these are just a small sample of the ISP’s addresses that are hosting Islamic/Jihadi websites, here in the United States of America….

Yet another case of primitive ideology exploiting cutting-edge western technology, except this time they’re doing it from bases inside America.

Yeah… I thought you were referring to today’s WSJ article about Google strengthening their relationship with the Democrats:

“Google Goes to Washington With Own Brand of Lobbying”
By KEVIN J. DELANEY and AMY SCHATZ
Wall Street Journal – July 20, 2007; Page A1

In a conference room overlooking the Washington Monument, about 150 young Democratic operatives-in-training recently munched on animal crackers as Google Inc. executives pitched the Internet company’s offerings.

Google’s newly hired team leader for political sales, Peter Greenberger, explained how attendees could use online ads and other services from Google to help their candidates win. One Google product could provide details about people who visited a campaign’s Web site, such as the approximate area where they lived, Mr. Greenberger explained. “Tremendously valuable info,” he said, adding, “It’s free. Did I mention it’s free? It’s free.”

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB118489524982572543.html?mod=politics_primary_hs

Read the whole thing. It’s paragraph after paragraph of how top Clinton Administration Democrats are being hired by Google and how Google’s Silicon Valley so-called progressive lefty groupthink merges perfectly with the Democrats’ plans for 2008.

It’s not all about Democrats, though. All six sentences of Paragraphs 28 & 29 are about how Republicans could use Google services but didn’t really do much and how YouTube sunk George Allen because he had no good response for the “macaca” video.

Even before I had skin in this game, I was always disturbed that almost no Republican politicians, organizations, and media outlets ever adopted and used new technologies until they absolutely had to because they were getting “pwned” by liberals. I was mostly disturbed because I was quickly adopting those new technologies and surrounded by nothing but disturbed liberals…

Look, I have a bootstrap online video company that provides cutting-edge software tools to reach young affluent Internet video consumers. The tech is sound and it works well. For the past six months I’ve been actively meeting with reps of conservative media outlets such as UPI, the Washington Times, NewsMax, and others to use my technology to create Internet TV “channels” for top conservative sites on every Windows Vista PC (70+ million Vista PCs sold since January 2007; projected to be 300 million by the 2008 election).

None of those conservative sites are buying. Even after I do a live demo of my software, show them how it can convert their existing postage stamp-sized web video into video that can easily be shown on every plasma and LCD TV in your home, and offer this software for a tenth of what other companies charge (companies that are run by Silicon Valley liberals that would NEVER pitch this service to a company affiliated with the e-e-e-e-e-evil conservative noise machine), the conservative companies all say “interesting” and then never go any further with negotiations.

-They don’t ask questions.
-They don’t discuss integration schemes between my product and their IT departments.
-They don’t talk timetables for deployment.

They. Just. Don’t. Get it.

And before you all start huffing and puffing about how cutting edge you are because you bought an iPod to listen to your Rush 24/7 subscriptions, I must remind you that Limbaugh didn’t offer those podcasts until June 2005. Apple iPods had been available for 4 years before that. Apple iTunes for 2 years. The RSS feed technologies required to push podcasts down to iTunes and the iPod had been in use in some form or another for almost 10. Cutting edge would’ve been Limbaugh and other conservatives using Shoutcast on AOL back in 1999…

Also, these companies make very little if any money out of “supporting” jihadists, so the main motivation for keeping them running seems to be intelligence gathering indeed.

Another option which is quite popular among law enforcement in Europe: setting up honeypots, i.e. some of these sites may be operated by fronts to various intelligence services in order to collect all those lone wolves out there running astray.

If I remember correctly, Internet Hagannah had a similar investigative project a while back, and they also inquired various ISPs to take down jihadi websites – until the FBI told them to stop it because it impeded their efforts to listen in on those very websites.

So the feds really appreciate those stupid jerks using our Internet. Yep, I said “our” .

I wonder if the feds don’t prefer to have them on American servers, though: it must make it a hell of a lot easier to find out who’s accessing the pages than it would if they were hosted in Saudi Arabia.

I guess I’m on their list then because I access those pages using Google translation when necessary. Weak, but one can get the gist. Keep your enemies closer.

I think The Jawa Report should also get some credit as anti cyberjihadis.

I agree.

:-)

I think The Jawa Report should also get some credit as anti cyberjihadis.

Number 2 on July 20, 2007 at 12:13 PM

Ding ding!

Jawa Report has been on this for MONTHS… Hell.. YEARS!

You do them a disservice by not reporting their key involvement in the takedown of dozens of Jihadi sites. (some taken down multiple times on multiple ISPs)

Credit where credit is due AP.