by Scott Creighton
Radicalization (or radicalisation) is a process by which an individual or group comes to adopt increasingly extreme political, social, or religious ideals and aspirations that (1) reject or undermine the status quo or (2) reject and/or undermine contemporary ideas and expressions of freedom of choice.
With the new CISPA in place (CISA) and the USA “Freedom” Act signed into law, some of us knew it wasn’t going to take long for the dynamic duo of state and industry (what did Mussolini call that again?) to unleash their talents and their corporatist agenda on the entire internet, making it safe for right-thinking citizens everywhere. And by “right” I mean, ultra-right wing reactionary fascists.
The White House will attempt to enlist Silicon Valley’s major technology firms in its efforts to combat terrorism on Friday when a delegation of the most senior intelligence officials fly to California to meet with executives from companies including Facebook, Twitter, Apple, Microsoft, YouTube (Google and Dropbox also) and others…
“In what ways can we use technology to help disrupt paths to radicalization to violence, identify recruitment patterns, and provide metrics to help measure our efforts to counter radicalization to violence?”..
… when asked about the meeting, a senior White House official said: “The administration has been clear about the importance of government and industry working together to confront terrorism.” The Guardian
Attending this meeting on the official side will be a number of staunch defenders of the constitution such as:
White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough, presidential counterterrorism adviser Lisa Monaco, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, FBI Director James Comey, National Intelligence Director James Clapper and National Security Agency Director Mike Rogers. Reuters
a. How can we make it harder for terrorists to leveraging the internet to recruit, radicalize, and mobilize followers to violence?
b. How can we help others to create, publish, and amplify alternative content that would undercut ISIL?
c. In what ways can we use technology to help disrupt paths to radicalization to violence, identify recruitment patterns, and provide metrics to help measure our efforts to counter radicalization to violence?
d. How can we make it harder for terrorists to use the internet to mobilize, facilitate, and operationalize attacks, and make it easier for law enforcement and the intelligence community to identify terrorist operatives and prevent attacks?
For those who say this meeting is simply about stopping “radicalized” individuals from recruiting terrorists on social media platforms, you have to remember… Apple, Dropbox and Microsoft don’t operate social media platforms. So why are they attending?
Apple and Microsoft are attending because they produce operating systems and as I have already shown you, Microsoft’s free new operating systems has legal language in it’s end user agreement that allows them total access to your content on your computer, all of it, and the ability to determine if that content might just present a threat to anyone anywhere at anytime. Microsoft then says it is free to take whatever action they deem necessary to protect national interests or Monsonto’s or whatever.
I would bet that all these new “free” cell phone games that are coming out with big name actors being paid to endorse them also come with similar language in their end user agreements but I have yet to research that theory.
It’s also important to remember what they deem as “radicalization” or the path to “radicalization”
I have provided the definition of the term above. Clearly it moves well past any concrete notion of using violence since that word or even the idea of any physical threat isn’t even mentioned in the definition.”Radicalization” is all about how one thinks, not how one acts.
Moreover, “radicalization” is literally defined as thinking in ways that are different than the “status quo” or “rejecting the contemporary ideas” of the establishment. That’s what “radicalization” means. Thinking for yourself.
Back in Feb. of 2015, National Interests magazine (fitting right?) published their “5 Paths Toward Radicalization“. The language of that article is rather interesting.
Second (path), the passage of an individual into homegrown radicalization is typically driven by personal dissatisfaction, grievances, indignation, and a sense of adventure, all factors for radical groups to exploit. Although the reasons vary, the most visible triggers are civilian casualties caused by airstrikes or drones, displeasure with political outcomes…
Radical groups also manipulate the shifting narratives around the real intentions of the United States in intervening in other countries…
Fourth (path), the desire to affect societal and political change can easily enthuse radicalism…
So from this description I guess we can surmise that young, unhappy, impoverished citizens who understand the true nature of the Shining City on the Hill are probably most likely to be “radicalized” and therefore present a threat to the establishment in the way they think and speak to the more conformist members of the population.
We wouldn’t want them spreading those troubling ideas to anyone (like BDS?), now would we?
This meeting of the minds between Big Business and Obama’s “progressive” alphabet agencies comes of the heels of some rather suspicious events like the San Bernardino shooting in which a brown-skinned, 4 foot tall woman and her brown-skinned boyfriend were described by several witnesses as “3 tall, athletic white men”
The couple has been continuously connected with ISIS™ by the corporate media in spite of the fact that the FBI concluded there was no connection. Their “radicalization” reportedly dates back to that “terrorist” Obama killed in Yemen (along with his son) who just also happened to have been invited to have brunch at the Pentagon just days after 9/11.
We also conveniently had two guys arrested just yesterday who were supposedly in communication with ISIS™. Their “path to radicalization” has yet to be determined but they are supposedly Palestinian, so I guess that about covers it for the MSM.
And of course we have the standoff continuing in Oregon. They had put out a call to other “patriots” via social media to come join them in their quest to burn down some wildlife refuge so they can hand it over to millionaire ranchers and logging/mining companies. No one showed up though. I guess the path to radicalization they tried to fabricate wasn’t very successful.
In all I think about one millionth of one percent of the population of this country might be sympathetic to ISIS™.
I’m not exactly sure that justifies the remaking of the internet into a pure, wholesome vision the likes of which Denis McDonough, Lisa Monaco, Loretta Lynch, James Comey, James Clapper and Mike Rogers have in mind for us.
As the fascist trade deals wait in the wings, ready to rewrite the foundations of our constitutional republic in favor of the new corporatist world order, seems to me someone thinks they had better homogenize the atmosphere on the interwebs before some wrong-thinking bloggers out here drop some turds in the punch-bowl.
It’s too bad Aaron Swartz is gone. He could have been useful right about now.
Filed under: Uncategorized