The insidious counter-extremism programme PREVENT is not limited to Britain in terms of its effect and impact. Muslim minorities in the US are experiencing similar policies designed to target them through bogus psychometrics. See previous blogs on CVE, the responses to it in Western states, and the need to internationalise the response to a policy of persecution which has gone global. The piece below by journalist Waqas Mirza is important in that it demonstrates that the concerns about PREVENT are being echoed in the context of American CVE projects. It is an important step forward towards the aim of transcending borders to combat CVE.
Transcending Borders to Combat CVE
The Dark, Shoddy “Science” behind PREVENT
As British Government Leads CVE Globally, Britons Lead the way in Opposing it.
Globalising CVE: The New Western Imperialism
CROSSPOST: Waqas Mirza
Nearly fifteen years of the War on Terror may not have led to any appreciable decline of terrorist groups but they certainly have resulted in the US government coming up with some uniquely comical ideas on how the war should be fought. The State Department once spent millions of dollars for its Center for Strategic Counterterrorism Communications division to troll Islamic State accounts on Twitter. Earlier this year, the State Department offereda $1.5 million grant to produce a “television drama series” aimed at “countering violent extremism among young people in contemporary Afghan society.”
Report: Preventing Education? Human Rights and UK Counter-Terrorism Policy in Schools
Further Reading: Muslim Children Through PREVENT: Victims of the War on Terror
The neoconservative social engineering programme of hate that is the PREVENT counter-extremism policy last week suffered a further set back.
Over the past year I have endeavoured to raise the impact on the rights as well as the psychology of children resulting from the application of PREVENT. In January, the Institute of Race Relations issued a report looking at the impact on children from the context of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child.
I have outlined in previous blog how the government has in essence stripped the people before the State and shrouded itself against scrutiny. Earlier in the year the case of David Miranda became a significant milestone in the treatment of journalists. He was detained under the anti-terror legislation at an airport because he possessed encrypted intelligence documents. More recently news surfaced that Metropolitan police had been recording journalistic activities on a secret database designed to monitor “domestic extremists”. Journalists are being “assaulted monitored and stopped and searched by police during their work, which often includes documenting police misconduct”.
The question remains, for a government which promotes democratic principles to the point that it happily enforces its respect in the guise of “British values”, why are journalists whom are supposed to be the practical manifestation of the principle of government transparency being harangued and monitored like this? To reverse the question to the State: what have you got to hide?
Inextricably linked is the treatment of whistle-blowers. Miranda’s detention is but one example. Julian Assange and Edward Snowden have helped disclose the excesses of western governments which would have otherwise gone unnoticed without accountability. Yet these individuals are pursued to the point that they have to hide in embassies and seek asylum.