The People want an enemy crushed, like what happened to the Germans and Japanese. The meat and bones of COIN isn't going to sell on the home front, no way. It's sort of a 'we're paying out the nose for you to be there so show us dead enemy' type thing. I think there is a very subtle, unspoken fear over the idea that to understand an enemy, one must be able to assume some of their beliefs and values. Mom and Pop back home don't want to have to be able to think like a jihadist - they only want you to eradicate the threat. That's what jumped into my mind.
Which is another way of saying that if a politician honestly said, "Here's what we need to do to change perceptions," Mom and Pop wouldn't vote for him. If you're a glass half full type of person, you can consider it job security.Originally Posted by goesh
MIA, options
Al Qaeda and the Insurgent groups have in excess of 4000 web sites,
Forums, groups etc.
They have convinced their key demographic that continual losses is a good thing, Martyrs.
They are waging a virtual information war.
Their are two basic views, the "Western News" and " terrorists".
Their brand has placed them on a level with News.
And it is a world wide brand, the 'recognition value' any CEO would be happy to have.
I'm not afraid of what the terrorists say, I can't stop or control that on the Internet. I am afraid of not answering their lies.
A lie posted often enough
in enough places
and over a long enough period of time
IS BELIEVED TO BE THE TRUTH...
Our experience posting on blogs where Insurgents are, is they have a different knowledge, some of it is even false.
One of the big differences between an Westerner and some from the M.E. is their "world history" view.
They know and learn a different history than the West does.
The number of Islamofacsists posting on the net far out number the Wests postings in regard to the conflict, USA should be targeting the same demographic as the terrorist do, countering the lies.
This is a battle for the hearts and minds and in many cases the USA is MIA, not even posting in the indigenous languages, the terrorist are.
Its hard to win a hearts and minds when USA isn't even posting in their language.
The Internet is the future battle ground for the hearts and minds, and the balance beam that will determine if our Grandchildren are still fighting the same war.
Currently there is a forest fire of lies going on and very little water in sight.
Bill
The internet is a rapidly growing and useful tool of propaganda, I think we can all agree on that. However, we must remember that overall internet penetration in the ME is around 17% and that the vast majority of people never sign on to a jihadi website, which must constantly change IPs and addresses to avoid shutdown or banning.
Anyone who logs onto a jihadi propaganda website is usually someone who is either seeking out the message already displayed within. These websites can feed and accelerate radicalization, but they are not the key battlefield.
Hmmm
Our experience has been that the new jahiddies are being recruited from this demographic, killing off all the insurgents, won't end the GWOT as long as they recruit new thru the Internet.
al Qaeda is on the 3rd or 4 level of cadre now due to casualties and arrests. The Internet is the indoctrination of kids.
Jihad Boy Scouts:
The Internet is also the vector for home grown terrorist world wide, the spontaneous kind, and the incubator for future generations.
If it wasn't for the Internet Biny would be like so many other forgotten insurgents/criminals.
While the Internet is not the Key to the current Battle field it is crucial to the recruiting of future generations of terrorists.
Cut off the recruits and there is a natural death to these organizations by battle field attrition.
Bill
Last edited by BILL; 12-28-2007 at 12:28 AM.
Hi Bill, I see you're a new member. Welcome to the jungle. As someone who's written extensively about al Qaeda's use of the Internet, I'm curious as to the nature of your own experience (you mention "Our experience" in your opening sentence). Are you involved with an organization that logs content from those sites, or are you sufficiently fluent in Arabic to penetrate those forums as a wannabe Jihadist?
This is an issue that is being addressed in various ways (i.e., Internet Haganah has one way of going about it). Do you have a proposal for how to accomplish cutting off al Qaeda's recruiting mechanism via the Internet?While the Internet is not the Key to the current Battle field it is crucial to the recruiting of future generations of terrorists. Cut off the recruits and there is a natural death to these organizations by battle field attrition.
Yes
"Do you have a proposal for how to accomplish cutting off al Qaeda's recruiting mechanism via the Internet?"
YES:
We have had operatives working for 1.5 years.
From my Boss:
As an anthropologist I wanted to do something in the GWOT,
I re-oriented an old blog "Internet Anthropologist" , Platform #1
and an Operative joined a Forum, Infovlad: where the terrorist videos are exchanged, Platform #2
A standby web site for when we need volunteers. Click to join AIcyber-Corps, fight internet terrorism.
A second recruiting social web site. Built, and loaded. on Standby.
And started applying my training. Applied anthropology, Social Change Engines ( SCE ), Gurellia Anthropology ( GA ) and our Paradigm Intel Engine,
PIE ( Data from closed cell and used info for troop family support ).
Context is the force and the Internet is the medium. Participant Observation.
Some of my research:
My "Terrorism Toolbar" ( 108 links, for OSINT and OPs ) and "CI Toolbar"; over 200,000 downloads.( its been checked by NSA )
My data bases, ( over 3,000 terrorist web sites, Public info ) Data from News, blogs and the web.
Intel Wiki ( 500 pages+ Confidential Intel, evidence ).
"Order of the Squid" Secure, encrypted web page for 'Troops', command and control.
1590 posts in Infovlad
and 1,093 Posts to the Blog, about 10% over lap with Infovad.
The effort is labor intensive, and requires equal amounts of action, reading and thinking TIME.
So far al Qaeda's use of the Internet has been reactionary.
USA cuts them off, Phones, so they switch to what ever else is
available. So in a sense their next move the Internet should not have been a surprise.
USA's use of the Internet is defensive, it is a paradigm they and we are still working out.
We put our own concept of the Internet paradigm, the "cyber warrior"
into cyber space. "Info War", version.
Any one with a Gov email, can recieve a copy of our white paper, send msg to me in private and we will send you a copy.
Bill
"Anyone who logs onto a jihadi propaganda website is usually someone who is either seeking out the message already displayed within."
Every time a "bad" story comes out the Ummah go to these sites for more information, and they don't have to log in to some of them. The casual visitor, the lurker is one of our key demographics on these sites, we don't think we can impact the hard core, beyond Morale activities.
While the lurkers, who out number the posters about 4 to 1, are not hard core yet, and are influencable.
.
Last edited by BILL; 12-28-2007 at 02:30 AM.
If I understand your answer, Bill, you're part of a civilian effort and not affiliated with any official government agency. So when you use terms like "operative", "Confidential" and "Cyberwarrior", those are terms that you've adopted for your own use, yes?
I've read from various university projects that the total number of Jihadist websites are on the rise. Perhaps attempting to halt their use of the Internet isn't really a workable proposition?
I think tequila is tracking on a more appropriate reality. We should probably be more concerned with curtailing DVD and CD duplication capability. Given the ease of reproduction, stemming the flow isn't the best proposition though, either.
Agreed. In a way it's similar to our own political blogs. Rightwing readers go to sites like Townhall.com while Leftwing readers gravitate to sites like Moveon.org. And commenters from alternate camps aren't welcome.
agree
I've read from various university projects that the total number of Jihadist websites are on the rise. Perhaps attempting to halt their use of the Internet isn't really a workable proposition?[/quote]
Trying to stop their use of the Internet is a non-starter.
Answering their lies is do-able and give the Ummah an alternate "true" view.
Point being it is much eaiser to recruit someone that only has one side of the facts, spin, religious bastardized interpretations.
Question is how to slow, stop turn recruiting down/off.
How do you reach the hearts and minds?
YOu talk to them.
You tell the truth, in terms they understand and will believe,
"Blessed be al Qa'ida and Arab Mujahideen"
suicide bombers dance, for al Qaeda
Either USA is in this "INFO WAR" or we loose by default,
the result is generations of Insurgents for our Grandchildren to deal with.
The alternate is to deed the Internet to them.
b
Comment:"Agreed. In a way it's similar to our own political blogs. Rightwing readers go to sites like Townhall.com while Leftwing readers gravitate to sites like Moveon.org. And commenters from alternate camps aren't welcome.( but are tolerated and can influence fence sitters. Bill )"
But townhall and moveon don't plot terrorism, the Insurgent sites DO.
And even in our own political system there is a correlation between the Internet and votes.
On their sites the correlation is between the Internet and deaths.
.
Last edited by BILL; 12-28-2007 at 04:01 AM.
Jeffc:
"If I understand your answer, Bill, you're part of a civilian effort and not affiliated with any official government agency. So when you use terms like "operative", "Confidential" and "Cyberwarrior", those are terms that you've adopted for your own use, yes?"
Am part of a civilian effort, I havn't spoken about Gov. affiliations.
""operative", "Confidential" and "Cyberwarrior", those are terms that you've adopted for your own use, yes?"
I use the terms in their common usage, and I have adopted these as I have adopted the rest of the English language. I wasn't aware of any exclusivity related to the terms, I hope I haven't offended.
Bill
..
.
No offense whatsoever, Bill. I was just looking for clarification since those terms are more often used in an official capacity. And thanks for taking the time to answer.
Curtailing capability? Are we thinking of the same thing? Because given that all relatively new laptops can burn CDs, and many can burn DVDs, I'm not entirely sure how we can curtail the duplication technologies.I think tequila is tracking on a more appropriate reality. We should probably be more concerned with curtailing DVD and CD duplication capability. Given the ease of reproduction, stemming the flow isn't the best proposition though, either.
Maybe it's naive, but time has shown that without extreme repression antithetical to the purposes and ideals of the United States, suppressing the dissemination of thoughts and ideas is impossible.
I liked the conclusion of Hammes' The Sling and the Stone where he declares that, essentially (don't have the book in front of me) once we figure out how to advance our message, our victory is inevitable, because a national message of hope, progress, and freedom will eventually prove irresistible.
Again, that may sound naive, but I fervently believe in that. We must focus on what we're saying and doing to counter our enemies, not on spending time and effort on an extraordinarily difficult (if not impossible) quest to suppress the enemy's propaganda.
Matt
"Give a good leader very little and he will succeed. Give a mediocrity a great deal and he will fail." - General George C. Marshall
A high preformance CD/DVD duplicator can be bought for $1000 and produce 15 CD/DVDs every three minutes. The one I bought uses all open source software and having purchased it I think I could likely build it for $300 or maybe less.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
In terms of actually being able to affect the reproduction angle, yes, it about pointless to attack it that way.
Beating the message with a better message is the desired endstate. I was using CDs/DVDs as an example of the medium where the opposing message gets out there the quickest and across the widest target area. Jihadist websites on the internet do not make for a "the sky is falling" situation. Now, if there is communication and coordination going on through those websites, then that's a different story. Websites alone do not make for much of an IO effect in my mind.
My experience is that you can not use a one way communication to create change or adaption in an adversary. You must insert yourself into the dialog to create those changes. In the United States we see that in how companies get news reports about their products, how books are sold on the "circuit" and reviews, and other examples of dialog. A website, or video does not create dialog it only creates a short term heightened awareness in the target. A great professor said good advertising uses good learning techniques. See, hear, do are the impetus of education and any information operation or advertising program.
Sam Liles
Selil Blog
Don't forget to duck Secret Squirrel
The scholarship of teaching and learning results in equal hatred from latte leftists and cappuccino conservatives.
All opinions are mine and may or may not reflect those of my employer depending on the chance it might affect funding, politics, or the setting of the sun. As such these are my opinions you can get your own.
Hmmm
There is a multi-Billion industry that is wrong then, advertising relys on one way communication.
The thing you mention are not dialog with viewers, but a discussion much like one has in forums.
And the Terrorist have found this to be a very effective way to recruit.
Bill
Last edited by BILL; 12-29-2007 at 12:47 AM.
Why do you think that an effort to add an opposing viewpoint inside a religious extremist forum would be successful? Is there any evidence that demonstrates it to be a successful effort?
Personally, as someone who's visited a variety of religious forums (everything from born-again Christian Fundamentalists to Satanists) over the years, I've never seen an outsiders message yield anything but a flame war. And those are just folks with strong religious beliefs. Now slide it further over to the "extreme" end of the scale where these people will kill in the name of their religion, and I have to wonder how effective any alternate message could possibly be?
I discussed this in a previous post,
let me copy it :
"Every time a "bad" story comes out the Ummah go to these sites for more information, and they don't have to log in to some of them. The casual visitor, the lurker is one of our key demographics on these sites, we don't think we can impact the hard core, beyond Morale activities.
While the lurkers, who out number the posters about 4 to 1, are not hard core yet, and are influencable."
The examples I presented.
"Blessed be al Qa'ida and Arab Mujahideen"
suicide bombers dance, for al Qaeda
B
.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks