Slashdot Mirror


Why ISIS Is Winning The Online Propaganda War (dailydot.com)

blottsie writes: The U.S. government has been unable to fight the Islamic State on the one battlefield it currently commands: the Internet. Exemplified by an August 2014 video produced by the State Department, the U.S. remains ineffective at combating violent extremism online. A definitive report by the Daily Dot explores how ISIS succeeds in spreading its message and recruiting new militants, and why the U.S. government continues to fail in its efforts to stop ISIS online.

97 of 168 comments (clear)

  1. ISIS is exploiting... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Young men whose culture expects a lot from them, but who have little options for employment or success due to cultural behaviors which limit their options, namely high birth rates and slow economic growth. This is both promoted by religious leaders and cultural prohibitions against lending

    Either lower the birth rate or increase their opportunities and there will be no more people wanting to join ISIS

    1. Re:ISIS is exploiting... by fustakrakich · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yes, they pay better than most other jobs in the region, in dollars. Apply the religious angle to get them to work for a little less. When ISIS cut wages a while back, many of the fighters jumped over to Al Qaeda. Toss the culture crap, it's plain old capitalism that motivates these guys. And maybe the drought, too. War is still more profitable than desalination.

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    2. Re:ISIS is exploiting... by michelcolman · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Oh, sure, it's all our fault, we haven't given them enough opportunities.

      Take Salah Abdeslam, for example. He had a good job as a technician at the Brussels public transport company but got fired because he regularly didn't show up for work. We should have given him more opportunities, we deserve to get shot to bits for not helping these people more.

    3. Re:ISIS is exploiting... by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 1

      You made a mistake by not helping this guy. You needed to communicate with him. You needed to ask him a deep, existential question that would cause him to question and reassess his actions, attitudes, and core beliefs in light of the impact he is having on the world and of the impact the world can have on him. You needed to ask him a question that would help him onto the path of nonviolent enlightenment.

      Sometimes you can even ask such a question without using any words at all. A question like - "You don't really want me to shoot you in the face with this .38, do you?"

      -- Massad Ayoob

      --
      Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
    4. Re:ISIS is exploiting... by dyslexicbunny · · Score: 1

      And the frustrating part is if we set up basic guaranteed income (something I am somewhat a fan of), he'd likely sit around complaining that it wasn't enough.

    5. Re:ISIS is exploiting... by Actually,+I+do+RTFA · · Score: 1

      Two base principles of economics: People are rational in maximizing utility, and people have different utility functions. People value the religious aspect of ISIS at different rates. There are going to be a few who value it very highly and many who value it negatively (see, non-Muslims). The more people value the non-ISIS alternative, the fewer people will opt for ISIS.

      --
      Your ad here. Ask me how!
  2. PR war to hate Islam by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The only propaganda war ISIL is winning is spreading hatred of Islam far and wide. And it's not going to be these young men who have to wear that, it's going to be your normal suburban families who just happen to have a different religion from those around them.

    1. Re:PR war to hate Islam by Aighearach · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Yeah, it is pretty stupid because it doesn't establish what the goals are, or what "winning" means. The US isn't trying to stop people from being asshats online, so it can't "lose" at that. The strategy is actually instead to track them silently so as to know who to drop a missile on, and what bank accounts are big enough to be worse seizing.

      If some part of the US Government was actually tasked with disrupting online activities they don't like, then the premise might make sense.

      And as for the general concept of "propaganda war," that is just specious. Look at all the refugees pouring out of Syria; they're running away from those asshats, not joining them. They're not even trying to fight a "propaganda war," they're using a niche strategy of recruiting angry people from the fringe. There is no premise by which you "lose" a "propaganda war" because 2% of the people supported the other side.

  3. My two cents by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Insightful
    The world is in a great era to live if you happen to live in some of its countries, but even in the richest, there are disenfranchised people not enjoying their existence. From the 3rd to the 1st world, these folks are drawn to belong to something.

    If you can find something to believe in that is bigger than yourself, it can make all your doubts and insecurities go away.

    So either be grateful or hateful that you're smart.

    --
    Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

    Ernest Hemingway

    1. Re:My two cents by rmdingler · · Score: 4, Insightful

      The words from those same foreign assholes fall flat. Well, something like "come join us and we will provide for your needs and give you a job" might not fall so flat, but those aren't the words we are saying to them.

      That's pretty much it. Those aren't the words anyone else is saying to them, and that's too bad.

      A mirror image is available in nearly any inner city in the world. We lose our youth to gangs in our own nations, and we act surprised when they begin to heed the resonating call of a worldly struggle.

      They must be offered an alternative or there's really no conteast at all for their hearts and minds.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

  4. It's not ISIS by fustakrakich · · Score: 1, Troll

    It's US/ISIS, fighting against the Russians.

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    1. Re:It's not ISIS by fustakrakich · · Score: 2

      Ahhh, the Troll mod. Sorry if it hurts the Slashdot/ISIS crowd, but this phase of the war goes back to 1979.

      "What is more important in world history? The Taliban or the collapse of the Soviet empire? Some agitated Moslems or the liberation of Central Europe and the end of the cold war?"

      Are you going to argue with success?

      And then the same man spills the beans in the very first response here. Qataris, and Saudis, and Turks! Oh my!

      "And it becomes clear that not all of those rebels are all that 'democratic.'"

      Gee! Understatement?

      But hey, theater.. Carry on

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  5. Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I have already theorized that if online surveillance were really as all-powerful as paranoids think it is, the NSA would have no trouble pinpointing ransomware operators and having them picturesquely snuffed out.

    Reason two: wouldn't a cyberspy agency with real power be able to use the Internet to scramble ISIS communications with fake chatter, misdirected operational orders, and sites filled with doctrinal errors designed to turn wealthy Muslims against ISIS?

    1. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by Bing+Tsher+E · · Score: 2

      fake chatter, misdirected operational orders, and sites filled with doctrinal errors designed to turn wealthy Muslims against ISIS?

      The people who are good at that kind of thing are busy spamming comment threads on sites like Breitbart and DailyKos.

    2. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      The NSA has better things to do than pinpoint ransomware operators. We pay their salary, but that doesn't buy us their loyalty.

      ISIS isn't a significant threat to Americans, but it creates an enemy to fear, which is extremely useful to those who wish to strengthen their own power base by taking freedom (or privacy) away from their citizens.

    3. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by rmdingler · · Score: 2, Insightful
      Or.

      ISIS is actually less threatening to us than a mosquito/Zika outbreak or a sudden death from a fall on the stairs at your pwn home.

      --
      Happiness in intelligent people is the rarest thing I know.

      Ernest Hemingway

    4. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      the NSA would have no trouble pinpointing ransomware operators and having them picturesquely snuffed out.

      :-) Well now, they don't snuff them out, so what obvious conclusion can we draw from that?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    5. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      If the three letter agencies can’t make enough money selling drugs to finance their black ops, perhaps a foray into ransomware will pick up some business?

    6. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by sociocapitalist · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I have already theorized that if online surveillance were really as all-powerful as paranoids think it is, the NSA would have no trouble pinpointing ransomware operators and having them picturesquely snuffed out.

      Reason two: wouldn't a cyberspy agency with real power be able to use the Internet to scramble ISIS communications with fake chatter, misdirected operational orders, and sites filled with doctrinal errors designed to turn wealthy Muslims against ISIS?

      Reason 3: Our governments find it useful to have a perpetual war (sell more and more weapons!) in the middle east (away from home) with an aspect of terrorism that is scary enough (be afraid we will protect you if you give us your civil rights!) without it being any significant threat to us or our society and thus do nothing of significance to end the war.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    7. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by jbmartin6 · · Score: 1

      US intelligence has a long history of working with criminals. They aren't a law enforcement agency.

      --
      This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
    8. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Why would the NSA care about ransomware operators? Nobody important really got hit by them.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:Reason two why NSA is a paper tiger by mattventura · · Score: 1

      ISIS is great at hiding their communications in plain sight, which our (un)intelligence agencies seem to be awful at detecting. See: Paris terrorists' unencrypted communications.

  6. Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by UnknownSoldier · · Score: 1

    "He who has the gold, makes the rules."

    WHO is funding ISIS ?

    Since we haven't evolved to live on a planet without money yet, the only effective way to stop any propaganda is to find out WHO financially supports them and cut off their money supply.

    All the Petabytes of Information the NSA has and they have to target American Citizens instead ??

    1. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      yes but we like the saudi dictatorship.

    2. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

      I don't think the World Health Organization is funding ISIS, it seems very unlikely.

    3. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by Koby77 · · Score: 5, Informative

      They are financed by Saudi Arabia, an "ally" of the United States and the Obama administration, who buys materials through the United States, which are smuggled through Turkey (another United States "ally") into Syria and ISIS territory. The reason the NSA is targeting the citizenry is because if they followed the money trail, then they would need to need to begin arresting other administration officials.

    4. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by ClickOnThis · · Score: 4, Informative

      Contributions from wealthy donors in Saudi Arabia (as well as Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates) does comprise a major part of the revenues ISIS collects. However, it's not the greatest part. Most of it comes from theft (particularly of oil resources), kidnapping, extortion and taxation.

      --
      If it weren't for deadlines, nothing would be late.
    5. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

      Here we have the most correct and easy to understand summary so far, yet somebody is modding it down. Okay class, anybody know why?

      --
      “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
    6. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by phantomfive · · Score: 2

      Oil sales in Iraq and Syria from wells they've taken over. Here's a good link, wikipedia also has some info.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    7. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by Pfhorrest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      an "ally" of the United States and the Obama administration

      They were also an "ally" of the Bush administration, and the Clinton administration, and the prior Bush administration and so on; because they're allies (for whatever that's worth) of the United States, regardless of its presiding administration.

      Why would you mention Obama here unless for a needless (and false) partisan attempt at blame-assigning? US-Saudi relations have nothing to do with Obama specifically and long, long predate him.

      --
      -Forrest Cameranesi, Geek of all Trades
      "I am Sam. Sam I am. I do not like trolls, flames, or spam."
    8. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by sociocapitalist · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Contributions from wealthy donors in Saudi Arabia (as well as Qatar, Kuwait and the United Arab Emirates) does comprise a major part of the revenues ISIS collects. However, it's not the greatest part. Most of it comes from theft (particularly of oil resources), kidnapping, extortion and taxation.

      You'd think that by now all the oil resource sources and distribution facilities would have been blown to hell and back to keep ISIS from having that money.

      There's obviously a deeper game being played.

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    9. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by cyberchondriac · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I'm trying to figure out why this got downvoted. It's an extremely valid point. It seems like the "coalition" did little but target ISIS pickup trucks *until* the Russians came in and started bombing the oil facilities, raising the bar and doing some real damage to ISIS's economic infrastructure. Now the coalition is finally taking out some oil refineries but it's very little very late.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    10. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by sociocapitalist · · Score: 1

      I'm trying to figure out why this got downvoted. It's an extremely valid point. It seems like the "coalition" did little but target ISIS pickup trucks *until* the Russians came in and started bombing the oil facilities, raising the bar and doing some real damage to ISIS's economic infrastructure. Now the coalition is finally taking out some oil refineries but it's very little very late.

      We agree - and I don't know why my comment would be downvoted either but there it is...

      --
      blindly antisocialist = antisocial
    11. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by war4peace · · Score: 1

      As a non-American, I guess the reason is that Obama could have stopped it, but hasn't, regardless of what his predecessors did.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
    12. Re:Simple Solution: Golden Rule ,,, by hyades1 · · Score: 1

      I wonder what they'd make of those pictures of George Bush Junior holding hands with that Saudi prince...and even kissing him.

      --
      I've calculated my velocity with such exquisite precision that I have no idea where I am.
  7. The truth by Dorianny · · Score: 5, Insightful

    For the same reason why Climate-change deniers, anit-GMO campaigners, vaccine truthers and other Conspiracy theories find such fertile ground on the internet. People don't go looking for impartial information, they go looking for material that affirms their already held beliefs. The internet offers them the opportunity to find and like-minded people and form communities even when members are separated by large geographical distances

    1. Re:The truth by turbidostato · · Score: 4, Informative

      "People don't go looking for impartial information, they go looking for material that affirms their already held beliefs."

      I remember Umberto Eco pointing it on his novel "Foucault's Pendulum" when making one of the characters saying (more or less) "conspiracists don't want new information, they want to be reasserted on their believings". Yes, tinfoil conpiracists are an extreme case, but I think you are right: to a shorter or larger extent everybody wants to be said that they are right and that they are special.

    2. Re:The truth by Digital+Mage · · Score: 1

      I agree with you on that is what maintains an individual's investment in the conspiracy theory. I believe also that people are 1st drawn to a conspiracy theory because they are looking for easy answers in a world that is more chaotic than they are comfortable with. It's a belief that an all powerful entity (Illuminati, Government, Aliens, Corporations, etc.) truly is in control of all the bad things in the world and if we just know what they are up to we can solve the evils of the world.

    3. Re:The truth by LongearedBat · · Score: 1

      I think the reason for that is that when someone has spent much time/energy (preaching, praying, being constantly mindful of following rules, etc.) on something that they believe is worth while, they don't want to be shown to have wasted all that effort in something futile.

      It's easier, more comfortable, to find like minded people who justify all that effort. Thus begins the positive feedback loop that leads to unreasonably strong opinions (extremism).

      And if too many people still keep undermining those opinions, then the unreasonably strong opinions lead to unreasonably strong frustration that leads to unreasonably strong anger, which leads to the dark side, so to speak.

      Have I got that right?

    4. Re:The truth by micahraleigh · · Score: 1

      Studies have shown republicans are more likely to look at both sides of an issue that democrats.

      They did the study by seeing which which sites/news sources people with different political views went to.

      The people who primarily read Fox News periodically check out other sites like CNN, MSNBC, yahoo!, etc.

      The libs are the ones in an echo chamber.

  8. "...A definitive report..." by turkeydance · · Score: 1

    ? really? ISIS may not be Obama's JV team, but ISIS ain't in the Final Four.

  9. Woah, no shit. by bistromath007 · · Score: 1

    They have failed to curb violent extremism online because if it's online, it's almost entirely fake. If anyone disagrees with me, I'll melt them in a vat of acid and post cum tributes of their cleaned skeleton.

  10. ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by slashdime · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Because we're helping them.

    Think about:
    1. Everything you know about ISIS.
    2. Who showed you these things?

    By portraying ISIS as evil incarnate and letting them provoke a reaction out of us, we are helping them get what they want.

    Without everyone being up in arms about them and feeding the media frenzy about a bunch of backwards goatherders, they would not have been able to successfully recruit their terror cells.

    1. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      we are helping them get what they want.

      Do you even know what they want?

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    2. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by phantomfive · · Score: 1
      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    3. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Do you honestly see any other alternative? If you think a media blackout can keep explosions and gunfire, tens of deaths, hundreds of injured and huge heavily armed manhunts in the middle of major cities and occupying vast areas in the middle east a secret you must have missed the invention of cell phones and the Internet. Particularly in anything resembling a free and open democracy. And once you start losing faith that the mainstream media is telling you what's actually happening, the crazies start being right. If you don't want an escalation of the conflict, you certainly don't want to create recruitment for those who'd like to fight fire with fire.

      As for ISIS they're doing a pretty good job of marketing themselves as evil incarnate, so I don't see how you could or should balance out the coverage. Yes, it's propaganda but it's also the proof of why they need to be fought. Nobody can hide behind ignorance, if they were hiding it we'd call it exposing them. But now we know, so we're supposed to pretend we don't? The fucked up part is that this is apparently good propaganda to some, they're showing a total disregard for human life and dignity and so people join them. I hope every one of them meet a bullet with their name on it.

      And I think you're vastly underestimating them, sure there are many backwards goatherders but also many highly educated, radicalized muslims who organize them. You don't cook up volatile high explosives and make bombs without blowing yourself up without a decent amount of skill. Don't confuse fanatics with being ignorant, like how you in the US have many otherwise highly functional people who believe in young earth creationism. Except where it directly conflicts with their beliefs some of these people could easily be engineers, doctors and lawyers.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    4. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      By portraying ISIS as evil incarnate and letting them provoke a reaction out of us, we are helping them get what they want.

      The propaganda from ISIS themselves paints them as worse than anything I've seen from our government.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    5. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by slashdime · · Score: 1

      Good points.

      I see how my own points were slightly ambiguous. When I say, "who showed us these things?", I meant to think past the people who shared them. I think our government and our media did what they think are correct in showing us these things. And I would agree with them.

      But ultimately, who created it? ISIS did. Everything we know about ISIS is only what they want/allowed us to know.

      Did you know ISIS sets up hospitals (not just for their own fighters) and provides healthcare to the people. They distribute food. They are very government like in some ways where they can be.

      So why would these people paint themselves in the worst possible light? Because that's what's needed for recruitment.

      An excellent book on this subject is Jihad Academy: The Rise of Islamic State by Nicolas Henin. He was a hostage alongside James Foley and has first hand knowledge how life is with ISIS on the ground and their inner workings.

    6. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by slashdime · · Score: 1

      You're exactly right. I didn't mean our government.

      ISIS created the propaganda. Our government and media spread it. We listen to it.

      Each of these three steps are planned by ISIS. Every reaction to each step is exactly what ISIS wants to happen.

    7. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      I think there is also the medieval mindset, where it's ok to kill people you disagree with, and kings are considered a good thing, etc. Like, the whole region is still in medieval times, and these are just typical fundamentalists from medieval times doing typical medieval things.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    8. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      Like every snotty child, attention. Ignore them for the most part and if they get annoying, just slap them left and right 'til it's not funny anymore.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
    9. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by phantomfive · · Score: 1

      They're just going to make themselves more and more annoying (which means realistically, kill more and more people) until they get slapped around.

      --
      "First they came for the slanderers and i said nothing."
    10. Re:ISIS is winning the propaganda war because... by Opportunist · · Score: 1

      That solves the problem, too.

      --
      We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  11. Online Extremism is Good? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

    Reality is online extremism is not really all that much of a problem. Most countries have laws in place to cover certain kinds of speech and on line extremism is pretty much like criminals carrying around a sign stating their crimes and expecting not to be arrested. You are kind of meant to allow it to happen and then investigate and arrest it creators and prosecute them not only for those specific speech crimes (keep in mind, money is speech and paying someone to kill someone else is just free 'er' paid for speech, also not to forget credit card fraud). As part of that you shut down the web site. So either they do commit real crimes and you prosecute them or they do not and in reality they are just one amongst a billion others. Give them enough rope and they will hang themselves.

    When it comes to offshore sites, well, that is imported and should come under import control laws and also can be extended to other countries export controls. Should countries not be doing enough to control export of criminal digital transmissions they should be subject to bans on other exports, until they in term seek to control the digital transmissions being export from the networks.

    --
    Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
  12. Wonder if it's censorship by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    Not the usual kind of censorship, but that of the news not showing anything that might be upsetting. Have to wonder if minds would change if they showed pictures of a happy, active 5 year old, then a burned, twisted mass of stuff that was the kid's body after some asshole set off a bomb.

    1. Re:Wonder if it's censorship by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Not the usual kind of censorship, but that of the news not showing anything that might be upsetting.

      It's more like the news not showing anything that might not be sensational enough.

      There is apparently a group of 400 British citizens negotiating with the British government to be able to return to the UK without being deported (if they are dual citizens) or thrown in prison (if they are not). They stupidly went to Syria or Iraq thinking that they would join in a Holy War to form an Islamic Republic. Now they realise they are just caught up in someone else's gang warfare, killing fellow Muslims. How they couldn't figure that out before they went, I don't know, but apparently there is no shortage of fools to join Daesh. If the news spent more time telling their story instead of glorifying Islamist attacks against the West, how would that affect Daesh's recruitment?

    2. Re:Wonder if it's censorship by cyberchondriac · · Score: 1

      If I was the UK, I'd say screw that. These people have seen ISIS's website, they've read and heard the news for the past year, they have to have known what ISIS is really about and still they went. To help form a strict, severe, Islamic theocracy, and that's putting it nicely. There's no excuse, none. If they came back to Britain the first thing they'd do is hook up with Anjem "Chowderhead" Choudary.

      --

      Look back up at my post, now look back down, you're on the Internet. Now look back up. I'm a signature.
    3. Re:Wonder if it's censorship by bugs2squash · · Score: 1

      I don't agree. Bring them back, put them on TV, find out what they know and have them explain how they were duped.

      --
      Nullius in verba
  13. Re:PsyOps by bistromath007 · · Score: 1

    That would make their position sound pretty sensible.

  14. what gives you meaning that counts. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    If you can find something to believe in that is bigger than yourself, it can make all your doubts and insecurities go away. So either be grateful or hateful that you're smart.

    Wanting or getting a sense of purpose in life has nothing to do with intelligence - at least whatever is measured by IQ and SATs. The most insecure people I know are quite brilliant and wonder why they're wasting their life on crap that's basically a consumer product that really doesn't better mankind. Or getting into a profession because they wanted a job but would rather have studied 19th century French literature - so they grit their teeth everyday and go to work. Some are lucky. I know an OB/GYN who studied music as an undergrad but wanted a family and knew he couldn't support them on a musician's salary (he was a classical pianist). After white knuckling ti through med school and residency, he ended up living delivery babies.

    So, what comes down to is what gives you meaning that counts.

    And our lives in the US - live to work at the expense of family and friends - to live a shallow consuming life is depressing. I miss the days when I had a lot of friends and cool people to hang with - even though I was poor as shit.

  15. Hmmm by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Can someone explain to my why that in the United States of America, the right hates and wants to carpet bomb a bunch of right wing extremists who believe in God, Guns and family values, while the Wacky left wing wants to protect and defend a bunch of people who want to keep women covered and walking 6 paces behind the men.

    Why do we fight the wars we do? It is because someone in the media says those guys are evil. I remember when Russia was evil and the Mujahudeen were our buddies. What has changed?

    To me the propoganda war is being waged in the United States against the citizens of the United States. It is being waged to turn the USA in upon itself. White against black. Left against Right. In the meantime China and Mexico grow rich. I believe nothing of what I hear on the news. None of it makes any sense to me anymore. It is all a conspiracy made up by someone on high for their own agenda.

    1. Re: Hmmm by ozduo · · Score: 1

      Sorry I've no mod points to award you.

      --
      I got to the chocolate box before you, that's why the hard ones have teeth marks.
    2. Re:Hmmm by Jiro · · Score: 1

      Other people can argue the God and family values, but I highly doubt that ISIS really wants the civilians who live in areas it controls to own guns.

      ISIS wants guns for itself and its fighters, of course, but that isn't the same thing as wanting the general population to be permitted guns.

  16. Simple... by Lumpy · · Score: 1, Informative

    It's also why Trump is doing so well. People in general are very gullible.

    --
    Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    1. Re:Simple... by gweihir · · Score: 2

      In all fairness to Trump, he is an excellent con-man! I do however think he has not quite thought this through, because if he becomes president, he will have to deliver _something_ over those 4 years, quite unlike his usual modus operandi.

      --
      Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
    2. Re:Simple... by Black+Parrot · · Score: 3, Interesting

      In all fairness to Trump, he is an excellent con-man! I do however think he has not quite thought this through, because if he becomes president, he will have to deliver _something_ over those 4 years, quite unlike his usual modus operandi.

      Yeah, the most interesting question about Trump is "What is his face-saving end game?"

      --
      Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
    3. Re:Simple... by Dog-Cow · · Score: 2

      Why? Do you think he cares if he stands a chance for reelection?

  17. Your story is short of facts by brennz · · Score: 4, Informative
    1. Re: Your story is short of facts by mspohr · · Score: 1

      I read TFA and all the comments but I still can't figure out what message they are delivering to recruit.
      Lots of crazy speculation here but it would be nice to understand the message and perhaps that might be a good starting point for a counter message.

      --
      I don't read your sig. Why are you reading mine?
  18. Oh please by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This "we'll take care of you" narrative is just about the only thing you hear from the do-gooders that're fscking up by the numbers here in Europe.

    Free monies? Check. Housing? Check. More help "integrating? Check. Special and remedial language courses and schooling? Check and check. Extra doubplelus more counselling? Check, check and check. They're getting way more "help" than the natives do. It doesn't help at all.

    There are piles of evidence that nothing of that actually works. And still you can regularly hear politicians harping on a schooling or support or whatever other course track thingy this week. It still doesn't work.

    The problem is that these extremist youths aren't extremist because they're poor. They're poor because of their death cult beliefs. But because of their beliefs they're easy to convince to dig in even deeper, and anyway, even observing that it's their backward belief system of virulent hate that's keeping them back is "racists". This is why, with every terrorist attack, even where the attackers where shouting very literal and widely known invocations of their belief, you'll see oodles of "experts" tumbling over each other to insist that nothing of all that had to with their so-called "religion" at all, nosiree, honest. You're not supposed to point to the actual cause because that's not polite, see?

    There are more problems, but the fundamental problem should already be visible: The west is operating on a certain set of assumptions ("we'll help you, then you'll be thankful and take the hint to be more like us"), and these people are operating on wildly different assumptions ("We get free stuff? Sure, give us some more. Us thankful? Nah. We have our own 'culture'. And now that free stuff is a right so we demand more or we'll call you racist... again.") that makes us look weak and contemptible in their eyes.

    And that's the European situation. The US situation is possibly worse because the US and thus the US government is even worse about this perception dichotomy thing. It's why the US has lost just about every war in the last couple decades. Military might? Sure. Er, excuse me, "AMERICA, FUCK YEAH!". But making it stick? HA HA HA HA. The name of the game is "hearts and minds" and against these people, the west sucks at it. The more west you look, in fact, the more they suck at it.

    This is why, for one, Assad needs very much to stay where he is, yet "the west" keeps on wishing him away. This is why the "Arabian spring" turned into nothing short of a global disaster. If you're wondering how that could come to pass, well, there were these wars arming and destabilising the region, and then all it needed was a relatively small trigger. The only spark of hope for us is that the region is full of extremists that disagree with each other and therefore dislike each other to death, and that's not much of a spark. We in the west are more or less entirely powerless, because we're so completely out of touch with their frame of reference.

    And that in turn is exactly what's making this counter-propaganda so excreably bad: It doesn't resonate with the target demographic at all. The ISIS propaganda, OTOH, resonates very well indeed, to the point it has no problem getting hordes of disaffected young men to join them and commit mass atrocities.

    1. Re:Oh please by AmiMoJo · · Score: 2

      There are piles of evidence that nothing of that actually works.

      What the hell are you on about? Integration and support are the only things that do work. De-radicalization through integration has been very successful in Europe. The real challenge is getting the help to those who need it.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    2. Re:Oh please by war4peace · · Score: 1

      De-radicalization through integration has been very successful in Europe.

      Quotation required.

      --
      ...gis sdrawkcab (usually not responding to ACs; don't bother posting as AC)
  19. Same reasons the Republicans win by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    They attack everyone's flaws and those are always plentiful... but in the long term they are nothing because they have no platform, no leadership, no ideas and they exist only as parasites on the system they claim to hate so much.

    As I said.. just like today's Republican politicians.

    It's easy to be critical of others and rally hate like that. We've seen this thousands of times throughout history and it's happened millions of uncountable times. However, when the shit hits the fan people demand reform and real governing tactics and it's pretty plain to see the Democrats are the only ones that have any kind of real and consistent plan. It's been the same message pretty much since The Great Depression.

    Of course the logistics of being liberal is what most conservatives don't get. You don't need to like other people or want to be generous to endorse social programs. Social programs are cheaper than prisons and the only other alternatives you have would be killing off the poor and that STILL hasn't worked!!

  20. Re:PsyOps by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Funny

    Next article will be "Bitcoins cause Autism"

    You might have that backwards.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  21. Re:Are they really winning? by Copid · · Score: 1

    All societies produce sociopths, it is a brain development disorder, but what ISIS have done is work out how to concentrate those individuals into a smaller geographic region while implementing systems to use and control them.

    This is a really easy explanation, but it doesn't make much sense. We're talking about relatively large groups of people here. We're also talking about a disorder that doesn't usually predispose one toward self sacrifice for some greater ideal.

    Did Hitler manage to put together a program to find hundreds of thousands of sociopaths from the German population? Or is it more likely that bad ideas and toxic cultural influences can make otherwise good people do terrible things?

    --
    An interesting anagram of "BANACH TARSKI" is "BANACH TARSKI BANACH TARSKI"
  22. Re:PsyOps by gweihir · · Score: 1

    You think they are stupid enough to be this obvious? Of course, we are talking about a government bureaucracy, so you may have a point....

    --
    Most ACs are not even worth the keystrokes to insult them. Be generically insulted by this and ignored otherwise.
  23. To butcher Baudelaire... by suupaabaka · · Score: 1

    The finest trick of the terrorist is to persuade you to fear him.

    When you have angry, disaffected young men who feel slighted by society/parents/whatever, they'll gravitate to anti-authoritarian entities. Usually these are individuals or groups that cause a lot of angst for people in power, and the knee-jerk reaction of the powerful is to speak out against them. This is the same as lavishing attention upon these groups, and makes them even more attractive to the disaffected.

    I think the media probably needs to reassess the way in which it reports on extremist groups and terrorist events. It'll probably have knock on effects for the rest of the "propaganda war".

    After all, the madman on the soapbox leaves when he realises there's nobody hanging around to listen.

  24. Yes, we are losing the soft power war. by quax · · Score: 1

    Then again when it comes to ISIS/Daesh, I must admit the hard power approach looks very attractive.

    These extremist really like this propaganda line, when bragging about themselves and addressing the West:

    "We love death more than you love life."

    Given this sentiment I am inclined to say, let's help them along. Give them what they so dearly love.

    On the other hand, from a more rational point of view, the soft power approach would probably be more cost effective.

  25. Not a paper tiger by Etherwalk · · Score: 1

    I have already theorized that if online surveillance were really as all-powerful as paranoids think it is, the NSA would have no trouble pinpointing ransomware operators and having them picturesquely snuffed out.

    Reason two: wouldn't a cyberspy agency with real power be able to use the Internet to scramble ISIS communications with fake chatter, misdirected operational orders, and sites filled with doctrinal errors designed to turn wealthy Muslims against ISIS?

    And when the NSA pinpoints the ransomware operator, what are they supposed to do? A drone strike in a place we're not at war with is a bad idea. A formal criminal action will fail because they live in corrupt countries. And even if you tried, you would be revealing sources and methods you use to spy on terrorists.

    Being good at spying is very distinct from being good at propaganda.

    1. Re:Not a paper tiger by Applehu+Akbar · · Score: 1

      "And when the NSA pinpoints the ransomware operator, what are they supposed to do?"

      Hire local talent to do the "wet work" in some manner that will dissuade anyone else in the area from getting into the ransomware business. By handling it this way, the agency need reveal nothing about its intel techniques.

  26. Nut Job Movements by JimSadler · · Score: 1, Insightful

    When these groups spring up they do attract followers for a while. But given a bit of time, the public tends to see through the false face that these groups present and they tend to collapse. Even in the US we have had lunatic movements that almost completely vanish. The KKK is an example. They used to have enormous power and now have only a few scraggly members with next to no influence at all. The prohibition movement is another such group although prohibition if heavy-handed would have been a great idea. And then we had the eugenics movement about 100 years ago as well. As far as the terror nuts go in reality they kill a few people and cause some economic problems but the handwriting is already on the wall for them. They are in meltdown and their leaders certainly know that.

    1. Re:Nut Job Movements by BetterSense · · Score: 4, Interesting

      This assertion itself illustrates the the disconnect in culture and assumptions.

      You are arguing from the typical, venerable, valid-in-post-enlightenment-culture dynamic in which ideas propogate on their own merit. In such an environment, the adaptive strategy for dealing with bad ideas is to ignore them and let them die on their own lack of merit, or "burn out" as you put it. This has been known to work as long as the immunity mechanisms against bad ideas are intact, and are capable of dealing with the particular strain of ideological pathogen.

      This strategy is not effective against ideologies not in that set, such as ones that spread themselves by the sword or by intimidation or in populations that believe ideas for reasons disconnected from the merit of the idea itself. The fact that said ideologies are bad or invalid or incompatible with civilization as we know it is not directly relevant to whether they will catch on or not. Such ideologies have spread themselves very effectively and they don't care that they are regression or that they are harmful. Effective disease agents dont care that they make the host organism sick, they are effective by definition if they propogate themselves, and just ignoring the symptoms and counting on typical immune mechanisms to make them go away doesn't always work.

      Westerners think that ignoring ideas or debunking them is going to always work, but those techniques only work in certain contexts and against certain threats. Ghandi's techniques were only effective because he was operating against the British Empire and pushing their buttons, for example.

      The West is not able to fight back bad ideas because, sometimes in an attempt to stop low level autoimmune problems, she has ingested massive doses of immune-suppression; immune mechanisms such as the nuclear family, shared but diverse Christian heritage, societal structures are weakened, made obsolete by technology, or dismantled, and ideological infections thought to be conquered are breaking back out in the unprepared populace, and getting some rest and drinking some fluids until it burns out may not work.

  27. The Islamic Sense Of Guilt by master_p · · Score: 1

    Muslims all over the world think the West is corrupt and immoral and it must be set on the right path.

    2nd and 3rd generation Muslims that live in western countries fill ashamed of and guilty to help maintain these western immoral and corrupt societies. Some of those react by embracing terrorism.

    1st generation Muslim immigrants that have struggled to get a place in western societies don't choose terrorism because they are torn inside: from one side, they dislike the West, and from the other side, they feel obliged to the West.

    It has nothing to do with poorness or social outcasting. It has only to do with how Muslims see the western civilization. That is why terrorists are not poor or uneducated.

  28. Feminism by Roodvlees · · Score: 1, Funny

    Has used political correctness and 'respect' for muslims to stifle the anti-islam debate.
    Also governments can't take the moral high ground because they are corrupt.
    All power corrupts, we'd be better off without governments, no power to abuse.
    Unless you've got enough religious nutjobs, then you just need enough power to keep them from forcing their religion on everyone else.

    --
    Thank you, Bradley Manning, Edward Snowden and so many others, for courageously defending humanity, my freedom and more!
  29. Have they tried? by jandersen · · Score: 1

    The U.S. government has been unable to fight the Islamic State on the one battlefield it currently commands: the Internet.

    I don't get the impression that they/we have actually done much to even engage in a propaganda war online. Perhaps because he real battle has to be fought elsewhere, in the communities, where so many young people are vulnerable to the frankly idiotic nonsense from Daesh. I don't think it is only about lack of good opportunities; many of them seem to be genuinely motivated by moral concerns, even if they are perverted in the extreme. It is in many ways driven by the same factors that created the hippies, the punk phenomenon, the 'Moral Majority' and others: the feeling that the establishment are false, self-serving hypocrites, nothing more than "the willing lackeys of capitalism" to use a phrase from yet another anti-establishment movement.

    Meanwhile, Daesh will die of natural causes sooner or later. We have already seen for a while that people go out there, full of idealism and enthusiasm and regret it, because they find that Daesh is not the promised Islamic State, built on divine justice, but rather a brutal tyranny ruled by the most depraved and callous criminals. A state can never exist in isolation, and who is going to want to want to trade with them? Only other criminals. Daesh will die out - what we should concentrate on is 1) How to get that to happen sooner, and 2) How to stop it happening again. It isn't a lot of use that we go in and wipe out the plague that springs from our own failings, if we don't go and clean up the conditions that will allow the next plague to erupt.

  30. Commands? by jbmartin6 · · Score: 2

    The premise seems to be that the US government controls the Internet

    --
    This posting is provided 'AS IS' without warranty of any kind, implied or otherwise.
  31. Free Speech by The+Raven · · Score: 2

    To be perfectly frank, I don't want anyone to succeed at quelling speech online, or offline, anywhere. I am proud of the fact that dissenting opinions and views, like those of frankly reprehensible groups like NAMBLA and the KKK, are not silenced in my country.

    For the same reason that rehabilitation rather than punishment should be the primary goal of prisons, our primary foreign policy should be aimed at trade and improving the economic viability and stability of the rest of the world for one simple reason: well fed, happy, comfortable people don't become suicide bombers. They don't take up guns and murder people. They don't rebel against the system.

    If we took half the military budget and spent it on trade instead the US could single-handedly eliminate half of the poverty in the world. And I don't mean 'spend it on handouts'. I mean trade, where we receive goods for money. But use the taxes for trade incentives rather that disincentives like tariffs.

    When entire populations of people are angry enough at my country to take up arms, then I consider that a failing of my country. We did something to deserve that anger. In the case of the middle east, we have spent decades meddling in their politics or actively waging war... no fucking shit they're angry. But silencing them doesn't remove the anger or repair the harm done. Instead, it just opens up the idea that controlling speech is effective. And that's antithetical to the entire foundation of our nation and the Internet.

    --
    "I will trust Google to 'do no evil' until the founders no longer run it." Hello Alphabet.
  32. WTF? by david_thornley · · Score: 2

    Western civilization has the greatest propagandists the world has ever seen. Armed with modern psychology and decades of experience, they do an excellent job of making us buy stuff and vote for people. How the hell are we losing this war? Are we failing to understand what's attractive about ISIS? Are we getting third-rate propagandists working against ISIS? We need to figure out what's going on and sell these people on something other than suicidal violence.

    --
    "When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
    1. Re:WTF? by aralin · · Score: 1

      It is pretty simple really, we have propaganda aimed at our own citizens primarily and at the citizens of allied countries in second guard. Those are the people that we need to control because they can affect change and we need their tacit approval. We don't care what the people, who cannot affect anything, think. Terrorists kill so few people that their negative impact is negligible, but their positive impact on propaganda aimed at our own population is huge. If we actually wanted to sell the terrorists themselves on something, we would have no problem with that and we often do just that if we need to get them to cause trouble for some foreign government.

      Anyway, it all got to a point where our own propaganda has actually adversely affected the ability of our own people to perceive the situation in the world realistically. But what is more important, we have a whole new generation of policy makers and journalists who now believe the propaganda and think it is reality and start to make critical decisions based on it. This could cause problems going forward.

      --
      If programs would be read like poetry, most programmers would be Vogons.
  33. Re:Moslems shooting in California, again ! by fustakrakich · · Score: 1

    GTFO! Silly rabbit...

    --
    “He’s not deformed, he’s just drunk!”
  34. US propaganda should adopt this tactic..vote on FB by dasgoober · · Score: 1
  35. Re:Clinton 2016 by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Does anyone really still care whether Punch or Judy are going to be running the show?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  36. So what? by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Let them spew their shit. Nobody but their "supporters" give a rat's ass about it anyway.

    Who gives a damn about what Daesh says?

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
  37. ISIS BAD USA GOOD by axewolf · · Score: 1

    ISIS BAD USA GOOD
    ISIS BAD USA GOOD
    ISIS BAD USA GOOD

    There I just saved you the trouble of thinking about this or reading any of the posts here

  38. DIfference by NewYork · · Score: 1

    The only difference between a Christian gunman and a Muslim terrorist is RACISM
    http://qz.com/649933/the-only-difference-between-a-christian-gunman-and-a-muslim-terrorist-is-racism/

  39. Petrocurrency by NewYork · · Score: 1

    Since 1971, OPEC is bullied to sell Crude Oil exclusively in US dollars resulting in friction between Islam and the West;
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Petrocurrency

    Petrocurrency is a global Pyramid scheme;
    http://www.zerohedge.com/print/502779

  40. Re:Clinton 2016 by Opportunist · · Score: 1

    Amazing how emotionally invested people are in the decision about which muppet is going to sit on the hand.

    --
    We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.