Slashdot Mirror
UK To Train Pro-West Islamic Groups To Game Google
Hugh Pickens writes "The British government's Office of Security and Counter-Terrorism (OSCT), a 200-strong Home Office unit created 18 months ago, has said in meetings it wants to 'flood the internet' with 'positive' interpretations of Islam and plans to train government-approved groups in search engine optimization techniques, which it is hoped will boost their profile online and battle radicalization. A Home Office spokesman confirmed search engine optimization training is part of the government's anti-radicalization strategy. 'In order to support mainstream voices, we work with local partners to help develop their communication, representational and leadership skills. This support could include media training, which can help make their voices heard more widely, and support the development of skills which allow communities to be more effective in debate.' However the effectiveness of search engine optimization in reducing traffic to extremist websites has been dismissed by academics. A report produced by the International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation (ICSR) said young Muslims were much more likely to be directed to extremist material online by web forums and offline associates than by Google or other search engines. 'Tweaking the results for supposedly extremist terms would be largely ineffectual, not least because it is unlikely that any but the most callow wannabe terrorist would use a mainstream search engine to find banned material.'"
Islam is the Middle East's response to the Mormon religion/cult. Islam was created by the Arab "prophet" Muhammad, yet another guy who heard voices in his head. These voices told him that his religion was a continuation of Judaism and Christianity and that those who followed these outdated religions should be converted or killed. Since he forgot about Zoroastrianism, he apparently thought that his religion was the third and final in the monotheistic trilogy. And being the third, it is inevitably the most shitty of the three (think Spiderman 3 or The Matrix Revolutions, not The Godfather, Part III).
However, Islam may well be an honest continuation of God's word -- that is, if God is a giant asshat. Whether by suicide bomb or an heroic murder spree, through making threatening phone calls or through biological, chemical, and/or nuclear terrorism, Islam is well-situated to guide humanity to certain death.
Those who follow Islam are termed Muslims, which probably makes sense in some non-English language. Muslims follow a magical book called The Koran, which is a slightly less lengthy version of the Holy Bible. The only difference is that it contains a somewhat more descriptive account of the Muslims' annihilation of those infidels who dared to practice peaceful religions and somewhat more child rape, primarily on the part of known pedophile Muhammad:
Muhammad married a 6-year-old girl and had sex with her when she was nine.
Seriously.
It's in the fucking Koran.
Dear Religion,
You are a pain in the ass. Please go away soon.
Imagine there's no countries.
It isn't hard to do.
Nothing to kill or die for,
And no religion too.
Imagine all the people,
Living life in peace.
Love,
Sane People
After all, don't we want young Buddhists to be much less likely to be directed to extremist material online?
Oh, sorry, forgot the UK government only sponsors your religion when you are violent. If you are peaceful, you are on your own. Do your own damn PR!
"it wants to 'flood the internet' with 'positive' interpretations of Islam and plans to train government-approved groups in search engine optimization techniques"
The next pasture is always greener
For the British Government. I find myself again having to explain to non-UK readers that we do not elect the Prime Minister, and owing to our elective dictatorship system, the present Prime Minister has never, in fact, been voted for by anybody outside the Scottish province of Fife. The Home Office is run by someone, Jacqui Smith, who makes Condoleeza Rice look like the greatest liberal brain on the planet (and charges the taxpayer $3000 a month for her sleeping in her sister's spare bedroom). Unfortunately, just like you with GWB, we can do nothing about it until next year. Until late 2010 then, be ready for a stream of "how stupid can the British Government get?" stories.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
The headline seems to put a negative spin on this, but as government activities go it seems pretty benign. Better than beating people up or killing them. We need to find ways to encourage governments to channel more of their energies into non-destructive activities like this.
Hasn't the British government been allowing Sharia courts to operate in Britain for some time?
If they want to battle "radical" Islam then how about getting rid of the Sharia Courts? How about really clamping down on female genital mutilation happening in Britain and to British citizens?
Tweaking some search results, that's pathetic. Islam is a danger to civilized nations, so trying to weaken it is fine, but this pathetic, it will do next to nothing.
A gov't that created the standards we know and love as ITIL.
A group of paranoid Orwellian Facists.
A religous group that's a political powder keg.
And THE big brain.
Starring Michael Palin, Eric Idle, Terry Jones and John Cleese, in a film written by Graham Chapman and directed by Terry Gilliam.
Honestly, the UK just writes this stuff for the satirists.
Problem is, the mainstream Muslims aren't the ones that need to be targeted, but the high-risk volatile ones. The rest of us don't feel anything about the west more than either some admiration on the liberal-side of the political spectrum, or some casual antipathy on the religious/conservative side of politics.
I live in Saudi Arabia. Which doesn't seem to have much of a global image as being progressive these days, and I can still tell you that most grad students these days want to study either in Canada or the US, followed by the UK and Australia (English in highschool is mandatory...hence the destinations of choice being all English-speaking countries).
Why can't I get money to spread the positive side of anti-religious zealotism. Like for instance how government doesn't waste tax money spreading the good points behind anti-religious zealotism.
It looks to me as if the Register has got this one wrong. The original criticisms were of negative tweaks against extremist sites by the government, as the quote they use in their article illustrates. This is about positive tweaking to promote genuine Islamic sites - and it's only, apparently part of a wider strategy of supporting peaceful interpretations of Islam, exactly what the original report recommended.
Not as bad as it sounds http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7233040.stm as you can see other religions can also pass judgements upon small non-criminal sectors of the law meanwhile all criminal matters are reserved for the UK's state courts.
This would be a hillarious joke for april fools day, but if they want to counter radical muslims this way won't work.
Muslims mostly tend to build local social groups mostly in favour of their origin-region(not country), these social groups are mostly not
radical but, from our point of view their views onto the world differ hughly from ours(*).
But in such communities radical thoughts and comments will occur as a common understanding of that the western society tries to supress the islam.
And here is the catch, these "supported" people and groups will find themselves outcast as they are seen as a part of a western supression strategy.
They will be recognized as traitors, and these former actions like "google-optimisation" will be seen as an evidence and so strengthen the common understanding of a western conspiracy.
Thus can also push moderate muslims into a position, where their word becomes less weight than it had.
Diplomacy will not convert muslims into liberal nude loving naturists, nor will war. We(wester people) should realize one thing
you can only gain someones trust when you not try to betray him, and with trust you can start a discussion about certain things,
like stoning of cheaters and heretics, as a start.
The human rights are a philosophical construct with the intention to make lives better for everyone, I think we should remember
those humanist philosophers, which brought us to a state of self-awareness, and start thinking about our selves and our actions.
Diplomacy does not work from top to down, like a hierachie it works on trust.
(*) This is my point of view as an observer.
If a faith is getting gamed, what else is been dropped or pushed up on google? :
Does google actively provide help with this faith based optimisation?
So the USA has used assassins and the UK wants to try OSCT funded apostasy?
From
http://www.google.com/corporate/tenthings.html
"Placement in search results is never sold to anyone."
Someone at google just recalls the scary start up days and that wonderful visit from the nice people in suits?
" Instead of relying on a group of editors or solely on the frequency with which certain terms appear"
Google now uses a 200-strong Home Office unit?
"Google is able to determine which sites have been "voted" the best sources of information by those most interested in the information they offer"
Is "voted" now "selected by tame academics"?
http://www.russiatoday.com/Politics/2009-04-02/Bush_administration_accused_of_organizing_secret_assassin_cabal.html
Domestic spying is now "Benign Information Gathering"
Google UK likes to please governments.
Those using pirated Tinysoft signatures(TM) are a real threat to society and should all be thrown in jail.
Some may wish to use http://us.ixquick.com/eng/privacy-policy.html when searching for things those in power may well not like.
Now they're being employed by the government to help further clutter up the web! I look forward to a stream of 'link to my official, government-approved website' emails.
...as pro-evolution content on the web is succeeding at making the creationists go away.
Opus: the Swiss army knife of audio codec
n/t
Colorless green Cthulhu waits dreaming furiously.
Many more people die from heart attacks and car accidents each year. Why the big fuss over terrorism?
I can only presume that this is a troll with some well co-ordinated sock-puppetry. Seriously, if this is the kind of bullshit Slashdot finds insightful, I'm out of here.
[FUCK BETA]
John Lennon sung such a beautiful song it was just such a let down when I found out he was worth approx. 40 million at the time.
Just think. John Lennon decided to become a US Citizen when Richard Nixon was President. Imagine THAT!
Seriously, I think is a bunch of rubbish and no solo work of John's could ever come close to the bass line Paul put down in Silly Love Songs.
But...
if you think Imagine is such a great song that you can quote it and build a religion out of the guy, don't you think that's worth a dollar to you? I mean, if its worth a dollar to you, for the song, pony up. If 40 million other people agreed with you, what's the problem with it? Who cares if John Lennon got 40 million bucks! Did John Lennon do something that was worth a dollar to you? Pony up.
This is my sig.
Which, btw, includes allowing in immigrant groups and letting them gradually assimilate. We did it with the European Jews, the Chinese, the West Indians, the Indians, the Pakistanis, and now others from other Muslim countries.
From scarped cliff or quarried stone she cries "A thousand types are gone, I care for nothing, no not one."
We've seen religious manipulation of Google before. Years back, the scientologists created the world's largest website to flood the search engine's results and prevent people from seeing all the references to the god "Xenu" and the cult's historically criminal behavior at the top of websearches on Scientology. Technologically, it was a fascinating effort: Google apparently had to stop scanning it and retool in order to handle sites that large.
That UK government isn't sponsoring a friendlier image of Cthulhu.
Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
Where I live (Cambridge), voting Tory could easily let the Labour candidate back in. Furthermore, our MP is very strong on civil liberties. Imperfect, to be sure (I disagree with the utilitarian strain of liberalism that leads to such things as the smoking ban), but unlikely to be easily improved upon, even if the Tory did get in, since it would be difficult to beat a law scholar who care about civil liberties in efficacy.
Apart from the special case of Cambridge, that Lib Dems are typically strong on civil liberties must mean that if this is an issue of importance for you, you should be willing to hold your nose to vote for them if it's appropriate in your constituency. Of course, the same reasoning applies in reverse to those places where the Lib Dems are weaker than the Tories.
There is, however an upper limit on the vote available to the Tories: some people feel that they simply cannot vote for them. Accordingly where the support for Lib Dems and Tories are similar, a vote for the Lib Dems will be more likely to succeed. Realistically speaking, intent to vote Conservative is felt by borderline LD/Labour voters, so that they shrink from voting Lib Dem in order to 'keep the Tories out'.
Wikileaks, no DNS
Oh please. We don't score so well on the milk and flowers content of our own holy texts either. As for al-Andalus - I hate to tell you, but the etymolygy of the word predates the Islamic incursion, so I have no idea what you meant. Who is they? And do you have a citation or are you just talking out your ass?
[FUCK BETA]
I can't be the only who has heard that entire song and thought....
How utterly boring.
Some folks may be fine being cows nonchalantly grazing in the meadows, but as for me, I prefer the challenges and conflicts in life, in overcoming them, and advancing.
A neutered, tepid world is all Lennon offers us in that song. It's a secular version of some cloudy heaven with lame harps and all those dead relatives you didn't like in life. I don't have to love war to think the vision sucks.
Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms should be the name of a store, not a government agency.
Are you being purposely dense? Just look up al Andalus on Wikipedia. "the Arabic name given to the parts of the Iberian Peninsula governed by Muslims, at various times in the period between 711 and 1492"
So it's not just a general term for the region, it's specifically related to rule by Muslims.
And who are "they" ?? Did you seriously not understand the connection of "they" to "Muslims"? Perhaps not since you didn't know that al-Andulus referred to Muslim rule, so who knows.
Mahmoud Ahmadinejad would like to thank the British for their support on behalf of the "Pro-Western Islamic groups".
OK, first off there's two kids of Muslims in the USA, the Nation of Islam/5 percenters which are to Islam as the Mormons are to Christianity (really, their Allah was born in the early 1900s in Detroit) and immigrant Muslims, you can't mix the two.
How are the latter well integrated? The USA are the one place where most people think of them the strongest as linked to terrorism, whereas in Europe they're more like our own Mexicans.
Here, have a reality check
You just got troll'd!
Asif Mandvi was born in India, far more liberal and secular than the middle eastern societies. Plus he's not a fundamentalist muslim.
I've seen many episodes of the daily show where he's making fun of Islamic jihadists.
Nobody disenfranchises muslims in any country I know of. This is simply a myth invented by fundamentalist muslims who simply cannot stand people who think and act differently from them. There are a lot of immigrants of other religions in Europe e.g. hindus, buddhists, confuscianists or even atheists and they are doing pretty well in that society. Heck, some of them are even amongst the richest people in Europe : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakshmi_Mittal
The whole 'muslim opression' is an invention by their paedophilic clergy to keep their own positions intact. Take a look at the headlines and you'll see that this religions is at loggerheads with almost every other religion : Fighting christianity in the west, judaism in the middle-east, hinduism in the east, even buddhists in afghanistan and atheists in china.
If you're at war with the rest of the world, I think it's time to re-evaluate your religion .
... because what the Internet needs, above all, is more religion.
Idiots.
Ed R.Zahurak
You know, oblivion keeps looking better every day.
A real citation, please. I am asking for the etymology of the word, since the OP seems to think it relevant. And yes, I do take issue. I seriously find it hard to believe that there are substantial numbers of Muslims out there foaming at the mouth about the issue of Spain's governance. So again, I ask, who is "they"?
[FUCK BETA]
Umm, the wikipedia page has a citation. "Andalus, al-" Oxford Dictionary of Islam. John L. Esposito, Ed. Oxford University Press. 2003. Oxford Reference Online. Oxford University Press. Accessed 12 June 2006.
I don't have access to it but in my experience wikipedia is pretty accurate. On the other hand, I see you have provided ZERO evidence that al-Andalus predates the Muslim invasion of Spain, and further that even if it was used before that, that it is a simple geographical description with no connotation of *future* muslim rule. Citation please?
I seriously find it hard to believe that there are substantial numbers of Muslims out there foaming at the mouth about the issue of Spain's governance. So again, I ask, who is "they"?
I don't think anybody's foaming at the mouth over the issue, but I do think it was pretty obvious what "they" meant. Whether you think "they" really exist is immaterial. If I make a sentence that clearly uses "they" to refer to aliens, you wouldn't be arguing that "they" should only refer to a known, quantifiable group, right?
Marcus Brigstock said it best.
The Now Show rules!
Stick Men
Nice post. Can I use it in my bog? http://www.go-to-canada.com/gen_joboffers.htm
Pro-West Islamic Groups To Game Google
I wonder who will be gaming whom...
Normally I ascribe all life to intelligent design, but in your case I'll make an exception.
So, to combat radical Islamic practices they are going to flood google, so that searches don't return as much radical content? It looks more like a shell game than actually trying to combat radical Islamic elements.
10: PRINT "Everything old is new again."
20: GOTO 10
... to use the Internet for propaganda purposes?
Well, there's no way THAT could every backfire :-)
Just like we learned in the 1980s, arming Islamist against the Soviet invaders of Afghanistan turned out so well in the long term, as did promoting the Islamist Hamas against the nationalist PLO. That worked out great for Israel, huh?
My bicyles
Not as bad as it sounds http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7233040.stm as you can see other religions can also pass judgements upon small non-criminal sectors of the law meanwhile all criminal matters are reserved for the UK's state courts.
Not the same thing. While Jewish law and Islamic law may have some nominal similarities, the main difference is that Jewish law only applies to Jews, not gentiles, whereas Islamic Sharia Law is a strategy created specifically to oppress non-Muslims in Islamic land quite brutally.
Issues with Jewish courts are best left within the Jewish community for the orthodox and reformist Jews to hash out. It doesn't affect any of the rest of us per se.
l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
everybody has religion
asking for the end of ideological conflict is basically asking for mastery by one ideology. in a way, tha tsong is the ultimate fascist paean
no, i'd rather prefer the constant ideological warfare, then the enforced view of one ideology
and no, there's no such thing as no ideology. as long as human beings have:
1. free rights
2. a thinking mind
there will be ideology, and there will be conflict, and it will get violent at times
this is the status quo of being in human society. get used to it
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
You are missing the point. The Arbitration Act only allows Sharia courts, Jewish courts, or some form of secular arbitration, to apply if both parties agree to it. If you are a non-muslim and you consent to have your case judged according to Sharia law then you get what you deserve for crass stupidity.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Let's turn now to the pillars of Islam. The Sunni define five pillars of Islam: faith, prayer, alms-giving, fasting, and the pilgrimage to Mecca. I notice very little in the way of genocide in there. Also, in light of any controlling authority over Islam as a whole, I would point out that interpretations of both the meaning of Dar al-Harb and Dar al-Islam vary widely - but I will note that generally speaking most Muslims are of the opinion that anywhere a Muslim can live freely and follow his faith is part of Dar al-Islam.
Lastly, once again, can you provide a citation from any vaguely organised group of Muslims who wish to reconquer Spain, please? Or would that puncture your rather one-sided view?
[FUCK BETA]
You are missing the point. The Arbitration Act only allows Sharia courts, Jewish courts, or some form of secular arbitration, to apply if both parties agree to it. If you are a non-muslim and you consent to have your case judged according to Sharia law then you get what you deserve for crass stupidity.
You're not seeing the bigger picture. This whole voluntary Sharia Law thing is just a wedge to be used to muscle in more Sharia law, eventually culminating in an ever-expanding Islamic ghetto in the UK where Islamic law abrogates British law. It has happened countless times in other countries and at other times.
People who immigrate to other countries should conform to the laws of that country, not bring their backward cultural and religious baggage with them. It's just the rank arrogance of the Islamic leadership and aggressive collectivist ethnocentrism of the Muslim world that makes them do this.
Try being an immigrant in the UAE and claiming that you want to follow secular laws instead of their Islamic Sharia+Feudal monarchy and your hand will be cut off.
l'Homme n'est Rien l'Oeuvre Tout: Gustave Flaubert to George Sand
"Is fascism such a big issue?
Many more people die from heart attacks and railroad accidents each year. Why the big fuss over fascism?"
you are dealing with ideology, with human beings, not nameless faceless statistics or uncontrollable events like lightning strikes or shark attacks
as such, you pay attention to people who clearly state their goals and then clearly go about executing their goals
and if you are paying attention to what a group like al qaeda wants, you better believe its a big issue
because when it comes to human intent and human action, we are talking about self-fulfilling prophecy: the more they succeed, the more they try, and the more followers they get. its emergent phenomena, not natural phenomena
if you understood exactly what you are dealing with here, you would understand exaclty how dangerous and potent the ideology behind terrorism really is
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
Interesting idea. Forget the Islamic extremists--we in the USA (and probably GB as well?) have a culture of fear and a knee-jerk reaction to any mention of Islam, and reducing that might be a good thing. It is rare that anything good comes out of a name that inspires terror, whether or not the terror is justified.
Of course, making it illegal to criticise religion is just braindead. My ideal would be to have only negative messages about all faith--if you can't prove it, be skeptical! But opening a coherent, rational dialog is the first step. Killing off kneejerk reactions is the zeroth step, I guess?
"The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has taken place."
Uh, what? The Arbitration Act was passed in 1996 and has not been the used as a wedge 'to muscle in more Sharia law', nor to muscle in more Jewish law, nor any other kind of law. It allows people to bypass the judicial system and go to less-expensive legally-binding arbitration with the arbiter decided by both parties. There is nothing specific to the Sharia law in the act, nor to any other kind of arbitration. It applies only to civil suits, not to criminal law, and applies only if both parties are willing. It is used far more by non-muslims than by muslims, since it saves a great deal of expense.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Yes we can see how much courage you have in your convictions when you post an AC.
I'm writing a book on social provocation amongst other things. I personally use the word god a lot like UFO. By definition if I cannot identify a flying object, it is a UFO. Once it is identified, it is not a UFO any more. Using the definition of god as a system beyond our scientific grasp of reality, then I believe in god. A discussion of god providing further clarity and definition can then begin and change with the advancement of science. As a scientist and engineer, a common basic understanding between parties is necessary to prevent non-constructive argument. I believe this has led to a lot of the difficulties in the past, creating contradictory views. Stop it please.
Without dealing with what fundamentally enables a human being to act, these kind of efforts are really futile.
My example may be bad, but this is slashdot so here it goes:
Alcohol and Health drinks are equally available and information about both is equally available, however what enables a human being to choose is something that gets ignored all the time.
Giving only one view of anything will not guarantee that other view will not be searched for, asked about or worse imagined.
-- It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -- Aristotle
How about Mark 7:25-30 where Jesus is being racist towards a woman who comes to seek his help? Not as bad as pedophilia but still...
He wasn't being racist!
She wanted Him to cast out a demon from her daughter. The text then mentions that she was Greek.
His response was basically, "Let the kids eat first, it's not right to take their food and throw it to the dogs."
She replied that even dogs eat the crumbs under the kids table.
He said "Touche! and for that, your daughter is well, off you go"
How on earth is that racist?
www.Buy-Proxy.com - A "buyer-driven" global marketplace.
I'm quite SURE they'll remain "pro-west" evermore. </sarcasm>
I mean, I am a westerner since birth, and not even I am pro-west.
Free, as in your money being freed from the confines of your account.
You are right, but Jesus fulfilled Scripture in other ways too. I'm going to take a "rabbi trail" here... In Judaism, to "fulfill" something means to interpret it correctly. This is what Jesus did through the way He lived His life. He full-filled it not only by keeping the commands of the law, but by filling it full of its true meaning.
Moreover, that He fulfilled the law does not mean that we, His followers , are to ignore the law's commandments, which are "holy, just, and good" (Romans 7:12).
Look at what Paul is saying. It's not that keeping the law makes sin your master; rather, legalistic observance of G-d's commands without having understood and received His grace is what makes sin your master.
It should be noted that the ancient Greek language did not have a word for "legalism." There was only this word (in Rom. 6:14, nomon), which is always simplistically rendered as "law" in English.
Look at the context, using another version (CJB):
Is Paul saying that lawlessness is bad, but keeping the law is also bad? Sounds like a lose/lose situation for humanity. But no; Paul professes, "we confirm/uphold/establish (KJV) the law" (Rom. 3:31) But only a keeping of the law that is grounded in a relationship of trusting faithfulness in G-d and His grace for us. Christians nearly always miss this distinction.
He did what was "unlawful" regarding the Sabbath only according to the Pharisaic rabbinical laws. He did not violate G-d's law concerning the Sabbath. He simply held to a less burdensome practice of keeping of Shabbat.
Here, Jesus was, in fact, going strictly by the Book (Deuteronomy 17):
Heh - a British 'bog' is an American 'can' is an Indian 'tati'.
Her lips were softer than a duck's bill, but her quacks