[h=2]Clinton’s Program to Counter ISIS Propaganda ‘Embarrassing,’ ‘In Disarray’[/h]In recent speech, former secretary of state touted creation of center that is widely viewed as ineffective
SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
BY: Daniel Wiser
December 17, 2015 5:00 am
A program touted by Hillary Clinton that was designed to counter the online propaganda of ISIS has been sharply criticized as ineffective and even embarrassing, according to recent reports.
In a speech Tuesday, Clinton, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination, mentioned the creation of an interagency center in 2011 while she was secretary of state. That initiative, known as the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications, employed specialists to “to wage online battles with extremists to counter their propaganda,” she said.
As part of her plan to counter the radicalization of Americans, she said that “we need to step up our game” and intensify existing efforts to combat the digital messaging of ISIS and other terrorist groups.
However, the center and its messaging efforts have been widely panned by experts and other critics, raising questions about Clinton’s counterterrorism policies.
Rita Katz, an analyst with the SITE Intelligence Group who tracks the online communications of jihadists, told the Washington Post in May that the center, as well as its “Think Again Turn Away” campaign, has produced “embarrassing” content that might have even benefited ISIS.
“It’s better to not do anything than to do what they’re doing at the State Department,” she said.
The Clinton campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
The program was reported to be a priority for Clinton, who envisioned that it could operate as a campaign-style “war room” delivering rapid-fire responses to terrorist propaganda.
Yet critics said that one of the group’s most prominent videos, designed to showcase the actual brutality of life in ISIS territory and released last year, was a misfire and a mistake. The videobegins with the text “Run Do not walk to ISIS Land” before showing images of suicide bombings, crucifixions, and other atrocities committed by the terrorist group.
The graphic images did not appear to slow ISIS’ recruitment of foreign fighters, Katz said, and might have enhanced its reputation among individuals vulnerable to radicalization.
Additionally, critics said the center was underfunded and overwhelmed by the burgeoning presence of jihadists on platforms such as Twitter. Terrorist messengers sent a barrage of complaints to Twitter and YouTube arguing that the center violated the companies’ terms of service, forcing the State Department to contact the companies to bring their accounts back online.
After a review by outside experts from Google, Twitter, and other technology companies, the State Department said it might scale back its efforts to produce counterpropaganda content on social media. The panel of experts said the State Department needs to do a better job of working with allies in the Middle East to combat ISIS ideology.
“The group’s skepticism reflected concern about U.S. credibility with Muslim audiences overseas as well as the scant evidence that the State program has diminished the flow of recruits to the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL,” the Washington Post reported earlier this month.
With the exit of center head Rashad Hussain to the Justice Department, the program has now lost two directors in one year.
Will McCants, an ISIS expert at the Brookings Institution and former State Department adviser, told the Post that the counterpropaganda program “is in disarray.” For those engaged in the effort, “morale is low, and they’re not getting any clarity from the top about what they’re supposed to be doing,” he added.
Critics have also condemned other elements of Clinton’s record fighting terrorist groups. Brian Hook, co-founder of the John Hay Initiative and former assistant secretary of state in the George W. Bush administration, said in a statement that she “misjudged the threat posed by ISIS while others were sounding the alarm.”
“Jihadists have far more recruits, weapons, and territory today than they did at the start of her tenure as Secretary of State,” he said. “This is the price of Secretary Clinton’s failed leadership, which our nation cannot afford at this dangerous time in the world.”
SHARE
TWEET
Hillary Clinton / AP
BY: Daniel Wiser
December 17, 2015 5:00 am
A program touted by Hillary Clinton that was designed to counter the online propaganda of ISIS has been sharply criticized as ineffective and even embarrassing, according to recent reports.
In a speech Tuesday, Clinton, the frontrunner for the Democratic presidential nomination, mentioned the creation of an interagency center in 2011 while she was secretary of state. That initiative, known as the Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications, employed specialists to “to wage online battles with extremists to counter their propaganda,” she said.
As part of her plan to counter the radicalization of Americans, she said that “we need to step up our game” and intensify existing efforts to combat the digital messaging of ISIS and other terrorist groups.
However, the center and its messaging efforts have been widely panned by experts and other critics, raising questions about Clinton’s counterterrorism policies.
Rita Katz, an analyst with the SITE Intelligence Group who tracks the online communications of jihadists, told the Washington Post in May that the center, as well as its “Think Again Turn Away” campaign, has produced “embarrassing” content that might have even benefited ISIS.
“It’s better to not do anything than to do what they’re doing at the State Department,” she said.
The Clinton campaign did not respond to a request for comment.
The program was reported to be a priority for Clinton, who envisioned that it could operate as a campaign-style “war room” delivering rapid-fire responses to terrorist propaganda.
Yet critics said that one of the group’s most prominent videos, designed to showcase the actual brutality of life in ISIS territory and released last year, was a misfire and a mistake. The videobegins with the text “Run Do not walk to ISIS Land” before showing images of suicide bombings, crucifixions, and other atrocities committed by the terrorist group.
The graphic images did not appear to slow ISIS’ recruitment of foreign fighters, Katz said, and might have enhanced its reputation among individuals vulnerable to radicalization.
Additionally, critics said the center was underfunded and overwhelmed by the burgeoning presence of jihadists on platforms such as Twitter. Terrorist messengers sent a barrage of complaints to Twitter and YouTube arguing that the center violated the companies’ terms of service, forcing the State Department to contact the companies to bring their accounts back online.
After a review by outside experts from Google, Twitter, and other technology companies, the State Department said it might scale back its efforts to produce counterpropaganda content on social media. The panel of experts said the State Department needs to do a better job of working with allies in the Middle East to combat ISIS ideology.
“The group’s skepticism reflected concern about U.S. credibility with Muslim audiences overseas as well as the scant evidence that the State program has diminished the flow of recruits to the Islamic State, also known as ISIS and ISIL,” the Washington Post reported earlier this month.
With the exit of center head Rashad Hussain to the Justice Department, the program has now lost two directors in one year.
Will McCants, an ISIS expert at the Brookings Institution and former State Department adviser, told the Post that the counterpropaganda program “is in disarray.” For those engaged in the effort, “morale is low, and they’re not getting any clarity from the top about what they’re supposed to be doing,” he added.
Critics have also condemned other elements of Clinton’s record fighting terrorist groups. Brian Hook, co-founder of the John Hay Initiative and former assistant secretary of state in the George W. Bush administration, said in a statement that she “misjudged the threat posed by ISIS while others were sounding the alarm.”
“Jihadists have far more recruits, weapons, and territory today than they did at the start of her tenure as Secretary of State,” he said. “This is the price of Secretary Clinton’s failed leadership, which our nation cannot afford at this dangerous time in the world.”
Why are the Democrats putting their candidates on stage on a Saturday, when most people are either out, or at least not likely to gather around the television for political debate (journalists and political nerds excluded)?
Hint: they may not want you to watch.
Some of frontrunner Hillary Clinton‘s rivals have suggested the debate schedule was put together to protect Clinton. The smaller the audience, the idea goes, the less likely it is for Clinton to succumb to a prominent stumble and lose her lead. The Washington Post notes that Clinton originally wanted to have four debates, rather than six, and that she preferred to avoid having too many debates.
Hint: they may not want you to watch.
Some of frontrunner Hillary Clinton‘s rivals have suggested the debate schedule was put together to protect Clinton. The smaller the audience, the idea goes, the less likely it is for Clinton to succumb to a prominent stumble and lose her lead. The Washington Post notes that Clinton originally wanted to have four debates, rather than six, and that she preferred to avoid having too many debates.
Hold the presses…
Hillary doesn’t have horns!
On Wednesday, Hillary Clinton was campaigning in Nebraska when she felt the need to assure Republican voters of one thing: "I don't have horns."
"Here's some additional facts that I want you to know," Clinton told the crowd. "Because I imagine when you leave here today, you might run into some of your friends and colleagues who ask, 'Where have you been? What have you done today?' and if you tell them you came for a rally to see me, you know, some of them who may be of the Republican persuasion -- although, we're not going to give up on them, are we? -- We're going to keep trying to reach out to them. First thing you're going to tell them, as best as you can tell looking under the lights, I don't have horns."
Now the more important question, Is it true that you have dust in your pussy?
Hillary doesn’t have horns!
On Wednesday, Hillary Clinton was campaigning in Nebraska when she felt the need to assure Republican voters of one thing: "I don't have horns."
"Here's some additional facts that I want you to know," Clinton told the crowd. "Because I imagine when you leave here today, you might run into some of your friends and colleagues who ask, 'Where have you been? What have you done today?' and if you tell them you came for a rally to see me, you know, some of them who may be of the Republican persuasion -- although, we're not going to give up on them, are we? -- We're going to keep trying to reach out to them. First thing you're going to tell them, as best as you can tell looking under the lights, I don't have horns."
Now the more important question, Is it true that you have dust in your pussy?
There is a long and treasured tradition of Democrat leaders insulting the intelligence or morality of their base in order to bully them into doing the "right" thing - in other words, into doing what that leadership wants. Shame is their chief weapon.
In keeping with that tradition, Senator Claire McCaskill appeared on MSNBC today, where she not only conceded that millennials aren't digging on Hillary, but suggested that the reason was that they don't know squat:
Well I think part of it is that they haven't yet fully looked at the choices. Um, there may not be a natural enthusiasm because the Clintons have been around all of their lives, and this doesn't feel as new and is different in this historic as it does to some of us who understand what it means to have a woman president, in light of the struggles we've gone through.
The best part is "some of us who understand what it means." Because you see, the millennial girls don't understand. They don't get it. Those dummies. Hilarious.
And it probably goes without saying that the millennial female voters who like Carly Fiorina don't get it either. A woman president is only a good and historic thing if it's a Democrat woman president.
Dust In The Wind.
In keeping with that tradition, Senator Claire McCaskill appeared on MSNBC today, where she not only conceded that millennials aren't digging on Hillary, but suggested that the reason was that they don't know squat:
Well I think part of it is that they haven't yet fully looked at the choices. Um, there may not be a natural enthusiasm because the Clintons have been around all of their lives, and this doesn't feel as new and is different in this historic as it does to some of us who understand what it means to have a woman president, in light of the struggles we've gone through.
The best part is "some of us who understand what it means." Because you see, the millennial girls don't understand. They don't get it. Those dummies. Hilarious.
And it probably goes without saying that the millennial female voters who like Carly Fiorina don't get it either. A woman president is only a good and historic thing if it's a Democrat woman president.
Dust In The Wind.
Three Hillary Clinton Stories You Probably Missed Thanks to the Media’s Obsession With Donald Trump
BY: Andrew Stiles
December 15, 2015 1:29 pm
SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
Former Republican frontrunner Donald Trump has been absolutely dominating the media’s coverage of the 2016 presidential race, mostly because his comments allow pundits to courageously take a stand against racism. Also, they’re pretty desperate for good ratings.
Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, hasn’t gotten a lot of attention lately, that doesn’t mean she hasn’t been making news. Here are few Hillary headlines you might have missed during the media’s most recent Trumpgasm.
1.
Senate investigators have asked the State Department for backup copies of emails sent by Bryan Magliano, the guy Hillary hired to maintain her secret email server, and has since pled the Fifth in response to the ongoing federal investigations. The State Department, however, just told those investigator that they couldn’t find any copies of those emails. The FBI, which has taken possession of Pagliano’s government computer, might have better luck.
2.
Just another run-of-the-mill story about nepotism/corruption involving Hillary Clinton and Goldman Sachs, her favorite Wall Street bank:
3.
Hillary Clinton has repeatedly insisted that she never (sent or) received information on her private email server that was classified (at the time). The intelligence community rejects that assessment, which Hillary has dismissed as a “disagreement” between government agencies. Fox Newsreports on a new development that undermines Hillary’s case:
BY: Andrew Stiles
December 15, 2015 1:29 pm
SHARE
TWEET
AP
Former Republican frontrunner Donald Trump has been absolutely dominating the media’s coverage of the 2016 presidential race, mostly because his comments allow pundits to courageously take a stand against racism. Also, they’re pretty desperate for good ratings.
Democratic frontrunner Hillary Clinton, on the other hand, hasn’t gotten a lot of attention lately, that doesn’t mean she hasn’t been making news. Here are few Hillary headlines you might have missed during the media’s most recent Trumpgasm.
1.
Senate investigators have asked the State Department for backup copies of emails sent by Bryan Magliano, the guy Hillary hired to maintain her secret email server, and has since pled the Fifth in response to the ongoing federal investigations. The State Department, however, just told those investigator that they couldn’t find any copies of those emails. The FBI, which has taken possession of Pagliano’s government computer, might have better luck.
2.
Just another run-of-the-mill story about nepotism/corruption involving Hillary Clinton and Goldman Sachs, her favorite Wall Street bank:
As secretary of state, Hillary Clinton intervened in a request forwarded by her son-in-law on behalf of a deep-sea mining firm to meet with her or other State Department officials, according to the recently released Clinton emails.
One of the firm’s investors had asked Clinton’s son-in-law, Marc Mezvinsky, who is married to Chelsea Clinton, for help setting up such contacts, the emails show.
Mezvinsky passed along the request on behalf of his former employer, Goldman Sachs, which was representing the mining firm Neptune in its effort to lobby for Senate approval of the Law of the Seas Treaty. Clinton forwarded the email to her aide Tom Nides, a former (and current) Morgan Stanley executive. The Clinton campaign refused to respond to multiple requests for comment from the Associated Press. A watchdog group has asked the U.S. Office of Government Ethics to investigate.One of the firm’s investors had asked Clinton’s son-in-law, Marc Mezvinsky, who is married to Chelsea Clinton, for help setting up such contacts, the emails show.
3.
Hillary Clinton has repeatedly insisted that she never (sent or) received information on her private email server that was classified (at the time). The intelligence community rejects that assessment, which Hillary has dismissed as a “disagreement” between government agencies. Fox Newsreports on a new development that undermines Hillary’s case:
An intelligence community review has re-affirmed that two classified emails were indeed “top secret” when they hit Hillary Clinton’s unsecured personal server despite a challenge to that designation by the State Department, according to two sources familiar with the review.
The sources described the dispute over whether the two emails were classified at the highest level as a “settled matter.”
Perhaps one of these stories will come up at the next Democratic primary debate, which takes place this Saturday, at night, during an NFL game.The sources described the dispute over whether the two emails were classified at the highest level as a “settled matter.”
[h=2]Clinton: ‘I Don’t Know That I Ever Have’ Taken Money From Fossil Fuel Industry[/h]SHARE
TWEET
EMAIL
BY: Alyssa Canobbio
December 16, 2015 6:51 pm
Hillary Clinton was asked by an attendee at her town hall meeting in Iowa Wednesday if she would sign a pledge saying that she would not accept money from the fossil fuel industry. Clinton said that she did not think that she had ever accepted money from the oil and gas industries. She joked that she was not one of their favorite people.
“Well, I don’t know that I ever have. I am not exactly one of their favorites,” Clinton said. “Have I? Well, I will check on that.”
A Huffington Post analysis revealed that all of her lobbyist-bundlers have worked for the fossil fuel industry at one point in time. The lobbying firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld has been registered to lobby for Chevron since 2006. Two of the firm’s lobbyists, Scott Parven and Brian Pomper, have bundled thousands of dollars for Clinton. They have also helped Chevron resist the efforts to eliminate oil and gas tax breaks.
Additionally, the Clinton Foundation accepts millions of dollars from the oil and gas industry. The foundation has accepted donations from fossil fuel giant ExxonMobil and large oil-producing states in the Middle East.
“I am committed to moving away from fossil fuels toward clean renewable energy. I go all over this country bragging about Iowa. Why? Because you are getting a third of your electricity from renewables, primarily wind,” Clinton said.
Clinton told the audience of her phone interview with a South Carolinian reporter that she is against drilling off the coast of the United States and that she was the first, even before the president, on not drilling in the Arctic.
“Everyone knows where I stand,” Clinton said.
TWEET
BY: Alyssa Canobbio
December 16, 2015 6:51 pm
Hillary Clinton was asked by an attendee at her town hall meeting in Iowa Wednesday if she would sign a pledge saying that she would not accept money from the fossil fuel industry. Clinton said that she did not think that she had ever accepted money from the oil and gas industries. She joked that she was not one of their favorite people.
“Well, I don’t know that I ever have. I am not exactly one of their favorites,” Clinton said. “Have I? Well, I will check on that.”
A Huffington Post analysis revealed that all of her lobbyist-bundlers have worked for the fossil fuel industry at one point in time. The lobbying firm Akin Gump Strauss Hauer & Feld has been registered to lobby for Chevron since 2006. Two of the firm’s lobbyists, Scott Parven and Brian Pomper, have bundled thousands of dollars for Clinton. They have also helped Chevron resist the efforts to eliminate oil and gas tax breaks.
Additionally, the Clinton Foundation accepts millions of dollars from the oil and gas industry. The foundation has accepted donations from fossil fuel giant ExxonMobil and large oil-producing states in the Middle East.
“I am committed to moving away from fossil fuels toward clean renewable energy. I go all over this country bragging about Iowa. Why? Because you are getting a third of your electricity from renewables, primarily wind,” Clinton said.
Clinton told the audience of her phone interview with a South Carolinian reporter that she is against drilling off the coast of the United States and that she was the first, even before the president, on not drilling in the Arctic.
“Everyone knows where I stand,” Clinton said.
The Hildabeast makes a tightly controlled appearance for a day, then she's back in hiding exhausted for the next 3-4 days. All interviews and gaystream media access to the queen bitch are scripted. The Clinton camp only wanted 3 debates and the DNC compromised at 6. The latest Dem debate is Dec 19th because they know nobody will be watching. I've never seen a presidential candidate this shielded and 'managed' like the Hildabeast. Probably because they know the more people see her, the less popular she becomes, AND...the more public appearances she makes, the more likely she will really fuck up and say something stupid or do another drunk face plant.
Contrast the Hildabeast to ANY of the serious GOP contenders and it's like a night and day - huge rallies and unscripted interviews almost on a daily basis. No restricted access. Everyone just speaking their mind out in the open and having a great time connecting with the American people.
Trump is right, the Hildabeast doesn't have the strength or stamina to be president. Not by a long shot.
Contrast the Hildabeast to ANY of the serious GOP contenders and it's like a night and day - huge rallies and unscripted interviews almost on a daily basis. No restricted access. Everyone just speaking their mind out in the open and having a great time connecting with the American people.
Trump is right, the Hildabeast doesn't have the strength or stamina to be president. Not by a long shot.
