The 12-page strategy (PDF), which outlines ways to respond to violent extremism, promises that: "We will continue to closely monitor the important role the Internet and social-networking sites play in advancing violent extremist narratives."
President Obama said in a statement accompanying the report that the federal government will start "helping communities to better understand and protect themselves against violent extremist propaganda, especially online."
While much of the White House document is focused on al Qaeda--which The Washington Post recently reported is on the "brink of collapse"--it also talks about domestic terrorists, neo-Nazis, anti-Semitic groups, and a broad "range of ideologies" that promote radicalization.
Today's announcement may signal that monitoring of social networks will broaden beyond the U.S. Department of Homeland Security already does. Depending on the details, it could also raise concerns about how to balance Americans' privacy rights with desire of security agencies to collect and analyze information that is, more or less, publicly available.
In June 2010, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security confirmed publicly (PDF) that its agents were permitted to create accounts on social-networking sites in some situations.
DHS's National Operations Center "will monitor activities on the social-media sites" using search engines, aggregators, and other tools, last year's announcement said. "The NOC will gather, store, analyze, and disseminate relevant and appropriate de-identified information to federal, state, local, and foreign governments, and private sector partners..."
In addition, the Electronic Frontier Foundation unearthed documents showing that DHS officials were sending "friend" requests to people applying for U.S. citizenship. DHS conducted extensive monitoring of social networks during Obama's inauguration.
In 2009, CIA investment arm In-Q-Tel invested in Visible Technologies, which monitors millions of posts on social-networking Web sites, Wired reported. Tax collectors, too, are "nabbing scofflaws by mining information posted on social-networking Web sites," according to The Wall Street Journal, and the FBI has previously supported legislation that would allow federal police to monitor the Internet for "illegal activity."
This move toward monitoring social networks hasn't been without controversy. A New York Times editorial suggested these techniques may go too far: "If government agents are joining social networks under false pretenses to spy without a court order, for example, that might be crossing a line."
It's also not been limited to the United States.
In 2009, the U.K. Home Office announced it would monitor all conversations on social-networking sites, including Facebook, MySpace, Bebo, Twitter, and Skype, in a crackdown on terrorists' use of the Internet. So has the Chilean government. And, of course, some repressive regimes have simply blocked Web sites completely.
Update 4:20 p.m. PT: Here's some background from a House Homeland Security hearing on July 27, where Rep. Michael McCaul, a Texas Republican, warned of Internet radicalization:
We're investigating the radicalization of Muslim youth in the United States. Does anybody on this panel disagree with the notion that the radicalization of Muslim youth in the United States poses a threat to our homeland security? I take it by your silence that you agree with the idea that the radicalization of Muslim youth in the United States poses a direct threat to the security and safety of our homeland security. We know that three dozen Americans have left the United States, mostly from Minnesota, to join forces in Somalia, to receive training under al-Shabaab, to receive training by Al Qaida...The same day, a subcommittee of the House Intelligence Committee held a hearing, where chairman Sue Myrick, a Republican from North Carolina, also stressed Internet radicalization. Referring to Samir Kahn, a U.S. blogger who reportedly moved to Yemen:
And clearly, al-Awlaki is becoming the emerging threat, you know, on the scene, in my judgment. He's radicalizing Muslim youth over the Internet here in the United States. And what easier way to do it? If you can't get into the country with travel documents, why not radicalize people who are already here?
You know he was here, we knew it but we really couldn't do anything about it. Now, he's very successful because he's in a country where he can radicalized, he is radicalizing. We have proof of that with our young people. And you know, parents are very concerned about this happening to the young people because as you said the Internet, et cetera, is very easy today for people to get on any site they want to, and you know, be involved.
So, what is it that we can do? ... You know, what can we do and ensure that in the future not only with him but with others, how do we stop this or how can we continue to fight back against what could become homegrown terrorism, none of us want to see, and you know, that happens right here in our own backyard?
A Fargling FARCE! IGNORE THE MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN!
Jeez, do ya think there might be some PTB-sponsored upcoming false flag events- with obligatory PTB/MSM/"our" Gov't blame on the Internet? A fluttering passport or such....The PTB do seem to be getting scared, don't they?
Any competent and free person over the age of ten should be able to write a dissertation dissecting the patent absurdity of the underlying "facts" "reported" in this "article," and of course said competent ten year old would then go on to the more important point as to why a supposedly "free" press would so unquestioningly support, via this facially false tripe parading as a “report.”
One quick example the kid could note... that the "report" goes to the NYT??? for "the other side" of the story. The NYT states (with deception and malice aforethought) - "IF government agents are joining social networks under false pretenses to spy without a court order, for example, that might be crossing a line."
The NYT well knows that there is NO "if" involved there. Such activities have been proven, and admitted by “our” government countless times and examples abound. And not just with "online identities.” - the government has had countless agents provocateur caught invading pacifist anti-death penalty groups, (Maryland) Instigating Riots, etc., etc.) All without court order. Another blatant lie of zero calorie aspartame-poisoned grass for the sheeple to feed upon, I guess. . .
This all might be farcically comical - if it were not so obviously evil and tragic. The NYT itself was the primary co-sponsor of the lies that caused the War Crime called AmericKa's ILLEGAL and patently Hitleresque invasion of Iraq - and its continuing illegal occupation, and should be prosecuted - not be held up as some entity that is concerned with the rights of Americans! (The NYT's subsequent claims that their lies had actually been bought by the US public was yet another of their and the MSM’s lies, as despite their efforts, most Americans were still against the invasion. and there we have yet another issue for our intrepid 10 year old.)
This article is barely smoother than.... BEEP BEEP BEEP... "Breaking News from Fox: And now, we have this observation
by Joseph Goebbels on the investigation into the Reichstag fire along with our ensuing War on Iraq - oops, I mean Poland - ARGH!
R.C.