...you'd spent two years running interference for the Saudis and the CIA:

Dismantling of Saudi-CIA Web site illustrates need for clearer cyberwar policies

There is no functional difference between a "real" jihadi forum and a "fake" jihadi forum, assuming the latter is accepted as legitimate by the community of activists. That means such a site will contribute in a meaningful way to the perpetuation of the terrorist threat globally. Nice people need to stay out of the spy business, and spies need oversight. The obvious ethical dilemmas presented by such a situation require constant reassessment of the costs versus the benefits. Left to their own devices intelligence officers and analysts will tend to focus on the latter. This is not to say that they are wrong, just that their bias needs to be understood and balanced by other considerations.

In general terms, we need to move away from this/that right/wrong arguments when it comes to the issue of keeping sites online or taking them down, and I see no sign of such movement in this article. What I see are people in entrenched positions defending their parochial interests, while simultaneously denying the obvious consequences of their actions. Perhaps they are just too nice and need to find another line of work. As for the rest of us, life goes on, as does the global war on terror, and our adversaries learn and alter their behaviors constantly. As a result of the last point, this whole debate is of limited value, as it doesn't address what al-Qaida operatives are doing online today, and where they are doing it. The caravan has moved on, folks.