Burst.net Officials Stating U.S. Government is Requiring Them to Host Terrorist Website

BushCountry.org ^ | 08/07/02 | Jeremy Reynalds

[justme346]

Burst.net Officials Stating U.S. Government is Requiring Them to Host Terrorist Website
By Jeremy Reynalds (bio)

Other Articles by Jeremy Reynalds
Back to News / Home Page

An exclusive investigation into a Scranton Pennsylvania based internet service provider found that some of the company's business activities resemble more of the adventures found in a Tom Clancy or John Grisham thriller than that of a regular ISP.

Company officials for burst.net are claiming that the ISP is being required by the government to continue hosting terrorist web sites containing materials that are directly opposed to the company's philosophy.

The site currently being hosted by burst.net at the time of writing is a site for the terrorist group Hamas.

Burst.net wasn't initially willing to officially comment this time, although in previous communication the company had admitted hosting a terrorist site and being required by the government to do so. However, a source familiar with the situation but speaking on condition of anonymity said that the ISP is unable to remove the www.palestine-info.cc site or even comment on the situation. In fact, he said, the whole affair is totally out of the company's hands.

However, a spokesman for the U.S. Department of Justice said that Burstnet's claim about government intervention in its business activities "doesn't sound in any way legitimate." The DOJ's Bryan Sierra said the department has "no legal mechanism to force someone to post stuff on the internet."

A spokesman for the FBI agreed. Special Agent Ken McGuire of the Los Angeles FBI Field Office said while he wasn't aware of this specific case that in general nothing like this occurs. He said that while the FBI does ask for cooperation from people if there appears to be an opportunity to catch a criminal, it is a voluntary effort and not mandated.

"If somebody doesn't want to do it we would be hard pressed to make it happen and I don't know if we would want to anyway," McGuire said.

A spokesman for the CIA said the agency had no comment.

Once I was made aware of the government's position, I contacted burst.net's public relations department and the company's CEO, S. Matthew Arcus. In part, writing:

"The Los Angeles Bureau of the FBI disputes (that the government is requiring you to host the site) ... Now, if you are indeed being forced to host such sites against your will, you need to come forward and expose the govt (or whoever is doing this) for violating your constitutional rights. While the govt has every right to ask you to cooperate, they do not have a right even under the Patriot Act to FORCE compliance. If however you are hosting the site(s) voluntarily in response to a govt response for help, then you need to tell me so ... You are not the only ISP to claim that you are being forced/required/obligated or whatever by the govt to host websites (contrary) to your beliefs. Everyone's Internet (in Houston) is also claiming the same thing in reference to the www.qassam.org site. If the govt is forcing this on ISP's and you fail to step forward, then unwanted government interference could know no limits."

The e-mailed response from Arcus read, "1. No Comment. 2. Mind your own business 3. You should be ashamed of yourself....you are doing more harm to this country than you realize.4. If we are telling you that we are working with a govt agency to use the sites for investigation purposes, don't you think it is for good reason? As far as I am concerned, you should be arrested for interference/obstruction of justice."

Since initiating contact with burst.net, I have been curious why the company is so overtly antagonistic to any inquiry about its hosting of terrorist web sites. But maybe some of that hostility is due at least in part to the activities of its sister company, www.unrestricted.net, the company's so-called "adult hosting division." (That's an aka for pornography). We don't think burst.net wants too many people to know the names of those sites, let alone the material they contain.

Not surprisingly, burst.net doesn't advertise the sort of sites it hosts on unrestricted.net (or any of their other related non- mainstream addresses). However, by electronic tracking I was able to find some examples of the company's clients by using www.spews.org, which is a "a list of areas on the Internet that several system administrators, ISP postmasters, and other service providers have assembled and use to deny email and in some cases, network traffic, from."

For example. Listed on www.spews.org/html/S423.html, we found rape- is.com, dailypornnews.com, zoocontent.com and zolorex.org, sites about even which the title tells too much..

Sites listed on spews.org under burst.net's numerical address were described as "notorious Russian based porn and scam spammers and ‘bulletproof' spamhaus."

Of course, controversy is nothing new these days for burst.net. You may remember that azzam.com, which was pulled off line recently for violation of terms of service, was described by one commentator as "the web site of the main ideological direction of the global Jihad." Being curious as to why an apparently successful American company would decide to host such a site, back in May I sent burst.net officials an e-mail asking them to explain their actions.

This was the response from a Sean Rosler, who identified himself as being with burst.net's "System Administration."

"BurstNET DOES NOT voluntarily host the azzam.com website. It has either been removed from our equipment (It hasn't) or has been left untouched by gov't official request ... It was formerly hosted here, was under government investigation, and was/will be removed as soon as the govt allowed us to do such. It would have been removed the instant we found out about it, had we not been instructed by the ‘powers that be' to leave it untouched ... We are a Jewish owned corporation, do you really think we want to host such crap?"

Azzam.com continued to be hosted on burst.net servers, so I recently e-mailed burst.net again. After initially ignoring me, the company's public relations spokesman wrote, "Please stop the e- mails to my department about this topic. There are inherent reasons why I do not and cannot reply to this same email."

My response to Burst.net was, "Try responding to it the first time and (we)wouldn't keep sending and sending."

The same spokesman e - mailed this very terse response. "I figured you would take the hint after strike one and strike two with no replies. Guess I was wrong. No harm done, just understand there are much bigger reasons to not reply and that is all you need know."

Really? I think that enquiring minds have every right to know, especially when terrorist web sites and blatantly pornographic material are being unashamedly hosted by the same company. With that in mind, I suggest you contact burst.net's president at president@burst.net and tell him that while the internet apparently allows him to carry on his salacious activities, it also gives you the right to let him know how much you disprove of what his company is doing.

Bush Country Disclaimer

Jeremy Reynalds is a freelance writer and the founder and director of Joy Junction, New Mexico's largest emergency homeless shelter. He has a master's degree in communication from the University of New Mexico and is pursuing his PhD in intercultural education at Biola University in Los Angeles. He is married with five children and lives in Albuquerque, New Mexico. His work can be viewed here and weekly at www.americasvoices.org. He may be contacted by e-mail at reynalds@joyjunction.org

[TxBec]

Next headline?

Burst.net Officials Stating U.S. Government is Requiring Them to Spend Money Earned by Hosting Terrorist Website

[hchutch]

I can understand why.

Better to know where the goats are grazing. Then it's easier to track them.

[justshe]

Well.......I would say if this WAS a clandestine investigation, the writer of this piece is WAY out of line. How many ways did the owners of the servers have to tell this guy...shhhhhhh.

[discostu]

What a truly bizaare story. Somebody is full of crap, and oddly enough it doesn't sound like that somebody is the government (truth stranger than fiction?). Maybe people at burstnet have been spending too much time at DU and think that when the FBI asked them to keep the site up so they could investigate they tought that meant Ashcroft would throw them in the gulag if they took it down. The folks at burstnet need to have a smoke and a beer and mellow out.

[Gorzaloon]

If the domain is in SPEWS, they are spammers.

Spammers always lie. Always.

[JohnathanRGalt]

We've got two denials from real people in U.S. law enforcement - the DoJ and the FBI - that the Govt. is NOT requireing ISPs to host terrorist websites.

So, let me get this story straight: when Burst.net and Everyone's Internet told reporters and the public several months ago they were being forced to host terrorist websites as a matter of National Security -- everyone just believed them, shut their eyes and ears, clicked their heals and said Seig Heil! -- without bothering to check the story out.

Sometimes patriots scare me more than the terrorists.

[JohnathanRGalt]

Jehadi website ping! (let me know if you want on or off).

[mhking]

Spammers always lie. Always.

That's my feeling on it - they're probably a spamhaus. And if they yank one domain, then it's open season on the spammers they house...Greedy SOB's

[facedown]

Bump

[monday]

"If somebody doesn't want to do it we would be hard pressed to make it happen and I don't know if we would want to anyway," McGuire said.

"But if you don't co-operate you will receive an IRS audit". McGuire concluded.

[monday]

"What a truly bizaare story. Somebody is full of crap, and oddly enough it doesn't sound like that somebody is the government "

Not bizaare at all. Using simple logging software the feds can keep an eye on who visits the site, how often, and depending on how sophisticated they get, could actually hack viewers computers in real time getting passwords, credit card numbers, addresses, phone numbers etc. I am not even sure they would need a court order anymore after the patriot act?

It makes perfect since for the FBI to require burst.net to continue hosting the web site.

[discostu]

But according to the FBI they have at most requested they kep the pages up, not required. And then the big dog at burstnet sends that missive telling the reporter it's none of his business and the story is obstruction of justice. From an investigative standpoint you're right it does make sense, but from what I've seen the FBI generally only seeks voluntary compliance for stuff like that. They might supoena the drives to scope out the logs but if they want to keep it up it's voluntary, they understand that some people don't want to enable terrorists (or child pornographers, or whoever else is going to be getting busted) once they know about it. And usually the logs contain enough to convict, but by keeping the site up they get to bust more people. But the whole tone of this article is bizaare.

[monday]

"But the whole tone of this article is bizaare."

How about this as an explaination? The FBI wants them to leave the site up and Burst.net wants to comply but they are getting a lot of grief from the public for hosting a terrorist web site. The FBI told them to stay quiet about it but business is business and no business can afford negative publicity.

The solution? a leak to let anyone interested know that the reason they are hosting it is to help the FBI, while not admitting that the info. came from them. Don't think it worked if the reactions on this thread are any indication.

[discostu]

I think there's a huge communication gap between the top of the company and whoever talked to the reporter. It's obvious that the CEO doesn't have a problem with this. I'd guess some drone wanted to delete the site, got told not to, whne he asked why the answer was something like "the FBI wants it to stay up" and he interpretted that as some sort of X-Files style threat from the FBI when in truth the CEO is voluntarily complying with the investigation. And our reporter is just an idiot.

[Minutemen]

If BurstNet was indeed voluntarily assisting an F.B.I investigation, I highly doubt that(BurstNet) would have even bothered to answer any questions posed by us Freepers. Furthermore, the FBI would surely have some type of cover or a contingency plan of attack to handle "un-witting" people who ask too many questions of BurstNet. As an example: Have any of you been discreetly contacted by the FBI to lay low and not ask so many questions?
Just my thoughts.

[JohnathanRGalt]

But according to the FBI they have at most requested they keep the pages up,...

No, we can't put words into the mouths of FBI agents.

Special Agent Ken McGuire of the Los Angeles FBI Field Office said while he wasn't aware of this specific case that in general nothing like this occurs. He said that while the FBI does ask for cooperation from people if there appears to be an opportunity to catch a criminal, it is a voluntary effort and not mandated.

"If somebody doesn't want to do it we would be hard pressed to make it happen and I don't know if we would want to anyway," McGuire said.

[Excuse_My_Bellicosity]

"If somebody doesn't want to do it we would be hard pressed to make it happen and I don't know if we would want to anyway," McGuire said.

"But if you don't co-operate you will receive an IRS audit". McGuire concluded.

I was thinking along these lines, too. Participation is voluntary, however, failure to participate will result in an IRS audit, a 6-hour wait at the DMV because of mysterious problems with your car license, and strange unexplained tax problems. The govt. has a million ways to harass you.

This reminds me of my superiors when I was in the Navy, who would tell us: "Participation is voluntary. However, failure to participate will result in you being placed on report and charged with dereliction of duty."

[Don Joe]

"It makes perfect since for the FBI to require burst.net to continue hosting the web site."

It always makes perfect sense to require spamhausen to do anything that 1) they don't like doing, and 2) buys them more bad press than anyone would think humanly possible. :)

If the FBI is indeed coercing a spamhaus to host a site that will earn them a permanent black eye, then let's hear it for the FBI! Hip hip hooray! :)