Should we disrupt cell phones during a terror attack
NY Times:
I do see a problem with jamming cell phone communications in that situation. During 9-11 we got very valuable information from cell phone calls from victims and they in turn got valuable information. In a Mumbai type attack cell phone callers could notify police and other first responders of the location of the terrorist. That vital information would be lost if we jammed all calls. A more rationale response would be to try to intercept the terrorist communications. It seems idiotic to ignore that information.
This seems to be a curious discussion since it has been the position of the NY Times that we should not intercept the communications of terrorist without a warrant which would obviously arrive too late in the Mumbai situation.The announcement by New York City police officials that they are studying the feasibility of disrupting cellphone communications in the event of a terrorist attack came after it was revealed that attackers in Mumbai, India, used electronic transmissions during their November assault.
Police Commissioner Raymond W. Kelly discussed the issue of jamming cellphones during a Senate hearing on lessons from the Mumbai attacks on Thursday.
In the Mumbai attacks, the gunmen used cellphones and satellite phones to receive instructions and pep talks from handlers elsewhere. The Indian authorities released details about some of those conversations that have served as an annotated guide to their planning and operations, police officials said.
...
I do see a problem with jamming cell phone communications in that situation. During 9-11 we got very valuable information from cell phone calls from victims and they in turn got valuable information. In a Mumbai type attack cell phone callers could notify police and other first responders of the location of the terrorist. That vital information would be lost if we jammed all calls. A more rationale response would be to try to intercept the terrorist communications. It seems idiotic to ignore that information.
they will block them thinking that that would really change the outcomes, as if pep talks are really needed... they would just change the tactics of the event so it works well without them.
ReplyDeletethey are not too bright, and all the bright people they keep trying to tap are just memory experts who believe they are smarter than they are and do their intelligentsia gig.
which is why they cant see an opportunity made of gold and want to choke the damn goose that honks too much.
the fact is that india could also have used those phones against the terrorists if they were prepared.
how hard is it to either imitate or recut audio and tell the attackers to stop?
in other words, someone could inject wrong orders into the stream during stressful moments when they are not able to think about it... do instantaneous jamming that happens when listening so that they blank out details.
"go down the street, turn right, turn left, right again, and go into the fourth house"
changes quite a bit when you get
"go down the street, turn , turn left, then right again, and go into the fourth house"
[you dump the audio to computer, and in minutes you can have right left and other instructions cut out and played at a key press like a DJ does fart sounds on the radio. now you can randomly replace a few cardinal directions here and there]
and since they are listening they just keep screwing up... or they silence the outgoing when they request a repeat of instructions... they have nothing else to do but go into the ambush or invent instructions.
[heck just saying this is what you do would end up having them abandon such as a liability, and voila, you ahve separated victim from terrorist, and succeeded in not blocking any positive information]
orders given during the stressful moments will not be examined closely, so tap in and tell them to do somtehing that will move them into the line of fire. (left instead of right. it only takes a split second to make it a fatal mistake)
none of this would really inconvenience victims too much... they will not reply and say things in the same gaps and places of the terrorists so in essence it controls one, but permits the others with minor difficulties.
telling the public that if only people would somehow get more video and send it through the cell to some three digit cell phone number like the ones they use to pay your bill, see your balance, etc.
tell people to dial, and leave their phone someplace on its side on a shelf, or cabinet, with the camera facing out, then get out of their. So technically if they did this when they called 911, they could just put the phone down by the window they climb out of when they are running away. or on a fire hidrant by the door as they run out the exit.
suddenly what you would ahve is a camera system everywhere... up to people to decide to do it. no one should say anything if they dont.
the moment they shut them off they are back in the last century... the whole thing goes dark, and the targets could run out with the victims by having tear off clothes... run into an area, tear, run out in different shirt, everyone will think your one of the victims trying to get away...
none of this violates privacy of anyone... keeps positive communication open... provides potential weaknesses in the system they are using that can potentially be exploited given ability... and could also create a short term ability to monitor things from places where no cameras exist.
i should start a think tank and charge them for ideas. sheesh...