Response to "FIght Terror with YouTube"

In Daniel Kimmage’s New York Times article “Fight Terror with YouTube” he proposes a different side to the fight on terror that I found to be very interesting. Instead of continuing to fight every single country that harbors or promotes terrorism through force, maybe the focus should be on stopping the promotion of Al Qaeda and other terrorists on the world wide web. It wouldn’t be a violation of their rights, which shouldn’t even matter anyways because they shouldn’t be entitled to the same rights as human beings to begin with, but instead managing the evolving web to work against them. In an age where sites like YouTube and Facebook have the ability to have such a great influence, the real terrorists can be shown for the scum that they are to their people; instead of the propaganda of the good that they are doing that the try to portray it as. The problem in that war lies in the states in the Middle East where terrorism is so profound. The authoritarian governments of Egypt, Libya, Saudi Arabia, Syria and Yemen prohibit or severely limit internet access to its people. Kimmage argues that not only should the people be entitled to the right to be able to unobstructed internet access as a right, but also it would serve as an effective way of limiting the sphere of influence that Al Qaeda feeds off of. I feel like the argument that Kimmage brings up is a very interesting, and potentially effective, way of fighting terrorism in the Middle East. That method paired with the war on Al Qaeda could prove very effective. Once the people are able to see what truly happens to the terrorists it could keep Al Qaeda from gaining additional forces. So when all of the remaining forces are either dead or jailed, it would prove very difficult for them to continue their terrorism on the rest of the world.