Slashdot Mirror
ISIS Makes Direct Threats Against Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey (cnet.com)
wjcofkc writes: A group of ISIS supporters have threatened to take down Facebook and Twitter, as well as their leaders. In a 25-minute propaganda video released by a group calling itself "the sons of the Caliphate army," photographs of both technology leaders are riddled with bullets. The video was first spotted by Vocativ. The threats are being made over the two companies' efforts to seek out and remove terrorist-related content on their respective platforms. The group is quoted as saying, "If you close one account, we will take 10 in return and soon your names will be erased after we delete your sites, Allah willing, and will know that we say is true."
Oh, I got my terrorist organizations mixed up. My bad #notFBI
Make sure everyone's vote counts: Verified Voting
I think the point is that the person with the pen is able to garner more support from friends and allies, and thus more swords.
Those who think the Pen is mightier than the Sword are about to learn the unpoetic truth that a person with only a pen needs to have some really good friends with swords.
The phrase means that in the course of history that ideas are a more powerful force for change than weapons.
Ghandi's "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." means the same thing.
The person with a "pen" may die. But his ideas may ultimately change the world, despite the attempt by those with "swords" to prevent it.
it's like, "if you dare to interfere with our propaganda, we'll retaliate by shutting down the service on which we distribute our propaganda!" Seems poorly thought out.
I know that was tongue in cheek, but still:
Thought independent outside of obsessing over "likes" and "friends".
No more walking off cliffs because your posting to Facebook. (this of course excludes general texting)
Living socially normal lives.
No more armies of people baffled that I among others are not on Facebook.
A vast reduction in narcissistic selfies.
(maybe) an increase in general civility as people would be forced to have face-to-face conversations within close physical proximity.
A steady increase in gray matter across a few billion people.
The avoidance of entire generations of kids that are socially inept and who knows what else developmental oddities because, well, facebook.
I could go on but that's a lot of typing. Maybe someone else take over?
Brought to you by Carl's Junior.
Considering that they believe in a magical sky fairy and that their actions are destined to bring about an apocalypse, I don't think critical reasoning is one of their strong suits.
is that they're very, very media savvy. They understand the value of PR, and are not above saying things they don't have any real plans to do just for the publicity effect. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they'd be happy to lop off a few CEO heads (especially the Jew), but I'm guessing their primary aim is to keep us talking about them.
And you know, we do have to talk about them, because that's the way our society operates and they know it. But we don't necessarily have to give their chest-thumping any credence. I think that's the primary thing they want; if we treat them as powerful then they will gain credibility and that will attract adherents. So let's review; the guys they're threatening are famous, high profile billionaires. They're already attractive targets for domestic terrorists and criminals; they're not soft targets for any screwball ISIS might inspire to martyrdom.
ISIS also can get other things from from making largely empty threats. They can get whip up American anti-Muslim sentiment, which serves ISIS's purposes very well. The droves of Muslims eager to get away from ISIS's control undermines the legitimacy ISIS's claim to having established a new caliphate, so they are very quick to publicize the fact that anyone trying to leave is going to get kicked by Hungarian cameramen.
If you don't want to be an unwitting ISIS stooge, take a deep breath and put them in perspective. Sure, they're a bunch of dangerous fanatics, but they're 6000 miles away. And yes, they're bound to have a few homicidal crackpot adherents here in the USA, but those crackpots are just a drop in our big bucket of homegrown homicidal crackpots, and we hardly give our native nutcases any attention at all. We're already taking our homegrown fanatics and mass killers in stride, so it's just a marginal effort to worry about ISIS.
That's ISIS in a nutshell for us: they're a marginal concern. Not to say ISIS doesn't have a place on the list of the things we need to be concerned with, but it hardly deserves to be the center of our foreign policy, much less the center of our national policy.
Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
You know, if you put Robert Downey on it, it'd make for a good movie.
Liberty - Security - Laziness - Pick any two.
Daesh vs. Facebook.
Whoever loses
We win
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
What would you call it?
Personally, I think people beyond the age of 8 that have an imaginary friend are kinda weird, to say the least.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
What I meant was https will be first, then unicode support
Gandhi's struggle would have turned out very, very differently had he been dealing with Hitler or Stalin or Mao instead of the British Empire. His methods only work against an adversary who has at least SOME heart or nobility you can leverage and exploit.
I don't think you fully grasp the concept. ie Gandhi's philosphy is still be taught, supported, and followed. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao not so much. So yeah I think his pen still beats their swords.
"If you close one account, we will take 10 in return and soon your names will be erased after we delete your sites, Allah willing, and will know that we say is true."
But, what if Allah doesn't will it?