“So-called ‘lone wolves,’ whether single individuals or small cells, comprise only six percent of US offenders but are responsible for 25 percent of terrorism-related violence,” she added. “Right-wing terrorism comprises 35 percent of US terror-attacks since 2010. Compare that to the 2000s, when terror-attacks from the far-right comprised just six percent of hate crimes in the US’s ten largest cities.”
This is a very meaningful passage
neo-Nazi who goes by the alias Norman Spear has launched a project to unify online fascists and link that vast coalition of individuals into a network training new soldiers for a so-called forthcoming “race war.”
How is he still free to roam at large? How can America be okay with turning a blind eye to domestic terrorists like this?
parameters
Parameters- "a limit or boundary that defines the scope of a particular process or activity" In this case it is explaining that New Zealanders have the freedom of expression, but that there are lines that should not be crossed. I think that is something that the U.S. should adopt.
The restrictions mean New Zealanders could face legal consequences for intentionally looking at the Christchurch killer’s video, which may have been seen millions of times around the world.
This is an interesting passage. Only because I think this is an important step forward for humanity, and it should be more enforced. I don't think anyone would disagree that intentionally watching and sharing a video about terrorist killing is morally wrong and reprehensible. But, as human (or at least Americans for sure), we have a strange primal need to look at disasters. When there is a car accident on the freeway, for instance, traffic forms as cars slowly roll by so that they can take in the damage. Even the saying from Tony Danza, which is now often repeated in different words, "Sometimes it's like watching a train wreck. You're uncomfortable, but you just can't help yourself" is an example of how people have an impulse to watch terrible, tragic things. I think society needs an enforceable guideline to deter watching this kind of tragedy.
isis spread a similar panic online
This bothers me greatly. How did we, as a community, and Social Media platforms allow these kinds of things to be posted? If these platforms committed to forming a team to personally read through reports and flags, could we have diminished, and still diminish, the reach of these accounts?
Yet we are not at the crest of the wave. Nearly half of the world’s adult population is still not online. Many of the new connections will be concentrated in regions most susceptible to violence and conflict. According to the International Telecommunication Union, internet use in the developing world grew by an average of 16 percent each year from 2005 to 2015. The U.S. National Intelligence Council has estimated that more people in sub-Saharan Africa, South Asia, and the Middle East have internet access than have electricity.
To summarize, there is still a way to go in order for us to see the full affect of the internet. Half of the adults in the world, at the time of this article, still lacked internet access. It goes on to predict that the communities that begin to have more access to internet will be in areas were fighting and war is the most likely to break out. The NIC approximated that the Middle East, Sub-Saharan Africa, and South Asia have been gaining more access to internet than they have to electricity.
virulent
Virulent was a new word to me, though I could grasp an idea of the meaning. The real definition was very fitting as it means that the ideologies extremely severe or bitterly hostile.