen of Your Mom and What to Pack When You Leave for Jihad.

Soon after its launch, it became the terrorist organizations most downloaded publication, according to US officials.

Samir Khan, who was responsible for the magazine, began his publishing career in online extremist materials from his parents home in Charlotte, N.C., translating Al Qaeda missives and posting them online.

So why didnt American authorities arrest him or take down his websites? The answer is simple: because Khan had not broken any US laws, according to a new study on cyberradicalism from the Bipartisan Policy Center (BPC).

Spearheaded by former 9/11 commission co-chairmen Thomas Kean and Lee Hamilton, the research project, entitled Countering Online Radicalization in America, wrestles with another question: Should the US government take down those sites?

Despite the radicalizing dangers of the Internet, the BPC study ultimately warns that shutting sites down may not be such a great idea.

In the fall of 2008, for example, the Pentagons Joint Functional Component Command Network Warfare reportedly disabled three Al Qaeda online forums, likely in the hopes of limiting the ability of insurgents in Iraq to coordinate attacks against US troops.

The Central Intelligence Agency, however, strongly opposed the Pentagons plans to take down the three Al Qaeda forums, according to BPC research.

Indeed, there was quite a debate within the US government as to the wisdom of doing that and, secondly, about the legal authority for doing that, says Peter Neumann, professor of security studies at Kings College London and director of the International Center for the Study of Radicalization, who wrote the BPC study. NOThe CIA was basically saying that this is not a good idea because were getting a lot of intelligence from these websites and online forums, and were losing that if you take these sites down.

Nor did the takedowns reduce traffic to such sites, because their creators simply migrated to other servers. So were losing these sources of information without any tangible gains, says Dr. Neumann. …

Search by... Author
Show... All Results Primary Sources Peer-reviewed


An unknown error has occurred. Please click the button below to reload the page. If the problem persists, please try again in a little while.