Vocal Voices

The savages who beheaded three innocent men have released another video. The video was said to be slick and well produced. It has not been shown, but the details have been discussed at length on Sky and BBC. We know the words spoken and by whom, John Cantle, and his condition(s) at the time. We know that there is more to come.

However, in an interview the analysis by former MI5 Chief, Stella Rimington, was that IS had changed tactic and was reaching out to a wider audience. On the one hand it was to frighten Westerners and on the other to draw in sympathisers that their cause was just: Come join us.

If the ex MI5 chief is right then why is the media giving these savages the oxygen of a wider publicity? Yes, the video will get an audience on the dark web, but it would be limited to the nutters. We do not need to know any IS propaganda, and we do not need to know what governments, security services and special forces are doing behind closed doors otherwise our actions are an open book.

Funny you should say that Frank, Mick was just saying they ought to cut off their internet (which he assures me is possible) and without the oxygen of publicity they would stop these sick murders...............

I totally agree. The publicity given to these barbarians is feeding their sense of importance and glamorises them to a certain impressionable element in society.

It does - M is actually quite puzzled as to why they haven't done it

I'd tend to agree they shouldn't be shown, certainly not, for example, on the news. Psychological propaganda is a major facet of warfare and you're handing the terrorists an advantage.

Interested in Mick's comments that they could cut them off from the internet, I wouldn't have thought that possible. If they can do that for ISIL, why can't they do it, for example, with child pornography? Is it something to do with location?

There is a mantra well known in security and military circles - Need to Know. Mick will know it. We might need to know that a man has been beheaded, but that is it. Everything else, the commentaries, the analyses, give the savages something to work on.

Imagine the frustration of the barbarians if they put out a video and it gets no air time: none. What are they going to do, write to the editors and complain?

Don't give them a voice.

Ossie, regarding child porno; it's a double edged sword. Cut them off completely and they will find other means, but if you can funnel them into ever fewer (hard to find) outlets you can watch, listen and control. This, I believe, is what is being done.

It is possible if M says it is. I don't mean to boast about him but he did his apprenticeship at a doughnut shaped building just up the road from here, so he knows

I think Frank is right about the child stuff

Kaz wrote:It is possible if M says it is. I don't mean to boast about him but he did his apprenticeship at a doughnut shaped building just up the road from here, so he knows

I think Frank is right about the child stuff

Oh yes, I wasn't disputing your Mick, Kaz .... I'm 100% sure he's correct; it's his area of expertise! I was just intrigued to learn that that it could be done .....

And point taken about the pornographers, WM.

Oh nooooo I knew you weren't, I was surprised too xxxxxxxxxx

There is no question they could cut them off. That is not really that difficult given that the Internet is really only one big network and that network has control points all over it.

However they would just release anyway by sending physical media to Al Jazeera which would be aired and then repeated time after time after time. It's a lot harder to block a satellite broadcast media which beams to much of the world. And even harder to stop a DVD or a USB key from being passed or even sent to Al Jazeera offices.

WM is right. We need to stop this obsessive talking about it. Simple response. They've murdered one of ours, that's one more on the slate when we are positioned to deal with them. End. No further discussion. As has been said, they'd be infuriated by a media vacuum.