Anonymous Takes Down Thousands of ISIS-Related Twitter Accounts In a Day (softpedia.com) 320
BarbaraHudson writes: Softpedia is reporting that Anonymous, along with social media users, have identified several thousand Twitter accounts allegedly linked to ISIS members. "Besides scanning for ISIS Twitter accounts themselves, the hacking group has also opened access to the [takedown operation] site to those interested. Anyone who comes across ISIS social media accounts can easily search the database and report any new terrorists and supporters. The website is called #opIceISIS [slow right now, but it does load] and will index ISIS members based on their real name, location, picture, Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube accounts." Anonymous crowdsourcing their operations... welcome to the brave new world, ISIS.
An article at The Independent reminds everyone that this information has not been independently confirmed, and that Anonymous is certainly capable of misidentifying people. It's also worth exploring the question of why Twitter hasn't already disabled these accounts, and why intelligence agencies haven't done anything about them, if they're so easy to find.
quite likely "intelligence" is monitoring (Score:2)
and using what they find for targeting information.
at this point, all civilized nations appear to have decided that since ISIS wants to live in 600 AD, we can help by bombing them there. that does not need pinpoint targeting.
Re: (Score:2)
Exactly. Think of it this way:
A dumb cop that discovers a black market operation's stash house kicks in the door, makes a few arrests, and gets some B-roll on the news with drugs and guns on a table.
A smart cop that discovers a black market operation's stash house will sit on the location watching who and what goes where, and build cases on all of it and take the whole operation and it's suppliers at the same time.
Re:quite likely "intelligence" is monitoring (Score:5, Insightful)
So at what point does the "smart cop" decide to stop them? After they've killed 129 people?
That makes a good movie plot but it doesn't work in real life.
The problem is that our "intelligence" agencies are more focused on electronics than on intelligence. It's easier. It's cheaper. It can cover a lot more "suspects". And it can be easily abused.
Stopping an attack makes you look good for one day.
Having a fearsome enemy that can attack any where, any time means you have funding for life.
Re:quite likely "intelligence" is monitoring (Score:4, Insightful)
They've killed a lot more than 129 people (along with many other atrocities). There have been thousands dead already but I guess they don't count since they weren't in a first world country.
Not that the West really has the stomach to stop ISIS. All we want to do is send planes over there to drop bombs and let the smaller countries from the area do the fighting on the ground. Getting rid of them is going to take putting troops over there but the people here don't want to deal with the casualties that would come with that.
Re:quite likely "intelligence" is monitoring (Score:5, Insightful)
More like it is a bit more difficult to arrest someone who is part of an armed organization in a different country.
Why would they be using social media to communicate with each other when they're bivouacked together?
It's not that they do not have the stomach for it.
They see advantages in having a scary enemy to distract from other issues.
Because once a bomb is used, a replacement has to be purchased. Which means a LOT of money flowing from taxes to vendors.
That is what created them the last time.
At this point there is no clean/easy way to deal with the mess we created. And we aren't willing to spend the money/years helping them if our vendors do not see a cash ROI.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
Where would you find these?
Because the most recent wave exhibited some quite aggressive hostility against the western countries and seemed quite sympathetic towards ISIS.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
So at what point does the "smart cop" decide to stop them? After they've killed 129 people?
That's always the tough call to make when receiving intelligence from sources. For instance during WW2 the British received information about German bombing raids in advance through agents but sometimes had to choose not to evacuate civilians near the targets so that the source would not be compromised and could continue to provide intelligence. Hindsight is 20/20 and we don't know what Western intelligence agencies knew before the Paris attacks.
Bullcrap. Turkey warned about one of the Paris attackers by name: [aljazeera.com]
A senior Turkish official provided background information to Al Jazeera on Monday about one of the attackers, 29-year-old Paris native Omar Ismail Mostefai, who died in the attack on the Bataclan concert hall on Friday night.
The official said Mostefai entered Turkey in 2013, and that there was no record of him ever leaving.
In October 2014, France asked for information from Turkish intelligence about four "terror suspects", the official said, adding that during their investigation, Turkish authorities identified Mostefai as a fifth suspect.
Turkish authorities "notified their French counterparts twice - in December 2014 and June 2015 [about Mostefai]," the official said.
"We have, however, not heard back from France on the matter. It was only after the Paris attacks that the Turkish authorities received an information request about Omar Ismail Mostefai from Turkey."
To quote from Cool Hand Luke, "What we have here is a failure to com-mu-ni-cate".
Re: (Score:2)
By the time a junkie on a high from a bad batch goes on a killing spree and murders everyone in a local school. The bad batch went through because it would reveal the antenna was compromised if it was stopped.
Not long afterwards the cartel boss begins suspecting the antenna was compromised anyway and moves the communication to different media, vanishing without a trace. Also, drugs are flooding the streets and the smart cop's daughter dies in a drive-by shooting between the cartel's men and some dealer.
All
Re: (Score:2)
I completely agree. Of course, there's also the case to be made that if a community activist posts a map to all of the drug dens in the neighborhood, it may finally encourage the community to take matters into their own hands, making the neighborhood inhospitable to the criminals. Get enough neighborhoods doing it, and it becomes pretty hard to do illegal business.
If the community actually responds, then great. But if they don't, which is what we'd typically expect, then the smart cop does exactly what you
Re: (Score:2)
It's only a bad analogy if you make the assumption that demand must be supplied from local sources. Your whole statement is predicated on that assumption, but that's not a safe assumption with drugs and it's not a safe assumption with terrorism.
I agree that suppliers will seek to fill demand, generally speaking, but a den may be in a particular neighborhood for any number of reasons, only one of which is to be close to consumers. If all of the neighborhoods in a region make themselves inhospitable to drug d
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
It's mixed indeed. Now if anonymous screens a bit and removes the twitter accounts that are the least interesting, while leaving alone the ones that are too talkative, then maybe there's a value. Not much though. It's more a feelgood operation.
As for bombing them to 600 AD, yeah right. I read somewhere that there are 10 million people living under ISIS rule. Guess who will suffer most. I'm not saying don't do it, but it's nothing to go bragging about.
Re: (Score:2)
Why they haven't taken them down (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
Re:Why they haven't taken them down (Score:5, Interesting)
If you only fight them in a war like scenario then this is correct. However, we can only win when we stop to produce young people who become willingly the tools of IS. Therefore, we have to cut the communication links of IS. And we must help those young men in school, university, and society to find another way to get recognition in life.
See also: http://www.theguardian.com/pro... [theguardian.com]
Re: (Score:2)
Problem is you push people on to the dark web. The people reading this stuff will quickly get instructions to download Tails and their reading habits will become much harder to monitor.
Actually, that may be a good thing. Force GCHQ/NSA to target individuals instead of relying on bulk collection. Oh man, what a moral dilemma, which bad guys do we help?
Re: (Score:2)
France has also a bulk monitoring and collecting of meta data, like the UK. And you can be sure that thy also monitor Internet traffic. However, they were not able to find anything. This is also one of the biggest problems. They have so much data, but they do not know what to do with it.
It comes down to the old adage... (Score:2)
Keep your friends close and your enemies closer.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Twitter, BAH! If you want to be effective, follow their finances and arms deals, but be careful, you will find out things you don't want to know. Or you could file an FOIA request for the receipts at the state department [telegraph.co.uk]. There you will find what makes this ride go 'round and 'round.
Great Work Kids! (Score:5, Funny)
There is literally nothing in the world harder than creating a Twitter account. I know, I tried. Couldn't read the damn CAPTCHA without my spectacles.
Anonymous has completely ruined the infrastructure of terror. It will take centuries to rebuild.
Great work kids. I hope you all get medals for you bravery.
Call me stupid but... (Score:2)
>> Anonymous Takes Down Thousands of ISIS-Related Twitter Accounts
Call me stupid but why doesn't Twitter shut off terrorist/childporn/etc. accounts regularly? Isn't there a TOS for that? Is there ANY way to get kicked off of Twitter?
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
>> You say that like there is an infinite number of moderators at twitter
No, I say that like there are a FINITE number of anonymous members who were able to make the necessary distinctions.
Re: (Score:2)
Yes, well, and what was the accuracy rate of anonymous?
It's all well and good to say they've done something ... it's another to know how good of a job they've done at it.
If they shut down thousands of accounts, and 99% of them had nothing to do with ISIS, that's hardly some great success now is it?
Those "necessary distinctions" have yet to be validated as anything other than Anonymous saying they've done so.
The proof is in the proof, not in the press release.
Re: (Score:2)
No, I say that like there are a FINITE number of anonymous members who were able to make the necessary distinctions.
The crucial difference is, Twitter didn't have to pay them anything.
ISIS has help desk to aid terrorists w/encryption (Score:5, Funny)
I was able to infiltrate this ISIS help desk and here is the prompt I heard when calling into it (translated from Arabic):
Welcome to the Daesh hotline. Please listen carefully to the following message as our options have changed.
Press 1 for information on how to encrypt messages sent to members of your terrorist cell
Press 2 if you're a suicidal bomber and are having trouble detonating your device
Press 3 if you're an oppressed female who would like to sign up for our next Perl Programming Bootmap
Press 4 for tips on how to write terror and/or hate messages in 140 characters or less
Press 5 to voice your displeasure with systemd
Or Press 0 to speak with a member of the Bush family for further assistance
Re: (Score:2)
There are plenty of intelligent, educated conservatives who just happen to have been taught some lessons that are really, really wrong. It's kind of like racist kids--they can still be bright, intelligent kids, they were just taught to be an asshole by their parents and haven't learned better yet.
accomplished what? (Score:3)
So the will stop ISIL from sawing off people's heads, raping, slaughtering, stealing, being pedophiles, vandals, shooting up discos in foreign countries etc.?
It will keep the really stupid ones, such as certain known ones from the USA for instance, from bragging as much I suppose.
Re: (Score:2)
You are so funny. They have and can recruit in person, on radio, on tv, via newspaper, to the neighboring towns as they expand. you can't remove their ability to communicate. they don't need facebook, twitter nor anything else.
you can kill them, then they will die whether they wither or not.
but imagining taking away some social media accounts will matter is just a delusion by ignorant kids
Dumb (Score:5, Insightful)
So they just reported them and drove them to new accounts or more obscure platforms?
Why not infiltrate them, honeypot them, phish them, throw in some trojans, etc? They could have caused a lot more trouble. Are these even the 4chan Anons from yesteryear? Where is the chaotic element?
Re: (Score:2)
It's also worth exploring the question of why Twitter hasn't already disabled these accounts, and why intelligence agencies haven't done anything about them, if they're so easy to find.
Why not infiltrate them, honeypot them ... ?
Maybe that's why the accounts weren't actively shut down before -- they're something like low-hanging fruit when it comes to surveillance.
Re: (Score:3)
They could have caused a lot more trouble. Are these even the 4chan Anons from yesteryear? Where is the chaotic element?
They largely aren't. 4chan is a shell of its former self. Don't get me wrong, it can still be a terrible place, but it's not nearly as bad as it used to be. I'd guess a lot of the former members either grew up, got busy with other stuff in life, or moved to other sites.
Racists waited for Westerners to get killed (Score:2)
Did they really have to wait for ISIS to strike in Paris? The group's earlier:
was not enough? If Anonymous had this capability of hurting ISIS' (impressive) online propaganda, why did they not use it before the attack on Paris?
Re: (Score:3)
Its not really racism, it's mostly that no one feels invested in it unless it happens to them. Sure, they may think to themselves, "let the brown people blow each other up," but what they are really saying is, "no bombings here, not my problem."
Re: (Score:2)
Given the wide scope of their earlier attacks [wikipedia.org] — from Sarah Palin to Tunisian government — they do "feel invested" in whole lot of locations and happenings. It is just that the ISIS — easily the most evil organisation of the 21st century so far — that avoided their wrath despite having a large collection of very juicy online targets [quora.com].
Whether it is racism or whatever, that Anonymous hasn't done anything until now
Re: (Score:2)
We have drawn a line in the sand.
Cross it and we shall draw another.
Re: (Score:2)
If only we could make it work like this. [youtube.com]
They haven't taken them down... (Score:2)
Because intelligence agencies use them to infiltrate terrorist groups and to network through terrorist organizations to the guys calling the shots. By shutting down these channels they are actually making the job harder for intelligence groups as they push terrorists to use more obscure forms of communications like the PSN which are harder for analysts to track. Not that terrorists aren't getting wise and doing this already but not all terrorists are as clever and we certainly want to keep them and their co
The spy agencies... (Score:3)
Twitter, etc have financial concerns and will not put that much money into identifying them, especially when the governments don't push it. But they will be happy to take them down if we do the work of identifying the bad actors.
Fuck it guys, let the hostages go (Score:2)
Anonymous is on the job now. Man, they really showed us.
"Know to intelligence" - why is this a theme? (Score:3)
FTA "It's also worth exploring the question of why Twitter hasn't already disabled these accounts, and why intelligence agencies haven't done anything about them, if they're so easy to find."
It's not just Twitter accounts, it seems to be a common pattern whenever most perpetrators of hate or terrorist attacks are analysed - at least some of the those involved have been under surveillance, known to law enforcement, or otherwise under suspicion already. I can understand this being the case once in a while, but it seems like pretty much every time.
Why is this? It is fear of false positives? Wanting to use known suspicious actors to reveal accomplices? Lack of police resources on the ground? What?
Re: (Score:2)
Because hindsight is 20/20. Intelligence agencies almost always own the information about an attack before it is committed. But they don't have enough reason to believe that attack is real vs. teh 300 other ones they also have indications of.
Please do not post the following (Score:2)
If any of you happen to have taken over an ISIS Twitter account, please do not post the following to it:
\_( `.`)_/ /\_
|
_
Although it is not - I repeat NOT - a cartoon of The Prophet Muhammad, some folks might accidentally mistake it for one and become deeply offended. So let's have a little respect and consideration for the religious beliefs of others - after all, wouldn't the ISIS folks do the same for you?
Taking down accounts a bad idea (Score:2)
"...why Twitter hasn't already disabled these accounts, and why intelligence agencies haven't done anything about them...."
Because NSA analysis - and possible hexing with fake tweets - of working Daesh accounts is better strategy?
Well, the prophecy came true.... (Score:5, Funny)
Daesh is about to get screwed by 72 virgins...
Don't call it "ISIS" or ISIL" (Score:5, Interesting)
That legitimizes them. They should be referred to as "Daesh".
http://www.ibtimes.com/isil-is... [ibtimes.com]
Re:Don't call it "ISIS" or ISIL" (Score:5, Funny)
Being tough guys with a tough sounding name is working in their favour. I suspect ridicule will assist in reducing possible future recruitment.
Akbal: "Hey Ahmed, I'm thinking of joining ISIS".
Ahmed "Haha you want to join The Tiny Penises?! Why do you have a tiny penis?"
Akbal reconsiders and joins goes back to playing Counterstrike instead.
Re: (Score:3)
I can. It's actually pretty interesting, IMO.
http://www.pri.org/stories/201... [pri.org]
No mistakes, right? (Score:2)
I'm sure Anonymous made no mistakes, taking down ONLY accounts that were truly connected to ISIS. The problem with vigilantes is that they shoot first and ask questions later.
Too Little, Too Late? (Score:2)
It is interesting that Anonymous is taking this on at the same time that the group is moving their operations to the dark net.
http://motherboard.vice.com/re... [vice.com]
It all seems all too convenient to the larger narrative that is shaping up around the need to crack down on encryption, Tor and other privacy measures. Here we have Anonymous serving as a tool of the powers that be, driving the "bad guys" to encryption through their vigilantism.
In an effort to do something good, they are inadvertently making things w
Re:what good will this do ? (Score:5, Insightful)
It makes it much harder for them to conduct their recruitment and other operations which depend on an online presence.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Are you seriously so naive to think that they get a lot of recruits from twitter?
Sure they get some, but typically first world whiney brats on twitter aren't the type that can actually survive even being around where ISIS does actual recruiting.
When you make silly comments like this it shows that you really have no idea what motivates these people to be terrorists.
Silly first world issues don't have any effect on people living in places that would call Hell an improvement.
Re:what good will this do ? (Score:5, Informative)
"Sure they get some, but typically first world whiney brats on twitter aren't the type that can actually survive even being around where ISIS does actual recruiting."
Suicide bombers/shooters are known for 'not surviving', it is kind of their thing.
Re: (Score:2)
Think military bootcamp.
Re: (Score:2)
Think military bootcamp.
Isn't that the Arab distribution of OSX's ability to run Windows 10?
Re: (Score:2)
Re:what good will this do ? (Score:5, Informative)
They use the accounts, as well as facebook accoiunts, for multiple reasons:
1 Communications between cells using code phrases
2 Distribution of propaganda (fear and terror - after all, they're terrorists)
3.Recruiting
Take down one channel of communication (a twitter for facebook account), and you have to tell people where to look for the next one. Do it often enough, quickly enough, and you've crippled their means of communications to the outside world. Sure, accounts are free - but imagine if you had to buy a new burner phone AND tell everyone your new phone number, every day.
Re: what good will this do ? (Score:4, Informative)
Check out the videos Vice News made inside ISIS territory. People are not starving. They even have electricity. It's not Ethiopia in the 80s. (Even Ethiopia wasn't quite how it looked on the news.) They do use social media, mainly for propaganda purposes. And they hate the west because they are taught to, because that hatred serves the needs of the people in power, not for any other reason.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yea, people who have time to dick around and read Twitter are not the kind of people who are willing to blow themselves up unless it's due to shear boredom.
Bored, idealistic, rich kids have been part of most major revolutions or asymmetric conflicts. "Useful idiots" maybe. Philosophers. Basically, kids angry with the world, looking for ways to improve the plight of some oppressed group. People who can be convinced of a noble sacrifice, however misguided.
I doubt very much that suicide bombers are sitting in their hovels, just waiting for someone to suggest the vest and the 72 virgins. They're cultivated over years. Slowly. Twitter and social media are ext
Re: (Score:2)
That might finally push them over the edge!
Re: (Score:2)
You may want to read the below Wikipedia article. It likely will give you some insight into some things you may be missing on the internet.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]
Re: (Score:2)
Most recruits of IS are young men, in a life changing situation, which are instable. Life changing situations are when thy end school and train in a profession, move towns for jobs, go to college and university. Therefore, this applies to most likely 1/3 of all slashdotters. I would assume that they use Twitter and Facebook beside all hate about it.
Re: (Score:2)
Like [cnn.com] these [cnn.com] folks [cbsnews.com].
Re:what good will this do ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Their entire PR and recruiting operation works on twitter, facebook and other social network properties. You don't actually think they are calling people do you? Sure they have facilitators on the outside spreading their message but 99% of their propaganda goes out via social networking and based on the people they've caught trying to join daesh they are their primary recruiting tools as well.
What do you think they are holding job fairs or some such nonsense? Their only way to communicate with people is through social media.
Re: (Score:2)
According to newspaper and magazine reports most recruitment happens in personal contact with radical preachers.
Re: (Score:2)
"Their entire PR and recruiting operation works on twitter, facebook and other social network properties."
Or they are recruiting them in around their mosques and the society they cultivate, whispering here and there, seeding ideas in early teenagers' minds and nurturing them to grow.
But, who knows, maybe it's twitter after all.
Re: (Score:2)
That's like saying that people have been recruited before movies. Sure - but once movies came out, those patriotic newsreels were a big thing in theaters.
And it's certainly easier to get their propaganda out there when it's searchable and nobody bothers to take it down on the false theory that it's better to listen in ... it's not, because we're not gathering evidence to take them to trial, and it's not like we can go there, knock in their door, and arrest them.
Re: (Score:2)
You are aware that people have been recruiting since before there was an Internet ... Right?
You too are trapped in this retarded first world view of things and have absolutely no concept of how different their world is from yours. Most of their members have never seen the Internet, how the fuck are they going to be recruited by an entirely first world time sink they don't even know exists.
Just because you once heard a news story about a couple girls who did it via social media doesn't make it common, it just makes you look silly for believing that.
That's where you're wrong. How do you think CNN gets a hold of all their videos? Internet. They have the money to setup and leverage social media. Facebook is the #1 form of communication across the planet. Especially for young recruits. That's how they intercept would be recruits crossing the borders into the middle east. Social media.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
teh reaperening (Score:2)
Re:teh reaperening (Score:5, Insightful)
>> it removed the stupid fuckups from our society to a location where we can safely dispose of them by bombing
That was kind of the point behind invading Iraq, if you listen to certain neo-cons. Unfortunately, it turns out that 1) the supply of stupid fuckups is nearly inexhaustible, 2) they start hiding among the civilians (which we then bomb) and 3) some are happy to "play ISIS" in their own backyards (like this fuckup [wikipedia.org]).
Re: (Score:2)
One simple way around that: leave no survivors.
Re: (Score:2)
Great plan... until that drone misidentifies someone else for the stupid fuckup (creating more anti-whoever sent the drone sentiment), and that stupid fuckup lives to take out a dozen or so non-fuckups before they finally go.
Re:teh reaperening (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2, Flamebait)
The "refugees" adamantly refuse to behave like normal people though. They aren't trying to escape the hell in their home country - they are bringing that hell with them in attempt to leech the West for welfare support. Their desire to attack us doesn't seem to wane any over time, just opposite - they grow increasingly angry that WE don't adapt THEIR ways, that countries don't agree to create districts with sharia law, that they shun inhumane treatment of women, that they demand tolerance to other religions.
FB propaganda = The division bell. (Score:5, Insightful)
Catholics in England were not ostracized when the IRA were blowing people up, Christians in the US were not attacked in the street by strangers because of the behaviour of the KKK. ISIS are religious extremists whose victims are mainly other muslims. Muslims are our allies against ISIS in the same way Christians were our allies against the IRA and KKK. The refugees pouring out of ISIS territory collectively know more about ISIS operations than the Pentagon, they have lost everything to ISIS, we are at a crossroad, we can welcome them as "citizens the free world", or we can allow ISIS to kill the brave, enslave the weak, and indoctrinate the youth.
The 35 million refugees represent the "human intel" that the west has so dismally failed to cultivate in the arab world. Why are we treating our most valuable allies as a liability? - These are the very people who want to (and can) help us dismantle ISIS from the ground up, yet western social media is littered with calls to close our borders and push our natural allies back into enemy territory "where they belong".
ISIS territory is unstable and surrounded by a standing army of 5 million muslims who want them dead. They desperately needs the rest of the Islamic world on board before they have a hope in hell of achieving their stated aim of a global caliphate. Sadly, at least a third of my FB friends cannot contain the xenophobic instincts that we all have. They are doing exactly what the enemy's strategy predicted they would do, spreading anti-muslim propaganda that seeks to divide the world into "rednecks vs muslims".
Re: (Score:2)
No, you're missing how powerful social media is for recruiting extremists to their cause.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3)
What good would this do ?
It's disruptive to their Internet-based propaganda and radicalization/recruiting operations, and hopefully it's making them an embarassment to anyone who is witnessing them being outed and shut down.
Unfortunately in their enthusiasm to do as much damage as possible, they may be disrupting government intelligence operations, that might have been monitoring some of those accounts for intel on ISIL operations. That's something I didn't consider until someone else mentioned it to me.
Re: (Score:2)
What good would this do ?
It's disruptive to their Internet-based propaganda and radicalization/recruiting operations, and hopefully it's making them an embarassment to anyone who is witnessing them being outed and shut down. Unfortunately in their enthusiasm to do as much damage as possible, they may be disrupting government intelligence operations, that might have been monitoring some of those accounts for intel on ISIL operations. That's something I didn't consider until someone else mentioned it to me.
It's not like the government can use the IP address to go knock on their door with a search warrant. Letting them continue isn't going to be useful if you can't connect the fake account to a real person, and a real location. Have the good guys shut down the account and immediately replace it with a fake new account that imitates ISIS, just to sow confusion. Then shut down the new account, to fuel paranoia.
Re: (Score:2)
Letting them continue isn't going to be useful if you can't connect the fake account to a real person, and a real location
I don't necessarily agree with that. Being able to monitor what they're saying could potentially be useful. If they get too comfortable they might let something slip that they might not if they're completely vigilant.
Re: (Score:2)
More likely, whatever they "accidentally let slip" isn't an accident.
Re: (Score:3)
read at -1 you pussy.
Re:Maybe intelligence agencies were running them (Score:4, Insightful)
You seem to be under the impression that just because some group uses the name Anonymous, they are the same as other groups that use the same name. I don't believe this is correct.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
That way they will effectively pissed off 80-90% of the worlds population against them.
That's exactly what they want. You think that is a suicidal tactic, but they believe God is on their side. They're trying to act to bring about the apocalypse. Why would they want any enemy to feel safe?
They believe that the little quagmire they have in Syria and Iraq will allow them to draw their enemies into a battle that they can't win.
The truth is, they may be right, especially if our answer is to keep bombing them without challenging their hold on the ground. You can't win a war without infantry.
Re: (Score:2)
You CAN ... but you have to be prepared to take a very scorched earth policy.
If you're ready to just Glass the country, and prepared for the Fallout that will entail (pun intended), then Infantry becomes irrelevant.
I am not in any way suggesting that this is either advisable, or something that any sane person would do, but it IS a position where bombing does not require infantry to win.
Re:Having followed their exploits for a while now. (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:2)
There is nothing "left" about Twitter. Twitter is a tech company selling your information to the highest bidder just like Facebook. However, as far as I noticed, every reasonable person only tweets something public and no private stuff (exceptions are people who marketeer a personality which they claim is theirs).
Re: (Score:2)
This isn't Ultra vs Coventry. ISIS knows we know about their Twitter accounts. They are public, and therefore known for a reason: these are the recruiting contacts for new fighters. The actual tactical command and control is done elsewhere.
Sure, ISIS can just create some new accounts. But while they are doing that and rebuilding their contact lists, they can't get their propaganda stuff out as easily. If Anonymous wants to screw with them, fine.
Re: (Score:2)
I wonder if Anonymous thought
You can stop right there and be sure the answer is "no, they did not."
CIA created ISIS (Score:3)
Dude;
When you consider that the CIA created Osama Bin Laden (by training him, and providing weapons when he was fighting the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan); and the CIA created ISIS (by creating false intelligence to justify the invasion of Iraq), the CIA is simply a terrorist organization that pretends to be working for American interests.
We're better off without you frankly. The world would be a lot healthier without your meddling. Stop trying to make Dick Cheney even richer than he is.
Thanks!
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2)
and why intelligence agencies haven't done anything about them, if they're so easy to find.
One likes to think they are finding and tracking whoever logs in to them, and sorting the hot air people from the real networked folks.
In that case, it's clearly not working. Twitter and Facebook (and youtube) are propaganda. It's the easy way for them to find people who are disillusioned, depressed, prey to dogma, as well as build up their "brand."
Re: (Score:3)
We already know that they got hundreds of millions by robbing an Iraqi bank. Then there's the black market oil they sell, the contributions from Arabs living elsewhere, hostage ransoms, taxing those inhabitants who are still living there ...
Heck, they even pay pensions to the wives of fighters KIA.
Re: (Score:2)