RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Another Use of Wiretapping to Catch a Terrorist

by
Larry C Johnson

An old friend, Paul Kaihla, who writes for Business 2.0, reminded me he had published a piece 4 years ago that highlighted one of the challenges of tracking terrorist targets. While this example falls outside the current debate about phone intercepts inside the United States, the technological challenge is the same. The fundamental point is that the law enforcement and intelligence community can deal with the threat. If they need new authorities they should seek them. But ignoring laws is not a prerogative of the President or any leader for that matter.

Weapons of the Secret War
By Paul Kaihla, November 01, 2001

. . . The Escobar takedown shows how U.S. sigint can work with local forces to eliminate bad guys. In 1993 the CIA and a covert U.S. Army unit called Centra Spike spent months in Colombia monitoring Escobar’s communications from both the ground and the air, finally pinpointing his location when he made a call from his cell phone. Colombian special forces commandos gunned down the Medellmn cartel leader as he ran barefoot across the rooftop of an apartment building.

Sigint’s work against the cocaine cartels evolved into a game of high-tech cat-and-mouse, especially after Escobar’s death taught traffickers the vulnerability of cell phones. One of the cartels’ countermeasures is to “roll” cell phones to confuse wiretappers. Using scanners, they steal the identities of innocent bystanders’ mobile phones and program the “cloned” numbers into their own handsets for a few days at a time. Authorities can’t keep track of what phone numbers they should be tapping.

In response, authorities deployed a remarkable surveillance technology that operates over Colombia from spy planes. It uses a series of devices called IF-to-tape converters (“IF” stands for “intermediate frequency”), in conjunction with directional antennas, receivers, and wide-band recorders, to scoop up the major bands across the entire cellular spectrum. Loaded with the proper gear, one aircraft can record all of the cell traffic in a major city by circling it at a high altitude and exploiting the powerful microwave signals that form a handshake between cell sites in wireless networks. Back at the plane’s base, a computer extracts audio files of actual conversations from the captured signals. The audio files are then filtered with sophisticated voice recognition software, allowing intelligence analysts to identify all of a suspect’s conversations by his voice, no matter how many times he rolls his phones.

  • Tap Duncan

    Hey Larry-
    As an average citizen I cannot help but think that while we have the technological capabilities to track these guys, we chose not to do it when bin laden was coming to the forefront of world wide terrorism. We even trained him!? As Barney Fife used to say we should’ve “nipped it in the bud!”. It just makes one wonder how this guy can get so far without anyone doing anything. Oooh Rah- Tap

  • Mr.Murder

    They use the same to fish out talk in north America if one is to believe Echelon legend.

    Nice to hear this verified anyways, Larry.

    Essentially what you’re saying this is not a concern on short notice to the point paperwork and request foolow-up would not be mitigated?

  • J

    Larry,

    here is one for all your readers to cast their votes: MSNBC Live Vote

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10562904/

    as of 1130am et Dec 22 05:

    Do you believe President Bush’s actions justify impeachment? * 73644 responses
    Yes, between the secret spying, the deceptions leading to war and more, there is plenty to justify putting him on trial.
    87%
    No, like any president, he has made a few missteps, but nothing approaching “high crimes and misdemeanors.”
    4%
    No, the man has done absolutely nothing wrong. Impeachment would just be a political lynching.
    7%
    I don’t know.
    1%

  • http://drewlbucket.blogspot.com/ Drew

    The key point is that the President needs to understand his role in our governmental system. It is not, much to Bush’s and Cheney’s dismay, to unilaterally determine what the laws are and how or if they should be obeyed.

    If they wanted to make changes to the existing FISA law, then they should have approached the Congress – theoretically a generally friendly Congress to Bush and Co. – and proposed the changes. That’s how our system works.

    Clearly, Bush and Cheney didn’t believe such a system would be conducive to their aims. And they must have believed that many Republicans would have balked at their suggestions. Hence, the secrecy and the unilateral action.

    There is NO justification for this egregious violation of our laws. Bush should be brought up on articles of impeachment at the earliest possible date. Anything less is a sellout.

  • Mr.Murder

    Odds that a couple of anthrax-attacked Congresspersons’ offices were on the NSA list?

    That case is still open, yes?

  • Persephone, the Younger

    Larry,

    Thank you for your posts this past year. You have added much to the dialogue. Best wishes to you and yours this holiday season. I look forward to reading your stuff in 2006.

    Joyuex Noel from an old feminist lefty,

    P.