Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Get HideMyAss! VPN, PC Mag's Top 10 VPNs of 2016 for 55% off for a Limited Time ×
Security Crime Earth Facebook Social Networks Twitter Politics

ISIS Makes Direct Threats Against Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey (cnet.com) 305

wjcofkc writes: A group of ISIS supporters have threatened to take down Facebook and Twitter, as well as their leaders. In a 25-minute propaganda video released by a group calling itself "the sons of the Caliphate army," photographs of both technology leaders are riddled with bullets. The video was first spotted by Vocativ. The threats are being made over the two companies' efforts to seek out and remove terrorist-related content on their respective platforms. The group is quoted as saying, "If you close one account, we will take 10 in return and soon your names will be erased after we delete your sites, Allah willing, and will know that we say is true."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

ISIS Makes Direct Threats Against Mark Zuckerberg and Jack Dorsey

Comments Filter:
  • Oh, I got my terrorist organizations mixed up. My bad #notFBI

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 25, 2016 @05:46PM (#51586791)
    A world without Facebook? Whatever would we do?
    • by wjcofkc ( 964165 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:12PM (#51587061)
      I know that was tongue in cheek, but still:

      Thought independent outside of obsessing over "likes" and "friends".

      No more walking off cliffs because your posting to Facebook. (this of course excludes general texting)

      Living socially normal lives.

      No more armies of people baffled that I among others are not on Facebook.

      A vast reduction in narcissistic selfies.

      (maybe) an increase in general civility as people would be forced to have face-to-face conversations within close physical proximity.

      A steady increase in gray matter across a few billion people.

      The avoidance of entire generations of kids that are socially inept and who knows what else developmental oddities because, well, facebook.

      I could go on but that's a lot of typing. Maybe someone else take over?
    • by goombah99 ( 560566 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:12PM (#51587071)

      It would make sense if they were to kindly list the accounts they want to stay open. Otherwise how is Facebook supposed to know which is an Isis supporting page and which is a Ted Cruz supporting page.

    • by wjcofkc ( 964165 )
      In regards to the post I responded to being at a -1, apparent there are some folks here who do not understand the concept of being facetious. Kinda of surprised that got down modded almost all the way to /dev/null. Also confident that this story is young enough that people who know better will come along and mod it up.
    • Re: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by Opportunist ( 166417 )

      Daesh vs. Facebook.

      Whoever loses
      We win

      • by Phydeaux ( 82550 )

        Ah-ha! Thankfully Jack had enough foresight to start Twitter's Trust and Safety Council. They're just the SJWs to smooth over any potential insults or hurtful words and make any possible concessions needed to keep the ISIS threat quelled. While ISIS is demanding a rather large "safe space", westerners need to check their white, democratic privilege and let these folks self-segregate so as to avoid any "justicesplaining" we might want to inflict on their sensitive feelings and need to provide a welcoming and

  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday February 25, 2016 @05:47PM (#51586807)
    Those who think the Pen is mightier than the Sword are about to learn the unpoetic truth that a person with only a pen needs to have some really good friends with swords.
    • by Desprez ( 702166 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:02PM (#51586963)
      I think the point is that the person with the pen is able to garner more support from friends and allies, and thus more swords.
      • I think the point is that the person with the pen is able to garner more support from friends and allies, and thus more swords.

        The sword must disable the pen to survive as the controlling force. This is why the pen is mightier.

    • by vux984 ( 928602 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:07PM (#51587011)

      Those who think the Pen is mightier than the Sword are about to learn the unpoetic truth that a person with only a pen needs to have some really good friends with swords.

      The phrase means that in the course of history that ideas are a more powerful force for change than weapons.

      Ghandi's "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win." means the same thing.

      The person with a "pen" may die. But his ideas may ultimately change the world, despite the attempt by those with "swords" to prevent it.

      • by fnj ( 64210 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:27PM (#51587199)

        Ghandi's "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

        Gandhi's struggle would have turned out very, very differently had he been dealing with Hitler or Stalin or Mao instead of the British Empire. His methods only work against an adversary who has at least SOME heart or nobility you can leverage and exploit.

        • by vux984 ( 928602 )

          Maybe. Had Ghandi simply been executed (ie martyred) that might have catalyzed change as well; although the transition would have been very, very, different.

          • Maybe. Had Ghandi simply been executed (ie martyred) that might have catalyzed change as well; although the transition would have been very, very, different.

            Doubtful in the Hitler, Stalin, Mao context. Sadly he would likely have been martyred long before he had a following. Ghandi's own strategy suggests that you are mistaken. First you need to be ignored, then you need to be laughed at. Hitler, Stalin, or Mao would have used a different strategy and started with execute rather than ignore. For moral persuasion to work the audience needs to be somewhat moral.

            • The audience isn't the government; it's the populus. And given that Hitler, Stalin, and Mao were ultimately unsuccessful -- and only one by armed conflict -- I think it's safe to say that superior ideas triumphed over superior physical might.

        • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

          Gandhi's struggle would have turned out very, very differently had he been dealing with Hitler or Stalin or Mao instead of the British Empire. His methods only work against an adversary who has at least SOME heart or nobility you can leverage and exploit.

          I don't think you fully grasp the concept. ie Gandhi's philosphy is still be taught, supported, and followed. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao not so much. So yeah I think his pen still beats their swords.

          • by drnb ( 2434720 )

            Gandhi's struggle would have turned out very, very differently had he been dealing with Hitler or Stalin or Mao instead of the British Empire. His methods only work against an adversary who has at least SOME heart or nobility you can leverage and exploit.

            I don't think you fully grasp the concept. ie Gandhi's philosphy is still be taught, supported, and followed. Hitler, Stalin, and Mao not so much. So yeah I think his pen still beats their swords.

            Gandhi's philosophy is being followed by who? Nuclear armed India, India who fights over Kashmir? Apparently not. The Tibetans being ethnically cleansed by China? Maybe them. The ethnically cleansed Christian communities of Iraq? Maybe them too.

            Hitler, Stalin -- Are you seriously saying their philosophies are not being followed? Both were role models to various strong-men dictators of recent times.

            Mao -- Tiananmen Square protests/massacre of 1989. Can the Pen in China even mention the actual events?

            • Gandhi's philosophy is being followed by who?

              Seriously?

              Nuclear armed India, India who fights over Kashmir? Apparently not.

              You know that 'India' is not a person right? And the entire Indian race don't all share the exact same philosophical views yeah? Or are you really that ignorant?

              Hitler, Stalin -- Are you seriously saying their philosophies are not being followed? Both were role models to various strong-men dictators of recent times.

              Yes because their "philosophies" is their pen. Their tanks and bombs were their swords (see how it works now?)

              Mao -- Tiananmen Square protests/massacre of 1989. Can the Pen in China even mention the actual events?

              If you've ever been to China you would see that since the 80's China's rule has become more benign. This didn't happen with guns or swords.

              • by drnb ( 2434720 )

                Gandhi's philosophy is being followed by who?

                Seriously?

                Nuclear armed India, India who fights over Kashmir? Apparently not.

                You know that 'India' is not a person right? And the entire Indian race don't all share the exact same philosophical views yeah? Or are you really that ignorant?

                Gandhi's creation, an independent India, abandoned his non-violent philosophy, immediately committed atrocities and ethnic cleansing upon itself, split into two countries, two countries that periodically war with each other. Seems a new sword triumphed as soon as the old sword, the British, left.

                Hitler, Stalin -- Are you seriously saying their philosophies are not being followed? Both were role models to various strong-men dictators of recent times.

                Yes because their "philosophies" is their pen. Their tanks and bombs were their swords (see how it works now?)

                Yes, sword wins. Hitler was only defeated by those who put away the pen and picked up swords.

                Mao -- Tiananmen Square protests/massacre of 1989. Can the Pen in China even mention the actual events?

                If you've ever been to China you would see that since the 80's China's rule has become more benign. This didn't happen with guns or swords.

                Nice dodge. More benign is an extremely relative thing, besides being a highly debatable claim. There is little room for c

        • by mjwx ( 966435 )

          Ghandi's "First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win."

          Gandhi's struggle would have turned out very, very differently had he been dealing with Hitler or Stalin or Mao instead of the British Empire. His methods only work against an adversary who has at least SOME heart or nobility you can leverage and exploit.

          Not necessarily. Remember that India was pretty far from England, so the British empire had to spend huge amounts of funds to police India with British forces rather than local forces (which was the preferred method of the British Empire). China can only control Tibet because they're right next door, controlling Ghana would be a different kettle of fish due to the expense of keeping soldiers stationed overseas, not to mention serious morale problems.

          Violent resistance also doesn't guarantee results. The

        • by wwalker ( 159341 ) on Friday February 26, 2016 @02:37PM (#51592843) Journal

          Heart of mobility my ass. Talking about the Bengal famine in 1943, Churchill said: âoeI hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion. The famine was their own fault for breeding like rabbits."
          https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... [wikipedia.org]

      • If the media are closed to you, then you just disappear. Never heard of again. Stalin had no problem with opposition - they just disappeared, and nobody dared ask where they were. The disappearance of most of the clergy of the Orthodox Church under Stalin is the most obvious example of that.
    • Plus those people who have the friends with the swords, can use those pens to write some pretty big checks to their friends.

  • by DigiShaman ( 671371 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @05:47PM (#51586813) Homepage

    Just in time for the Zuck to respond with *angry face*.

  • Ob Kum Ba Ya (Score:3, Informative)

    by Hognoxious ( 631665 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @05:48PM (#51586817) Homepage Journal

    So the lesson is that even a sadistic bunch of mediaevalist nutbag bandits aren't entirely bad...

    • Maxim 29. (Score:2, Funny)

      by Anonymous Coward

      29. The enemy of my enemy is my enemy's enemy. No more. No less
      (The Seventy Maxims of Maximally Effective Mercenaries)

    • by Tablizer ( 95088 )

      Why don't they make their own (anti) social network: MedievalBook or something? They can share decap pics among friends and fam.

  • by xxxJonBoyxxx ( 565205 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @05:49PM (#51586831)

    >> 25-minute propaganda video

    Anyone seen SlashDot's video editor lately? A 25-minute rambling screed sounds like the kind of thing that's typically posted here.

  • big talkers (Score:5, Funny)

    by frovingslosh ( 582462 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:17PM (#51587129)
    I'll believe it when it happens. I think it is just a bogus attempt by ISIS to try to win American's favor.
  • I feel kinda bad about this, but part of me really hopes Zuckerberg is the one threat they actually follow through on.

  • by JustNiz ( 692889 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:19PM (#51587141)

    I think the end of Facebook and Twitter would actually make the world a significantly better place for many reasons.
    Just one example would be during my commute every day its unusual to not see multiple morons (for whatever reason its nearly always women) that are drifting into other lanes, suddenly hard braking, or or causing multiple other problems by not keeping up with the busy traffic flow around them, because updating their facebook status is clearly more important than paying any attention to controlling 2 tons of metal barelling down the freeway.

    • I think the end of Facebook and Twitter would actually make the world a significantly better place for many reasons.

      Indeed. When I first read the summary on the front page, my first thought was, "And nothing of value was lost."
  • While ISIS is threatening Zuckerberg, Zuckerberg is threatening [usatoday.com] to `investigate' his employees for failing to indulge BLM grievance mongering.

  • by hey! ( 33014 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:32PM (#51587261) Homepage Journal

    is that they're very, very media savvy. They understand the value of PR, and are not above saying things they don't have any real plans to do just for the publicity effect. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure they'd be happy to lop off a few CEO heads (especially the Jew), but I'm guessing their primary aim is to keep us talking about them.

    And you know, we do have to talk about them, because that's the way our society operates and they know it. But we don't necessarily have to give their chest-thumping any credence. I think that's the primary thing they want; if we treat them as powerful then they will gain credibility and that will attract adherents. So let's review; the guys they're threatening are famous, high profile billionaires. They're already attractive targets for domestic terrorists and criminals; they're not soft targets for any screwball ISIS might inspire to martyrdom.

    ISIS also can get other things from from making largely empty threats. They can get whip up American anti-Muslim sentiment, which serves ISIS's purposes very well. The droves of Muslims eager to get away from ISIS's control undermines the legitimacy ISIS's claim to having established a new caliphate, so they are very quick to publicize the fact that anyone trying to leave is going to get kicked by Hungarian cameramen.

    If you don't want to be an unwitting ISIS stooge, take a deep breath and put them in perspective. Sure, they're a bunch of dangerous fanatics, but they're 6000 miles away. And yes, they're bound to have a few homicidal crackpot adherents here in the USA, but those crackpots are just a drop in our big bucket of homegrown homicidal crackpots, and we hardly give our native nutcases any attention at all. We're already taking our homegrown fanatics and mass killers in stride, so it's just a marginal effort to worry about ISIS.

    That's ISIS in a nutshell for us: they're a marginal concern. Not to say ISIS doesn't have a place on the list of the things we need to be concerned with, but it hardly deserves to be the center of our foreign policy, much less the center of our national policy.

    • "Wouldn't it be neat if someone killed soadso?"

      Half if not most attacks are not by direct effort. This is serious.

    • by Jiro ( 131519 )

      if we treat them as powerful then they will gain credibility and that will attract adherents.

      If we treat them as powerful, attacking them will also gain credibility. Beheading videos may be great to recruit supporters, but they're also a great way of getting the West to accept military force used against them.

      ISIS actually doesn't understand that. Middle Eastern cultures tend to assume that if they threaten the West and the West doesn't attack them, it's because of weakness, not because of scruples. Of c

  • Guess the ISISsies haven't gotten the hint yet.

  • by spiritplumber ( 1944222 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @06:50PM (#51587435) Homepage
    You know, if you put Robert Downey on it, it'd make for a good movie.
  • ...how many hellfires Zuckerberg could afford...

  • .... I'm actually inclined to cheer that bunch of goat fuckers on.

  • Allah willing (Score:5, Insightful)

    by SylvesterTheCat ( 321686 ) on Thursday February 25, 2016 @08:40PM (#51588289)

    "If you close one account, we will take 10 in return and soon your names will be erased after we delete your sites, Allah willing, and will know that we say is true."

    But, what if Allah doesn't will it?

  • They should each make troll videos showing a burka'ed head fellating them while they eat bacon, drink a beer and wipe their butts with the ISIS flag. All while mumbling "Run from the bombs, run from the tanks, you can't handle the truth!"

    Then auto-refresh Rickroll them.

"It says he made us all to be just like him. So if we're dumb, then god is dumb, and maybe even a little ugly on the side." -- Frank Zappa

Working...