Monday, February 13, 2006
A Delta team of Davids: Shannen Rossmiller nabs another one
Some of you will surely remember the stories a couple of years ago about Shannen Rossmiller, a municipal judge in the tiny town of Conrad, Montana. Without any brief from federal authorities, Judge Rossmiller stays up late prowling jihadi web sites and luring would-be killers into online conversations with various of her personae. In 2004 her work led to the capture and conviction of a National Guardsman named Ryan G. Anderson, who sought to assist al Qaeda in attacks on the United States. Daniel Pipes has lots of background in a post called "Shannen Rossmiller, American hero."
Well, she's done it again.
Michael Curtis Reynolds, 47, has not officially been charged with terrorism, but a prosecutor at a hearing said that Reynolds tried to "provide material aid to al Qaeda" and that the case "involves a federal offense of terrorism," The Philadelphia Inquirer reported in its Sunday editions.
CBS News correspondent Randall Pinkston reports that a tip from Shannen Rossmiller - a judge from Conrad, Montana who in 2004 helped snare a Washington state national guardsman who was considering defecting to al Qaeda – was what pointed the FBI to Reynolds.
"Rossmiller was scanning terrorist websites when she noticed a post from Reynolds seeking $40,000 dollars to by fuel trucks to blow up refineries in New Jersey and Wyoming and a section of the Alaska oil pipeline," said Pinkston.
Posing as an al Qaeda banker, Rossmiller promised the money, set up a date and time for the rendeszvous near Pocatello, Idaho, and notified the FBI. They set up a sting.
Rossmiller is doing valuable work, because she is interdicting the amateur wannabes who could do serious damage without any directive from any cave. She is unlikely to capture the experienced heart of al Qaeda's leadership -- the veterans trained and trusted since those halcyon days in the Afghani training camps -- but she will watch our backs for approaching yahoos. Stratfor noticed Rossmiller's work in a letter titled "Turning the tables on the amateurs," and makes precisely this point:
There is no question that jihadists and other extremist groups use the Internet for various purposes. White supremacists, anarchists and right-wing hate groups use it not only to release propaganda, but to communicate, coordinate and plan operations as well. The Internet, however, works both ways: It also allows law enforcement and counterterrorism agencies to monitor and infiltrate such groups. With some skill and luck, law enforcement and intelligence agencies posing as members or sympathizers can use the Internet to penetrate the organizations and obtain enough evidence to bring a particular cell down.
Jihadist groups use the Internet to post statements and videos for their propaganda purposes because it provides near-real-time access to a wide audience. Authorities usually shut down sites linked to known militant groups, but the Webmaster often just moves to another Internet address. Experienced militants such as al Qaeda, however, would not use the Internet to plan and coordinate a significant operation for the reasons illustrated in this case: They could be monitored -- and caught.
So, Judge Rossmiller is unlikely to nail the heart of the jihad, but in her work shows that a -- dare I write the words -- Army of Davids
can defend the homefront.9 Comments:
By 
Olivier Blanchard, at
Mon Feb 13, 10:13:00 PM:
By 
, at
Mon Feb 13, 10:53:00 PM:
nice work. It's exactly this type - the lone gunmen - who are prone to evade formal efforts.
By , at
Tue Feb 14, 05:45:00 AM:
I'm not convinced.
What mechanism is proposed to discriminate between bonafide people only posing as terrorists or terrorist enablers, or the real thing?
I remember a few drug stings gone south, because both selling and buying parties turned out to be from different police branches.
By , at
Tue Feb 14, 06:09:00 AM:
I'm not buying it either anon, don't buy it.
By , at
Tue Feb 14, 08:54:00 AM:
> I remember a few drug stings gone south, because both selling and buying parties turned out to be from different police branches.
Therefore no one should run drug stings?
> What mechanism is proposed to discriminate between bonafide people only posing as terrorists or terrorist enablers, or the real thing?
The same mechanisms that we use to distinguish folks play-robbing and folks actually robbing.
I find it interesting that folks would be so concerned with posers. Are they actually concerned, or just offended but unwilling to take the heat?
As to the posers, surely they can play a different game. How about posing as child molestors?
There are consequences to playing on freeways.
By , at
Tue Feb 14, 11:52:00 AM:
What mechanism is proposed to discriminate between bonafide people only posing as terrorists or terrorist enablers, or the real thing?
Why would anyone do that anyway? The only reason I can see is as a misguided attempt at legal entrapment (i.e. to entice law enforcement, or even someone like Judge Rossmiller, into taking action against the poseur, who then tries to sue them). Not only does this usually not work, but the poseur may well end up with criminal charges anyway (albeit along the lines of attempted fraud or extortion, rather than terrorism).
By , at
Tue Feb 14, 01:31:00 PM:
White supremacists, anarchists and right-wing hate groups use it not only to release propaganda, but to communicate, coordinate and plan operations as well. The Internet, however, works both ways: It also allows law enforcement and counterterrorism agencies to monitor and infiltrate such groups.
Uh...hate to spoil the party, but last time, I checked, it wasn't illegal to be a "white supremacist" or a "right-wing hate group". Will be infiltrating the "gun nuts" and "political activists" next?
By , at
Wed Feb 15, 06:39:00 AM:
"Therefore no one should run drug stings?"
The average citizen shouldn't. I believe that's the direct comparison you missed making.
As for the value of this it is zero. Terrorists are not being caught whether they are affiliated or not. The point you are missing is that YOU can go right now and set up an identical "sting" for every english language wannabe badguy in an IRC channel who wants to create a dirty bomb.
You can then have half the blogosphere pat you on the back like you did something useful. Nevermind the fact that is nobody other than you offerring this scheme and the only people you will get weren't interested in it until you offered.
You will still get the same results as an undercover cop selling fake Rolex on a street corner. 100% of the buyers didn't go out looking for a fake watch and 100% of them wouldn't have bought one if you didn't offer.
Yeah... thank god the homefront is being protected by bullshit like this.
By , at
Thu Feb 16, 04:36:00 PM:
Great!!!
Do you think she can discover those Iraqi WMD that W couldn't find!
Or do you suppose we were lied to!!!
I know you chicken hawks will never admit to a flaw within the current administration. You're really hopeless dupes, but it is fun rubbing your nose in the mess W and his accomplices created and which you all so ardently support.
