Are cyber jihadis armed combatants?

Are cyber jihadis 'armed illegal combatants' or are they just criminals. There is a big difference. My friend at Toasted Bread raised the question here.

So, are the Governments taking Online Jihad seriously? It's possible that they haven't because as MyPetJawa writes they have not been much more worried about this:

They are willing to view the cyber jihadis (occasionally, at least) as criminals. What they have not been willing to concede, to this point, is that they are armed illegal combatants.

While it may seem minor, it is an important distinction. Why? Because if the internet is 1) a field of battle and 2) propaganda on the internet is a weapon of war, then the strategy for confronting it must be military. The first rules of war are to 1) possess better weapons than the enemy and 2) control the battlespace.

As to point 1: is there really any doubt as to whether our geeks possess better internet skillz than the Islamists?

As to point 2: there has been no serious attempt to control the battlespace.

Toasted Bread mentions a Moroccan suicide Jihadi who killed himself and what the Counterterrorism Blog had to say:

According to news services, the attack was not aimed at the cybercafe. But two terrorists carrying explosive belts entered the cybercafe to surf the web. They were connected to a terrorism-linked site and the manager wanted to prevent them to do so.

When he approached one of the two terrorists, the suicide bomber decided to activate his bomb. Its accomplice fled but was stopped by Moroccan police. The most credible explanation for what happened last night is that the two terrorists wanted to consult Internet to receive their orders for an attack against another target.

From CBS:

"Without a doubt, the Internet is the single most important venue for the radicalization of Islamic youth," says Army Brigadier General John Custer, who is the is head of intelligence at central command, responsible for Iraq and Afghanistan.

Custer says he knows where the enemy finds an inexhaustible supply of suicide warriors. "I see 16, 17-year-olds who have been indoctrinated on the Internet turn up on the battlefield. We capture 'em, we kill 'em every day in Iraq, in Afghanistan," he says. .....

CBS 60 Minutes video here at LGF, via The Jawa Report, who says:

Among those featured in the 60 Minutes segment are Rita Katz of the SITE Institute and Aaron Weisburd of Internet Haganah.

It would be wise, though, if people were not only aware of the clear and present danger presented by the online jihadis, but that they would also listen to Aaron's advice on how to confront them. [snip]

It's pre-9/11 think, really. Treating terrorism as a crime to be prosecuted after the fact. Treating the cyber-jihadis as criminals who must break a law before they are stopped.

It's really not that hard. Give a few of my friends legal indemnity and a few bucks and they'll systematically fight the online jihadis. And they'll win.

Pre-September 11, 2001 thinking indeed.

Comments

[Debbie]

Lady Vorzheva, those are very good questions you ask, and I'm hoping some of the 'experts' that comment here at Right Truth will respond.

It seems if these sites are known and they do publish terrorist propaganda, it comes back to the question "who decides what is propaganda and what isn't?"

Also many of the jihadi websites can be traced back to American companies. What do we do about that?

The 'why' money is not spent on cyber jihadism in Europe I don't know. I would suspect politics in some form could be partially blamed.

I'm looking forward to the other comments from my readers on your questions.

[Lady Vorzheva]

Thanks for the links, Debbie.
Actually, when I raise the question I was more concerned about Europe, where this things are too sophisticated and not only for the public. Police is much more trained to urban conflicts than to cyber warfare.
So I received a comment from a friend of mine who writes about cyber and web technologies a comment in which he stated that they are not spending at all. Basically, that means that against something which is basically ideological we are unprotected or rather unprotected.
That raises an important question: why are they not spending it?
And that is what worries me much more. The "why".
What surprised me (not so much) was that, reading the links, there were blogs located on blogger and on wordpress.com, which were spreading Islamoterrorist ideology. I have not visited their blogs but the video menacing Spain, Germany and Austria was in one with the wordpress.com extension. So, how on earth these blogs are not at least suspended and the IP of the owner controlled? I mean they are not critisizing, they are publishing TERRORIST propaganda.

[StormWarning]

Newt, you can nuance me all you want. Cyber terrorism, becuase of the linkage to critical infrastructure is a serious issue being addressed and constantly being watch as TACK mentioned. When you spend some time studying critical infrastructure and the various interdependencies, it becomes clear how important this area is to us all. Even if it is misunderstood by many.

[StormWarning]

Newt and Debbie. Having seen the Towers of Light when they first appeared (we were able to get a clear view of the skyline from the southshore LI beach), it is an image that I will never forget.

I actually use an image like that juxtaposed with one of my own photographs of the WTC in the presentations that I make regarding homeland security.

Just in case anyone here has seen it, its the slide that starts "Imagine the Unimaginable."

[TACK]

Great article. I along w/ co workers of mine sat in on a meeting that discussed this issue directly. I can tell you this, there are law enforcement / military agencies and entities that are getting their "butts kicked" in this arena. Details were not given as to how and why, but the source of this info is credible. To me this is very scary and makes me very nervous for numerous reasons. Like I said great post and info.

[Debbie]

A NEWT ONE, I like the "never forget' image you have at your site. I might make me one like it!

StormWarning, I really enjoyed reading your latest post. Very informative and so timely.

[A NEWT ONE]

I would argue that cyber terrorists are MORE of a threat than suicide bombers because they can cause billions in damage and affect millions of people.

[StormWarning]

Cyber security and cyber terrorism is as much a threat to our Nation as a suicide bomber, although clearly with differing results.

The linkage of cyber security with critical infrastructure makes it all more important.