I Feel So Much Safer Now (Sarcasm)

This war on terrorism is going well if you count the physical aspects but what about the program to counter the on-line recruitment and radicalization?

We are kicking ass and taking names on the ground but in the fight on-line is another story…..

In that seemingly endless array of US government programs intended to counter ISIS’ online recruitment, the Pentagon invested substantial money in a program called WebOps, meant to employee top language specialists to scour social media and talk potential recruits out of joining ISIS.

Those familiar with the program call it an absolute disaster, quickly becoming a laughingstock in social media circles for its incompetence, and having no measurable impact beyond costing money, and leading to investigations of impropriety.

Counter-propaganda efforts failing is nothing new, but the ways in which WebOps has failed are definitely unique, centering in no small part on their “Arabic specialists,” meant to talk ISIS recruits out of joining, having no experience in counter-propaganda, little to no understanding of Islam, and not even being able to speak Arabic very well.

This has been the source of a lot of mocking from would be targets, who get approached and quickly discover the specialists are unintelligible, using incorrect words all over the place. Workers said that one translator had mixed up the word authority with the word for salad, and made numerous social media posts about the Palestinian Authority which referred to it as Palestinian Salad.

While Centcom is downplaying the problems and refusing to discuss the matter too directly, reports are that whistleblowers have been pushing investigations into the program, even as the Pentagon has begun taking bids on another $500 million scheme that aims to do what WebOps was supposed to be doing, but isn’t.

(antiwar.com)

Maybe someone in the new admin ought to address this lack of success and find a way to expand this program to include a successful conclusion.

Just a thought that will not do anything to improve their success percentage….get more media bang for visuals not shadow ops…..

Generation Jihad

Have you had enough of the antics, the childish antics, of the candidates?

let’s talk about something that is getting very little play these days….terrorism.

This is an op-ed that I wrote for my friends at Ace News room…….

BAM! Just when the word terrorism was taking a backseat to the antics of these clowns that are pretending to campaign and some idiot has set a couple of bombs in New York and New Jersey….. An…

Source: Generation Jihad

I shall return to the comical world of American politics after this post is read…..

Clinton Has A Plan

The first debate I learned the Hillary has a plan for fighting ISIS…..her plan is to hunt down al-Baghdadi…..pause there for thought…….you mean that we have not been trying to kill this tool?

Even as Hillary Clinton pushes a new scheme for defeating ISIS, the reality is that contradictory U.S. policies in the Mideast that she helped formulate are fueling the growth of jihadi extremism

Hillary Clinton has unveiled a two-part plan to defeat the Islamic State, and just as critics might expect, it’s a doozy. One part calls for an “intelligence surge” to combat the group both at home and abroad while the other urges that Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, Islamic State’s self-styled caliph, simply be knocked off.

Both are indicative of why the disaster in the Middle East can only get worse. The problem with an “intelligence surge” is twofold: (1) it’s not clear what it’s supposed to do beyond undermining civil liberties in the name of anti-terrorism and (2) whatever information it turns up will only be as good as the people who use it. Stalin had excellent sources warning him in 1941 that a German attack was imminent. But since some said the attack would occur in April, he was able to ignore them once April came and went and stick with his original conclusion that Hitler would not attack at all.

Source: Clinton’s Faulty New Scheme to ‘Fight’ ISIS – Consortiumnews

And then there is another look at this new plan……..

A key priority of Hillary Clinton’s proposed intelligence surge will be to kill or capture Islamic State leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, her campaign has told the Guardian.

During the past year, Clinton, the former secretary of state and Democratic presidential nominee, has placed bolstering the vast US intelligence apparatus at the center of her national security agenda.

Days before the first presidential debate – and after the New York area escaped without mass casualties from multiple bombings – her campaign has for the first time expanded on how her policies would work.

Source: Hillary Clinton’s plan to stop Isis: hunt down leader Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi | US news | The Guardian

Think about it……with all the “great” foreign policy minds at the disposal of our elected officials and this is the best they can come up with?

Was that not the plan for Osama with the Bush people?  And that took how many years and a different president to accomplish their plan?  And how did that work out when eliminating AQ?

My dog could come up with a better plan……

‘there’s no real assimilation’

This press is an op-ed that I wrote for my friends at Ace News Room…..the US election of 2016 has had it all this time…immigrants and terrorism……fear and anguish seem to be the big pulls in the media coverage…..

The biggest fear that is being slung around the internet is that refugees will bring with them all the terror that others are experiencing…..

After the tragedy of Orlando was playing out in the media…I recall an interview by FOX with Trump I believe it was Hannity….when asked Trump said that US Muslims have not done very well…

Source: ‘there’s no real assimilation’

Nothing that I offer my readers will change anyone’s mind….but hopefully they will read and try to understand the situation from one of knowledge…..

Which Candidate Can Better Exploit Our Irrational Fear of Terrorism?

The first presidential debate is now in the history books…..why no one knows…..other than it is an election and we expect the mental midgets to go after each other in a debate or two.

But enough of the trivial bullshit from either of these two dingle berries…..but thanks to the media and people that are afraid of their own shadow…..but the first debate has a segment called “Securing America”……and once again it was about instilling fear not offering solutions…..

Politico (9/20/16) frames the terrorism issue as “who has the upper hand.”

The media’s tendency to focus on horserace issues—who’s up and who’s down, what the cosmetics are of an event rather than the substance—is routinely derided by media critics, and mocking it has become something of an election year tradition. But one 2016 topic in particular, terrorism, has become the hot horserace topic of the year in a way that goes beyond the silly to the potentially damaging:

Source: Media Ask Which Candidate Can Better Exploit Our Irrational Fear of Terrorism | Rise Up Times

The candidates had their 15 minutes in the light talking shit……and both showed that they are more than willing to exploit the irrational fear that some Americans harbor about terrorist or Muslims or Hispanics a or any other brown skin individual…..

Most of the people that are fighting terrorism in its many forms are calling for calmer heads…..say that were to happen…..would it collect any votes?

An explosion on the streets of Manhattan, pipe bombs in New Jersey, and a shootout with a terrorist suspect: a jittery election, filled with hyperbole, just grew more breathless.

Of course most of that hype has emerged from the mouth of Donald Trump, and he embraced the emergence of a new terror campaign well before officials confirmed Saturday’s explosion as a bomb.

Whether this helps or hurts Trump’s candidacy depends a lot on whether you are already primed for the politics of fear. If Trump and Clinton sound like they’re talking to two different audiences, that’s because the polls suggest they really are.

Source: On terrorism, cooler heads have better policy. But do they win more votes? | Richard Wolffe | Opinion | The Guardian

The easy answer is NO!

The truth is the M-IC will exploit our fear to make themselves richer and more powerful in DC……by giving in to that fear we will make them the only game in town.

We have a handful of debates remaining….does anyone think that a truthful answer will be given?

Terror Attacks–USA

I have done lots of research on terrorism…..I have attempted to help people understand the tactic as well as see what can be done….a monumental chore.

Americans have their opinions on terrorism….most of which are nothing more than emotional responses for the act.

I had previously wrote that the overall incidents of terrorism across the world are on the rise….the exception being the US….to be fair I had read another report from a think tank, Intel Center, has issued another point of view…..

According to their research terror attacks in the US are on the rise……keep in mind that this is a think tank and are paid for their research….

The number of jihadi terrorist attacks in the US is now at the highest it has ever been and is continuing to rise based on attacks tracked in the IntelCenter Database (ICD). The current rate of attack in 2016 is at one attack every 38 days. In 2016 there have been seven attacks as of 20 Sep., which nearly doubles the previous record of four attacks in 2015. Sixty-eight percent of attacks in the US since 2002 have occurred in the past four years.

Small arms and bladed weapons were the most common tactics, which was driven by a significant increase in inspired attacks. The rise in inspired attacks also resulted in a shift with 58% of attacks occurring in areas not previously thought to be at significant risk from terrorism. Military/Police and recreational sectors were the most frequently targeted with a more detailed breakout putting police personnel, military facilities and civilians the most at risk. New York had the most attacks during the period, however, the attacks were spread out over a total of 13 states.

Source: IntelCenter: Jihadi Terrorist Attacks in US at HIghest Level Ever, Continues to Rise

I must point out that the attacks in the US are mostly “lone wolf” attacks….meaning that they are not organized in the sense of say the 9/11 attack was organized and carried out.

IST tries to offer as many views on the research as possible…..even if it originates at a think tank that probably gets its funding from the M-IC….while I may find their findings a bit dubious they deserve to be heard…..(plus it will give my detractor some ammo to use when they visit not that they will notice)

Do You Really Want To Defeat ISIS?

Now there is question that most Americans will answer….yes.  But the tactics used is not for defeat but rather for a continuation and the profits that follow.

But more “experts” will be trotted out now that there has been a couple of bombings and the American people will once again get on some high horse and spout the rhetoric of ignorance.

Sadly these days Americans are otherwise distracted with the antics of the two clowns that desire the presidency…..the media labors long and hard to make sure that the attention of the country is otherwise directed toward the silliness that is the campaigns these days.

So do you want to really defeat ISIS?

There have been many studies that point to the actions needed to defeat this barbarous enemy….they range from bombing the crap out of them to sending in a massive army to obliterate the group…….there are other ways that this can be accomplished without so much violence…..but it will take work….and work is not something that many will want to pursue…..

Let’s begin by looking at the situation of ISIS today……

Recently I wrote a piece that explain why there is a void in the strategy of ISIS…..(if a refresher is needed)…….

Source: What Is ISIS’ Problem? – In Saner Thought

There are many problems fighting ISIS but if a defeat is truly wanted then maybe try to eliminate the ideology that spawned the barbarous group……Wahhabism

To truly understand ISIS one must understand Wahhabism……

The dramatic arrival of Da’ish (ISIS) on the stage of Iraq has shocked many in the West. Many have been perplexed — and horrified — by its violence and its evident magnetism for Sunni youth. But more than this, they find Saudi Arabia’s ambivalence in the face of this manifestation both troubling and inexplicable, wondering, “Don’t the Saudis understand that ISIS threatens them, too?”

It appears — even now — that Saudi Arabia’s ruling elite is divided. Some applaud that ISIS is fighting Iranian Shiite “fire” with Sunni “fire”; that a new Sunni state is taking shape at the very heart of what they regard as a historical Sunni patrimony; and they are drawn by Da’ish’s strict Salafist ideology.

Many Saudis are deeply disturbed by the radical doctrines of Da’ish (ISIS) — and are beginning to question some aspects of Saudi Arabia’s direction and discourse.

Source: You Can’t Understand ISIS If You Don’t Know the History of Wahhabism in Saudi Arabia | Huffington Post

Now some are saying that the defeat of ISIS would necessarily mean a defeat of the fundamentalist ideology of Wahhabism……

I have been repeatedly saying that an extensive course of action is required to successfully combat ISIS, Daesh, and other similar offshoots that follow the same ideology, Wahhabism.

Some really bold steps must be taken. One of those steps is to ban Wahhabism. World leaders should speak with Saudi Arabia face-to-face and ask them to abandon all moral and financial support of Wahhabis.

Source: Defeat the Wahhabi Ideology to Defeat Daesh | The Awaited One

I have read a piece and used it in a previous post…..about an movement against Wahhabism…..

The religious authority in Saudi Arabia responded aggressively to Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s annual message Sept. 5 in which Khamenei attacked the Saudi government against the backdrop of the disputes between both states that culminated in forbidding Iranian pilgrims from the hajj this year. Iran also accused Saudi Arabia of negligence in managing the hajj, which led to the deaths of more than 760 people and injuries to around 1,000 in 2015.

Sheikh Abdulaziz Al Sheikh, the Saudi grand mufti and head of the Council of Senior Scholars, spoke to Makkah newspaper Sept. 6, saying, “We must understand that those are not Muslims. They are Majus [Zoroastrians], and their enmity to Muslims — specifically to the Sunni community — goes way back.”

Although Sheikh was addressing the Iranian political regime, his choice of words and the context of his response gave the impression that he was targeting Iranian Shiites in general. He used the pronoun “they” in his reply to the message of Khamenei, who is only one of many Iranians. He also focused on Zoroastrianism, the historical religion of Iranians before Islam, and his reference to historical enmity with Sunnis is further proof that the international media got the story right — this was an attack on Iranian Shiites in general.

Of course not everyone in the region feels this way…..some see it as Wahhabism is not the same as the ideology or religious beliefs of ISIS leadership…..

Wahhabism was first introduced in the central Arabian region of Najd in the mid-18th century by Shaykh Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahhab (c. 1703-c. 1792). Since then, it has been one of the most maligned of any religious reform movement in modern history. That in itself is not so extraordinary. Wahhabism is essentially a puritanical, fundamentalist Islamic reform movement calling for renewal of the faith as originally laid out in the Qur’an and the Sunna, the inspired traditions of the Prophet Muhammad and his early converts. Reform movements advocating major doctrinal changes are always likely to be threatening to those who resist any change of the existing status quo.

In addition, over the years Wahhabism has acquired a political dimension that has been threatening to a broad spectrum of people. In order to understand what Wahhabism is and is not, therefore, one must look both at what it actually advocates as a religious reform movement and what political implications have evolved since its founding.

Source: Tawhid or Jihad: What Wahhabism Is and Is Not | Middle East Institute

What now needs to be formed is a Muslim effort against ISIS and its ideology…..this will be tricky at best…..but if they want this scourge erased from the region then someone must step up and take on the ideology….words may not be the best weapon…..

We have the tools to defeat ISIS and NO more violence and destruction is NOT the answer!