Unwelcome Internet Guests

Demonic Minions of Jihad
Like all good ideas, this could backfire. Closing web sites doesn’t stop someone from posting messages on other web sites, chat rooms, emails etc. This will no doubt cause a few legal problems as pissed off groups sue to keep on line all the while claiming they just teach their religion and not hate. That would lead to disaster for Muslims in a court room as I think there is plenty of proof that the Koran not only teaches hate it demands it. I don’t know about any of you but I would love to sit on a jury where Islam was discussed as a “religion of peace”.

A real concern for me is this action could also be used to silence other blogger’s and web sites attempting to expose Islam, or totally on unrelated topics. It will be hard to commit to this and protect 1st amendment rights. Is this a hate site? I don’t think so, we do have a few questionable comments but I do not believe Doc or I hate anyone. We watch, warn and inform. If anything it makes the minions of Islam hate us and that brings a big smile to my face.

If this attempt to monitor and control islamonazi propaganda works as planned, I say good on them. The realistic part of my brain screams, watch out. This could spin out of control any number of ways and could go past its original attempts to limit Islamonazi propaganda and target those of us already working to counter it and more importantly teach others to recognize and respond to it, ignoring it just does not solve the problem. Until I see this plan work as intended, I will remain cautiously optimistic of its chances for success. I only have one question for whoever is behind this effort: What took you so long?

The problem of jihadist websites hosted in America.
by Jonathan V. Last , THE WEEKLY STANDARD
08/06/2007, Volume 012, Issue 44
An ambitious private initiative to help American Internet service providers (ISPs) identify jihadist websites they are unwittingly hosting was unveiled the other day in Washington. The Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) will lend its translation capabilities and the expertise of its Islamist Website Monitor Project to any ISP that wants to investigate the content of a suspicious foreign-language site. MEMRI president Yigal Carmon expects that ISPs will voluntarily shut down extremist sites once the providers realize what inflammatory material the sites contain.

The goal is to significantly disrupt the jihadists’ use of the Internet to spread their ideology, their explosives know-how, and their recruitment propaganda worldwide. It’s a daunting task: The Economist reports that the number of terrorist websites has gone from “a handful in 2000 to several thousand today.” What makes it doable, Carmon says, is the fact that the majority of extremist websites are hosted by ISPs in the United States.

Consider “Supporters of Jihad in Iraq” (www.hussamaldin.jeeran.com), a website whose headlined caption reads “Kill the Americans everywhere.” It is hosted by Electric Lightwave, a subsidiary of Integra Telecom in Portland, Oregon. Or the website of Islamist sheikh Hamed al-Ali (www.h-alali.net), hosted by Fortress Integrated Technologies, in Irvine, California. Or the Al-Saha Forum (www.alsaha.com), which has posted videos from the media production arm of al Qaeda: It’s hosted by Liquid Web Inc., in Lansing, Michigan.

If these and similar ISPs systematically eliminated sites with dangerous pro-terrorist content–just as they routinely purge sites with obscene content–al Qaeda and company would lose one of their most valuable weapons. “This is their air force, this is their unconventional weapon,” says Carmon.

Some ISPs already have procedures in place to banish extremist sites. Google, which hosts more blogs than any provider in the world, requires its blogger clients to agree to a detailed Terms of Service waiver that prohibits both “hateful” and “violent” content.

In addition to their own standards of taste and civic responsibility, companies must be mindful of the fact that most extremist websites are hosted in violation of federal law. Section 219 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, for example, makes it illegal to provide support to designated terrorist groups, and Title 18, Section 842, of the U.S. Code makes it illegal to disseminate operational military information to terrorists.

Usually, the problem isn’t that companies are unwilling to comply. It’s that the websites are in Arabic or Farsi or other foreign languages. The ISPs don’t realize who they’re helping.

This is where MEMRI comes in. A privately funded nonprofit founded in 1998 to break down the language barrier between the Middle East and the West, the institute translates and posts on its website selections from the press, television, and websites of the region. It translates them into English, French, Italian, Hebrew, German, Spanish, and Japanese.

Three years ago, MEMRI published a study of Islamist websites, naming their hosts. Within a week, most of the ISPs had shut down the extremist sites–without any direct prodding from MEMRI. Now, to encourage more such voluntary action, MEMRI has made a standing offer: Any company concerned about a foreign-language site it is hosting can fill out a short form on MEMRI’s website, and the think tank will–at no cost–translate the content, usually within a week.

On July 19, the day it announced this offer, MEMRI also released a new study of Islamist websites. Several of the American ISPs it names, contacted by a reporter, seemed happy to learn what was lurking on their servers. SiteGenie’s Scott Litke acted swiftly to remove the World News Network (www.w-n-n.net), which was posting instructions on bomb making. “If someone tells me one of these sites has nasty stuff–it’s gone,” Litke said. “I don’t even like sites talking bad about America.”

Interserver, Inc., an ISP in Secaucus, New Jersey, quickly took down the website of Sheikh Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi (www.alsunnah.info), who was spiritual mentor to Abu Musab al Zarqawi, the late leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq, notorious for beheadings of foreign hostages and ferocious bombing attacks on civilians.

But not all companies are alert to the problem. A spokeswoman for ThePlanet, in Houston, said, “We don’t police the content of our websites.” Asked about the website they host for the group Palestinian Islamic Jihad–a State Department-designated Foreign Terrorist Organization–she claimed never to have heard of it and would say only, “We work with the authorities when sites are a credible threat or there is some kind of pending harm.”

Even willing companies, however, are up against the fact that websites are portable. When the World News Network was kicked out by SiteGenie, it quickly found a new home with an ISP in Malaysia.

Yet it is a mistake to assume the Internet is untamable. Of the sites shut down after they were exposed in MEMRI’s July 19 report, only one had managed to relocate as this story went to press eight days later. One of the reasons so many jihadists use American service providers is precisely that other governments have managed to keep them off
their service providers. In May, Saudi Arabia passed a law mandating up to 10 years in jail for anyone setting up a website that promotes terrorist goals. China, too, has been quite successful at excluding content deemed objectionable by the regime.

The United States need not take such drastic governmental action. American businesses seem mostly eager to do the right thing, if not perfectly equipped to do so. The Holy Grail for these companies would be a database of individuals and websites associated with violent jihad. Whether maintained by a private or a public entity, such a watch list could help ISPs identify suspicious clients before accepting their business. Carmon likens the concept to a Better Business Bureau for the web or the “know your customer” regulations that the U.S. Treasury imposes on banks.

Such a database lies farther down the road. For now, MEMRI’s translation service is an excellent start.
Jonathan V. Last is a staff writer at THE WEEKLY STANDARD

Explore posts in the same categories: anti dhimmitude, breaking news, Fighting Back, Muslims in The USA, Radical Islam

3 Comments on “Unwelcome Internet Guests”

  1. Godefroi Says:

    “If anything it makes the minions of Islam hate us and that brings a big smile to my face.”

    In a Leftard mind, that would be construed as you inciting hatred.

    Wait…how did I think of that?

    Seriously though…I agree that this would be VERY difficult to institute and maintain while not infringing on the rights of those who do not deserve it.

  2. Ronin Says:

    I could see where some people not thinking clearly might believe I am hateful but if you check my other comment on Doc’s article about the koran in the toilet, I clearly encourage people to find as many scientific and artful ways as possible to honor Islam. Obviously, I am anything but Islamophobic. And fear not for I will enlighten these deviant thinkers until they understand that allah is all knowing and has given me permission to conduct my own private jihad in which I strive for the betterment of all people. I am all about equality.

  3. naisioxerloro Says:

    Good design, who make it?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: