The Taliban - business barbaric as usual
-
Oh, you folks think the Taliban has a Twitter account? Go ahead of search for it. There is no such Twitter account.
@axtremus said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Oh, you folks think the Taliban has a Twitter account? Go ahead of search for it. There is no such Twitter account.
That was my first thought too, Ax. Taliban on Twitter???
GMAFB.Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka
-
As we approach the final withdrawal of all US and Nato forces from Afghanistan, it’s worth pointing out a shocking double-standard that has so far gone strangely unnoticed. How can it be that Twitter has banned a US president, who even in defeat garnered more than 74 million votes in 2020, yet still allows the Taliban to pump out propaganda on its platform?
Let’s be clear. The Taliban is a hard-line Islamist group that extols jihad, opposes democracy and is engaged in a brutal war of attrition against a democratically elected government in Afghanistan.
As Paul Wood noted in these pages on June 24, Twitter is the Taliban’s preferred social media platform. At the time of writing, the official Taliban spokesman’s account has over 204,000 followers and is prolific in daily output, tweeting official statements, numerous attack claims and occasional propaganda. Twitter seems to have no problem with this.
Much of the content mirrors what has been uploaded onto the group’s official Voice of Jihad website, so Twitter is in many ways acting as a free dissemination tool for the Taliban.
The spokesman, or his administrators, are normally careful not to cross the platform’s so-called moderation policy, but the account has tweeted content that clearly constitutes an incitement to violence, which is the charge that Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey used to remove Donald Trump from the platform, permanently, in January, following the Capitol Hill riot.
How does that standard not apply to the Taliban? One video tweeted by the group’s spokesman in April (still viewable today) shows a vehicle belonging to the Afghan security forces making its way through a narrow alleyway in Jalalabad. The video, filmed through the front windscreen of a waiting Taliban member around 100 yards away, runs for seven seconds before the approaching vehicle is jettisoned sky high by an improvised explosive device (IED). The spokesman’s tweet added that this was a ‘tactical explosion’. If that is not an incitement to violence, then I do not know what is. I don’t know what the casualty toll was for that incident. Judging by the force of the explosion alone, I very much doubt anyone in the vehicle survived.
This video was also widely shared and celebrated by a large network of Taliban supporters on Twitter, many of whom added hate-filled messages. Many of these supporters appear to operate authentic accounts but there are also accounts that demonstrate inauthentic activity (bots). The supporters routinely deploy hashtag campaigns on Twitter to generate further content engagement. One ‘popular’ campaign in terms of likes and retweets was #Get_out_of_Afghanistan, which was accompanied by multiple use of videos showing archive IED strikes targeting Nato and Afghan forces.
More clear incitement to violence — but not even a chirp from Twitter.
Most prominent Taliban supporters have a presence on other social media platforms as well, notably Facebook and Telegram, to spread content further. But in terms of reach and visibility — especially for messaging aimed at the international audience — Twitter is number one. Occasional takedowns do occur, but the Taliban supporters soon reemerge on the platform, often using the same, or similar, account names, with just a small incremental number change.
In a further demonstration of Twitter’s chaotic takedown approach, several well-established analysts of the Afghanistan security environment had their accounts suspended temporarily in recent months, presumably because an automated ‘moderation’ algorithm was unable to distinguish between a real jihadist account and one who comments on and analyses jihadist activity.
Twitter has taken action on accounts run by, or supporting, the so-called Islamic State — so a coordinated takedown strategy is clearly possible, when there is the will. The predominant language of IS content is Arabic, and resources and time have clearly been spent to block or remove material in this case.
So why can’t similar efforts be made for jihadist content in Pashto, the predominant language for Taliban messaging? The simple truth of the matter, I suspect, is that social media executives do not perceive the Afghanistan-focused Taliban to be as much of a threat to their way of life as IS, and the latter’s high-profile attacks in Western cities will have focused minds.
The fact that many reports continue to shed light on existing ties between al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan should be enough to counter this rationale. More importantly, what about the death toll in Afghanistan: don’t Afghan lives matter?
Donald Trump’s actions — and his tweets — during the Capitol Hill riot should not be excused, but Twitter’s absurd double-standards deserve to be called out.
The author of this article, an active open-source intelligence (OSINT) analyst who specializes in jihadist output on social media, is writing under an alias.
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
-
@axtremus said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Oh, you folks think the Taliban has a Twitter account? Go ahead of search for it. There is no such Twitter account.
That was my first thought too, Ax. Taliban on Twitter???
GMAFB.@catseye3 said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
@axtremus said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Oh, you folks think the Taliban has a Twitter account? Go ahead of search for it. There is no such Twitter account.
That was my first thought too, Ax. Taliban on Twitter???
GMAFB.Now, don't you feel stupid?
“Cry havoc and let slip the DOGE of war!”
Those who cheered as J-6 American prisoners were locked in solitary for 18 months without trial, now suddenly fight tooth and nail for foreign terrorists’ "due process". — Buck Sexton
-
@catseye3 said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
@axtremus said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Oh, you folks think the Taliban has a Twitter account? Go ahead of search for it. There is no such Twitter account.
That was my first thought too, Ax. Taliban on Twitter???
GMAFB.Now, don't you feel stupid?
@jolly said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Now, don't you feel stupid?
Not really. Excerpt from NBCNews: "[The Taliban] Twitter feed pumps out several messages a day, keeping 993 followers up to date with often highly exaggerated reports of strikes against the "infidel forces" and the "Karzai puppet regime . . .
it seems the Taliban have joined the new millennium.The Guardian noted that on Thursday (last May), the account posted its first English tweet about an attack on police in Farah province: "Enemy attacked in Khak-e-Safid, 6 dead." Links to similar reports are more often broken than not because "the Taliban's official website, regularly evicted from servers or shut down by authorities, is constantly on the move."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/follow-taliban-now-twitter-flna123360
^^^^^^I don't know if this has more truth or your guy's. It seems like Taliban is on Twitter, kinda. I've not followed the Afghan business for quite some time. I'd have thought Taliban was more into chewing the chess pieces. But if you're right, you're right, and I'm wrong.
But for the record, no far right source will ever, fucking ever, make me feel stupid.
Success is measured by your discipline and inner peace. – Mike Ditka
-
As we approach the final withdrawal of all US and Nato forces from Afghanistan, it’s worth pointing out a shocking double-standard that has so far gone strangely unnoticed. How can it be that Twitter has banned a US president, who even in defeat garnered more than 74 million votes in 2020, yet still allows the Taliban to pump out propaganda on its platform?
Let’s be clear. The Taliban is a hard-line Islamist group that extols jihad, opposes democracy and is engaged in a brutal war of attrition against a democratically elected government in Afghanistan.
As Paul Wood noted in these pages on June 24, Twitter is the Taliban’s preferred social media platform. At the time of writing, the official Taliban spokesman’s account has over 204,000 followers and is prolific in daily output, tweeting official statements, numerous attack claims and occasional propaganda. Twitter seems to have no problem with this.
Much of the content mirrors what has been uploaded onto the group’s official Voice of Jihad website, so Twitter is in many ways acting as a free dissemination tool for the Taliban.
The spokesman, or his administrators, are normally careful not to cross the platform’s so-called moderation policy, but the account has tweeted content that clearly constitutes an incitement to violence, which is the charge that Twitter CEO Jack Dorsey used to remove Donald Trump from the platform, permanently, in January, following the Capitol Hill riot.
How does that standard not apply to the Taliban? One video tweeted by the group’s spokesman in April (still viewable today) shows a vehicle belonging to the Afghan security forces making its way through a narrow alleyway in Jalalabad. The video, filmed through the front windscreen of a waiting Taliban member around 100 yards away, runs for seven seconds before the approaching vehicle is jettisoned sky high by an improvised explosive device (IED). The spokesman’s tweet added that this was a ‘tactical explosion’. If that is not an incitement to violence, then I do not know what is. I don’t know what the casualty toll was for that incident. Judging by the force of the explosion alone, I very much doubt anyone in the vehicle survived.
This video was also widely shared and celebrated by a large network of Taliban supporters on Twitter, many of whom added hate-filled messages. Many of these supporters appear to operate authentic accounts but there are also accounts that demonstrate inauthentic activity (bots). The supporters routinely deploy hashtag campaigns on Twitter to generate further content engagement. One ‘popular’ campaign in terms of likes and retweets was #Get_out_of_Afghanistan, which was accompanied by multiple use of videos showing archive IED strikes targeting Nato and Afghan forces.
More clear incitement to violence — but not even a chirp from Twitter.
Most prominent Taliban supporters have a presence on other social media platforms as well, notably Facebook and Telegram, to spread content further. But in terms of reach and visibility — especially for messaging aimed at the international audience — Twitter is number one. Occasional takedowns do occur, but the Taliban supporters soon reemerge on the platform, often using the same, or similar, account names, with just a small incremental number change.
In a further demonstration of Twitter’s chaotic takedown approach, several well-established analysts of the Afghanistan security environment had their accounts suspended temporarily in recent months, presumably because an automated ‘moderation’ algorithm was unable to distinguish between a real jihadist account and one who comments on and analyses jihadist activity.
Twitter has taken action on accounts run by, or supporting, the so-called Islamic State — so a coordinated takedown strategy is clearly possible, when there is the will. The predominant language of IS content is Arabic, and resources and time have clearly been spent to block or remove material in this case.
So why can’t similar efforts be made for jihadist content in Pashto, the predominant language for Taliban messaging? The simple truth of the matter, I suspect, is that social media executives do not perceive the Afghanistan-focused Taliban to be as much of a threat to their way of life as IS, and the latter’s high-profile attacks in Western cities will have focused minds.
The fact that many reports continue to shed light on existing ties between al-Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan should be enough to counter this rationale. More importantly, what about the death toll in Afghanistan: don’t Afghan lives matter?
Donald Trump’s actions — and his tweets — during the Capitol Hill riot should not be excused, but Twitter’s absurd double-standards deserve to be called out.
The author of this article, an active open-source intelligence (OSINT) analyst who specializes in jihadist output on social media, is writing under an alias.
@jolly said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Let’s be clear. The Taliban is a hard-line Islamist group that extols jihad, opposes democracy and is engaged in a brutal war of attrition against a democratically elected government in Afghanistan.
Just go ahead and say it. Islamo-fascist terror cult.
There, it's been done.
-
@jolly said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Now, don't you feel stupid?
Not really. Excerpt from NBCNews: "[The Taliban] Twitter feed pumps out several messages a day, keeping 993 followers up to date with often highly exaggerated reports of strikes against the "infidel forces" and the "Karzai puppet regime . . .
it seems the Taliban have joined the new millennium.The Guardian noted that on Thursday (last May), the account posted its first English tweet about an attack on police in Farah province: "Enemy attacked in Khak-e-Safid, 6 dead." Links to similar reports are more often broken than not because "the Taliban's official website, regularly evicted from servers or shut down by authorities, is constantly on the move."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/follow-taliban-now-twitter-flna123360
^^^^^^I don't know if this has more truth or your guy's. It seems like Taliban is on Twitter, kinda. I've not followed the Afghan business for quite some time. I'd have thought Taliban was more into chewing the chess pieces. But if you're right, you're right, and I'm wrong.
But for the record, no far right source will ever, fucking ever, make me feel stupid.
@catseye3 said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
@jolly said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Now, don't you feel stupid?
Not really. Excerpt from NBCNews: "[The Taliban] Twitter feed pumps out several messages a day, keeping 993 followers up to date with often highly exaggerated reports of strikes against the "infidel forces" and the "Karzai puppet regime . . .
it seems the Taliban have joined the new millennium.The Guardian noted that on Thursday (last May), the account posted its first English tweet about an attack on police in Farah province: "Enemy attacked in Khak-e-Safid, 6 dead." Links to similar reports are more often broken than not because "the Taliban's official website, regularly evicted from servers or shut down by authorities, is constantly on the move."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/follow-taliban-now-twitter-flna123360
^^^^^^I don't know if this has more truth or your guy's. It seems like Taliban is on Twitter, kinda. I've not followed the Afghan business for quite some time. I'd have thought Taliban was more into chewing the chess pieces. But if you're right, you're right, and I'm wrong.
But for the record, no far right source will ever, fucking ever, make me feel stupid.
Sorry, on this one, you're a kneejerk idiot and it probably didn't take a far right news source to make you feel stupid. By rushing to judgement without a shred of evidence to the contrary, you dialed up and channeled your best Don Lemon to come to an erroneous conclusion. Don't ever base your entire worldview on where news originates from. The Taliban is on Twitter. Full stop, period. Trump is not. Full stop, period.
Admit it and move on. Better luck next time.
-
@catseye3 said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
@jolly said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Now, don't you feel stupid?
Not really. Excerpt from NBCNews: "[The Taliban] Twitter feed pumps out several messages a day, keeping 993 followers up to date with often highly exaggerated reports of strikes against the "infidel forces" and the "Karzai puppet regime . . .
it seems the Taliban have joined the new millennium.The Guardian noted that on Thursday (last May), the account posted its first English tweet about an attack on police in Farah province: "Enemy attacked in Khak-e-Safid, 6 dead." Links to similar reports are more often broken than not because "the Taliban's official website, regularly evicted from servers or shut down by authorities, is constantly on the move."
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/follow-taliban-now-twitter-flna123360
^^^^^^I don't know if this has more truth or your guy's. It seems like Taliban is on Twitter, kinda. I've not followed the Afghan business for quite some time. I'd have thought Taliban was more into chewing the chess pieces. But if you're right, you're right, and I'm wrong.
But for the record, no far right source will ever, fucking ever, make me feel stupid.
Sorry, on this one, you're a kneejerk idiot and it probably didn't take a far right news source to make you feel stupid. By rushing to judgement without a shred of evidence to the contrary, you dialed up and channeled your best Don Lemon to come to an erroneous conclusion. Don't ever base your entire worldview on where news originates from. The Taliban is on Twitter. Full stop, period. Trump is not. Full stop, period.
Admit it and move on. Better luck next time.
-
Pay no attention Cats. The big issue is whether the Taliban may have posted on Twitter at the expense of Trump. It is not an issue anywhere beyond the borders of pseudo - conservative USA.
Elbows up!
-
Pay no attention Cats. The big issue is whether the Taliban may have posted on Twitter at the expense of Trump. It is not an issue anywhere beyond the borders of pseudo - conservative USA.
-
Pay no attention Cats. The big issue is whether the Taliban may have posted on Twitter at the expense of Trump. It is not an issue anywhere beyond the borders of pseudo - conservative USA.
@renauda said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Pay no attention Cats. The big issue is whether the Taliban may have posted on Twitter at the expense of Trump. It is not an issue anywhere beyond the borders of pseudo - conservative USA.
The issue is bigger than that. The issue is censorship in the public square. Trump is the example, but the issue is bigger than just him.
-
Pay no attention Cats. The big issue is whether the Taliban may have posted on Twitter at the expense of Trump. It is not an issue anywhere beyond the borders of pseudo - conservative USA.
@renauda said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Pay no attention Cats. The big issue is whether the Taliban may have posted on Twitter at the expense of Trump. It is not an issue anywhere beyond the borders of pseudo - conservative USA.
Say, Renauda, would you care to name a single living "real conservative"? I know you can't define "real conservativism", but I feel naming an example might be within your capabilities.
Education is extremely important.
-
@renauda said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Pay no attention Cats. The big issue is whether the Taliban may have posted on Twitter at the expense of Trump. It is not an issue anywhere beyond the borders of pseudo - conservative USA.
Say, Renauda, would you care to name a single living "real conservative"? I know you can't define "real conservativism", but I feel naming an example might be within your capabilities.
-
Joe Lieberman is not a conservative. Boris Johnson isn't an American.
-
@larry said in The Taliban - business barbaric as usual:
Joe Lieberman is not a conservative. Boris Johnson isn't an American.
Yes, but Lieberman is reasonable. He has principles which I have to respect (ignoring the fact that he ran with Algore). He's not crazy.
I'll let others comment on BoJo.
"Now look here, you Baltic gas passer... " - Mik, 6/14/08
The saying, "Lite is just one damn thing after another," is a gross understatement. The damn things overlap.
