Britcore Hip Hop is ‚anti-deutsch‘ and still against the antisemitism from left radicals

Although some current versions of posthuman point toward the antihuman and the apocalyptic, we can craft others that will be conducive to the long-range survival of humans and of the other life forms, biological and artificial, with whom we share the planet and ourselves.

While the biopolitics of ecological science as practice have received critical attention within the past decade, many institutional practices of sustainability still seem to constitute the authority of ecological science and create the conditions for docile bodies that adhere to the navigational paths ascribed to them. Ecosystem theory does aim to account for complex interactions within a given biome; however, certain Linnaean and Darwinian foundational concepts yet limit this science to the study of bounded organisms constituted through somewhat stable taxonomies. This system has an incredible explanatory power and allows for certain remarkable understandings of ‚life‘; however, when given univocal authority in practice, ecological science involves the disciplining of life in both an epistemological and a regulatory sense.

Using a Foucauldian perspective to examine ecology and governmentality, Paul Rutherford critically examines how „modern thinking about the natural environment is characterized by the belief that nature can be managed or governed through the application of the scientific principles of ecology“. Indeed as Foucault’s notion of biopower suggests, the scientific principles of ecology constitute the very ‚life‘ that requires and enables management and administration--- Such administration of life is evident not only on campuses with sustainability objectives, but also within managed forest parks that are newly deemed to have value through the practices of protective demarcations. One has only to walk through dedicated ‚park‘ spaces within the Pacific Northwest region of North America to embody an ontological divide between human and old growth tree. While two decades ago, a ‚human‘ could walk up to and touch these trees, within the park spaces, most trees are now off limits. This practice registers the entry of life into history of these trees; as populations to be administered, they are now protected by /from ‚humans‘ through the restriction of humans to marked paths…

udies on the transformation of terror groups from a hierarchal structure into a flat, multi-cell, multi-nation amorphous organization, show that the Internet and mobile communication became the exclusively venue that holds together those disparate cells, ideologically and operationally. During this process, approximately from 2003 and on, terrorists needed Internet and networking expertise which they didn’t have at that time. Understanding how vital those means are for self-survival, recruiting, planning, training and indoctrination, terrorists invested unique efforts in augmenting their knowledge and perfecting Internet exploitation for their purposes. If in 2003 terrorists had few true professionals at their disposal, much more complex and sophisticated intrusion and hacking techniques performed by their in house grown professionals began popping up more frequently. This is because as IT becomes more widely common and public knowledge more cyber terrorists need less highly trained people to perform the suite of activity defined as cyber terrorism acts. In a detailed report released in December 2002 by the Center for Strategic & Intl’ Studies, the project director James Lewis, stressed that “we threat cyber security as an orphan in the storm. This is the place we’re being hurt the most. People have miscalculated the threat”. Obviously, even then there were enough indicators to what was about to come: a combination of official denial propped by private expertise which resulted in a bureaucratization of the subject, neglect to define cyber terrorism threat as real, that led to prevention of regulations aimed at establishing workable countermeasures.

What’s in the cyber terror arsenal?

The Internet and its derivates offer members of terrorist groups endless ways to align themselves with the ideological and practical facets of their organization. It allows local and group leaders to perform a host of tasks which were impossible before switching to the Internet as their main communication frame. Among others, it facilitates:

• Delivery of information – ranging from news to religious fatwas, to recruiting calling campaigns
• Networking – anonymously coordinating, planning and adjusting, adapting and constantly changing the organization to keep it flexible and less predictable. It is also used to mitigate risks, protect sources and add security to the structure
• Intel and info gathering & sharing – ranging from data mining, open sources, exploitation of Western liberties and intruding weak systems
• Recruiting – one of the most effective tools, as it can use all media venues, launch targeted campaigns and focus on certain groups, say computers savvy
• Financing – focused solicitations using various websites simultaneously, benefit from e-schemes, identity theft, e-commerce entities and customer buying tools. Also, raising money through charities and front organizations
• Ideological & psychological warfare – tuned to reach various audiences and population groups, whether by disseminating fear of terror, uncertainty and instability
• Use of open sources – which enable to create, develop and launch programs, viruses and Trojans traps that can be activated at any time

The notion, thought by some pundits and academia gurus, that what we learn and the information we gather from terrorists using the Internet has greater value than the cumulative damage they can create, is long gone (“They are a greater value as an intelligence source than if they were to disappear”, J. Lasker “Watchdogs Sniff Out Terror Sites” piece, 2005). Even if this was true before 9/11, since 2003 the proliferation of terrorist sites is definitively an indication that the payoffs in terms of publicity, indoctrination, recruiting and propaganda values, are higher and more profitable than the exposure risk. Not only that it allows terrorists to trick law enforcement and intelligence agencies by seeding misinformation and conduct psychological warfare, and mislead, confuse and break coordinated efforts to gather intelligence.

Unfortunately, too many options, security gaps and gaffes remain widely open and are fully taken advantage of by a host of known terror groups like Al Qaeda (the unknown path of morphology in Arabic/Hebrew interpretations) and less known, stealthy small organizations like Al-Takfir Wa’l Hijra (nothing to do with me – Bel). This is because the Internet is so widely spread and so deeply rooted into our social, economic and financial fabric, that it is impossible to control the flow of information or regulate any of its activities. Every ‚www‘ network aspect becomes old technology faster, and Internet generations shorten with every technology cycle. Therefore, old data processing, content auditing, regulation and computer security models become obsolete, sometime before it has gained grounds. This is a situation which terrorists were quick to grasp and instrumental in attaining technological power to manipulate the tools that it offers for free, thus augmenting the real cyber terrorism threat.

One of the most powerful weapons that the www network offers is uncertainty. Uncertainty of whether terrorists have really harnessed the Internet to the level that it can cause destruction of a national scale, uncertainty whether they consider the Internet an equal weapon to physical attacks, and uncertainty regarding the level of disinformation and misinformation is run do blur what really happens. Nobody denies that the www added new dimensions to their existing assets used by terror groups, basically widening their options.

Regrettably, terrorists are far ahead of us in this new battle field. This is because the pundits’ opinion and the lack of vision, have allowed terrorists to emerge under a new, morphed structure, which made Internet communications a “live or die” issue. The short sighted vision of those in charge with national security made possible the today situation where terrorists have a significant lead. Trying to catch up now requires infinite sources, extreme coordination efforts between and with scoreless agencies and private industry, which is raises questions if it is possible at all. We could have avoided this menacing situation should had those in charge accepted that the terrorists are not all backward individuals with past century beliefs, therefore incapable of using a cell phone, let alone sophisticated internet tools.

First and foremost, there are some fundamental measures that must be taken if we intend to give ourselves a slight chance to succeed, starting with agreeing that the cyber terror is for real, an increasing plague hanging over our head like Damocles’ sword. One of the most serious concerns because of the given nature of the Internet, terrorists can afford to suffer temporary web relate defeat, sites closed and malicious information dissemination blocked. It can even withstand being much more virtually exposed, which translate into providing good information sources to our intelligence and law enforcement agencies. This is because each such case provides them with valuable lessons, allow them to correct mistakes and learn where to pinpoint their efforts in circumventing the security systems in place. Weighing what is the added value we gain from spying after terrorists on the web, against what terrorist gain from our activity and anti cyber terror actions, it becomes increasingly clear that terrorists may have the upper hand. And this should create serious reason for concern. Contrary to counter attacking terrorists, kill them, capture them and have them constantly on the run, if a terrorist website is taken down, nobody dies; they just move to another server, open a new website or communication premise, better organized, better protected and better prepared to deal with our anti cyber attacks.


The ‚Still Dangerous-Crew‘ is at the 30th april in the Schanzen-Bistro for anti-sexist men’s coalition warefare dance- by Hamid & family‘ – and we coordinate a release action for the Vinyl ‚direct action‘ from Altona! Thanx Gato!

0 Antworten auf „Britcore Hip Hop is ‚anti-deutsch‘ and still against the antisemitism from left radicals“

  1. Keine Kommentare

Antwort hinterlassen

XHTML: Du kannst diese Tags benutzen: <a href=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

× sieben = neunundvierzig