Why False Enemy Propaganda Matters: German Jihadi Motivated by Fake US Soldier Rape V

http://undhimmi.com/2011/03/06/frank...at-gets-raped/

Quote:

---

People are being murdered on the pretext of malicious lies and propaganda, circulating like an opportunistic virus around the Islamic world. And make no mistake, it is finding its mark.

Apart from some concerned interest groups, a relatively small band of bloggers and writer/webmasters who do get it – no one, it seems, is fighting the civilised world’s corner in this information war.

It is truly chilling to think that the Frankfurt shooting may have been assisted by our seemingly chronic inability to challenge the Islamist narrative.

---

Cannoneer, what do you propose as a solution to this situation?

Quote:

---

“YouTube has become a major alternative distribution point for jihadi propaganda, especially for homegrown militants who may not have the pedigree to gain access to the classic password-protected jihadi chat forums,” Mr. Kohlmann said, referring to militant sites that restrict access. “If you don’t have online friends who can sneak you in, and if you don’t speak Arabic, then YouTube may be the best available option.” - Evan F. Kohlmann

---

Quote:

---

It may be that the crowdsourcing that drives YouTube, its reliance on the masses, becomes the ultimate answer to violent messages on the site, more than company censors. Anti-jihad activists with names like the YouTube Smackdown Corps patrol the site constantly, flagging what they consider to be offensive material.

At a site called Jihadi Smackdown of the Day (“Countering the cyber-jihad one video at a time”), the links for past YouTube videos of Mr. Awlaki now usually lead to a standard message: “This video has been removed as a violation of YouTube’s policy.”

---

Anti-Islamic Supremacist Virtual Militias attempting Restrictive Measures are available should any .gov or .mil types care to work with, through or by them.

There is no one single Final Solution to the propaganda problem. There are many steps that could be taken that would help mitigate the problem. Hackers for good could take down YouTube, for a few hours, just to let them know that there are consequences for their action or inaction. Social media analysts could research friends and followers of the most troublesome enemy propagandists, who would then receive the attentions of Black Hat hackers. There are virtual militias on the web united around various aspects of counterpropaganda, many of whom would be overjoyed to find out that Cyber Command has been paying attention to them and wants their help.

Virtual militias can do things that .gov/.mil are lawfared out of. Autodefensas Unidas de Ciberespacio

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fuchs

How many Americans believe that Obama is a Kenya-born Muslim again? 30%?
Sounds to me like you need to do homework first and maybe outsource information campaigns in distant places to others.

---

I am a reasonably intelligent man and not easily swayed by hyperbole. I had a great deal of difficulty believing the claim. But two plus years later, it's still hanging out there. So it makes reasonable people wonder...Can YOU refute this with facts? The reason this has lasted as long as it has is because it is never definitively refuted. Then when the guy makes a bone-headed move, the number who wonder increases.

(I'm serious about your dismissal of the birther question - it's easy to say it's ridiculous. But if it's ridiculous, you should be able to prove the point.)

Much like this claim, the US does a poor job of telling the facts, but rather spends way more time backbending and contorting themselves to explain or excuse someone else's claims. We let the bad news languish since we use the reasonable person's standard. What is unreasonable to Americans is not necessarily so for others. We never get that. And that's why we look like "Clowns In Action" regarding IO and information "warfare".

It's been refuted by the relevant Hawaii official, showing a copy was deemed sufficient by officials and last but not least an internet wisdom:

At some point you need to stop feeding the trolls.


Let's assume he had showed the original. That wouldn't have kept the trolls from claiming that it's a forgery (something they had much experience with, considering the fake Kenyan birth certificates).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Pete

Cannoneer, what do you propose as a solution to this situation?

---

I'm not Cannoneer, but I have a couple of suggestions.

First, let's have I/O and PAO run by some folks who aren't the rejects from every other branch of the service.

Second, they could be... well... I don't know... PROACTIVE!?!? for once in their lives? Seriously. I/O and PAO are inhabited by a bunch of lazy SOBs who evidently spend their careers surfing porn on the internet and waiting to react to something someone else is doing. What is wrong with identifying the extremely few insurgent themes (there are only a few) and pre-loading the "system" with a canned reaction? Then, aggressively and creatively look for counterthemes to push not only when the insurgents push their narrative, but when the insurgent isn't pushing a narrative at all.

Third, the US, whether DoS or DoD doesn't do ANYTHING without an I/O PAO campaign that doesn't consist of a dry press release that noone reads for fear of dying from boredom. Hire some freaking writers or something. It's not that tough to predict the ways in which US activities can be attacked from an I/O standpoint. And it's stone-cold stupid to understand that they WILL be attacked.

And fourth, the next I/O person who suggests a "leaflet drop" should be dropped with the f*cking leaflets. And anyone who briefs XXX tons of leaflets were dropped during the last 24 hours should be executed with a spork.

In my reading of the Frankfurt attack the reported fact that stood out and which does not feature on SWC is that the attacker self-radicalised so quickly, allegedly after watching one Jihadist film report.

The Madrid mass transit bombers took sixty days to go from radicalised to attack and that was then considered fast.

I await the arrival of a fuller analysis on the Frankfurt attack background, which appears to be that of a "lone wolf".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Fuchs

It's been refuted by the relevant Hawaii official, showing a copy was deemed sufficient by officials and last but not least an internet wisdom...snipLet's assume he had showed the original. That wouldn't have kept the trolls from claiming that it's a forgery (something they had much experience with, considering the fake Kenyan birth certificates).

---

I'm not going to fight the birther fight here. The response does amplify my larger point. It is not settled satisfactorily; instead it is festering. Some surmise that it serves a political purpose by being a distraction. Others think there view is valid because it is not able to be proved. Regardless, the kerfuffle serves to illustrate the problem this thread addresses.

This is indicative of the US's way of waging info war. These days, it seems, it is more a matter of ridiculing message deliverers than it is providing a solid, uniform, believable message. In the quote above, there is no recognition of a reasonable person's view, merely a smug dismissal that the readers must accept. The writer must be believed simply because he says so. The zealots from the other side, of course think the worst. It serves their purpose to do so.

However, consider also that for every dismissive reply like the one quoted above, there's an equal response from reasonable, curious people that says "ok, I believe you, so show me" and the hard copy proof never materializes. At some point, a claim by a few zealots could easily bloom into a belief, real or perceived, by a larger percentage of a population writ large.

And this is in a country that is thoroughly modern. Imagine in a place where word of mouth is a primary means of communicating...a

PS: Even the current Governor can't provide it, and he said he would so as to put the issue to rest...So if the Governor can't, is that "feeding the trolls"? :)

Ridiculous beliefs do not only spread because of "lack of proof" - they spread because they justify, confirm, or feed preexisting prejudices. For instance:

Growing Number of Americans Say Obama is a Muslim

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by tequila

Ridiculous beliefs do not only spread because of "lack of proof" - they spread because they justify, confirm, or feed preexisting prejudices. For instance:

Growing Number of Americans Say Obama is a Muslim

---

There's little doubt the forces you cite are a part of the problem. Yet, from the article you linked come these items:

Quote:

---

"When asked how they learned about Obama's religion in an open-ended question, 60% of those who say Obama is a Muslim cite the media. Among specific media sources, television (at 16%) is mentioned most frequently..."

---

So. Prejudice, etc. or sloppy and pathetic media? The reporting on the topic has not been incisive, to say the least...

Quote:

---

About one-in-ten (11%) of those who say Obama is a Muslim say they learned of this through Obama's own words and behavior.

---

Proving yet again that the infamous 'Ten percent' are always with us... :D

Probably far more pertinent and indicative of not preexisting predjudices but of how insidious ideology and politics can be:

Quote:

---

Beliefs about Obama's religion are closely linked to political judgments about him. Those who say he is a Muslim overwhelmingly disapprove of his job performance, while a majority of those who think he is a Christian approve of the job Obama is doing. Those who are unsure about Obama's religion are about evenly divided in their views of his performance.

---

Thus one could wonder just how many of those surveyed actually believe him to be a Muslim and how many say they do just for grins -- or other reasons to include both the prejudice you cite and the politics of the moment... :wry: