But it seems to me that enthusiastic policy wonks might also take note of a comment offered as regards the "Anonymous" assault. How many of them would take the following yardstick and apply it to the government that is so swift to condemn Islamic State and its concomitant "terrorism?"Hacktivist group Anonymous is ramping up efforts to tackle sympathisers of the Islamic State group on Twitter.It has published a list of Twitter accounts it claims are spreading propaganda in support of the group.Some accounts have been flooded with images of Japanese anime characters to try to influence search engine results for phrases connected to IS.
Repeating for an emphasis a policy-challenged wonk might require:"The action is both positive and negative," said Rashad Ali, a senior fellow at the Institute for Strategic Dialogue which works on ways to counter extremism."Practically speaking, you are getting rid of a whole host of people from the public domain," he said, adding that such a large takedown can undoubtedly have an impact."However," he said, "it's not a solution because what we now need to do is not just take down accounts but actually provide new narratives for people."This is where we are failing," he said. "We have not had a strong, thought-out counter-argument to IS's message.""This is where we are failing," he said. "We have not had a strong, thought-out counter-argument to IS's message."
We have not had a strong, thought-out counter-argument to IS's message.
It took 50 years to acknowledge American strangle-hold approaches to Cuba as a "failed policy." How long will it take to recognize that a big stick is only as good as its thoughtful counter-argument tread in the Middle East?