SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Brumar89 who wrote (1132483)4/30/2019 4:33:01 PM
From: Brumar891 Recommendation

Recommended By
rdkflorida2

  Respond to of 1578303
 
America Under Attack by White Supremacists Acting Like ISIS A widespread digital network is calling for people to carry out more terrorist attacks after Poway and Christchurch.


[ The SI friends of the white nationalist movement can be identified by doing a search for "vdare." You see who's posting from there and you will see who's doing their little part to help the next synagogue attack. ]

Kelly Weill
04.30.19 4:59 AM ET

The alleged killer at a Southern California synagogue this weekend worked alone, according to law enforcement, but behind him is a sprawling, digital network of white supremacists spurring each other on to murder.

Moments before allegedly opening fire at worshippers in Chabad of Poway on Saturday, white supremacist John Earnest previewed his plans on 8chan, just as his supposed inspiration did. Last month, a white supremacist in Christchurch, New Zealand used 8chan to share a link to a livestream of him killing 50 Muslims at a mosque. In between the attacks, the anonymous forum with a large fascist presence called for people to carry out more shootings. The calls for violence also spread across fringe platforms like Gab, and messaging apps like Telegram. It’s reminiscent of calls online for followers of ISIS and al Qaeda to strike out at the enemy, counter-terrorism experts said.

After the New Zealand shooting, 8chan users decorated the alleged killer as a “saint” and encouraged each other to commit shootings of their own, including against synagogues, to prepare for the “third world war” against Jews, or to kill a journalist critical of the forum.

“As a lot of people have noted over the past few days, 8chan is an awful cesspool of encouraging violence and hatred,” said Sam Jackson, an assistant professor focusing on online extremism at the University of Albany. “That hate and encouragement of violence might be a sort of baseline, background noise, but periodically someone moves from participating in this online awfulness to committing offline actions.”

“We fretted so much about al Qaeda and ISIS online, and we’ve got a massive white supremacist network online right now.”
— ex-FBI agent Clint Watts

Those real-life actions appear to have spiked over the past six months, with at least three white supremacists announcing attack plans on 8chan or Gab, before opening fire at Jewish or Muslim houses of worship. Three such attacks—at a Pittsburgh synagogue, a Christchurch mosque, and at the Poway synagogue—have killed a combined 62 people in the past six months.

That background noise can act as a war drum for violence. White supremacist communities often use memes to normalize extreme violence. Almost immediately after the San Diego shooter warned of his attack on 8chan, forum-goers treated the mass-shooting like a game.

The first response to his 8chan post urged him to “get the high score,” investigative outlet Bellingcat noted. (When only one person, 60-year-old Lori Gilbert Kaye, was murdered, some 8chan users lamented the attack’s “low score.”)

The online-inspired terror, and its instant repackaging as propaganda, was pioneered by ISIS and al Qaeda. And unlike Islamic extremism, white supremacist terror appears to hold a place of middling concern in the Trump administration.

“It’s interesting: we fretted so much about al Qaeda and ISIS online, and we’ve got a massive white supremacist network online right now,” said Clint Watts, a Clint Watts, a former FBI agent on the Joint Terrorism Task Force.

“The technology has evolved over the last few years,” said Watts, who traced in real-time propaganda from groups like ISIS and Al-Shabaab in his role a distinguished research fellow covering terrorism and social media at the Foreign Policy Research Institute.

Groups like al Qaeda “used to film their attacks, or parts of them. Some good examples are the Westgate attack of al-Shabaab in Nairobi in 2013. They were live-tweeting out updates during the attack. Fast forward to ISIS a couple years later—they would be shooting video and quickly uploading it during 2013-2014. But ISIS was mostly kicked off the mainstream platforms by the time live video uploads were available.”

Nazis, meanwhile, have found more staying power online.

Forums like Gab and 4chan’s far-right /pol/ board appear to have grown steadily more hateful since President Donald Trump’s election, research by the Anti-Defamation League found earlier this month.

In these forums and others, users can be observed spreading anti-Semitic conspiracy theories with the stated goal of inciting a reader to violence.

After the San Diego shooting, Twitter user AntiFash Gordon uploaded screenshots of members of a violent white nationalist Telegram channel agitating for “pogroms.”

“thats the thing with memes about jews,” one user wrote on Telegram. “does it matter if theyre true? their consequences are pogroms and thats what matters at the end of the day.”

Not even experts can predict who will kill next. Studies of so-called “lone wolf” terrorists have produced few common characteristics besides “young and male,” Watts said.

Jackson added that researchers at University College London conducted “a study where they found lone wolf actors have a slightly higher chance of having some sort of mental illness, but it’s not even a huge number.”

Perhaps surprisingly, the series of terror attacks have happened in a slow moment for open white supremacist organizing. After 2017’s deadly white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, a number of the movement’s stars have fallen and its most prominent groups have imploded or gone underground. Opposition from anti-fascists in the streets and lawsuits in the courts has smeared the public-friendly face some racists hoped to present before 2018.

Sometimes movements under pressure will resort to terrorism, Watts said, comparing the movement to al Qaeda after a law enforcement crackdown.

“By the time it was like 2009, the real threat was inspired terrorism,” he said, by extremist preachers “like Anwar al-Awlaki. He’d post a message telling people to do attacks at home, and people would pick up arms and do attacks at home. You’re seeing a refined version of that.”

Jackson, meanwhile, attributed the apparent spikes in white supremacist attacks to “a contagion effect,” adding that “it’s also possible that the attention that previous attackers have got from mainstream sources encourages others to make a name for themselves in similar sorts of acts.”

The white supremacist movement’s online footprint is a sign of its terror potential. Whereas ISIS supporters might succeed in uploading a limited number of ISIS videos to social media, footage of the Christchurch shooting went viral immediately after the attack. In the 24 hours after the mass shooting, Facebook recorded 1.5 million attempts to upload the video.

ISIS might be a favorite Trump talking point, but the 1.5 million Christchurch video uploads suggest a much larger following for white supremacist terror.

“You can tell that the global network of white supremacist terrorism is pretty damn strong right now, because they keep uploading, they keep talking about it, and the pace of attacks continues to speed up,” Watts said.

“That’s a bad sign. If we were talking about inspired ISIS or al Qaeda attacks, all lights would be blinking bright red right now.”

thedailybeast.com



To: Brumar89 who wrote (1132483)4/30/2019 6:31:27 PM
From: RetiredNow2 Recommendations

Recommended By
bruwin
locogringo

  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1578303
 
The Real "Bombshells" Are About To Hit Their Targets

Authored By Julie Kelly via American Greatness



The next bombshell report to drop from the Justice Department likely will earn none of the breathless fanfare and media coverage that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s report received, but it could be far more incriminating.

In the next several weeks, Inspector General Michael Horowitz is expected to issue his summation of the potential abuse of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act by top officials in the Obama Administration and holdovers in the early Trump Administration who were overseeing the investigation of Donald Trump’s presidential campaign.

And the perpetrators of the so-called FISAgate scandal now are scrambling for cover as the bad news looms.

Horowitz announced last March that his office would examine the Justice Department’s conduct “in applications filed with the U.S. Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court (FISC) relating to a certain U.S. person.” That U.S. person is Trump campaign associate Carter Page. In October 2016, just two weeks before the presidential election, the Justice Department submitted an application to the FISC seeking authorization to wiretap Page. The court filing accused Page, a Naval Academy graduate and unpaid campaign advisor, of being an agent of Russia.

The application cited the infamous Steele dossier—unsubstantiated political propaganda that had been funded by the Hillary Clinton campaign and Democratic National Committee—as its primary source of evidence. But the specific political origin of the dossier intentionally was omitted in the court filing. (Robert Mueller similarly tap danced around the role of Fusion GPS, the political consulting firm that hired Christopher Steele to create the dossier. Mueller never mentioned the name “Fusion GPS” in the 448-page document, referring to it only vaguely as “the firm that produced the Steele reporting.”)

Former FBI Director James Comey and former Deputy Attorney General Sally Yates signed the original FISA application. It was renewed three times; subsequent signers included former acting FBI Director Andrew McCabe and Deputy Attorney General Rod Rosenstein. If there’s one document that represents the malevolence, chicanery and arrogance of the original Trump-Russia collusion fraudsters, it’s the Page FISA application.

But—to borrow a favorite term of the collusion truthers—the “walls are closing in” on the FISA abusers.

Representative Mark Meadows (R-N.C.) and James Jordan (R-Ohio) recently met with Horowitz and offered some ominous news for Comey and company: “We anticipate the IG’s report will come out . . . in the next four to six weeks and I think it’s highly likely that we’ll see criminal referrals coming from them,” Meadows told Fox Business host Maria Bartiromo on April 14.

President Trump also speculated that the inspector general’s report would contain damning allegations against former top officials for the world’s most powerful law enforcement agency.

“I think he [Horowitz] knows how big this is,” Trump told Sean Hannity in an interview last week. “The IG report coming out in three or four weeks, from what I hear, is going to be…a blockbuster because he has access to information that most people don’t.” If anyone misled the FISA court, including Comey and Yates, Trump suggested that “they’ll all be in a pile of trouble.”

Since last fall, Trump has threatened to declassify the entire application, much of which is still concealed behind redactions, but that has presumably been delayed to protect the integrity of the investigation. Once the inspector general’s report comes out, however, Trump would be free to unredact crucial portions of the application.

So the targets of the inspector general’s probe and their media pals now are spinning hard in preparation of the report’s release.

Natasha Bertrand, a reliable mouthpiece for Fusion GPS, is smearing Horowitz and raising questions about his investigation. “Former U.S. officials interviewed by the inspector general were skeptical about the quality of his probe,” she wrote in an April 17 piece for Politico. “The inspector general seemed neither well-versed in the FISA process nor receptive to the explanations, the officials said.”

Comey unconvincingly is rejecting accusations by Attorney General William Barr and others that there was “spying” on the Trump campaign. “When I hear that kind of language used, it’s concerning,” serial uptalker Comey said in an April 11 interview. “The FBI and the Department of Justice conduct court-ordered electronic surveillance. I have never thought of that as spying. I don’t know of any court-ordered electronic surveillance aimed at the Trump campaign (emphasis added).”

Yates appeared on Sunday for a softball interview with NBC’s “Meet The Press” host Andrea Mitchell. Without any sense of irony, Mitchell introduced Yates as “someone who seems to show up at key moments in the Trump presidency,” including her central role in the set-up, laughable Logan Act inquiry, and subsequent firing of former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn. (Yates served as acting attorney general for 10 days before Trump fired her for insubordination.)

Yates, much like Comey, has a flair for the dramatic, often using hushed tones, theatrical facial expressions, and overwrought rhetoric to make her point: “When the Russians came knocking at their door, you would think a man who likes to make a show of hugging the flag would have done the patriotic thing and would have notified law enforcement.” (Hard eye roll.)

Yates referred to Trump campaign objections about Russian collusion as “a lie” and (falsely) lamented that “now we have devolved to ‘there’s nothing wrong with taking help,’ illegal help, from a foreign adversary. Surely that’s not where we’ve come to.”

But Yates’ own words might come back to haunt her, and soon.

An April 19 article in the New York Times, which now is backpedaling on the legimitacy of the Steele dossier in advance of the Horowitz report, speculated that the dossier was part of a Russian propaganda campaign targeting the Trump team.

“There has been much chatter among intelligence experts that Steele’s Russian informants could have been pressured to feed him disinformation,” the Times reported. Further, at the time Steele was working for Fusion GPS on Russian-sourced dirt against Trump, he also was lobbying on behalf of Oleg Deripaska, a Russian oligarch with ties to the Kremlin.

So if Yates signed a court document that heavily relied on shady sources and a lobbyist (Steele) for a Putin-connected billionaire, who would be guilty of relying on help from a foreign adversary for political purposes? Not Donald Trump.

The imperious Yates and her accomplices might have a chance to answer that question—and others—in front of Congress in the very near future.

In response to her “Meet the Press” interview, Senator John Cornyn (R-Texas) tweeted that Yates’ actions “will certainly be part of forthcoming Senate Judiciary Committee oversight hearings on FBI/DOJ during Obama years in which she served as Deputy AG under Loretta Lynch.”

The Horowitz report could do what the Mueller report could not: Find legitimate evidence of conspiracies between political operatives, Russian interests, and top government officials; uncover attempts to obstruct justice as the various investigations into misconduct proceeded; and expose rank corruption at the highest levels of a presidential administration.

It just won’t be the presidential administration that Mueller and his colleagues were targeting.

Content created by the Center for American Greatness, Inc. is available without charge to any eligible news publisher that can provide a significant audience. For licensing opportunities for our original content, please contact licensing@centerforamericangreatness.com.

Photo Credit: Thos Robinson/Getty Images for The New Yorker