The NYT reports that Hillary Clinton spoke at the Brookings Institution's annual Saban Forum on Sunday and said that the Islamic State had become "the most effective recruiter in the world" and that the only solution is to engage American technology companies in blocking or taking down militants' websites, videos and encrypted communications. "We need to put the great disrupters at work at disrupting ISIS. We need Silicon Valley not to view government as its adversary. We need to challenge our best minds in the private sector and work with our best minds in the public sector to develop solutions that would both keep us safe and protect our privacy," said Clinton. "We should take the concerns of law enforcement and counterterrorism professionals seriously. They have warned that impenetrable encryption may prevent them from accessing terrorist communications and preventing a future attack. On the other hand we know there are legitimate concerns about government intrusion, network security, and creating new vulnerabilities that bad actors can and would exploit."
Related Stories
Google's chairman Eric Schmidt has written an op-ed to The New York Times calling for tools to disrupt speech on social media:
Technology companies should work on tools to disrupt terrorism - such as creating a hate speech "spell-checker" - Google's chairman Eric Schmidt has said. Writing in The New York Times, Mr Schmidt said using technology to automatically filter-out extremist material would "de-escalate tensions on social media" and "remove videos before they spread".
His essay comes as presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton again called on Silicon Valley to help tackle terrorism, specifically seeking tools to combat the so-called Islamic State. "We need to put the great disrupters at work at disrupting ISIS," she said during a speech in Washington DC.
From the NYT editorial:
In Myanmar, connectivity fans the flames of violence against the Rohingya, the minority Muslim population. In Russia, farms of online trolls systematically harass democratic voices and spread false information on the Internet and on social media. And in the Middle East, terrorists use social media to recruit new members. In particular, the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria has harnessed social media to appeal to disaffected young people, giving them a sense of belonging and direction that they are not getting anywhere else. The militants' propaganda videos are high on style and production value. They're slick and marketable. In short, they are deluding some people to believe that living a life fueled by hatred and violence is actually ... cool.
This is where our own relationship with the Internet, and with technology, must be examined more closely. The Internet is not just a series of tubes transmitting information from place to place, terminal to terminal, without regard for those typing on their keyboards or reading on their screens. The people who use any technology are the ones who need to define its role in society. Technology doesn't work on its own, after all. It's just a tool. We are the ones who harness its power.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @05:12AM
I wonder whyyyyyyyyy.
We're the good guys because we say so. Because We Say So. US tell you what to do. LOVE US!!!!!!!!!!
(Score: 3, Funny) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 07 2015, @05:19AM
Anonymous is doing that much.
Why doesn't that woman just stop breathing? Or - does she even breathe?
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: -1, Troll) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @10:06AM
So, what is your solution? You have a better one, right? Because if you don't, then what is the point of your post?
(Score: 3, Disagree) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 07 2015, @12:44PM
I just posted a reply to Hemomyacin here: https://soylentnews.org/comments.pl?sid=11002&cid=272764 [soylentnews.org]
Yes, I have a better idea. Arm those who are already there, and willing and able to fight Daesh. Arm them, and fly air support for them. And, kick Turkey out of NATO, because Erdogan is fighting a genocidal war against the Kurds who should be our allies. Erdogan is also accepting money under the table to avoid seeing the arms flowing in to Daesh, and oil flowing out to pay for those arms.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by tathra on Monday December 07 2015, @05:19PM
yeah that's worked real well for the Taliban and ISIS, you know, groups we already did exactly that with. i know, lets continue the same stupid policies that keep coming back to bite us in the ass!
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 07 2015, @05:45PM
Perhaps you've not followed all of my posts on the subject. It's not he policies that are so bad, it's WHO we've been supporting that is terrible. To date, we've not supported any of the groups I've named. Instead, we've supported those who have oppressed the groups I've named.
Do you have any idea how much American money flows into the coffers of Salafist Muslims? Salafism is really what is at work in Daesh. But, we continue to pour money into Saudi Arabian accounts. You figure it out - Saudis export Salafism, Salafism is the driving force behind Daesh, Daesh is committing genocide against the groups I've named. Simple solution - tell the Saudis to go pound sand, and send arms to all those groups presently being oppressed by Daesh, Turkey, Iraq, and fly air support for all of those groups.
Big deal, we leave hundreds of thousands of Sunnis, Shias, and Salafists dying in the sand. The world will be a much saner place.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @11:23PM
(Score: 5, Funny) by bziman on Monday December 07 2015, @05:23AM
I'm sorry, ma'am, but we're too busy fighting the forces of fascism here at home, to worry about impoverished freedom fighters on the other side of the world who occasionally post on Twitter.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by jmorris on Monday December 07 2015, @05:24AM
Silicon Valley won't fight ISIS. And even if they try it isn't clear they can do a lot at this point. ISIS is distributing their own Android add already. Sure it won't work, but let the NSA break it a few times and they will iterate. They aren't all rock stupid goat humpers, sooner later they will get it right, the point is they have already figured out that depending on the existing social media infrastructure will become more problematic over time as they finally anger enough folks enough to put a stop to their past free use of the Internet.
But what about this idea? Nobody wants to put "boot on the ground" and for pretty good reason. Accepted wisdom is that air power alone can't win a war. But what if that is wrong, that we just haven't used it right? ISIS wants to bring back the 7th Century so what if we simply help them? Tell the electric grid and telco operators that if they want to preserve their infrastructure they should switch it all off. Then go hunting. Knock down any remaining electric grid, their telco networks, cell towers, radio/TV transmissions, fuel supplies, etc. Good luck recruiting via social media when you can't even get a light to stay lit. Make it clear we will assume ISIS will seize any existing generators so when we see power we will feel free to bomb. As they go dark detecting remaining electromagnetic radiation will get easier until we eventually make it as quiet as the Quiet Zone in West Virginia. Sat phones would stick out like a beacon in the quiet, bombs away. They rule because the local population sees them preferable to the other options. How long would that support last as they sit in the dark and entirely cut off from the world, reduced to animal power. A few solar panels might charge the occasional cell phone or laptop but it wouldn't matter. All that tech is OURS, if they reject our civilization we take the toys away.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 07 2015, @05:42AM
"Nobody wants to put "boot on the ground""
There are already boots on the ground. Kurds, Yazidi, Phalangists, Bedouin, and more. The boots are there, and some of them are kicking Daesh ass pretty soundly.
We need to:
A: Stop Turkey carrying out it's own private genocidal war on the Kurds.
B: Start supplying all those groups who want to kick Daesh ass with real weapons - not just small arms, but tank killers and crew served anti-personnel weapons.
C: Coordinate our air missions with those boots on the ground, as well as coordinate with Russian, France, the Brits, etc.
D: Entice Putin to run for President of the United States.
Alright, maybe D: is out, but I can dream, can't I? The fruitcake in the White House has no idea how to prosecute a war, and nothing indicates that any of the fruitcakes hoping to reside in the White House after the next election have any clues.
Oh - before anyone argues with me about the Turks and genocide - you might want to interview a few Armenians. The Turks have done it before, they're doing it now, and they'll do it again. Erdogan is no ally of the west. Erdogan's government is not an ally of the west. The Turkish people may not even be our ally. The whole ball of shit about being our ally is just a facade, used to get whatever Erdogan wants from the west.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 5, Informative) by frojack on Monday December 07 2015, @06:01AM
Entice Putin to run for President of the United States.
Another Putin adoration post!
You do realize this guy blew up entire blocks of flats (in several cities) in his own country just to blame it on the Chechens, right? Endeared him to Yeltsin enough to assure is subsequent ascension.
Names Anna Politkovskaya and Alexander Litvinenko ring any bells?
http://www.themoscowtimes.com/opinion/article/plenty-of-crime-but-no-punishment-for-putin/506403.html [themoscowtimes.com]
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @03:29PM
Just like the US brought down the World Trade Center in a false flag operation to steal Iraq's oil?
Some material on the apartment bombings:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Explanation_attempts_for_the_Russian_apartment_bombings [wikipedia.org]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Russian_apartment_bombings [wikipedia.org]
In any case, go Putin! He seems to be the only sane player in this mess.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 09 2015, @04:27AM
When I saw the TV broadcast of the WTC on fire, those bombed-out apartment buildings in Moscow came immediately to mind. Of course we'll never really know who did it, any more than we can know who killed Alexander Litvinenko.
(Score: 2) by Joe Desertrat on Monday December 07 2015, @06:21PM
Putin continually plays the populist "us against the world" card in order to remain in power. There are always fools in every country that lap it up (just listen to the rhetoric in the U.S. over ISIS). That will succeed until the wealth in Russia decides it is tired of having to play handicapped by sanctions, then there will be upheaval and Putin will be diminished.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @06:40PM
No, Putin plays "the US government is not the world card" and the last time I checked even in the US 70% agree wit him. Actually, Americans say they hate the government, while Putin still calls it "our partners".
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @06:41PM
Ahh yes, that timeless +5 informative source: the opinion section of an anti-Putin website by a former British ambassador. Yes certainly the pinnacle of unbiased authority. Same "any link will do if it agrees with me" frojack.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by hemocyanin on Monday December 07 2015, @07:09AM
Isn't that how they got their weapons in the first place, receiving arms to fight the evil-de-jour?
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 07 2015, @12:36PM
That deserves an unqualified "yes, no, maybe" answer.
Yes, Daesh got those arms because we supplied them to various people in Iraq. Had we not supplied arms, they wouldn't have shiploads of arms.
No, we weren't fighting the "evil-de-jour" so much, as we were carrying on a personal grudge match against the current ruler of Iraq. Bush and Blair had personal issues with Saddam, and they told myriad lies about Saddam to entice us to go after him. Don't get me wrong, Saddam was an evil SOB, but he gave the region something that we are unable to give - relative stability. Al Queda couldn't operate in Iraq, because Saddam ruled with an iron fist, and wouldn't tolerate Al Queda in his territory.
We have never supplied arms to any of the Christian groups in the region. We have never supplied arms to the Bedouin. We have never supplied arms to any groups who weren't either state actors, and/or Muslim in the region. Before ever I joined the Navy, all military aid has gone to oppressive regimes, never to the rebel factions, never to the oppressed people. Starting with the Shah of Iran, onward, American arms have only ever gone to oppressive SOB's.
Which makes our hatred of Assad that much more puzzling. We claim to hate him for being oppressive, we arm "rebels" who aren't really partisan Syrian rebels at all, but Daesh in partisan clothing, and we badmouth Russia for aiding the only force in Syria capable of offering the people stability. I really don't know what our game is there, but it sure as hell isn't aiding genuine rebels.
Worse, we stand by Turkey, which is engaged in a genocidal war against a Christian people.
I want to arm those small groups of people so that they can resist the insane portions of Islam. That means, I'm willing to arm Muslims who are not part of the insanity, along with Christians, and I'll even arm any animists and other survivors of the ancient religions.
In effect, if everyone is armed to the teeth, the old status quo will be re-established. That IS how politics have always worked in the region. The strongest bastard calls the shots.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @01:01PM
> No, we weren't fighting the "evil-de-jour" so much, as we were carrying on a personal grudge match against the current ruler of Iraq.
Potato, Potato.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 07 2015, @01:50PM
Well, I believe that it's important to know why a war was fought, who the actors were, and which actors were more honest, and which actors were less honest. The war in Afghanistan was an honest war, fought for honest reasons, albeit, poorly planned, and poorly carried out. The war in Iraq was a load of dishonesty from beginning to end, complete with forged intelligence documents, bogus reasons for fighting, boogeymen who didn't exist, weapons that only partly existed - from beginning to end, it was a false construct. The "evil-de-jour" had in fact been actively supported by both the US and UK in previous years. The war in Iraq can probably be characterized as an effort by the US/UK to cover up their own atrocities and crimes, more than a war against some "evil-de-jour".
Iraq was armed and supported to contain the Ayatollahs in Iran, then Saddam was "erased" to prevent to much of the related intelligence leaking out.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @02:25PM
Do you all really want to know? Read the links. The US talking about fighting ISIS is quite disgusting when it was the US that supported the growth of the ISIS:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/05/newly-declassified-u-s-government-documents-the-west-supported-the-creation-of-isis.html [washingtonsblog.com]
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq [theguardian.com]
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2013/08/u-s-started-backing-syrian-opposition-years-before-the-uprising-started.html [washingtonsblog.com]
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/21/world/middleeast/cia-said-to-aid-in-steering-arms-to-syrian-rebels.html?pagewanted=all [nytimes.com]
Take it from me lines between the rebels in Syria and the ISIS are rather blurry when they are mostly "Sunni Islamists fighting a Jihad". I'm pretty sure the CIA and the US Gov know it, they just feign ignorance and continue adding fuel to the fire. http://www.aljazeera.com/news/2015/11/free-syrian-army-decimated-desertions-151111064831800.html [aljazeera.com]
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/sep/23/us-trained-rebel-officer-syria-defected-al-qaida [theguardian.com]
Heck even in Libya the US and friends were supporting the rebels who were allied with the Al Qaeda: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html [telegraph.co.uk]
And the supposed US allies like the Saudis, Qatar and Turkey are helping the ISIS: https://theintercept.com/2015/10/26/bbc-protects-uks-close-ally-saudi-arabia-with-incredibly-dishonest-and-biased-editing/ [theintercept.com]
http://www.businessinsider.com/links-between-turkey-and-isis-are-now-undeniable-2015-7/ [businessinsider.com]
The USA plays with fire to destroy stuff and when people get burnt they dare pretend to be innocent, the good guys or even the victims.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @05:38PM
I think you are wasting your breath. The patriotic streak in some never dies, especially when it means that a person's own actions were ultimately being used for deceitful and borderline evil purposes, which was pretty much all US military action after WWII. Imperialistic power grabbing. It has been the same human story for countless centuries, war as a game for the powerful / crazy.
Then the tides of history turn against the provokers, and all the destabilization that seemed so clever and amazing is biting the big dog in the ass. I wonder if some day historians will look back and be amazed at how much evil was perpetrated unknowingly by innocents because of the fiction for "need to know" and "national security".
If anyone would like to justify the screwed up actions in the name of bringing freedom and democracy please start by considering all the atrocities that have gone unhindered, while huge amounts of money and manpower have gone into overthrowing some dictators who in comparison were just pretty bad assholes. Oh right, cause one was waaaaay more profitable.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @07:31PM
I've got a real strange idea. What if ISIS is just a multinational false flag operation? Apparently every major government is guilty of this fuckery, so is ISIS just the horror to distract us from something else?
Like the monied interests behind every major government getting away with the fraud, theft, and outright corruption of the recent global economic catastrophe we had recently? When major corporations and banks are stealing the people blind (they do literally steal houses when the mortgage note is missing), and banking executives are caught laundering drug money with no justice whatsoever, etc. I've got a strange feeling they really need something like ISIS to change the discussions going on.
I'm not worried about ISIS quite frankly. They didn't steal my house from me. They don't complain bitterly about living wages saying some jobs weren't actually designed for it. They don't limit me to 29 hours of part-time to deny me medical benefits. They don't engage in massive conspiracies to get around the consequences of being highwaymen and robbers.
ISIS are a bunch of backasswards idiots all the way across the planet, and other then the reaction by governments, have caused us practically no harm at all (Paris being an exception). Major corporations, banks, and politicians are de facto the terrorists organizations that cause me the most direct harm. I can be put away for 10 years for selling crack cocaine in an urban environment, but They can launder the billions from it and be told they're too important to face consequences.
Fuck ISIS. Don't send a missile into one of their bases. I don't care, and I don't want to pay for the missile. Please do send some officers to start arresting, and prosecuting, and putting away, literally thousands of the truly sociopathic pieces of shit in my own country .
No, Hillary. Fuck you. You are the enemy to us, not ISIS. Silicon Valley simply isn't stupid enough to see you as allies, and the grunts in the tech sector that you are hoping to rally support from, fully well know how full of shit you are. That's on a technical, political, and moral basis.
No, we will not disrupt ISIS. Yes, we will continue to disrupt You. Avoid, Disrupt, Block, and Break applies to the U.S government, not ISIS.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @09:36PM
it's not a strange idea. it's what it is to anyone with any sense. though, i think the motives are a little more complex and dangerous than "to distract us". Hillary Clinton is a career criminal and traitor along with her coke-headed husband. read, Bush, Clinton and the CIA for one of many references.
the whole country is being turned into fascist sycophants with the coercion of these vermin. Why is she able to walk around with that condescending look on her face?
(Score: 2) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday December 08 2015, @12:39AM
I don't agree with all your points, but I think you're on to something here.
Daesh does seem to be a convenient threat/excuse, and combined with the recent attacks on the availability of strong encryption to the masses, despite having absolutely nothing to do with Daesh's organizational and communications methods, there has to be something going on.
Well, actually, re-reading your comment, I agree with most of your points, especially the conclusion. I'm sorry about your house.
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Monday December 07 2015, @03:50PM
Daesh were pro-Saddam Hussein in the Iraq war? I thought Daesh is made up largely of Iraqi Sunnis, the minority group that supported Saddam Hussein.
(Score: 2) by hemocyanin on Monday December 07 2015, @05:40PM
Whether that is true or not, I have no idea, but you do realize that we gave Saddam tons and tons of weaponry. The pattern is, we make a friend, give weapons, then decide that friend is the enemy, and make new friends. Rinse repeat.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 08 2015, @02:39PM
It's more like this:
https://richardajonesdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/twitter.jpg [wordpress.com]
https://richardajonesdotorg.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/clear-as-mud.jpg [wordpress.com]
And the USA intentionally created the mess:
http://www.washingtonsblog.com/2015/05/newly-declassified-u-s-government-documents-the-west-supported-the-creation-of-isis.html [washingtonsblog.com]
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jun/03/us-isis-syria-iraq [theguardian.com]
(Score: 2) by PiMuNu on Monday December 07 2015, @03:48PM
> A: Stop Turkey carrying out it's own private genocidal war on the Kurds.
But how do you keep them in NATO? You did notice Russia are baddies according to the Western propaganda didn't you? So which do you worry about more, Daesh or Russia?
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 07 2015, @04:14PM
Russia is paranoid, but rational. Daesh is irrational, and they are hell-bent on destroying the world unless the world converts to Islam. I don't see much of a choice here. Daesh is the worse enemy at this point in time, and Russia is "enemy of mine enemy". Take care of Daesh, then worry about those paranoid assholes in Europe might do later.
Consider this: Russia has been sitting on atomic and nuclear weapons for longer than most of us have been alive. They've not used any of those weapons against us, in spite of the fact that we "beat" the old Soviet. Daesh? Those mad dogs wouldn't pause to detonate any sort of bomb they acquired in Washington, New York, Moscow, Paris, London, Berlin, or any other major western city. They wouldn't blink an eye. And, they have plenty of followers who would volunteer to deliver that weapon in person.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @05:25PM
No, they're hell-bent on destroying the world unless the world converts to their personal, extremist, fundamentalist interpretation of Islam, which is about as far from correct or valid as you can get.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by Runaway1956 on Monday December 07 2015, @05:39PM
Degrees.
Islam, in general, is all about converting the world. Daesh, specifically, is all about converting the world to their own specific cult within Islam.
Think about this:
The Jews are a schizo bunch, whose God gave them the world, then took it away as punishment, then gave the world back to them, and took it away again. They are understandably schizo, but largely harmless.
The Christians inherited that schizo God, but schizo told us to love our enemies, turn the other cheek, forgive our transgressors, and to love our neighbors. No matter our track record, those are the commandments - love, love, love. The words came straight from the saviour who forgave us all of our sins.
The Moslems? A juvenile boy-toy owned by a demanding cougar finally grew up to be a man, and he decided to take vengeance on the world. He became a "general", laid seige to many cities, killed every adversary he could lay his hands on, ultimately putting to death tens if not hundreds of thousands. He preached hatred and vengeance, and promised to behead every infidel in the world. Read the man's history. There is no "religion of love", unless it is the love of death. Even moderate Moslems dream of jihad. Moderates may not take up the sword and kill infidels, but the dream is how they amuse themselves.
If you can't tell the difference between a harmless schizo, a forgiving saviour, and an avenging killer cult, there is little hope for you.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 2) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday December 08 2015, @12:43AM
but mostly harmless
FTFY
/ducks
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 08 2015, @05:37AM
And that differs from Christianity [wikipedia.org] how exactly? If anything, Islam got the "Convert everyone to our flavor of YHWH worship" from its predecessor, Christianity.
(Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Tuesday December 08 2015, @02:40PM
Obviously, you missed the bit about the psychopathic killer, and the pedophile who founded Islam. And, you missed the bit about a forgiving saviour. No matter how well or how poorly the adherents follow their religions, there is a huge difference in psychology between the two.
If you need it spelled out any plainer - when Christians go conquering, they are generally sinning, and they'll answer to their God for the sin.
When Muslims go conquering, they are doing the Will of Allah.
One is not the same as the other - they are very unlike.
We're gonna be able to vacation in Gaza, Cuba, Venezuela, Iran and maybe Minnesota soon. Incredible times.
(Score: 2) by frojack on Monday December 07 2015, @05:47AM
Well there is no reason to believe that all of the social media recruiting originates in Syria or other conflict areas.
Just how much of the world do we have to shut down?
As for the local support enjoyed by ISIS, I haven't actually seen much evidence of that. Its lot like the locals have a lot of choice in the situation.
Still, not bombing oil tankers because there might be civilian drivers sleeping in the cab seems pretty stupid.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday December 07 2015, @04:10PM
We should be able to shutdown their social media operations in the civilized world pretty easy. If we really wanted to that is, that might require a change of administration to restore the strained relationships with our allies. Since ISIS seems to like hitting them too now, they are probably doing a fair bit of suppression these days on their own. Would be more effective if we actually trusted each other again and could work together.
As for the local support enjoyed by ISIS, I haven't actually seen much evidence of that. Its lot like the locals have a lot of choice in the situation.
Look into it a bit, there is a fair amount of local support. It is a result of ALL of their options being bad. In Iraq, since most of ISIS leadership are former Iraqi military they have long standing connections in the areas they hold, while in Syria it is a total furball with no side a sane person should clearly support. However it should still be possible to make ISIS the obviously worse choice. And yes the locals do have a say in it. It is really hard to rule without at least the grudging consent of the governed. Especially when you are numerically small as ISIS.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 09 2015, @04:36AM
Take away their Facebook accounts, and the so-called caliphate will fall like a house of cards.
(Score: 1, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @06:00AM
This is the real issue. No one is talking about it because it can't be changed with military action.
(Score: 4, Informative) by frojack on Monday December 07 2015, @06:13AM
This is the real issue. No one is talking about it because it can't be changed with military action.
There is no other option BECAUSE they rule. Not the other way around.
And THAT CAN be changed by military action.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @09:25AM
yeah cos that's worked great over the past decade in iraq and afghanistan... so well in fact that the taliban has taken over afghanistan again and al quaeda (re-badged) now has its own quasi-nation in eastern iraq
maybe the issue is that the US military has absolutely no fucking idea what its dealing with, and if they want to maintain petrodollar hegemony they're not gunna win over oil-producing nations by destroying and threatening them (or committing genocide through sanctions)
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @09:27AM
s/eastern/western/
(Score: 3, Interesting) by tathra on Monday December 07 2015, @05:37PM
that's more the politicians, the soldiers' bosses, that have no idea what they're dealing with or are intentionally fucking things up further for personal profit. "the military" knows exactly what they're dealing with and how to handle it - there's a whole field manual on counter-terrorism and it can be summed up in 3 words: "hearts and minds". there's a lot of dumbasses in the service that don't want to follow the FMs or regulations though and just want to, ahem, "kill towelheads", and idiots like that, especially when they're in command positions, are the reason little gets accomplished on deployments. foreign nationals are just like you and me, they don't want maniacs blowing up bombs in the middle of their streets and causing all sorts of chaos, so all you have to do is treat them like human beings and they'll give you all the info you need to know. i know this from personal experience because we barely got attacked at all on my deployment because we treated our surrounding communities like human beings, we befriended them, had tea with them, hired them to work on the base, had them help us with guarding and patroling the base, etc, but the guys who replaced us undid all of that, all the goodwill and work we set up with our surrounding communities, and were attacked within a week of replacing us and had a very rough year. if you get deployed on a counter-terrorism mission and want to ensure you and your buddies come home alive, "hearts and minds" is the best advice you can get.
(Score: 2) by aristarchus on Monday December 07 2015, @07:42AM
ISIS is distributing their own Android add already.
jmorris, I know you are suffering from both the Steve Jobs and the Obama derangement syndromes, but could you at least put forth the effort to make sense to the rest of your fellow soylentils? This is the second time in recent memory when I have felt forced to ask for clarification from you. Such sloppiness is not acceptable.
So, "Android add"? What the hell is that? Did you mean to say "app", but were so afraid since it was about the number one existential threat to the existence of "western Civilization" (a "good idea", as Gandhi quipped!)? Or that they have their own distro of Android, which means they are violating Google trademarks and so this conflict will soon be over?
So please inform the rest of us Soylentils of what you are trying to say, or we will have to put you in the same category as Eth and frojack. At long last, jmorris, have you no shame?
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Monday December 07 2015, @08:17AM
Yes. App. That is a brainfart.not any intentional attempt at being clever.
(Score: 3, Funny) by aristarchus on Monday December 07 2015, @09:07AM
OK, thanks for clearing that up. But really, you have farts in your brain? I would have that looked at, as soon as possible.
(Score: 3, Funny) by TheGratefulNet on Monday December 07 2015, @10:12AM
you can't look at brainfarts. I think it has something to do with quantum theory or something.
"It is now safe to switch off your computer."
(Score: 1) by cmdr_tofu on Monday December 07 2015, @11:10AM
What is their app called TOR? (I do know they had a non-TOR app that was in the google play store for a minute)
Unfortunately, if we want hard-to-track, free(as in freedom to do it without BigBrother's review), end-to-end encrypted communications, we are potentially enabling tools for ISIS.
I think this is a hard problem, but that doesn't mean we shouldn't try. Like most people here (I think), I'm very much in favor of privacy and security for individuals and very much against ISIS. If ISIS people start digging into the technology, then this might indeed be a real problem.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @01:23PM
Just like terrorists use electricity and highways and we still don't ban them.
It is not a problem and this is not the solution. "A hungry man is an angry man." That's the real issue here.
(Score: 3, Informative) by Anal Pumpernickel on Monday December 07 2015, @05:37PM
Unfortunately, if we want hard-to-track, free(as in freedom to do it without BigBrother's review), end-to-end encrypted communications, we are potentially enabling tools for ISIS.
Fine with me. That's the price we pay for having freedom, and it's a price worth paying.
I think this is a hard problem
It's an impossible problem to solve without violating everyone's privacy and destroying their security, which is unacceptable.
(Score: 1) by cmdr_tofu on Tuesday December 08 2015, @02:57AM
Well there are encryption schemes where you may want to encrypt decryption key with "groups" public keys. For instance, I want to share my data such that a group of 4 friends (who each have a different public key) can decrypt, or anyone within my business organization can decrypt. A system which allowed people to "opt" to allow USG to decrypt would not violate anyone's privacy or security.
I don't see a great value to it either (for the individual opting in or a presumably benevolent government looking to identify terrorists). But is there something useful that can be done guaranteeing individual privacy and protection from government abuse, and giving government information critical to preventing terrorist plots? I think that is a hard problem and a worthy one, but you are probably right. It may be an impossible one.
Terrorism is not a "technology problem". We can't even solve spam or malware. We can't solve there being bad people trying to do bad things.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @05:39PM
No worries from me. I put him in that category a long time ago, along with the Buzzard and a couple of others.
(Score: 3, Insightful) by frojack on Monday December 07 2015, @05:38AM
I wonder if more info is gained by mining ISIS communications than trying to do everything via spy satellites and drone intercepts. I also wonder just what percent of their comms are actually encrypted. (Discounting encryption such as Skype or Dropbox which are already backdoored).
Supposedly they use things like Signal from Open Whisper Systems for encrypted calls and texts.
As for not viewing government as an adversary, it seems the shortest route to that end would be for the government to stop treating us all as guilty.
No, you are mistaken. I've always had this sig.
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @05:56AM
As for not viewing government as an adversary, it seems the shortest route to that end would be for the government to stop treating us all as guilty.
Right, but if they did that, then that would mean they would have to cease conducting mass surveillance, stop trying to force backdoors into encryption, just generally stop violating everyone's rights in the name of stopping bad guys, and start following the constitution.
But really, the government should always be treated as an adversary. The price of freedom is eternal vigilance.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @05:55PM
If I'm not mistaken, the real problem is that it would inevitably lead to accusations of racial profiling. When the terrorists overwhelmingly come from a certain demographic, the others in that demographic get nervous and touchy about feeling under siege when law enforcement targets them for greater scrutiny. It would also make the others in that demographic less likely to cooperate with law enforcement and turn over information on suspicious activity that they have witnessed; it doesn't take all that much reading between the lines to notice that at least some terrorist plots have been foiled because someone in the community (perhaps even their own family) tipped off the police. How do we solve this problem? Not sure but somehow law enforcement needs to gain the trust of the people they are trying to police for criminal activity.
(Score: 2) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday December 08 2015, @01:04AM
somehow law enforcement needs to gain the trust of the people they are trying to police for criminal activity
This is the crux of the issue, no? It's also the trouble with a lack of diversity. I can imagine an ideal world where there are Muslim police officers who are engaged with local Muslim communities. Well, hell, this is an ideal world. The Muslim community would be integrated with the rest of the community. One could imagine mosques with food banks, churches with food banks, synagogues with food banks, and Hindu cultural centers with food banks (plus many others I've failed to name).
Most of the Middle-Easterners around here are Hindu, but I think there are a few Muslims. Somehow, we all get along. My favorite benefit: the variety of food I can access right here in flyover country. I can have Mediterranean one evening, Korean the next, and Indian the third. I just need to drive over to Dearborn, MI, a bit of a drive but not far in the grand scale of things, and I can have Muslim, minus the Sharia law! Then I can attend an all you can eat fish fry the next day. Ribs, gyros, dönners, hummus, curry, you name it.
Actually, the one kind of cuisine I can't find is African. I don't mean African as an aggregate, but I want to know what traditional Somalian or Egyptian dishes were (when those cultures were in their prime—I'm sure the information is available but I fail at cooking). What about cultures from the Congo basin? It's an historical tragedy that those were effectively erased to Westerners in the trade triangle. I'm sure there's all kinds of delicious and weird things I have yet to try. Well, if I may allow myself some racist humor, there is a Chicken Coop down the street and watermelons a-plenty. But I like it all. Probably explains my expanding waistline, but also probably a side effect of getting older.
I hate to sound like an SJW, but diversity is the answer. Ultimately, I come to the same conclusions as you: I don't know.
(Score: 1) by kurenai.tsubasa on Tuesday December 08 2015, @01:06AM
Hate to reply to myself.
Somalian or Egyptian
I might have meant Ethiopian or Egyptian. Or hell, all three. Why not?
(Score: 2) by bziman on Tuesday December 08 2015, @05:35AM
No idea about Somalian food, but Ethiopian and Egyptian food are very different. I love Egyptian food... very Mediterranean, but not a fan of Ethiopian, which is various flavors of mush. Though you're far more likely to find an Ethiopian restaurant in the US than Egyptian. Too bad.
(Score: 2) by c0lo on Monday December 07 2015, @01:45PM
Yeah... somehow... I don't think that means what she thinks it means.
https://www.youtube.com/@ProfSteveKeen https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: 4, Touché) by Snotnose on Monday December 07 2015, @06:04AM
it shouldn't be surprised when it's treated as an adversary. It was the revelation of how extensively the government was spying on all of us that spurred this rush to encryption and other privacy measures.
Somewhere in America a little girl is hiding in an attic writing about ICE.
(Score: 4, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @06:33AM
Was it Churchill who said that? We have an American as apple pie shoot-up at a Christmas party in the middle of nowhere, and our leaders find a convenient reason to call it "terrorism" and beat the drum for weak encryption and more government intrusion in our lives.
I guess "terrorism" only depends on the ethnicity of the perpetrators, since Sandy Hook apparently wasn't an incident of "terrorism".
(Score: 4, Informative) by isostatic on Monday December 07 2015, @12:11PM
Yup, but the difference between the typical week-in week-out mass shootings, this one was done by brown people!
"Naturally the common people don't want war: Neither in Russia, nor in England, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, IT IS THE LEADERS of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is TELL THEM THEY ARE BEING ATTACKED, and denounce the peacemakers for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. IT WORKS THE SAME IN ANY COUNTRY." --Goering at the Nuremberg Trials
(Score: 2) by edIII on Monday December 07 2015, @07:55PM
Best comment so far, and now seemingly the most pertinent if you watch the news.
Technically, lunchtime is at any moment. It's just a wave function.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 09 2015, @04:48AM
When we white people do a mass shooting, we get to choose whether to shoot ourselves dead afterward, or get arrested. Everyone else gets the choice of shooting themselves dead or getting shot dead by the police.
(Score: 2) by useless on Monday December 07 2015, @12:46PM
since Sandy Hook apparently wasn't an incident of "terrorism".
Because it wasn't. It was the act of an individual with mental issues lashing out, and not trying to instill terror on a population to coerce or influence the government.
"Terrorism" does not mean "Something that makes you scared", no matter how much the media and politicians try to make it so.
(Score: 1, Informative) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @05:43PM
It sure doesn't. Terrorism definitely has happened very recently in the US though - the attacks on Planned Parenthood. There's no way that doesn't fit under the definition of "terrorism", seeing as it was an example of the use of violence and intimidation in the pursuit of political aims.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday December 09 2015, @04:58AM
The shooting at the Planned Parenthood clinic happened before the cessation of bulk collection of call data records under Section 215 of the Patriot Act. Therefore it was not terrorism.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by hemocyanin on Monday December 07 2015, @07:03AM
Based on what? With billions of people in the world, any marketing campaign is going to get some support, but it isn't like ISIS has become Coca Cola or Manpower or whatever, and the product they sell (killing yourself) isn't going to be flying off the shelves like hotcakes. I suspect that the types of people who are willing to shoot up Paris or San Bernadino are people who have serious issues to begin with -- you don't just kill people unless you are already fucked up -- and if it wasn't done under an ISIS banner, it would be done under some other banner, or even none at all. Making ISIS out to be something like Pol Pot with ICBMs and this year's must have fashions, is just a self-serving power grab designed to monopolize on a fearful public.
(Score: 2) by spamdog on Monday December 07 2015, @09:32AM
I suspect this new push for encryption backdoors will be end up being little more than requests like this, and no action from the IT industry.
I find it a little impertinent that they are actually asking for this. Surely there is plenty of room for spying by other means?
Make your own "secure" messaging system and market it in the middle east or to arabic speakers. That kind of thing.
Like that other guy said about mass surveillance and the manpower needed to weed out false positives - it's just going to be a waste of time for them anyway.
Can you imagine how many people are using encryption just for a couple of porn pics?
I also wonder how the NSA and other intelligence services feel about piracy crackdowns too - lots of people using VPN's and encryption now to avoid getting a nastygram.
The tech world has accelerated greatly in the last 5 years - this call for encryption backdoors is definitely a sign that they're more out of their depth than ever.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 07 2015, @08:44PM
Have you actually found porn sites that support encryption?
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday December 07 2015, @09:48AM
This ride doesn't end. [soylentnews.org]
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]
(Score: 5, Insightful) by Geezer on Monday December 07 2015, @11:17AM
Words of incomparable wisdom from the woman who supposedly had no clue about her own personal email system! Great source for tech advice.
(Score: 3, Troll) by Phoenix666 on Monday December 07 2015, @01:57PM
If only the NSA could spy on every communication on planet Earth, then they'd be able to stop ISIS, right? Oh, wait, the NSA does have that ability. Now why is it they still can't stop anything?
Hillary Clinton is an idiot. The reason ISIS is so strong is that Google & company aren't stopping their Twitter accounts?
It's not going to happen, but it would be so choice if the FBI were to indict her.
Washington DC delenda est.
(Score: 2) by chewbacon on Monday December 07 2015, @05:49PM
She told them that via interview because she forgot her email password.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday December 08 2015, @04:05AM
Silicon Valley's bigwigs have thrown in with international money laundering rings to avoid paying taxes on their $billions in earnings. From Zuckerberg's new "charity" we confirm that Saudi royals are part of the operation. At the same time the same Silicon Valley companies issue directives from the top down that all employees are to support "diversity" or get fired, and "diversity" is enforced by political activists who arrive intending to stamp out the "Islamophobia" of atheism, feminism, and gay activism. Alternative pro-Islam versions of atheism, feminism, and gay activism have been provided for you to keep pretending to be progressive while holding the opinion that treating women as subhuman and killing gays for being gay is acceptable but disapproving of these atrocities is racist.
ISIS / Al-Qaeda / whatever you call them are not hicks living in caves. They are international businessmen who are experts at laundering billions of dollars at a time. One year they wanted to get off the dollar before the 1998 embassy attacks so they bought the entire West African blood diamond supply. BCCI was an operation of Pakistani ISI which is so closely aligned with al-Qaeda that it might be considered a subsidiary. The heads of state of Saudi, UAE, Qatar are all part of the organization. Now Silicon Valley wants to launder tens of billions of dollars. Who will they turn to? The experts. Whoever can move that kind of money around. With that much money going around in their area of business, you cannot tell me that AQ is not involved. Obviously they will use layers of frontmen so the Californians don't know its them.
At the same time we get speech codes across the tech industry. We're not allowed to condemn the terrorists in Paris or San Bernardino or else activists will contact our employers and we'll get a meeting with HR about how our harmful speech might hurt the feelings of people who support the terrorists. We're not allowed to disagree with the new Islamic branded versions of atheism, feminism, or gayness or else we'll get fired for being the wrong kind of gay atheist feminist. The entire tech industry came out to support clock boy Ahmed Mohamed within 24 hours of the news breaking before it turned out he had built a fake bomb (a felony in Texas, thus the arrest) and he was supported by the Saudis and Qatar. The tech industry came out in support of Black Lives Matter to the point of banning dissenting opinions from Facebook and Twitter, and if you listen to what Black Lives Matter activists actually say instead of what the newspapers choose to print, they want black communities to separate from the United States and be governed by the Nation of Islam. All of these coincidences are aligned in the same direction, and there is nothing aligned in the opposite direction. Call it speculation, call it a conspiracy theory because it is, but it's starting to look like ISIS disrupted Silicon Valley long before Hillary Clinton got around to asking Silicon Valley to disrupt ISIS.