Gitmo: Soon to be at 90 Detainees, Then What?

Posted on January 4, 2016January 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

Control of the released detainees after transfer? Hardly.

Former Guantanamo detainee travels to Argentina, calls for asylum for remaining detainees

BUENOS AIRES, Argentina – A former Guantanamo detainee who was resettled in Uruguay is asking Argentina to grant asylum for detainees still at the U.S. detention facility.

Abu Wa’el Dhiab wore a Guantanamo-style orange jumpsuit as he told Barricada TV that he believes “the Argentine government could receive the prisoners at Guantanamo here in a humanitarian way.” Calls to the Foreign Ministry seeking comment were not returned.

From the Director of National Intelligence:

Section 307 (a) (2) An assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will engage in terrorism.

Based on trends identified during the past eleven years, we assess that some detainees currently at GTMO will seek to reengage in terrorist or insurgent activities after they are transferred. Transfers to countries with ongoing conflicts and internal instability as well as active recruitment by insurgent and terrorist organizations pose particular problems. While enforcement of transfer conditions may deter reengagement by many former detainees and delay reengagement by others, some detainees who are determined to reengage will do so regardless of any transfer conditions, albeit probably at a lower rate than if they were transferred without conditions.

Section 307 (a) (2) An assessment of the likelihood that such detainees will communicate with persons in terrorist organizations.

Former GTMO detainees routinely communicate with each other, families of other former detainees, and previous associates who are members of terrorist organizations. The reasons for communication span from the mundane (reminiscing about shared experiences) to the nefarious (planning terrorist operations). We assess that some GTMO detainees transferred in the future also will communicate with other former GTMO detainees and persons in terrorist organizations. We do not consider mere communication with individuals or organizations— including other former GTMO detainees—an indicator of reengagement. Rather, the motives, intentions, and purposes of each communication are taken into account when assessing whether the individual has reengaged.

Source: ‘Al Qaeda followers’ among 17 being transferred from Gitmo

FNC: The group of 17 detainees expected to be transferred out of Guantanamo Bay as early as this week includes “multiple bad guys” and “Al Qaeda followers,” a source who has reviewed the list told Fox News.

Little is known publicly about which prisoners are being prepared for transfer, but the Obama administration has notified Congress it plans to ship out 17 detainees – some of whom could be transferred within days.

While the identities of the men are closely held, the source who spoke with Fox News said it includes “multiple bad guys … not taxi drivers and cooks.”

This is a reference to the administration’s transfer of Ibrahim al Qosi to Sudan in 2012. Despite entering a “re-integration program,” the one-time cook for Usama bin Laden has now fled to Yemen, where he is among the leadership of Al Qaeda in Yemen. That transfer is now said to be a source of considerable heartburn for the Obama administration.

As for those on the docket for immediate transfer, the source told Fox News the administration will not identify the detainees until they are relocated in their new home countries — because knowing who they are in advance would create further roadblocks and increase the controversy.

Multiple countries have agreed to take the men, in small groups, and the source said some of the countries were so-called first timers — a reference to the fact those countries had not taken Guantanamo detainees in the past.

The move to clear out 17 detainees is seen as part of the administration’s long-term plan to ultimately shutter the detention camp.

The transfer of 17 prisoners would bring the number of detainees left down to 90 – the bulk of whom cannot be transferred to another country.

Many in Congress, though, fiercely oppose any plan to bring those detainees to the U.S.

President Obama in his year-end news conference justified the closure of the detention camp, claiming “Guantanamo continues to be one of the key magnets for jihadi recruitment.” But the Middle East Media Research Institute, or MEMRI, which tracks jihadist propaganda, said that terrorist groups have moved on from using Guantanamo in their recruitment efforts.

“The topic of Guantanamo prisoners appeared rather frequently in Al-Qaeda’s propaganda in past years,” MEMRI’s Eliot Zweig said. “However, the topic has received little to no attention in the last year or two … Gitmo hasn’t received much attention in official ISIS releases.”

U.S. Arms Exports to Mexico Mostly to Blame for Violence

Posted on January 4, 2016January 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

US arms, exported legally, are behind many violent crimes in Mexico (CHARTS)

Mexican military and police authorities are still at war with the country’s drug trafficking organizations. And the fight still isn’t going well. Since 2006, the conflict has generated as many as 164,345 civilian deaths. Experts are still unable to agree if murders are going up or down.

More Mexicans have died violently over the past decade than Afghan or Iraqi civilians over the same period, combined. High-powered weaponry, along with handguns, is playing a key role in driving the violence.

Many commentators assume that arms and ammunition are flooding into the arsenals of drug cartels from illegal dealers spanning the US-Mexican border. There are empirical studies substantiating this claim. Other analysts contend that some military-grade firepower consists of stolen and leftover kit from Central American conflicts of the 1970s and ’80s. They are also partly right.

But the full picture is more complex.

Mexican imports of weapons 2001-2012
Create column charts

In fact, at least 50 countries have exported military-grade weapons and associated materiel to Mexico over the past five decades —with well over half of them exceeding $1 million in sales over the period. There has been a steady uptick in sales since 2006, and especially since former President Felipe Calderon ratcheted up the drug war.

According to UN customs data compiled by NISAT, a research group, the United States is by far the largest exporter of military arms to Mexico. The sums are not trivial. The US has exported more than $300 million worth of “military style” weapons to Mexican authorities since the 1960s; more than half of those sales have been since the year 2000. Top exporters following the US are Italy, Belgium, France and Israel, some of the world’s largest manufacturers.

These firearms include crew-serviced machine guns, assault rifles, rocket-propelled grenade launchers, heavy explosives and related munitions, parts and accessories. However, the US and others also sell vast quantities of “civilian-style” weapons, including shotguns, handguns, and related ammunition.

An arms mapping visualization developed by the Igarapé Institute with partners including Google Ideas shows that Mexican imports of all types of weaponry increased steadily from 2006 onward. Moreover, the share of all imports that included military-style weapons shot up from around 10-25 percent a year to 30-50 percent each year during this timeframe.

While many of these weapons are officially destined for the Mexican armed forces and the country’s more than 1,600 federal, state and local police agencies, some of them fall into the hands of cartels and militia. In Mexico, military-style arms are frequently diverted and leaked from official arsenals. In some cases weapons are sent to the wrong customers altogether. For example, a recent high-profile case involved 9,000 firearms shipped illegally to Mexico by a German firm.

Of course, military-issue firearms and ammunition are routinely trafficked across international borders, including from the US. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) has traced high-powered rifles and handguns shipped by land, air and sea. One especially controversial operation dubbed Fast and Furious allowed weapons from the US to be smuggled to Mexican cartels for tracking purposes —hundreds were lost en route and linked to subsequent crimes.

Arms exports to Mexico, 2000-2014
Create column charts

Igarapé Institute and University of San Diego research has determined that a considerable proportion of illegally acquired firearms in Mexico were originally sold by federally licensed dealers in the US. Meanwhile, older issue US and Soviet-style weaponry is also trafficked from post-conflict Central American countries, including via El Salvador, Honduras and of course Guatemala.

Military and police stocks in some of these Central American countries were singled out by the International Commission against Impunity in Guatemala as the largest source of illegal firearms in the region. Twentieth-century M16s and AK-47s have surfaced in the arsenals of the Juarez, Sinaloa, Zeta and Gulf cartels, though the quantities are comparatively modest.

Making matters more complicated, the Mexican authorities lack a robust marking and tracing system. They have traditionally relied on their US counterparts for background checks on seized weapons. Getting a handle on leaked and trafficked weapons has simply not been a priority of successive governments.

In the past, samples of seized weapons were submitted to the ATF (using eTrace). Extrapolations generated from these assessments suggest that up to 70 percent of recovered firearms were from the US, though these numbers are disputed on both sides of the border.

Top arms exporters to Mexico
Create your own infographics

While internationally supportive of more gun regulation, Mexico is not especially transparent when it comes to reporting on weapons exports, imports or recovery, as the Small Arms Survey arms barometer makes clear. It is also unable to comprehensively get to grips with where illegal guns are coming from.

At least part of the problem is that under Mexican law, all firearms seized by the government must be surrendered to the armed forces within 48 hours. The military is charged with “safeguarding” these arms and is under no compulsion to assist in related law enforcement investigations. The fact that the armed forces may well be one of the key sources of illicit arms is problematic, to say the least.

In the case of the US, ATF officials are required to submit a formal request to the Mexican Attorney General for each and every weapon (with accompanying data on the firearm type/caliber). As a result, most weapons are simply not traced and abusers go unpunished.

The development of a more effective system for tracing the origins of illicit firearms is a priority for both the US and Mexican governments. The current approach is deeply inefficient. If Mexico wants to do more to stop the shooting, it cannot afford to keep asking questions later.

Oregon: BLM and the Hammonds

Posted on January 4, 2016January 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

All is not what it seems much less what both the right and left are reporting with regard to the Hammond family and the stand-off in Burn, Oregon with respect to grazing permits and the Bureau of Land Management.

Click here for an article on the Hammonds in 1994.

The Hammonds agreed to the re-sentencing in court. AGREED! Click here for the court testimony.

Further, the Hammonds have been challenging government for decades and even threatened them with death as well as volunteer firefighters. Click here for an interactive map of the land designations in Oregon.

The full .pdf document is here.

Nearly half of the western United States is owned by the federal government. In recent years, several western states have considered resolutions demanding that the federal government transfer much of this land to state ownership. These efforts are motivated by concerns over federal land management, including restrictions on natural resource development, poor land stewardship, limitations on access, and low financial returns.

This study compares state and federal land management in the West. It examines the revenues and expenditures associated with federal land management and compares them with state trust land management in four western states: Montana, Idaho, New Mexico, and Arizona. The report explains why revenues and expenditures differ between state and federal land agencies and discusses several possible implications of transferring federal lands to the states.

Key Points:

The federal government loses money managing valuable natural resources on federal lands, while states generate significant financial returns from state trust lands.

The states examined in this study earn an average of $14.51 for every dollar spent on state trust land management. The U.S. Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management generate only 73 cents in return for every dollar spent on federal land management.

On average, states generate more revenue per dollar spent than the federal government on a variety of land management activities, including timber, grazing, minerals, and recreation.

These outcomes are the result of the different statutory, regulatory, and administrative frameworks that govern state and federal lands. States have a fiduciary responsibility to generate revenues from state trust lands, while federal land agencies face overlapping and conflicting regulations and often lack a clear mandate.

If federal lands were transferred, states could likely earn much greater revenues than the federal government. However, transfer proponents must consider how land management would have to change in order to generate those revenues under state control.

New Jihadi John Identified

Posted on January 4, 2016January 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

Is this former Anjem Choudary lackey the new Jihadi John? Speculation mounts that former bouncy castle salesman who skipped bail to join ISIS in Syria is killer who executed UK spy

WARNING: GRAPHIC CONTENT
Propaganda video shows ISIS thugs shooting five men at point blank range
Executioner threatened Prime Minister, calling him a ‘slave to White House’
Young boy who appears to be around five said ‘we will kill them over there’
British fighter jets began airstrikes on ISIS locations in Syria a month ago
For more news on the latest ISIS video visit www.dailymail.co.uk/isis
If you recognise the boy or man, email [email protected] or call 0203 615 1926

Speculation was mounting today that the ISIS executioner dubbed the ‘new Jihadi John’ is a British fanatic who taunted police after skipping bail to flee to Syria.

British security agents are racing to identify the masked militant who spoke with a clear English accent in a sickening new execution video in which he is seen shooting an alleged British spy.

Claims have been circulating online that it could be Siddhartha Dhar, a British militant who went on the run with his pregnant wife and family while under investigation by Scotland Yard in 2014.

The father-of-four from Walthamstow was one of nine men detained on suspicion of encouraging terrorism and supporting radical cleric Anjem Choudary and the banned group al-Muhajiroun.

The former bouncy castle salesman later posted a picture of himself cradling his baby while brandishing an assault rifle to mock security services whose blunders allowed him to escape the UK.

Dhar, also known as Abu Rumaysah, is believed to have met, and possibly mentored, Michael Adebolajo, one of the murderers of Fusilier Lee Rigby.

Speculation was mounting that the ISIS executioner dubbed the ‘new Jihadi John’ (left) is British fanatic Siddhartha Dhar, also known as Abu Rumaysah (right) who taunted police after skipping bail to flee to Syria.

Dhar was released on bail after his arrest in September 2014 and ordered to hand in his passport.

But less than 24 hours after walking free, he took a coach from London to Paris and headed to the ISIS war zone with his young family.

Prior to posting the photo, Dhar taunted the police on Twitter for clumsily allowing him to slip through their fingers: ‘What a shoddy security system Britain must have to allow me to breeze through Europe to the Islamic State.’

He also boasted how he had fooled MI5: ‘My Lord (Allah) made a mockery of British intelligence and surveillance. Make hijrah (flight) Muslims. Place your trust in Allah.’

Proclaiming his love for ISIS and the importance of the fight against the West, Dhar wrote: ‘The Islamic State will punish the tyrants in the West. The army of Caliph Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi is coming. Rejoice O Muslims.’

Dhar, who has been courted by broadcast media and repeatedly given a platform on the BBC and Channel 4 to promote his radical views, had publicly stated that he wanted to live under the Islamic State in Syria.

A few weeks before his arrest, he told one interviewer that he was willing to renounce his British citizenship if it meant he was allowed to travel.

Dhar was also interviewed by CBS News’s 60 Minutes programme about radicalisation in the UK earlier this month, telling presenter Clarissa Ward that he was unable to love his mother because she was not a Muslim.

Titled ‘Campaigning for ISIS in the West’, the episode focused on Choudary’s band of London-based radicals.

Slipped from police grasp: Siddhartha Dhar (circled) disappeared only 24 hours after being released on bail. The follower of Anjem Choudary (centre) took a coach to Paris with his family before travelling on to Syria.

Taunting the police: Abu Rumaysah posted a picture of him cradling his baby and brandishing an assault rifle in the other to mock security services whose blunders allowed him to escape the UK

It is understood that Dhar is of Indian origin and was brought up a Hindu before converting to Islam.

He was a key member of al-Muhajiroun and offshoot groups such as the Shariah Project, masterminding ‘roadshows’ in London that aimed to recruit troubled youngsters to Islam.

In the ten-minute footage, the executioner threatens Prime Minister David Cameron and vows that ISIS will one day occupy Britain before shooting the alleged spies in the head.

The fanatic has been compared to feared British executioner Mohammed Emwazi, dubbed Jihadi John, who was killed in a drone strike in November after appearing in several beheading videos.

Intelligence analysts are expected to employ the same techniques used to successfully unmask and track down Emwazi, including voice analysis and possibly even vein-recognition technology that mapped the executioner’s hands. They will also be hunting for clues to the identity of a young English-speaking boy who also appears in the video.

Dressed in military fatigues and a black bandanna bearing the white mark of ISIS, the boy declares: ‘We will kill kuffar [non believers]’.

Experts fear the boy, thought to be just five, is a member of one of dozens of families who have left the UK for the blood-soaked warzone of Iraq and Syria.

A spokeswoman for Mr Cameron said the video was a propaganda tool that serves as a reminder of the barbarity of the group.

They said: ‘We are examining the content of the video and the prime minister is being kept updated on that

‘It serves as a reminder of the barbarity of Daesh (ISIS) and what the world faces with these terrorists.

‘It is also clearly a propaganda tool and should be treated as such.’

A Foreign Office spokesman said: ‘We are aware of the video and are examining its content.’

Speculation mounted today that the child could be the son of a notorious Jihadi bride from London, Grace ‘Khadijah’ Dare. This picture of a youngster posing with a toy gun in front of an ISIS flag in 2014 and thought to be Dare’s son, also bears a similarity to the child. It was tweeted by Londoner Umm Khattab, the teenaged widow of an ISIS fighter with the caption: ‘Next generation, Bi’ithnillah (God willing)’. ISIS also threatened David Cameron in the gruesome video in which it executes five suspected spies.

British war veterans said the video was a sign of desperation after ISIS suffered a number of setbacks in Iraq and Syria, notably the fall of the town of Ramadi.

Former Admiralty chief Lord West told The Sun: ‘Terror is part of their policy because they think it shakes and rattles the West.

‘But it’s a sign of desperation, not strength. We must do better at our own propaganda to make them look silly, not terrifying.’

Iraq war hero Colonel Tim Collins added: ‘Nobody is pretending RAF jets are going to do it all, but they are making room for the Iraqis to get the job done.

‘This isn’t going to happen overnight but it’s going to happen.’

It came as speculation mounted today that the child could be the son of a notorious Jihadi bride from London.

The child bears a striking similarity to the young son of Grace ‘Khadijah’ Dare, who grew up in Lewisham, south London, and converted to Islam as a teenager.

In 2014, Dare posted a shocking photograph to her Twitter account of her then four-year-old son Isa, meaning ‘Jesus’, smiling as he aims an AK-47 rifle.

She is married to a Swedish Islamic fighter called Abu Bakr, and is reported to be a convert who previously attended a mosque in South London.

Isa also has a younger brother, who would now be between two and three years old, who his mother has referred to as a ‘mini mujahid’, or holy warrior.

Images of Isa look remarkably similar to those of the young boy featured in the video, who could pass as six years old – the same age as Isa would be now.

The two children also appear to have a mole on their face in the same area and have similarly shaped eyes.

The terror group’s captives (pictured), dressed in orange jumpsuits, were filmed ‘confessing’ in Arabic to spying for British security service

Two years ago, Dare swapped her ‘comfortable life’ in Britain, where she was known for her dimples and her love of her mother’s home cooking, for the horror of Syria, where she has joined the terror group ISIS.

After appearing in an ISIS recruitment video calling on British Muslims to ‘stop being selfish’ and give up their families and studies to join the front line in the Middle East, Dare – a pseudonym – is said to be top of MI6’s list.

Young children have appeared in many ISIS propaganda videos before, including material which shows groups of youngsters being trained with guns.

In one infamous image, a child was pictured holding a severed head, while another photograph that circulated online showed a young child being encouraged to kick a severed head.

More than 30 UK children had been made the subject of family court orders over radicalisation fears, Scotland Yard said in August.

At that time, judges had considered cases involving 12 different families.

Assistant Commissioner Mark Rowley, the country’s most senior terrorism officer, said in some instances the children were ‘almost babes in arms’, with ages ranging from two up to 16 or 17.

There have been a series of high-profile cases involving families taking their children to Syria, or making unsuccessful attempts to make the journey, in the past year.

In October, police released images of a family of seven from Bradford thought to have begun a journey to Syria or Iraq.

The evil and disgusting ISIS propaganda video shows why we need to do much more to tackle radicalisation in Britain.

In the footage released over the weekend, the five captives were forced to confess to their crimes – most probably under duress – before they were paraded to a remote desert location and ordered to kneel.

The English speaking jihadi yelled ‘Allahu Akbar’ before he and four other fanatics shot the men from point blank range.

The video ended with a trailer for another execution in which a young, dark skinned boy warned Britain of coming atrocities.

It raised fears that the child, who appeared to be around five, may have been made to execute someone on camera.

Before killing the prisoners in cold blood, the British jihadi said: ‘This is a message to David Cameron, slave of the White House, mule of the Jews.’

He called the Prime Minister an ‘imbecile’ and warned ‘your children will pay’ for British airstrikes on ISIS targets in Syria.

He added: ‘How strange it is that we find ourselves today hearing an insignificant leader like you challenge the might of the Islamic State.

‘How strange it is that the leader of a small island threatens us with a handful of planes.

‘One would have thought you would have learned the lessons of your pathetic master in Washington and his failed campaign against Islamic State.

‘It seems that you, just like your predecessors [Tony] Blair and [Gordon] Brown, are just as arrogant and foolish.

‘David, only a fool would wage war against a land where the law of Allah reigns supreme and where the people live under the justice and security of the Sharia.

‘As for those of you who wish to continue fighting under the banner of Cameron on the minimum wage, we say to you, to ask yourself, do you really think your government will care about you when you come into our hands?

‘Or will they abandon you, as they have abandoned these spies, and those who came before them.’

The chief executioner (pictured) in ISIS’s newest propaganda video wore military fatigues and spoke in a clear British accent.

The executioner in the new propaganda video bore a chilling resemblance to ISIS’s former executioner in chief, Jihadi Jn.

Reacting to the video, Labour MP Sadiq Khan wrote on Twitter: ‘The evil and disgusting ISIS propaganda video shows why we need to do much more to tackle radicalisation in Britain.’

The masked executioner in the video bore a chilling resemblance to ISIS’s former executioner in chief, Jihadi John.

The fanatic, real name Mohammed Emwazi, was filmed executing British aid workers David Haines and Alan Henning, American journalists Steven Sotloff and James Foley, American aid worker Peter Kassig and Japanese journalist Kenji Goto.

He was killed by a US drone strike near an iconic clock tower in the terror group’s de facto capital of Raqqa in Syria in November.

Security experts believe the mass execution is the culmination of an Islamic State manhunt for those who helped Western forces kill Emwazi.

Among the five men shot dead are understood to be those suspected of providing information on his movements and appearance.

The victims give their names and briefly discuss the details of their so-called offences – presumably under duress. Although their identities could not be verified, among them was Umaar Hamud al-Ja’far, 30, from Raqqa, who said he supplied information about the city’s topography. Another victim, Ubi Muhammad Abdul Ghani, 26, said he undertook covert surveillance.

Faisal Hamud al-Ja’far, 25, said he was also from Raqqa and stated he was paid money to open an internet café in the city.

Mahyar Mahmud al-Uthmaan, 31, says he accepted a payment of $300 in Turkey, also to open an internet café. Ha’il Marwan Abdul Razaq, 40, admitted taking pictures of militant activity.

Intelligence agencies are already working to identify the young boy and the older British jihadi in the film.

More than 800 Britons have travelled to Syria and Iraq to fight for Islamic State, including families from Luton, Bradford and London.

The new video, which featured a child threatening Britain, comes a month since RAF jets began bombing ISIS targets in Syria.

Russian speaking ISIS fighter threatened President Vladimir Putin before he beheaded a suspected spy on camera in a propaganda video released last month

RAF strikes killed 396 ISIS terrorists from October 2014 to October 2015, with 30 wiped out in a single strike in November, a Freedom of Information request revealed (pictured, US airstrike in Ramadi, Iraq)

In the wake of the Paris attacks and a UN Security Council resolution which called on all member states to double their efforts to eradicate ISIS, British drones, as well as Typhoon and Tornado jets, began airstrikes on Syria.

RAF strikes killed 396 ISIS terrorists from October 2014 to October 2015, with 30 wiped out in a single strike in November, a Freedom of Information request revealed.

And on December 9, Chancellor George Osborne said 16 RAF jets had killed four since MPs voted to extend strikes to Syria a week prior.

In another propaganda video released last month, a Russian speaking ISIS fighter threatened President Vladimir Putin before he beheaded a suspected spy on camera.

The jihadi vowed revenge on Putin in response to Russian jets which had been targetting ISIS and rebel fighters in aid of President Bashar al-Assad.

The executioner, who was later named as Anatoly Zemlyanka, 28, said to Russia: ‘You will not find peace in your homes.

‘We will kill your sons… for each son you killed here. And we will destroy your homes for each home you destroyed.

All praise be to Allah the greatest, the only one worthy of worship, obedience and submission.

And may the peace and blessings be upon the prophet Muhammad, the final messenger sent to all of mankind.

This is a message to David Cameron.

O slave of the White House, o mule of the Jews.

How strange it is that we find ourselves today hearing an insignificant leader like you challenge the might of the Islamic State.

How strange it is that the leader of a small island threatens us with a handful of planes. One would have thought you would have learned the lessons of your pathetic master in Washington and his failed campaign against Islamic State.

It seems that you, just like your predecessors Blair and Brown, are just as arrogant and foolish.

In fact David, you are more of an imbecile.

Only an imbecile would dare to wage war against a land where the law of Allah reigns supreme.

And where the people live under the justice and security of the Sharia.

Only an imbecile would dare to anger a people who love death the way that you love your life.

O British Government. O people of Britain. Know that today your citizenship are under our feet.

And that the Islamic State, our country, is here to stay.

And we will continue to wage jihad, break borders and one day invade your land where we will rule by the sharia.

But as for those of you who wish to continue fighting under the banner of Cameron on the minimum wage, we say to you, to ask yourself, do you really think your government will care about you when you come into our hands?

Or will they abandon you, as they have abandoned these spies, and those who came before them.

Because you will lose this war, as you lost in Iraq and Afghanistan.

But this time when you lose, your children will pay for your deeds.

And remember you as the fools who thought they could fight the Islamic State.

Russia: The Troll State

Posted on January 4, 2016January 4, 2016 by Denise Simon

Saint Petersburg (AFP) – Lyudmila Savchuk says it was money that wooed her into the ranks of the Kremlin’s online army, where she bombarded website comment pages with eulogies of President Vladimir Putin, while mocking his adversaries.

“Putin is great,” “Ukrainians are Fascists,” “Europe is decadent”: Savchuk, 34, listed the main messages she was told to put out on Internet forums after responding to a job advertisement online.

“Our job was to write in a pro-government way, to interpret all events in a way that glorifies the government’s politics and Putin personally,” she said.

Performing her duties as an Internet “troll”, Savchuk kept up several blogs on the popular Russian platform LiveJournal, juggling the virtual identities of a housewife, a student and an athlete.

I could not be happier that a doctoral student at the University of California, Berkeley wrote this piece below as he is quite right and it must be understood. His study has validated the propaganda item noted above.

If you as a reader want to further understand Vladimir Putin and is mission leading Russia, to know his background is key. That is found here.

Russia has propaganda operations that literally troll events in the United States and in fact creates them causing alarm and worry for American citizens that pay attention. Well done to Andrew Kornbluth.

AtlanticCouncil: In the eighteen months since Russia annexed Crimea, the world has been alternately captivated and bewildered by the wild swings and sudden shifts that describe Russian foreign policy under President Vladimir Putin. Particularly alarming for those who fear a direct clash between Russia and the West has been Putin’s tendency to swerve between antagonism and conciliation, or—even more bizarrely—to pursue both simultaneously.

In an attempt to put a name to this behavior, a variety of epithets, from “rogue state” to “spoiler,” have been dusted off and applied to the present Russian government. But insofar as the current state of Putin’s Russia represents a new kind of autocracy, none of these labels do justice to its innovative nature. Perhaps a better indication of what drives this system can be found in the Russian government’s well-documented embrace of Internet “trolling,” which corresponds surprisingly well to the seemingly random and contradictory fluctuations of the country’s relations with the outside world.

In its most basic form, trolling refers to the phenomenon of Internet users who post inflammatory messages in online forums like comment sections and social media threads with the aim of antagonizing others. Although most trolling is idle provocation, the Kremlin was famously revealed in the last year to be paying large numbers of professional “trolls” to both write and up-vote posts praising Russia’s occupation of Ukrainian territory and condemning its critics. But how can trolling be a technique of rule?

To begin with, trolls, regardless of the anger they unleash online, are not people who want to definitively cut themselves off from the real world. Trolls seek instant gratification and attention by spreading vitriol on the Internet, but resume their normal lives offline. With this in mind, Russia’s sudden intervention in the war in Syria can be understood as the latest in a long line of trolling campaigns, beginning with the suspension of foreign adoptions three years ago. These acts were intended to needle the West and cheer Russians, but without risking an actual breakdown in foreign relations (in this respect, the war in Ukraine proved to be a serious miscalculation).

The label of “rogue state” is therefore misplaced when it comes to Russia, which clearly desires to win readmission to the “clubhouse” of world powers. Thus the bombing of Syrian rebels, for all the consternation it has caused, has been accompanied by thinly-veiled pleas for Western governments to lift the isolation imposed on Russia over the Ukrainian crisis.

Trolling is also an effective substitute for constructive activity. By tormenting others, trolls create the illusion of action and assuage their own nagging feelings of powerlessness. Likewise, Putin’s military adventures in Ukraine and Syria have been remarkably successful at distracting attention from the worsening decay of Russia’s human and economic capital.

But the satisfaction derived from trolling is inherently short-lived. To sustain their short attention spans, trolls must constantly find new and varied ways to bait their opponents. Hence the dizzying pivot from promoting the so-called “People’s Republics” of Donetsk and Luhansk, which were banished from the headlines almost overnight, to heralding the creation of an “anti-terrorist coalition” in Syria.

Unfortunately, trolling is a tactic that cannot serve as a platform for a long-term vision or strategy. In place of ideology-based opposition to the West, Russia’s troll state offers up only irascibility and schadenfreude, the glee derived from other people’s frustrations. Perhaps it could not be otherwise. After all, Russia’s elite depends on the West—for recreation, money-laundering, medical treatment, and the education of its children. In many ways, Russia’s rulers have more in common with the West’s upper class than they do with the pensioners scraping by in the Moscow suburbs.

The danger, of course, is that even bloodless trolling can unintentionally escalate into life-or-death confrontation, a risk that was made real when, after months of Russian incursions into foreign airspace from the Baltics to Japan, Turkey shot down a Russian bomber passing over its territory. But the state’s reliance on trolling in an ideological vacuum gives some cause for hope. After all, a sustained and sober response, both online and in real life, is often sufficient to curb trolling. In the commotion set off by Russia’s Syrian interlude, many seem to have forgotten that limited sanctions and diplomatic ostracism appear to have persuaded the Kremlin to restrain its forces in the Donbas region. Although the conflict in eastern Ukraine continues to claim lives on a daily basis and has flared back up, no major offensive has been launched since February 2015.

To think of Russia as a troll state is not to assume that it has no real goals or that its targets are chosen purely on a whim. It does, however, help to explain a style of statecraft that might otherwise seem increasingly irrational and unpredictable. Certainly, the Russian public delights in the spectacle of their President poking Western leaders in the eye. And Putin does seem to have hit on something fundamental about the age we live in. As the unexpected popularity of Donald Trump’s run for the American presidency has demonstrated, trolling is a political technique perfectly suited to more than one easily-bored, confrontation-hungry modern society.