Experts: Social media giants fight Trump’s anti-terror plan while providing platform for terrorists

Twitter’s $1.6 million pledge to help fight the White House’s anti-terror immigration order is just the latest case of social media companies taking on Trump, but critics say the same companies are doing next to nothing to stop dangerous radicals from using their platforms to spread hate.
According to sources, radical social media accounts are using photos of Nawar al-Awlaki, the 8-year-old daughter of cleric Anwar al-Awlaki who was killed in the U.S.-led raid in Yemen on Sunday, to recruit members. That’s just the latest in a plethora of social media strategies and campaigns created by extremists to recruit and spread their jidhadi message.
“Recruitment has many forms, and sharing the news of her death and her picture can be seen as a motivation to some to join the jihadi cause,” a spokesperson for the Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) told Fox News. “MEMRI’s Jihad and Terrorism Threat Monitor has observed many accounts, both jihadi and non-jihadi, discussing the killing of Nawar al-Awlaki and displaying her picture.”
Companies like Twitter and Facebook have been hit with a slew of civil lawsuits the past year alleging that the companies are liable for the deaths of those killed in terror attacks by ISIS and organizations that have used social media platforms to spread their message. Among those suing are the families of the Pulse Nightclub victims, who filed a lawsuit against Twitter, Facebook and Google alleging the companies provided “material support” to ISIS and helped radicalize the shooter.

A Message from Vitamix

12 Must-Have Kitchen Tools

Everyone should have the basic tools in their kitchen that let them expand their culinary skills. See what you might be missing...

A Facebook spokesperson told Fox News that terrorist activity is not allowed on the platform.
MUSLIM TERRORIST KILLS FRENCH COP, WIFE WHILE LIVESTREAMING ON FACEBOOK
“Facebook has zero tolerance for terrorists, terror propaganda, or the praising of terror activity,” a spokesperson for Facebook told Fox News. “We work aggressively to remove it as soon as we become aware of it.”
But the social media giant relies heavily on the Facebook community, of almost 1.7 billion users, to report activity that violates community standards and shows any traces of extremism. Facebook, then, confirms the account of interest, immediately removes it from the platform, and then attempts to identify related material through accounts with associated activity.
But critics say this isn’t a reliable way of tracking accounts of those individuals who have hijacked their profiles to promote propaganda.
 “Social media sites and applications have been propaganda multipliers, allowing them to connect with potential followers across countries, cultures and languages,” House Homeland Security Chairman Michael McCaul wrote in a counterterrorism strategy report released last fall. “Social media companies are on the virtual frontlines of the fight and must be proactive in removing terrorist content—they should ensure that their terms and conditions expressly prohibit such material and that takedowns are done quickly to prevent extremist messages from spreading.”
Twitter officials, who did not respond to Fox News’ request for comment regarding its strategy, shut down hundreds of thousands of accounts for threatening or promoting terrorist attacks since mid-2015. Facebook said it has teams around the globe to review reported content 24 hours a day, seven days a week.
But still, small technology companies feel there is more that could be done.
HISTORY WILL JUDGE TECH PHILANTHROPISTS IN FIGHT VS. CYBER JIHAD
“Users don’t know what they’re looking for –you need to be schooled,” Eric Feinberg, founding member of Global Intellectual Property Enforcement Center, told Fox News. “Some of these things aren’t in English –you can’t rely on people who don’t know what to look for.”
Feinberg’s firm uses a technology that scans for hashtags across social media platforms in different languages for communication that indicates terrorist planning.
But Christopher O’Rourke, CEO of Soteria, a cybersecurity firm based in Charleston, South Carolina, told Fox News that extremists are not as “naïve” as people think.
“We’ve been following them for years. They use code words, they are covert,” O’Rourke, who is a former U.S. government-sponsored cyberhacker who worked with the tailored access operations within the NSA, told Fox News. “It’s the silent, smart ones using technology to their benefit that are the most risk for causing problems. You wouldn’t pick up on subtle nuances –you’d notice if someone threatened ‘infidels’, but the thing about terrorists is the smart ones know how to blend in and you can’t really differentiate that.”
O’Rourke criticized Facebook, saying that the company has data on how users interact on the platform, but the algorithms have failed them in the past, such as reports last year of Facebook not sharing certain partisan information, which the company blamed on an algorithm error.
“At the end of the day, computers are not as intelligent as a proper analyst,” O’Rourke told Fox News. “Good, old fashioned man power and communication with law enforcement is what we need.”

Appeals court denies Trump request to immediately reinstate travel ban

Early Sunday morning a federal appeals court denied the Justice Department's request for an immediate reinstatement of President Donald Trump's ban on accepting certain travelers and refugees.
The DOJ filed an appeal of a judge’s order temporarily stopping Trump’s travel ban on Saturday night, saying it’s the “sovereign prerogative" of a president to admit or exclude aliens.
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco instead asked for the Justice Department to file a counter-response by Monday afternoon.
The higher court's denial of an immediate stay means the legal battles will continue for days at least.
The appeal stated that the district court’s ruling “conflicts with the basic principle that an alien seeking initial admission to the United States requests a privilege and has no constitutional rights regarding his application."
The appeal also said the temporary order blocking Trump’s ban was an overreach of judicial authority. The order was issued by U.S. District Judge James Robart in Seattle.
"Judicial second-guessing of the President's national security determination in itself imposes substantial harm on the federal government and the nation at large," it said.
Acting Solicitor General Noel Francisco argued on Saturday night saying that the president has the power to decide who can enter or stay in the United States.
"The power to expel or exclude aliens is a fundamental sovereign attribute, delegated by Congress to the executive branch of government and largely immune from judicial control," the brief says.
The Justice Department asked that the federal judge's order be stayed pending resolution of the appeal, so that the ban can "ensure that those approved for admission do not intend to harm Americans and that they have no ties to terrorism."
Trump’s controversial executive order has caused unending confusion for many travelers trying to reach the U.S.
Demonstrations took place outside the White House, in New York and near his estate in Palm Beach, Florida, where Trump was attending the annual American Red Cross fundraising gala.
"We'll win," Trump told reporters Saturday night. "For the safety of the country, we'll win."
The department on Saturday advised refugee aid agencies that those set to travel before Trump signed his order will now be allowed in. A State Department official said in an email obtained by The Associated Press that the government was "focusing on booking refugee travel" through Feb. 17 and working to have arrivals resume as soon as Monday.
The Homeland Security Department no longer was directing airlines to prevent visa-holders affected by Trump's order from boarding U.S.-bound planes. The agency said it had "suspended any and all actions" related to putting in place Trump's order.
Hearings have also been held in court challenges nationwide. Washington state and Minnesota argued that the temporary ban and the global suspension of the U.S. refugee program harmed residents and effectively mandated discrimination.

X U.S. Representative Barney Frank Cartoons

AKA

Dodd-Frank financial regulations

Trump begins rollback of Dodd-Frank financial regulations

President Trump signed an executive order Friday taking aim at the regulatory labyrinth created by Dodd-Frank, the massive 24,000-page law passed in the wake of the 2008 financial crisis.
“We expect to be cutting a lot out of Dodd-Frank,” Trump said, after morning meetings with business leaders.
The order directs the Treasury secretary to initiate a review and consult with regulatory agencies to identify changes to Dodd-Frank. It will not take effect immediately and awaits Senate confirmation of Trump’s Treasury Secretary nominee Steve Mnuchin.
Trump also signed a presidential memorandum that instructs the Labor Department to delay implementing an Obama-era rule that requires financial professionals who charge commissions to put their clients' best interests first when giving advice on retirement investments.
The rule was intended to prevent conflicts of interest by financial advisers and brokers. Opponents say it extends beyond the Labor Department’s authority.
While the financial oversight order won't have any immediate impact, the administration's intent is clear.
"The Dodd-Frank Act is a disastrous policy that's hindering our markets, reducing the availability of credit and crippling our economy's ability to grow and create jobs," said Press Secretary Sean Spicer.
Trump pledged during the transition that rolling back regulations, particularly 2010 Dodd-Frank law, would be a priority of his administration.
White House National Economic Council Director Gary Cohn echoed the president in an interview with Fox Business Network’s Maria Bartiromo.
Cohn argued regulations are “the biggest hindrance to job creation” and have a negative impact on banks’ lending practices.
“All banks have been under such regulatory scrutiny where they’ve been forced to literally build capital. Instead of lending capital ... to their clients and allowing them to grow their businesses and hire people and create jobs, they’ve been taking those reserves and taking that capital and hording it to meet the regulatory requirements and pay for additional regulations,” he said Friday morning.
The executive order is the “beginning of some of our executive actions to roll back regulations in the financial markets,” Cohn added.
Since its passage, there has been a surge in banking mergers and acquisitions, according to data compiled by Bloomberg News.
They reported that U.S. bank mergers increased to about $18 billion in 2016, the highest recorded level since 2009.
“We appreciate the administration’s support for pro-growth policies so banks can go even further in helping communities and our economy thrive,” said Rob Nichols, president of the American Bankers Association, in a statement.
“A sensible and careful review of Dodd-Frank and other financial regulations can and should strengthen those goals while unleashing the power of the banking industry — from small towns and communities to our nation’s financial centers — to fuel the increase in economic prosperity that we all seek,” added Nichols.
In its regulatory rollback, the administration has a willing partner in the Republican-controlled Congress which got the ball rolling this week.
On Wednesday, the House voted 235-187 to repeal a controversial Dodd-Frank requirement that publicly traded companies disclose confidential information related to the negotiation of business contracts.
The rule was vacated in 2013 by a federal judge on the grounds it was too arbitrary.
The SEC re-issued the rule last summer. But in an early morning Friday session, the Senate voted 52-47 to OK the House-approved measure, which President Trump is expected to sign.
Describing it as an “anti-corruption rule,” Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-OH, maintained repealing the regulation makes it easier for companies to hide their dealings with foreign governments, like Russia and China.
A source close to House Financial Services Committee Chairman Jeb Hensarling told Fox News the Texas Republican plans to reintroduce the Financial Choice Act in the coming weeks. The legislation is the only measure to date that proposes to repeal and replace Dodd-Frank.
The bill would repeal the authority of the Financial Stability Oversight Council (FSOC), which was intended to help rescue failing large firms without relying on government bailouts. It also would replace the head of the controversial Consumer Financial Protection Bureau with a five-member panel and establish an office of inspector general.

BuzzFeed sued over publication of Trump dossier, report says

Ze Frank is an American online performance artist, composer, humorist and public speaker based in Los Angeles, California. He is currently the president of BuzzFeed Entertainment Group.

Buzzfeed was sued by the Russia-tied tech firm named in the dossier that contained unsubstantiated allegations against President Trump for including “libelous, unverified” information about the company, McClatchy reported Friday, citing the lawsuits.
The defamation suits were brought by XBT Holdings. Company lawyers reportedly filed complaints against BuzzFeed and its editor Ben Smith. A former British spy and his company were also named in complaints.
The company seeks an “undetermined compensation for the damages.”
VIDEO: TUCKER CARLSON INTERVIEWS BUZZFEED EDITOR
A Buzzfeed spokeman told McClatchy that it redacted the name of the company’s owner and “apologize for including it.”
McClatchy reported that the dossier said XBT and affiliates “had been using botnets and porn traffic to transmit viruses, plant bugs, steal data and conduct “altering operations” against the Democratic Party leadership.”
The suit reportedly says Alekej Gubarev, XBT’s owner, is married with three children and “has found his personal and professional reputation in tatters.”
The network did not give details about the information, saying the charges had not been verified, but BuzzFeed soon published the 35-page dossier. Most reputable news organizations, following up the story, also did not report the details.
Trump and his team was quick to attack news organizations that spread unsubstantiated reports about a damaging dossier last month collected on him by Russia, an incident that illustrates how old rules of journalism are being tested in today's rapidly changing media world.
Trump called BuzzFeed "a pile of garbage" for publishing the allegations.
CNN reported that Trump had been briefed by intelligence officials about compromising personal and financial information that Russia had collected on him.
White House Press Secretary Sean Spicer and Vice President Pence sharply condemned those who spread the story. Spicer called BuzzFeed's decision "outrageous and highly irresponsible," while Pence said it was an effort by some in the media to delegitimize the election and discredit the incoming administration.
"The American people are sick and tired of it," Pence said.
Meanwhile, Trump credited The New York Times, a newspaper he's often been at odds with, for its decision not to publish what it could not independently verify.

Airlines reportedly told to board passengers otherwise banned under Trump's travel order after federal judge's ruling

U.S. District Judge James Robart (stupid ass)

A federal judge in Seattle issued a ruling Friday that temporarily halts President Trump’s controversial executive order barring travelers and immigrants from seven predominately Muslim countries.
U.S. District Judge James Robart ruled that Washington state and Minnesota could challenge Trump's order to freeze the entire U.S. refugee program for four months and ban Syrians from entering as refugees indefinitely.
“What the judge announced today is nationwide—the president’s executive order does not apply,” Bob Ferguson, the attorney general from Washington state, said. It was his state that filed the suit.
Ferguson said the travel ban significantly harms residents and effectively mandates discrimination. The state's legal challenge was the way the president's order targeted Islam.
The New York Times reported Friday night that airlines have been told by the government to begin allowing these travelers on planes to the U.S. The Trump administration could block these travelers if it wins an emergency stay, but Reuters reported that the U.S. Justice Department will not be filing a stay tonight.
The State Department said it has been informed about the ruling “barring the U.S. government from enforcing provisions of Executive Order 13769.”
“We are working closely with the Department of Homeland Security and our legal teams to determine how this affects our operations,” a spokesman from the department said to Fox News. “We will announce any changes affecting travelers to the United States as soon as that information is available.”
The judge’s ruling, as The Wall Street Journal reported, adds a “fresh round of confusion” to several challenges to Trump’s order.
The judge ordered federal defendants "and their respective officers, agents, servants, employees, attorneys and persons acting in concert or participation with them are hereby enjoined and restrained from" enforcing the executive order.
Robart wrote that he granted the restraining order partly because the plaintiffs were likely to win on a constitutional claim, and that halting the executive order would cause the plaintiffs “irreparable injury.”
Harvard Law Professor Alan Dershowitz said in an interview that he believes the state may have an uphill climb because the Supreme Court has ruled in the past that  the Constitution does not protect non-citizens.
Sean Spicer, the White House spokesman, said in a statement that the Justice Department “intends to file an emergency stay of this outrageous order and defend the executive order of the president, which we believe is lawful and appropriate.”
The judge's ruling could be appealed the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
The Journal reported that district judges seldom issue nationwide injunctions, but cited a few in recent years, including a 2010 ruling against “don’t ask, don’t tell” and, a similar ruling in 2015, where a federal judge in Texas issued a nationwide injunction blocking the Obama administration’s implementation granting some protection to children of illegal immigrants.
Trump's order last week sparked protests nationwide and confusion at airports as some travelers were detained. The White House has argued that it will make the country safer.
Washington became the first state to sue over the order that temporarily bans travel for people from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Sudan, Somalia, Libya and Yemen and suspends the U.S. refugee program.

Qatar Airways: US approved the boarding of refugees with valid visas, green cards after ruling

Qatar Airways announced on its website Saturday that it has been directed by the U.S. government to permit formerly banned passengers to board U.S.-bound flights after a federal judge’s ruling halted President Trump’s controversial refugee order.
The airline was directed by U.S. Customs and Border Protection that the “nationals of the seven affected countries” and “all refugees seeking admission with a valid U.S. visa of green card” will be allowed to travel to the U.S. and “processes accordingly upon arrival.
U.S. District Judge James Robart issued a ruling Friday that temporarily halts President Trump’s controversial executive order barring travelers and immigrants from seven predominately Muslim countries.
The New York Times first reported Friday night that airlines have been told by the government to begin allowing these travelers on planes to the U.S. The Trump administration could block these travelers if it wins an emergency stay, but Reuters reported that the U.S. Justice Department will not be filing a stay tonight.
The State Department said it has been informed about the ruling “barring the U.S. government from enforcing provisions of Executive Order 13769.”
“We are working closely with the Department of Homeland Security and our legal teams to determine how this affects our operations,” a spokesman from the department said to Fox News. “We will announce any changes affecting travelers to the United States as soon as that information is available.”
The Guardian reported that a duty manager at San Francisco’s international airport said his colleagues have not been instructed on how to proceed after the ruling.
“We’re just waiting to find out how the law’s changing and morphing,” he said. “People are just coming and going. We’re hoping it works out well for everyone.”
The State Department said it has been informed about the ruling “barring the U.S. government from enforcing provisions of Executive Order 13769.”
“We are working closely with the Department of Homeland Security and our legal teams to determine how this affects our operations,” a spokesman from the department said to Fox News. “We will announce any changes affecting travelers to the United States as soon as that information is available.”

Tex Mex Border Cartoons