Terror on YouTube: The Internet’s Most Popular Sites are Becoming Tools for Terrorist Recruitment

Since its creation, the Internet has been viewed as a symbol of democracy and free speech, a tool for communicating, networking, and learning. But there is a dark side to the unregulated sprawl of the World Wide Web, and it doesn’t take a computer forensics expert to find it. The very same features that make it convenient for the average user to socialize with friends or research for a school paper are now being used by terrorist organizations to recruit, raise funds, and attract a whole new generation of supporters.
The terrorist presence on the Web concerned Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee chairman Joe Lieberman (ID-Conn.) so much that he wrote a letter to Google chairman Eric Schmidt, urging him to remove from YouTube all videos with ties to terrorist organizations. In his letter, Lieberman wrote that terrorists use YouTube and similar sites to “disseminate their propaganda, enlist followers, and provide weapons training” and that they unintentionally “permit Islamist terrorist groups to maintain an active, pervasive, and amplified voice, despite military setbacks or successful operations by the law enforcement and intelligence communities” (Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 2008).

“Protecting our citizens from terrorist attacks is a top priority for our government,” Lieberman continued. “The private sector can help us do that. By taking action to curtail the use of YouTube to disseminate the goals and methods of those who wish to kill innocent civilians, Google will make a singularly important contribution to this important national effort.”

Many Terrorist Videos
YouTube responded to Lieberman’s request by taking down some videos that the company said violated its policies on content. But The Forensic Examiner found that on June 18, weeks after the Lieberman initiative, many videos remained on YouTube that appeared to promote or affiliate with terrorist groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, and the Iraqi insurgency.

One disturbing YouTube video featured Star Wars action figures recreating the beheading of American journalist Daniel Pearl. Though the actual Pearl execution is not on YouTube, it can easily be found elsewhere on the Internet.

YouTube videos posted by supporters of the Iraqi insurgency show American soldiers being shot and flag-covered coffins en route to the United States.

Other YouTube videos found by The Examiner included tributes to suicide bombers, propaganda promoting Hamas and Hezbollah leaders, and statements alleging that the U.S. is covering up its actual casualties in Iraq. One cartoon image showed a bloody U.S. soldier caught in a mousetrap that featured the Iraqi flag.

Osama bin Laden’s message praising the attacks of 9/11/2001 also can be found on YouTube.

Free Speech Debate
Lieberman’s plea re-ignited the nationwide debate about when—if ever—security should override freedom. Civil libertarians ask: Terrorists on the Web pose a very real threat, but would harshly regulating Internet content in an attempt to stop them do more harm than good?

In his report “How Modern Terrorism Uses the Internet,” Gabriel Weimann (2004a, p. 2) states that security agencies have focused too much on potential acts of cyberterrorism (such as virus attacks and hacking) and have failed to widely address the more common ways terrorists use the Internet every day. Although cyberterrorism is a real threat that needs to be handled seriously, terrorists more commonly use the Internet to recruit new supporters, mobilize current supporters, raise funds, find information on potential targets, and wage campaigns of intimidation and disinformation.

Weimann (2004a, p. 2) states that in 1998, “around half of the 30 organizations designated as ‘Foreign Terrorist Organizations’ under the U.S. Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 maintained Web sites; by 2000, virtually all terrorist groups had established their presence on the Internet.”

Modern terrorist organizations have changed with the times, operating more like a PR-savvy corporation than a stereotypical bunch of nomads hiding in a back room. One of Hezbollah’s sites targets international journalists directly and encourages them to contact the organization’s press office (Weimann, 2004a, p. 4). According to Weimann, Web sites maintained by terrorist groups use similar methods of propaganda, aiming their messages at current and potential members, the global public, and citizens of enemy states in order to gain sympathy and financial support.

“Typically, a (terrorist organization) site will provide a history of the organization and its activities, a detailed review of its social and political background, accounts of its notable exploits, biographies of its leaders, founders, and heroes, information on its political and ideological aims, fierce criticism of its enemies, and up-to-date news,” said Weimann in his report. “Despite the ever-present vocabulary of “the armed struggle” and “resistance,” what most sides do not feature is a detailed description of their violent activities” (p. 4).

Using sophisticated rhetorical methods, online terrorists attempt to convince their audiences that their violent acts are necessary to achieve “greater peace,” that they have no other choice. Their tactics are undeniably successful: Since Sept. 11, numerous threats of big attacks on U.S. soil have appeared on al Qaeda’s Web site, and while none of these threats came into fruition, they attracted significant media attention and managed to perpetuate the nationwide feelings of fear and insecurity that arose post-9/11.

In a 2003 speech, former Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld read the following passage from an al Qaeda training manual recovered in Afghanistan: “Using public sources openly and without resorting to illegal means, it is possible to gather at least 80 percent of all information required about the enemy” (as cited in Weimann, 2004b). “Public sources,” of course, refer primarily to the Internet, where the average user can find anything from maps of the New York subway system to commercial flight schedules to the current whereabouts of a particular U.S. politician—all without sacrificing anonymity.

Because there is no question that terrorists use the Internet every day to further their plans, the solution seems fairly straightforward: shut down their sites, take their videos off YouTube, closely monitor their chat rooms, and censor their blogs and news articles. But, as Dan Gillmore, a panelist at the 2005 International Summit on Democracy, Terrorism, and Security in Madrid, pointed out, it’s often more complicated than that. In some countries, the line between terrorist rebellion and legitimate political dissent is hard to distinguish, and heavy regulation of the Internet could actually backfire and endanger innocent people.

“We believe that an attempt to end anonymity would be highly unlikely to stop a determined terrorist or criminal of any kind, but it would certainly have a deeply chilling effect on political activity in places where speaking one’s mind is dangerous and where certain kinds of unpopular speech could jeopardize someone’s livelihood or perhaps life,” Gillmore said (as cited in Ito, 2005).

Another case for a free and open Internet rests on the idea that it is best to keep enemies in plain sight. As long as terrorist organizations uphold their presence on the Web, it is possible to keep track of their whereabouts, plans, and new campaigns. Rebecca MacKinnon, also a panelist at the 2005 summit, argued that the general public can play a useful role in the fight against terrorism—keeping a watchful eye on those corners of the Web that security agencies are not able to monitor constantly.

“Terrorism is a problem of armies, it is a problem faced by police forces, but it is also a problem faced by ordinary citizens everywhere,” she said. “The best way to combat terrorism is to involve the general public in that fight and the best way to do that is though the open Internet” (as cited in Ito, J, 2005).

On May 8, 2008, the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs released a report, “Violent Islamist Extremism, The Internet, and the Homegrown Terrorist Threat,” detailing the threat of terrorists on the Internet. Authored by Lieberman and Ranking Minority Member Susan Collins (R-Maine), the report calls on federal agencies to unify their scattered attempts into a single, comprehensive plan for responding to the terrorist web presence.
 “Despite recognition in the National Implementation Plan (NIP) that a comprehensive response is needed, the U.S. government has not developed nor implemented a coordinated outreach and communications strategy to address the homegrown terrorist threat, especially as that threat is amplified by the use of the Internet,” Lieberman and Collins (2008, p. 16) wrote.

The committee’s report proposes no specific solution but stresses the immediacy of the problem, concluding that the “use of the Internet by al-Qaeda and other violent Islamist extremist groups has expanded the terrorist threat to our homeland. No longer is the threat just from abroad, as was the case with the attacks of September 11, 2001; the threat is now increasingly from within, from homegrown terrorists who are inspired by violent Islamist ideology to plan and execute attacks where they live. One of the primary drivers of this new threat is the use of the Internet to enlist individuals or groups of individuals to join the cause without ever affiliating with a terrorist organization” (Lieberman & Collins, 2008, p. 15).

Because complete censorship is difficult and dangerous, perhaps what we need to do is not regulate but reign in the Internet as a tool—not impose heavy restrictions, which could hurt everyone, but utilize the freedom and global connection provided by the Internet to further the goals of democracy and peace.

“The fundamental democratic values that are embedded in the architecture of the Internet are the same fundamental democratic values that will enable us to defeat terrorism,” said Andrew McLaughlin, head of Global Public Policy and Government Affairs for Google, Inc., at the 2005 summit. “They are openness, they are participation, they are distribution of authority, accountability; these are the essential features of the Internet, and if we view this medium properly, we can see that it is in fact the best ally that we have in fighting the scourge of terrorism.”

References

Ito, J., moderator. (2005, March 10). Democracy, Terrorism and the Internet. International Summit on Democracy, Terrorism and Security. Retrieved June 9, 2008, from http://english.safe-democracy.org/keynotes/democracy-terrorism-and-the-internet.html#transcrip

Lieberman, J., and Collins, S. (2008, March 8). Violent Islamist extremism, the Internet, and the homegrown terrorist threat. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Retrieved June 9, 2008, from http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/_files/IslamistReport.pdf

Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. (2008, May 19). Lieberman calls on Google to take down terrorist content. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. Retrieved June 8, 2008, from http://hsgac.senate.gov/public/index.cfm?Fuseaction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=8093d5b2-c882-4d12-883d-5c670d43d269&Month=5&Year=2008&Affiliation=C

Weimann, G. (2004a, March). How modern terrorism uses the Internet. U.S. Institute of Peace. Retrieved June 10, 2008, from http://www.usip.org/pubs/specialreports/sr116.html