back to article Facebook, Twitter and Google are to blame for terrorism, say MPs

A UK parliamentary committee has claimed that Facebook, Twitter and Google are responsible for terrorist attacks in the West by “consciously failing to combat the use of their sites to promote terrorism and killings.” The claim comes after a year-long inquiry into the UK's efforts into “countering extremism”. The Home Affairs …

Page:

  1. Baldy50

    This is a joke?

    I think certain governments and their foreign policies have to take the credit and blame for terrorism more than social media!

    Spend loads of dosh on crap studies again, yawns!

    1. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: This is a joke?

      The right thing to do is to make sure no-one can say anything against government policy and that with no definition of terrorism and extremism the police can be trusted to take down the right content and arrest the right people.

      Obviously it is wrong to consider whether illegal wars, attempts to topple governments we don't like and supplying weapons in an unstable area may have come back to bite us.

    2. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: This is a joke?

      "Facebook, Twitter and Google are responsible for terrorist attacks in the West by “consciously failing to combat the use of their sites to promote terrorism and killings.”"

      I agree with Baldy50 above; it's a direct result of recent western governmental foreign policies, largely driven by the U.S.A. who need to keep their large standing army ('army' in this case includes naval and air forces) occupied; a large standing army with nothing to do will start to find things to do on its own, at which point they're no longer controlled by their government.

      As for "plac[ing] the blame for young Muslims being “radicalised” on those operating social media sites" - this precludes the idea that anyone can actually think for themselves and come to their own conclusions.

      "This blame was apportioned despite the committee also acknowledging that witnesses it had summoned agreed “that there does not appear to be any clear template for the factors which might lead to radicalisation.”" - Yes, we take evidence into account (but ignore it if it doesn't suit our current agenda).

      "We should utilise the brightest talent of the world’s creative industries..." - more fscking pop-up ads. Hmm... I wonder how the ad-blockers will handle this.

      "Vaz also recommended that the press be responsible for promoting “counter-narratives”, and in particular “should refrain from using the term ‘so-called Islamic State’, and should instead refer to ‘Daesh’." - Oh yes, calling people names is both very grown-up and proven to be an effective deterrent.

      "“We believe that young people’s lack of ability or awareness of the need to critically challenge their beliefs is also central to the problems we have found,” the committee also reported." - Yes, young people are especially stupid.

      Let me make it clear that I do not support terrorism and personally believe that religion is a mental illness (YMMV), but I don't support politicians who treat me like an idiot either.

      1. DavCrav

        Re: This is a joke?

        "As for "plac[ing] the blame for young Muslims being “radicalised” on those operating social media sites" - this precludes the idea that anyone can actually think for themselves and come to their own conclusions."

        I somehow feel that nobody sane would "think for themselves" and come to the conclusion that what they really should do is drive a lorry through crowds of people. So either, of all crazy people, it just happens to be mostly Muslim crazy people who do this type of mass killing (although not always, see for example the Germanwings pilot, Breivik, etc., but Muslims are massively over-represented in the crazy mass killings stakes here), or someone somewhere is radicalizing them, helping the mildly crazy people move on to the proper unhinged level they need to be at to think that machine gunning a bunch of people is all OK.

        Since it isn't a sane response to US military policy to attack people with an axe on a train in Germany, I think you are wrong, at least about most of the people committing terrorist acts in Europe.

        "and in particular “should refrain from using the term ‘so-called Islamic State’, and should instead refer to ‘Daesh’." - Oh yes, calling people names is both very grown-up and proven to be an effective deterrent."

        What are you on about? Daesh is the Arabic acronym for ISIS/ISIL/IS. I think the reason he wants to move from those and towards Daesh is to dissociate in people's mind the organization Daesh and 'Islam' as a concept. So the opposite of calling people names.

        "but I don't support politicians who treat me like an idiot either."

        And yet you think using the term Daesh instead of IS is somehow calling people names.

    3. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: This is a joke?

      I think certain governments and their foreign policies have to take the credit and blame for terrorism more than social media!

      What, countries like Switzerland (didn't participate in any Middle Eastern conflict), France (didn't participate in Gulf War 2), Belgium (didn't participate in any ME conflict), Germany (didn't participate in Gulf War 2), Syria (didn't participate in Gulf War 2), etc?

      If there's a lesson to be learnt is that cowardly terrorist tend to go for easy soft targets with maximum news and media impact, not any kind of target that has any passing connection to any particular country's foreign policy. The shock for Europe has been that keeping one's head down in the hope of avoiding becoming a terrorist target hasn't worked, and that letting trouble fester uncountered in certain communities (e.g. certain suburbs of Brussels) has proven to be disastrous.

      1. Anonymous Coward
        Anonymous Coward

        Re: This is a joke?

        It's no good reeling off a list of countries and saying what they didn't do. Take France, for example. Sure, they didn't join in the Second Gulf War. So what? They participated in the sanctions against Iraq which probably caused more deaths than both Gulf Wars put together. And now http://www.ronpaulinstitute.org/archives/peace-and-prosperity/2016/july/19/retaliation-for-nice-france-bombs-120-civilians-in-syria/

        Moreover, the French enthusiastically led the lynching of Libya, in which "civilized" European nations dropped huge numbers of bombs quite indiscriminately, destroying cities, killing many civilians, and (not incidentally) smashing the government and infrastructure of the wealthiest, most advanced African nation. Where do a lot of the deadliest Daesh fighters and leaders come from? Libya.

  2. Elmer Phud

    "Facebook, Twitter and Google are to blame for terrorism, say MPs"

    and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

    shows what I know

    1. sabroni Silver badge

      re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

      Not at all. Religion is a handy way to try and spread division, but there are plenty of non-religious nut-jobs around.

      Foreign policy, by which I mean invading foreign nations, is surely as much to blame. Greed is behind a lot of our bad policy desicions.

      How would you feel if another country's military arrived and destroyed our government? What steps would seem reasonable in retaliation?

      1. Jo_seph_B

        Re: re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

        I'd retaliate just like all good folk do with all issues in their lives. Posting that shit straight to Facebook.....

      2. Anonymous Coward
        Joke

        Re: re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

        How would you feel if another country's military arrived and destroyed our government?

        Seems a pretty good idea to me? Would they like me to hold thier coats while they get on with the job?

        What steps would seem reasonable in retaliation?

        Once they have finished the job, make them the next goverment. After a year or two of that sort of c**p I am sure they will leg it with their collective tail between their legs.

      3. Tom_

        Re: re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

        I'm pretty sure we're more than capable of destroying our own government, thank you very much.

      4. Anonymous Coward
        Headmaster

        Re: re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

        @Sabroni

        Except that nobody's military arrived and destroyed ISIS or Al-Qaeda's government. They are both outgrowths of pan-national Islamic revanchism. If anything, they like to complain about Western support FOR existing governments, but how many times have you heard of these guys complaining about Saddam Hussein or the old strongman of Tunisia or even the Islamic Brotherhood in Egypt getting toppled? Barely a whisper.

        Their real problem with governance is that they view current Middle Eastern governments as corrupt and ungodly.

      5. DavCrav

        Re: re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

        "Foreign policy, by which I mean invading foreign nations, is surely as much to blame. Greed is behind a lot of our bad policy desicions [sic].

        How would you feel if another country's military arrived and destroyed our government? What steps would seem reasonable in retaliation?"

        Attacking the citizens of a country that hasn't done anything (Germany)? Seems like a perfectly reasonable thing to do.

        1. Anonymous Coward
          Anonymous Coward

          Re: re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

          Germany has been actively joining the occupation of Afghanistan by NATO. And the whole country (Germany) is little more than one enormous US military base, complete with scores of nuclear weapons, missiles, and of course Ramstein (http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/ramstein-base-in-germany-a-key-center-in-us-drone-war-a-1029279.html) which is a key part of the drone mass-murder system.

      6. Mark 85

        Re: re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

        Foreign policy, by which I mean invading foreign nations, is surely as much to blame.

        Not in this case. Go read this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wahhabism The seeds were planted a long time ago and the roots run deep.

      7. Vic

        Re: re: and there was me thinking it was mainly down to religion.

        How would you feel if another country's military arrived and destroyed our government?

        The last time that was a serious proposition was in the early 1940s.

        The SIS established the "Home Defence Scheme", and other parts of government established the "Auxiliary Units". Both of these groups were intended to use "irregular warfare" methods against an invader.

        These days, we'd call that terrorism. Back then, we considered it valour.

        Vic.

    2. caffeine addict

      It's all about religion if you accept that there is a collection of modern religions that worship resources, power and idiologies. Neocons hit all the checkboxes for a religion with the exception of the invisible man in the sky.

  3. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
    Mushroom

    Isn't "Vaz" some kind of lubricant?

    We should utilise the brightest talent of the world’s creative industries to counter terrorist propaganda with even more sophisticated anti-radicalising material. In the face of this new threat, we need a terrestrial star wars.

    What kind of utter collectible moron says this kind of shit?

    The Darth Vaderesque collection of even greater collectible morons in nominal charge on our side should give anyone with even a passing knowledge of history since at least "Darth Clinton" pause (soon with a neoconnish reboot in "Clinton II: Darth Harder", electible again because of the "female+liberal=caring" meme complex)

    1. sabroni Silver badge

      Re: electible again because

      If the only argument for your candidate is that they aren't the other candidate you don't have a good candidate.

      Is he ever going to release his tax returns?

      1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge
        Windows

        Re: electible again because

        He's not "my" candidate (anyway too old to care all that much, I noticed myself starting to dream of sitting on my front porch with a dog and a beer reserve), but you have to give him his dues. Making the press panic and the establishment candidates whore even more loudly than usual is a sight to behold. It is also telling. Telling that we are entering the final sprint and the system is now making more noises than a submarine at implosion depth.

        As for "releasing tax returns" (which, I am sure, are not entirely clean) we have "The Clinton Media’s Manufactured Reality" by Ilana Mercer, who is, of course, strongly into Trump:

        The coda to every article written by the presstitutes exalting Hillary’s “heroic” tax disclosure asserts that, “By not releasing [his taxes] during the campaign, [Trump] is breaking with a 40-year bipartisan tradition of transparency expected of presidential nominees,” and that “there is nothing to prevent Trump from doing the same during an audit.”

        Oh yes there is.

        Clinton will never be perp-walked for flouting state secrecy laws, much less audited, or, conversely, criminalized by the IRS in the course of an audit. Were he merely to be accused of tax violations; Mr. Trump is certain to be destroyed by both political factions.

        “When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty,” forewarned Thomas Jefferson. When it comes to the IRS, Jefferson’s bar has been met. Trump needs to be very afraid.

        P.S. ...I don't know the story about "The Clinton Foundation" (all comers welcome, favors repaid later, pay now because we will not accept your donation after the election) and the "The Clinton Family Foundation" (some othe rfoundation, as it seems), but these seem murky at best.

        Anyway, getting off-topic, here, har har!

    2. Flywheel

      Re: Isn't "Vaz" some kind of lubricant?

      "What kind of utter collectible moron says this kind of shit?"

      MPs usually. It's hot air, but to certain sections of the community it sounds great!

    3. Dan 55 Silver badge

      Re: Isn't "Vaz" some kind of lubricant?

      Was that the sound of Vaz jumping on two bandwagons at once? Impressive, even for him.

    4. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

      Re: Isn't "Vaz" some kind of lubricant?

      I suspect that the "terrestrial star wars" bit referred back to the US Star Wars defence initiative of the '80s. Let's see, what party was the president back then?

    5. Anonymous Coward
      Meh

      Re: Isn't "Vaz" some kind of lubricant?

      We should utilise the brightest talent of the world’s creative industries to counter terrorist propaganda with even more sophisticated anti-radicalising material. In the face of this new threat, we need a terrestrial star wars.

      I always grimace at the term "creative industries". Anyone who invents, designs or modifies anything other than a T-shirt logo or a website can just fuck off, because you aren't "creative".

      1. Charlie Clark Silver badge

        Re: Isn't "Vaz" some kind of lubricant?

        I always grimace at the term "creative industries". Anyone who invents, designs or modifies anything other than a T-shirt logo or a website can just fuck off, because you aren't "creative".

        Oh, I don't know. Sounds like an appeal for a generous subsidy. I'll happily organise anti-radicalist jam festivals if I'm being paid to.

    6. Anonymous Coward
      Anonymous Coward

      Re: Isn't "Vaz" some kind of lubricant?

      "What kind of utter collectible moron says this kind of shit?"

      A British politician. What's more, God help us, a pretty successful one.

  4. tiggity Silver badge

    muppetry

    Despite the glib assurances of many politicos, lots of people are struggling financially.

    Zero hours contracts, minimum wage zero promotion chance jobs do not make wealthy or happy people.

    An awful lot of people in work are just a few weeks wages from losing just about everything (and of course unemployed people at whim of random changes in the system).- leading to fairly continual low level stress.

    A fair chunk of the Brexit vote was an anguished howl of protest from people in poorer regions overlooked by the London centric media and politicians

    In times of stress then simple, anti - establishment messages work well (look historically at correlation of fascism upsurges in times of economic woe).

    Daesh et al provide these types of message that the disaffected can relate to (though obviously more likely to relate to the message if you subscribe to certain religious views, but given that religion is rarely promoted by facts (for obvious reasons) but often by rhetoric it's what people are used to, albeit on a video feed rather than in person )

    Importantly, Daesh etc. propogandat gives people a target that seems achievable (a disaffected UK person might see zero chance of improving their perceived low success prospects but can see chance of success / status in armed conflict so heavily covered by teh media)

    Politician hint No. 1: Happy, not on the breadline, respected people are less likely to become terrorists

    Politician hint no 2: Try a year on minimum wage - living hand to mouth on what you earn (if you can keep a job, hot air spout age not a skill much in demand at that pay grade )- without making use of any of your savings etc Not one of these mamby pamby I spent a week on the dole and thrived fatuous stunts.

    1. Graham Cobb Silver badge

      Re: muppetry

      This is an important point: people who are progressing in society, and see it delivering positive results for them and their peers, are unlikely to try to destroy it.

      Of course, they may decide to help destroy a different regime (e.g. Syria, or Spanish nationalists in the '30s), which is likely to lead to further radicalisation. But the answer to that is not forcing the ISIS propaganda into the underground, with special apps etc (thus increasing its attractiveness to teenagers) but is sensible and effective counter-propaganda. This is a case where the US axiom that bad speech should be dealt with not by bans but by more (counter) speech is definitely true.

      As for "Prevent" -- it is toxic and needs to be very publicly killed. If the Muslim community can come up with some alternative that gets support then fund that. Otherwise, just spend the money on the community anyway. What is important is that teens and returning fighters can see their community working to improve lives. Take that anti-everything energy and try to redirect it into (more constructive, although still anti-establishment) political and community activity to improve the lives of those around them.

      A bit like Keith Vaz used to be known for, before he got old.

      1. DavCrav

        Re: muppetry

        "As for "Prevent" -- it is toxic and needs to be very publicly killed."

        It is toxic, but this appears to be at least partially down to lies, half-truths, misunderstandings and propaganda in the discussion of it. Statistically Prevent has been a reasonable, but not a runaway, success, resulting in for example significantly fewer Daesh fanatical runaway children than in similar countries like France and Germany. It is currently being Sellafielded/Accentured, having its name (but nothing else) changed to remove previous stains.

  5. Caff

    back in the good old days

    So before the internet the world was a lovely place with no extremists or terrorism or people being radicalised?

    oh wait...

    http://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/16/upshot/is-terrorism-getting-worse-in-the-west-yes-in-the-world-no.html?_r=0

    1. Destroy All Monsters Silver badge

      Re: back in the good old days

      Anyone who has lived through the "Red Terror" scares of the 80s (some of which are likely to have been entirely manufactured by NATO wingnuts) knows this is just the same old, same old.

  6. Ken Hagan Gold badge

    "slick and effective propaganda machine being run by Daesh"

    I must have missed that. The only propoganda I've seen has been along the lines of "Join us and you get to rape and murder innocent foreigners (fellow Muslims mainly, but don't worry, they aren't *proper* ones) for a year or so before being bludgeoned yourself by the armed forces of the countries you've chosen to attack.".

    The evidence is that this appeals to at most a few hundred disaffected teenagers out of a population of millions, who are resistant to the counter-propoganda not only of their own age group but also their parents and wider family. So yeah, they're really going to sit up and take notice if The Government starts telling them what to do.

    So did the whole select committe sign up to this verdict, or are some of them *not* utter cretins?

    1. NinjasFTW

      Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean its not there

      There are numerous reports of reports of very high quality movies being released.

      The video of that poor airman (at work so don't want to look up his nationality) that was burned to death in a cage was apparently professionally done.

      Chances are that we are not the target audience for this stuff so we are unlikely to see most of it.

      That Daesh spend so much time and effort on social media stuff says that it's seeing results from it.

      Reports on Brit kids that have gone to Syria etc often show that they have been groomed through social media contacts.

      This report is a load of crap and is just being used to further the govts desire to run a police state but I think its wrong to dismiss the effect of Daesh propaganda based on anecdotal evidence.

      1. DavCrav

        Re: Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean its not there

        "This report is a load of crap"

        I take it you read it then?

      2. Charlie Clark Silver badge

        Re: Just because you haven't seen it doesn't mean its not there

        There are numerous reports of reports of very high quality movies being released.

        Presumably along the same lines as the "smart" bomb video after the first gulf war. Did wonders for US arms sales in the region.

        Reports on Brit kids that have gone to Syria etc often show that they have been groomed through social media contacts.

        The social media part is spurious but it's what everyone focuses on. "Terrorists" or plain old criminals have always known who to recruit and how to inculcate the right set of "values" in them. Targets are usually either easily led or looking for leadership.

        Recently saw a British Asian comedian tackling the subject and pointing out, that at least for some groups, a stint with IS in Syria is an attractive alternative to a restrictive suburban existence. If this reminds anyone of the age old army recruitment campaigns then it should. The twist, she added, was that the prospect was even sexy for younger women. But maybe this chimes in with our own colonial calls for settlers and missionaries: "isn't life in Glasgow/Newcastle/Liverpool/etc. shit? Wouldn't you like to go somewhere exciting like black Africa where you can meet wonderful new people (with massive dicks and few inhibitions) and do God's work?"

    2. DavCrav

      ""slick and effective propaganda machine being run by Daesh"

      I must have missed that. The only propoganda [sic] I've seen has been along the lines of "Join us and you get to rape and murder innocent foreigners (fellow Muslims mainly, but don't worry, they aren't *proper* ones) for a year or so before being bludgeoned yourself by the armed forces of the countries you've chosen to attack.".

      The evidence is that this appeals to at most a few hundred disaffected teenagers out of a population of millions, who are resistant to the counter-propoganda [sic] not only of their own age group but also their parents and wider family. So yeah, they're really going to sit up and take notice if The Government starts telling them what to do.

      So did the whole select committe [sic] sign up to this verdict, or are some of them *not* utter cretins?"

      The problem with this viewpoint, and it's not just your viewpoint but held by a lot of people in the UK, is that more or less every fact and piece of information in it is false. Let's start with this:

      "I must have missed that. The only propoganda [sic] I've seen has been along the lines of "Join us and you get to rape and murder innocent foreigners (fellow Muslims mainly, but don't worry, they aren't *proper* ones) for a year or so before being bludgeoned yourself by the armed forces of the countries you've chosen to attack."."

      I thought it was well known that Daesh has a large social media presence with many audio and video releases of high quality, but it appears not. They are very good at it, and strangely enough don't mention any of the downsides when asking people to sign up.

      "The evidence is that this appeals to at most a few hundred disaffected teenagers out of a population of millions, who are resistant to the counter-propoganda [sic] not only of their own age group but also their parents and wider family. So yeah, they're really going to sit up and take notice if The Government starts telling them what to do."

      No. The UK, despite having many more Muslims of a background that would suggest susceptibility to propaganda, sends fewer fighters to Syria than Germany, per head of population, and half as many as France. The evidence is there that Prevent, working alongside the other three strands of the strategy (Pursue, Protect and Prepare), succeeded in lowering the terrorism and extremism threat that faces the UK.

      "So did the whole select committe [sic] sign up to this verdict, or are some of them *not* utter cretins?"

      You've been reading about this for at least ten minutes, and read the whole of this article, so of course you know more than the people in the Select Committee about this, who only had these boring briefing papers and reams of documents to leaf through.

      I really do fail to see why the general population, who normally have no particular knowledge of an area, think that they are equally qualified to voice an opinion about a topic as those whose job it is to work in the area, and furthermore to brand them as 'utter cretins' on the basis of the flimsiest of evidence. This anti-expertise-ism lay at the heart of Michael Gove's 'Britain has had enough of experts' statement. What do experts know, with their education, years and experience and knowledge of the area? You can prove anything with facts.

  7. Richard Wharram

    Vaz

    Vacuous slimeball.

  8. Pen-y-gors

    Weasels

    It's not difficult to understand. Terrorist attacks are the responsibility of the terrorists. Radicalisation is the responsibility of those dripping the honeyed lies into the ears of the gullible listeners.

    That's all. There's no way to wriggle off the hook and say "I blew up a bus-full of children because my mother didn't love me" or "because a policeman didn't shoot me in time" or "because someone invented encryp;tion" or "because MI5 didn't see the message in the Times personal column"

    Causation is not the same as responsibility. Responsibility requires conscious volition.

    Yes, there may be a thousand factors, big and small, contributing to cause an event, but that doesn't make Twitter responsible for Bataclan.

  9. frank ly

    Why not

    just educate people that what they read on social media and also in the newspapers is often just someone's attempt to influence them for that other person or organisation's benefit. Teach them critical thinking and to cross reference a variety of sources and opinions to get a better idea of how 'truthful' something is.

    Oh, ..... wait a minute.

  10. Warm Braw

    Is another term for press subjugation to the Home Affarirs committee...

    ... Vaz deference?

    1. zebthecat

      Re: Is another term for press subjugation to the Home Affarirs committee...

      You are in the right anatomical area

  11. Bogle

    Tube

    Does anyone else think "Vas deferens" every time this clown pops up?

    Time to cut the tubes, Keith, 'cause that stuff you're spunking is utter shite.

  12. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    "slick and effective propaganda machine being run by Daesh"

    Does this committee really believe that a bunch of nutters uploading be-headings and running around the desert with guns is slick and effective propaganda?

    I think they will find foreign policy is all the propaganda they need.

  13. Doctor Syntax Silver badge

    It's noticeable that existing legislation, for which MPs are, of course, responsible for framing, has made it almost impossible to deal with radical preachers. It seems so much easier to find someone else to blame doesn't it?

    1. Adam 52 Silver badge

      When looked at objectively it's hard to tell the difference between the "honeyed lies" (as pen-y-gors wonderfully puts it) offered by politicians and those offered by radicals, so politicians are never going to pass effective legislation.

      1. Dr. Mouse

        And, as mentioned by others above, this is why the most effective way to combat this propaganda* will never be used: It would harm politicians as much as terr'ists.

        *Teach people proper critical reasoning, research skills, and generally to think for themselves, not just accept what people tell them on face value.

  14. Anonymous Coward
    Anonymous Coward

    I stopped reading as soon as I saw Keith Vaz mentioned - he's a bullshitter and bandwagon-jumper par excellence, even compared to other MPs.

  15. Triggerfish

    Chilcot Report

    Nice to see that was taken seriously then.

    1. Velv
      Childcatcher

      Re: Chilcot Report

      It was even nicely presented as a show at this years Edinburgh Fringe:

      https://iraqoutloud.com/

      Took 245 hours and 45 minutes to read out.

  16. Graham 32

    "We believe that young people’s lack of ability or awareness of the need to critically challenge their beliefs is also central to the problems"

    Damn right. But careful what you wish for, politicians. They might start critically challenging YOU.

Page:

POST COMMENT House rules

Not a member of The Register? Create a new account here.

  • Enter your comment

  • Add an icon

Anonymous cowards cannot choose their icon

Other stories you might like