Islamic State identities compromised

[Steveman]

http://news.sky.com/story/1656777/is-registration-forms-identify-22000-jihadis

Tens of thousands of documents, containing 22,000 names, addresses, telephone numbers and family contacts of Islamic State jihadis, have been obtained by Sky News.Some of the telephone numbers on the list are still active and it is believed that although many will be family members, a significant number are used by the jihadis themselves.

The files were passed to Sky News on a memory stick stolen from the head of Islamic State's internal security police, an organisation described by insiders as the group's SS. He had been entrusted to protect the organisation's core secrets and he rarely parted with the drive.

Massive breakthrough by Sky News, could be the start of the end for IS.

I would imagine some of the most valuable information will be on the 5000 Jihadis that have been smuggled into Europe disguised as migrants. I would imagine the security services will have to move staff from other areas to go through that much information.Could be a few doors getting kicked in pretty soon.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

Surely by publicising this Sky has ensured that a lot of those numbers will change and people will be hurriedly relocated before the security services can act on all the information?

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Surely by publicising this Sky has ensured that a lot of those numbers will change and people will be hurriedly relocated before the security services can act on all the information?

I totally agree with what you say. None of the general public at large should even be aware of this and that information should be acted upon by the security services to the best of their ability without the knowledge by these ISIL fifth columnists.

 

[miami]

I would imagine some of the most valuable information will be on the 5000 Jihadis that have been smuggled into Europe disguised as migrants.

Citation? 5000 is a large number, and based on the Paris ratios of 3:1 that means there's at least 15,000 EU citizens willing to kill.

They aren't very well trained.

 

[CheesyChips]

The value in releasing this info is that it's likely to cause serious internal problems for IS. The usual communication methods will be compromised for some time, trust will have been lost and the dynamic of the organisation will change which will slow down progress for them.

We can exploit their problems.

It's a bit like why the UK joined the EU, so we can make sure it doesn't work from within

 

[HMS Ark Royal]

PMSL...!

I'd like us all to take a look at this

The files were passed to Sky News on a memory stick stolen from the head of Islamic State's internal security police, an organisation described by insiders as the group's SS. He had been entrusted to protect the organisation's core secrets and he rarely parted with the drive.

And laugh at the thought that the head of their security was compromised.

The value in releasing this info is that it's likely to cause serious internal problems for IS. The usual communication methods will be compromised for some time, trust will have been lost and the dynamic of the organisation will change which will slow down progress for them.

We can exploit their problems.

I agree...

This is going to seriously hurt their command and control abilities greater then ever before - I would even hazard a guess at them losing a lot of ground too. All their stuff will have to be changed which will take a hell of a lot of time, meanwhile, we can clear up

 

[Johnuk123]

Citation? 5000 is a large number, and based on the Paris ratios of 3:1 that means there's at least 15,000 EU citizens willing to kill.

They aren't very well trained.

From Rob Wainwright head of Europol on the 20th of February -

“Europe is currently facing the highest terror threat in more than 10 years.” He said that the EU Member States can expect by the so-called Islamic State (IS) or other religious terror groups to stage an attack somewhere in Europe “with the aim of achieving mass casualties among the civilian population.” Up to 5,000 EU citizens, trained in Syria and Iraq by the Islamic State (IS), have returned in Europe,

 

[Steveman]

Surely by publicising this Sky has ensured that a lot of those numbers will change and people will be hurriedly relocated before the security services can act on all the information?

Sky released the information to various security services before going public according to the news this morning.

 

[Johnuk123]

Citation? 5000 is a large number, and based on the Paris ratios of 3:1 that means there's at least 15,000 EU citizens willing to kill.

They aren't very well trained.

The 5000 is a widely avaialbale figure and true not all will have been smuggled in, some are home grown who have gone abroad for training and come back. Some will be Middle East terrorists who have arrived on fake passports, some by legitimate means some by impersonating migrants.Some of course will simply be living here and elsewhere in Europe who are fully committed to Jihad.

 

[Tetchytyke]

And how far in advance did they release it to MI6? Long enough for MI6 to use the information and arrest people?

Either Sky News have compromised security with this splash, or it is information that MI6 have decided is fundamentally worthless. Wonder which it is.

 

[Steveman]

And how far in advance did they release it to MI6? Long enough for MI6 to use the information and arrest people?

Either Sky News have compromised security with this splash, or it is information that MI6 have decided is fundamentally worthless. Wonder which it is.

I'm sure the 10 times News channel of the year has no idea what to do with information like this and no procedure in place.

If you think it's all worthless information that's up to you.

Former global terrorism operations director MI6 Richard Barrett :

"It will be an absolute goldmine of information of enormous significance and interest to very many people, particularly the security and intelligence services."

 

[EssexGonzo]

And how far in advance did they release it to MI6? Long enough for MI6 to use the information and arrest people?

Either Sky News have compromised security with this splash, or it is information that MI6 have decided is fundamentally worthless. Wonder which it is.

Or....MI6 etc have had some time to do something meaningful with some of the data and have decided that, even though they didn't claim the glory here, that this sort of win is a good psychological blow in the war against terror. Sky wouldn't have gone solo on this.

Don't discount the fact that this could have been engineered by the security services and that the source wouldn't meet a "spy" and that the Sky journo was used as an intermediary on the promise that they'd get a pretty good story out of it. You don't just think that Abu got on the blower to the Sky News desk out of the blue, do you?

 

[NSEFAN]

this sort of win is a good psychological blow in the war against terror.

Terrorism works both ways, it seems!

 

[Tetchytyke]

There are two possible situations:

1. That Sky News have recklessly jeopardised our security by publicising the existence of these files before handing them to the security services.

2. That Sky News handed these files to MI6 and have been allowed to publicise that they have the information because it is worthless.

Obviously my sarcasm wasn't clear enough. I do not think that Sky News would recklessly jeopardise our security. That leaves option two. A sensationalist non-story from the sensationalist gutter press.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You don't just think that Abu got on the blower to the Sky News desk out of the blue, do you?

Actually, he probably did, in the same way Edward Snowden just got on the blower to the Washington Post.

 

[Steveman]

There are two possible situations:

1. That Sky News have recklessly jeopardised our security by publicising the existence of these files before handing them to the security services.

2. That Sky News handed these files to MI6 and have been allowed to publicise that they have the information because it is worthless.

Obviously my sarcasm wasn't clear enough. I do not think that Sky News would recklessly jeopardise our security. That leaves option two. A sensationalist non-story from the sensationalist gutter press.

That will be a news broadcaster that has just won news channel of the year for the 10th time perhaps everybody doesn't have your agenda.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

There are two possible situations:

1. That Sky News have recklessly jeopardised our security by publicising the existence of these files before handing them to the security services.

2. That Sky News handed these files to MI6 and have been allowed to publicise that they have the information because it is worthless.

Obviously my sarcasm wasn't clear enough. I do not think that Sky News would recklessly jeopardise our security. That leaves option two. A sensationalist non-story from the sensationalist gutter press.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Actually, he probably did, in the same way Edward Snowden just got on the blower to the Washington Post.

The words 'Sky' and 'news' should not be used in the same sentence. Might as well watch RT, Al Jazeera or Babestation!

 

[Steveman]

The words 'Sky' and 'news' should not be used in the same sentence. Might as well watch RT, Al Jazeera or Babestation!

Tell me your broadcaster of choice.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

Tell me your broadcaster of choice.

I don't think much of any of them. The news agenda is precisely that - an agenda by a person (editor). They decide what they think is important enough to broadcast / print. It could be on their personal view of life and what is important, on their proprietor's views, or of their perception of their viewers / readers prejudices.

In the end there are so many issues which simply don't receive coverage whilst other issues receive too much. Yes, that ultimately comes down to my personal preferences/interests/prejudices.

Ultimately, in this country, we are governed by a very narrow elite - regardless of apparent political affiliation. That includes the media.

You ask me to choose so I will say the BBC is my news broadcaster of choice, for breadth and depth of coverage, and an attempt at unbiased reporting. But I think the quality of their journalism is, in the round, sinking fast.

 

[Steveman]

In the end there are so many issues which simply don't receive coverage whilst other issues receive too much. Yes, that ultimately comes down to my personal preferences/interests/prejudices.

You admit to being prejudiced so admit to not being rational.
Just because a broadcaster reports on things you don't like doesn't make it a bad broadcaster.

At this years RTS TV Journalism awards :

Alex Crawford Sky - Journalist of the year (unprecedented 5th time)
Sky News 5.00pm - Daily News programme of the year
Sky News - International News Coverage
Sky News - News Channel of the Year (unprecedented 10th time)

This organisation has judges picked from every aspect of UK media so for you to rubbish Sky because you don't like it is pretty immaterial because if it was as awful as you make out it wouldn't be so successful.

 

[Tetchytyke]

You keep mentioning the Royal Television Society (whose president is the bloke whose crowning career achievement was Big Brother) awards as though they mean something.

It's quite sweet really.

 

[Steveman]

You keep mentioning the Royal Television Society awards as though they mean something.

It's quite sweet really.

They mean more than someone saying they don't like any broadcaster that doesn't report exactly what they personally think they should.

 

[ComUtoR]

You ask me to choose so I will say the BBC is my news broadcaster of choice, for breadth and depth of coverage, and an attempt at unbiased reporting.

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHEEHEHHAHHAHAHEHEEEEE


On the original point

Massive breakthrough by Sky News, could be the start of the end for IS.

I very much doubt it will be the end for Daesh. Whilst the current conflict is currently going against them it is still a long way before any form of resolution starts to appear.

 

[Steveman]

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHEEHEHHAHHAHAHEHEEEEE


On the original point



I very much doubt it will be the end for Daesh. Whilst the current conflict is currently going against them it is still a long way before any form of resolution starts to appear.

Yes I don't suppose it will but it is a very good result and I imagine IS are not happy.

 

[Tetchytyke]

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHEEHEHHAHHAHAHEHEEEEE

All sides think the BBC are biased against them, which can tend to imply they're doing something right. One doesn't hear many right-wingers complain about Sky News being biased, on the other hand...

Personally I reckon Russia Today is more neutral than either Sky or the BBC, and that isn't a compliment to Russia Today, but that's by the by.

Yes I don't suppose it will but it is a very good result and I imagine IS are not happy.

Other than the inconvenience of having to get a new cellphone, I doubt they give a stuff tbh.

 

[Baxenden Bank]

You admit to being prejudiced so admit to not being rational.
Just because a broadcaster reports on things you don't like doesn't make it a bad broadcaster.

At this years RTS TV Journalism awards :

Alex Crawford Sky - Journalist of the year (unprecedented 5th time)
Sky News 5.00pm - Daily News programme of the year
Sky News - International News Coverage
Sky News - News Channel of the Year (unprecedented 10th time)

This organisation has judges picked from every aspect of UK media so for you to rubbish Sky because you don't like it is pretty immaterial because if it was as awful as you make out it wouldn't be so successful.

Everyone is prejudiced in some way. Admitting it is a step forward. Denying it is burying ones head in the sand.
Why should I be rational? Define rational - rational in relation to what?

Winning an award does not mean that you are good, merely that in a specific context you are judged as being better than someone else. Do the awards to which you refer require an entry/recommendation or do they consider the whole range of media output? My employer was previously in the 'Times Top 100 Employers'. The employer paid to be part of that survey, it was/is not a survey of every employer in the country. Perhaps ISIS should run a 'Best Jihadist' competition. Should we all laud the winner of that completion? Best Beheader for 10 years running!

--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

HAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHAAHEEHEHHAHHAHAHEHEEEEE

1) Please explain the basis on which I have made you able to split your sides with laughter this am. On what basis do you make your judgement? Please do put forward your side of the argument, evidenced appropriately.

2) Have the decency to quote my point in full. Do you profer a better alternative or agree with my view that none of them are up to much nowadays?

You ask me to choose so I will say the BBC is my news broadcaster of choice, for breadth and depth of coverage, and an attempt at unbiased reporting. But I think the quality of their journalism is, in the round, sinking fast.

 

[ComUtoR]

1) Please explain the basis on which I have made you able to split your sides with laughter this am. On what basis do you make your judgement? Please do put forward your side of the argument, evidenced appropriately.

Because the BBC are terrible at reporting, obviously from a personal perspective. They are reliant on their reputation and sadly that reputation was once deserved but now just isn't. There is a perception that the BBC is still as good as they once were.

As to the BBC being non biased that too is misplaced trust in the BBC. One of their worst habits is their editing. They will often cut off mid sentence to create sound bites and to spin the story in their favour. I certainly believe that in the pursuit of neutrality they are missing part of the story.

2) Have the decency to quote my point in full. Do you profer a better alternative or agree with my view that none of them are up to much nowadays?

I didn't quote you in full because the second part was not germane to my laughter. I also agree with the second part. Journalism is a dying art and I agree that the BBC are sinking fast.

You also mentioned Al Jazeera. Oddly that channel was recommended by someone at work because they felt that it was a very good news reporting channel. Arctic is right in that people will see bias when their views aren't supported. They will also flock to a channel where their views are specifically supported.

When I want to read a particular story I tend to read it from multiple sources rather than just one. I get my news via a newsfeed site that pulls from multiple sources and I click what I find interesting. I also tend to lean towards discussion shows so that I get a more rounded opinion from all sides rather than a blanket report where I am reliant on my own personal prejudice and ignorance to interpret the news.

 

[Groningen]

In my eyes it would be smarter to keep this document secret. Let IS(IS) guessing.