#counterextremism

[graymanbriefing]

National Security / Government Oversight Brief: Online Extremism  The Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Center for Prevention Programs and Partnerships (CP3) along with the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) will administer training and support to schools, churches, health care providers and others in a stated goal to counter targeted violence and prevent terrorism. The program is expected to enable recipients to focus on "online extremist speech" and was approved through a $20 million taxpayer funded grant to 34 organizations. Opponents of the program claim that it creates a crowdsourced, government controlled effort to detect "free speech" that counters "approved" narratives on vaccines, the Russia/Ukraine conflict, LGBT agendas, gun rights, and immigration. The grant document states, "Many violent extremists exploit online platforms to spread hate, sow discord and division, and promote narratives to encourage violence. This program supports online, in-person, and hybrid programs that address the threat of online promotion of violence as well as the threat of violence in physical spaces." The grant further highlights the threat and need to counter anti-government, anti-authority, and white supremacists. In Connecticut, the Center for School Safety and Crisis Preparation advised the grant will aid in K-12 schools' efforts to "investigate digital threats on social media platforms" sayi...(CLASSIFIED, see full brief at www.graymanbriefing.com) #nationalsecurity #governmentoversight #dhs #fema #publicschools #socialmediamonitoring #intel #news #graymanbriefing #counterextremism #onlineprivacy #freedomofspeech

[muslims-and-exmuslims]

Far-Right, Anti-Muslim Terrorism: Ways to Support the Muslim Community and Report Suspicious Activity

On back of growing anti-Muslim hate speech over the recent years, if nothing has put the danger of anti-Muslim, far-right terrorism on the same footing as Islamist terrorism, the tragic terror attack at the Christchurch mosque in New Zealand that killed 50 innocent people, mostly Muslims, may have.

This abhorrent anti-Muslim terrorist attack is part of the growing trend of anti-Muslim hate speech which involves holding negative views about Muslims and unfair treatment of Muslims as an ethnic group as a reaction to Islamist extremism perpetuated by Islamists, i.e. supporters of a religious-political cause who wants to impose any version of Islamist extremism on others, such as by promoting Female Genital Mutilation, forced marriage, spreading malice against LGBT+ people etc.

Some examples of anti-Muslim hate crime includes:

Severe persecution of Uighur Muslims in China where over thousands of Muslims have been detained in dehumanising concentration camps.

A pregnant Muslim woman being kicked by a racist man in an abhorrent racist attack, causing the woman to lose her baby.

A anti-Muslim terrorist attack in the US that killed three in the same family.

If you are a non-Muslim or an Ex-Muslim in a country or community where Muslims are a minority and you have have witnessed unfair treatment of Muslims, there are ways you can reach out to them with compassion to understand their situation and look after them during difficult times. Here are some ways you can support the Muslim community:

Understand the difference between Islamism (Islamist extremism, including non-violent and violent extremism) and practicing Islam as a personal faith. Understand the difference between an Islamist and a Muslim. An Islamist is a person who imposes any version of Islamist extremism either by force or in passive manner, for example, by forcing or blackmailing women to cover their hair otherwise slandering them as a racist, or justifying sexual harassment against women who do not cover their bodies, or invoking prejudice against LGBT+ community. A Muslim is a person who practices the the Islamic faith personally and do not impose any element of Islamist extremism on other people.

If you know a Muslim friend or neighbour who may have been affected by anti-Muslim hate speech or discrimination, reach out to them with compassion and offer support such as listening to their experience over a cup of coffee should they need them.

If you are studying at a school or university, getting involved in multicultural activities such as celebrating Eid-al-Adha are good ways to understand the Muslim culture.

If you see a Muslim person is being discriminated or being bullied, do not ignore it. If this is a situation of potential violence, call the police immediately. If you see anti-Muslim discrimination happening at a workplace, speak to your line manager.

If you want to assume a leadership role in raising awareness about tackling anti-Muslim sentiment in your community, team up with organisations that support Muslim minorities. Ask them how you can make a difference by volunteering your time and skills.

It is reported in media that the anti-Muslim terrorist who attacked the Christchurch mosque posted images of weapon and hateful content supporting far-right, neo-Nazi populism. Just like Islamist extremist contents supporting and justifying terrorist attacks, if you see similar online content promoting far-right, anti-Muslim violence, make sure you report them to the Police immediately.

We plan to take more tailored and effective initiatives in future to help everyone with anti-Muslim hate speech, in the spirit of multiculturalism that binds us all together. If you have any idea on how we can better support the Muslim community in dealing with hate-speech and would want us to add to this blog post, you can directly contribution suggestions in the publicly editable version of the blog here. All contributions are subject to review.

[question-why-not]

Yo everyone this blog seems good

I’m posting this for any of my followers who may need this, and I encourage you to reblog it for yours.

[jeffschoep]

Beyond Barriers with Jeff Schoep and Jenn Kreis

[finnes]

Maajid Nawaz. 🎙🎙🎙Maajid Nawaz is a counter-extremist, author, broadcaster and founding chairman of Quilliam. His personal experience and life story are fascinating to say the least. His combination of practical knowledge and a sharp noggin renders interesting truths and policy prescriptions for some of the worlds most pressing problems concerning integration, citizenship & identity, immigration, and terrorism. ⠀ ⠀ He says in order to fix a problem you have to be able to name it correctly or else it's akin to taking on a Lord Voldemort effect as the "one who can not be named." I very much loved this analogy so in this drawing you can see Lord Voldemort's wand in his right hand. ⠀ ⠀ #HappyNES #maajidnawaz #quilliamfoundation #counterextremism #islamandthefutureoftolerance #lbc #radioshow #radical #illustration #idw #intellectualdarkweb #inktober #inktober2018 #harrypotter #lordvoldemort #wand #tolerance #integration #migration #counterterrorism #sharpdresser ⠀ ⠀ https://www.instagram.com/p/BoghXYfhz-1/?utm_source=ig_tumblr_share&igshid=1j5tsetuqhubt

[yasbxxgie]

[wikiweb-blog]

Trump plans to reshape counter-extremism program to focus on Islam: report

The Trump administration is pushing to reshape a government program aimed at combating extremist ideologies to focus solely to countering Islamist extremists, Reuters reports.

Under…

FULL ARTICLE

[lookwhatilost]

because she’s very on twitter and has harvard in her bio, alejandra caraballo is seen by journalists with no subject-matter expertise as a serious voice on anti-disinformation/counterextremism stuff. 

but she spreads disinformation *all the time*. like, seemingly ever new viral lefty rumor.

caraballo helped spread the rumor that the club q shooting had a connection to online anti-LGBT rhetoric, a still totally unproven claim. then, because she was loud on Twitter about it, she was treated as an expert by journalists who know nothing about the subject.

same deal with the power station attacks, which remain unsolved. authorities are still seeking a motive. caraballo gets viral attention by suggesting some of the attacks had to do with drag queen story hour – her evidence being one wacko's social media post.

[girl4pay]

like the point of tehanu imo is that she’s saying men will say where they begin and end regardless of if it’s true or not in order to maintain control and so the traits like depth and unknowability and inconsistency and intuition attributed to women in this quote are actually just human but patriarchal influence tries to obscure that and whatshername speaking doesn’t have the connection to a man that tehanu has to ged to have perspective on that so she assumes it’s inherent to her and to other women with magic because she can’t see men as human because they’ve intentionally tried to set themselves apart. its like the counterextreme to to more widespread attitude of gender and power in the book but the conclusion tenar and the narrative come to is a complicated mix of everything yk…

its so weird to me that this is the quote that shows up the most when you search tehanu i mean i get why because it’s #girlbosswitchlit but like in context it’s supposed to be an unsatisfying & inaccurate assessment that ignores nuance at least as i understood it like how it ends with ‘who will ask the dark it’s name?’ when ged literally did that…

[xtruss]

ARGUMENT

Pope Francis’s Silence on Xinjiang Speaks Volumes

A pope dedicated to human rights has said nothing on China, thanks to a secret deal with Beijing.

BY BENEDICT ROGERS | JULY 29, 2020 | Foreign Policy

Pope Francis leaves the window of the Apostolic Palace overlooking St. Peter's Square in Vatican City after the Sunday Angelus prayer on July 22, 2018. ANDREAS SOLARO/AFP VIA GETTY IMAGES

This month, the president of the Board of Deputies of British Jews wrote a most courageous letter to the Chinese ambassador in London.

In the letter, Marie van der Zyl took an extraordinary step for the leader of Britain’s main Jewish organization—she drew comparisons between the plight of the Uighurs in China today and the Holocaust. Nobody could see the evidence and fail to note, she wrote, “the similarities between what is alleged to be happening in the People’s Republic of China today and what happened in Nazi Germany 75 years ago: People being forcibly loaded on to trains; beards of religious men being trimmed; women being sterilised; and the grim spectre of concentration camps.”

Van der Zyl is just one of many faith leaders to speak out against the atrocities being committed in Xinjiang. But one voice has been strangely absent—that of Pope Francis, ordinarily a powerful advocate for the oppressed. His silence speaks to the dangers of the deal made with China by the Vatican—and demands that others in the church speak out.

Before van der Zyl’s letter, there was the decision by Jewish News to highlight the discovery of 13 metric tons of Uighur hair—with “Nazi resonance”—on the front page of the newspaper.

The letter was followed by a Twitter thread by the widely respected former Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks, who wrote: “As a Jew, knowing our history, the sight of people being shaven headed, lined up, boarded onto trains, and sent to concentration camps is particularly harrowing. That people in the 21st century are being murdered, terrorised, victimised, intimidated and robbed of their liberties because of the way they worship God is a moral outrage, a political scandal and a desecration of faith itself.”

Around the same time, Maajid Nawaz, a prominent Muslim counterextremism activist, went on hunger strike for the Uighurs. Nawaz, a former radical Islamist who now devotes his time to fighting intolerance of all kinds courageously and successfully, promoted a petition for a parliamentary debate on imposing Magnitsky-style sanctions on the Chinese regime for its treatment of the Uighurs.

And last Saturday, the president of the Federation of Asian Bishops’ Conferences, the outspoken Cardinal Charles Bo of Myanmar, released a statement mostly about Turkey’s Hagia Sophia mosque—but which included: “In China, the Uyghur Muslims are facing what amounts to some of the contemporary world’s worst mass atrocities and I urge the international community to investigate.”

Yet so far, the world has heard nothing from the world’s major Muslim and Christian leadersYet so far, the world has heard nothing from the world’s major Muslim and Christian leaders. Muslim-majority countries have, mostly, sided with China—shamefully and in pursuit of narrow and elusive economic interests. The archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, has said nothing. Neither has Francis.

“Yet so far, the world has heard nothing from the world’s major Muslim and Christian leaders.”

It is Francis’s silence that shocks me most. Almost every Sunday, as he prays the Angelus, he rightly references some injustice somewhere in the world. He has spoken often in the past not only of the persecution of Christians around the world but of the plight of the Rohingyas in Myanmar; the conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Ukraine, and Nigeria; and religious freedom for all.

One country—and one country alone—is noticeable by its absence in his prayers and statements: China.

In China today, we see one of the 21st century’s worst crimes—perhaps a genocide—being perpetrated against the Uighurs. But in addition, we see the most flagrant violation of an international agreement in China’s imposition of the new national security law on Hong Kong—a law that destroys Hong Kong’s freedoms and autonomy. We also see the worst crackdown on Christians since the Cultural Revolution, while the repression in Tibet continues.

Yet in the face of all of these crimes, Francis remains silent. He has not uttered a public prayer (I hope he has at least said a private one) for the Uighurs, Hong Kongers, Christians, Falun Gong practitioners, Tibetans, and others who are increasingly feeling the pressure of the Chinese Communist Party’s boot—at all.

Why?

Two years ago, the Vatican made a deal with Beijing that bought the pope’s silence.Two years ago, the Vatican made a deal with Beijing that bought the pope’s silence. When I say “bought,” I am not suggesting impropriety. I love this pope and his focus on mercy and forgiveness. On almost every other matter—and I write as a Catholic who converted seven years ago and came into the church in, of all places, Myanmar—I agree with Francis. So I write not as a hard-line conservative hostile to Francis but rather as someone who loves him but is perplexed by how badly wrong he has gone on China.

“Two years ago, the Vatican made a deal with Beijing that bought the pope’s silence.”

One of the most troubling aspects of the Vatican-Beijing deal is that the text remains secret. If it is such a good arrangement in the eyes of the Holy See, why can’t ordinary Catholics—and the world at large—know what it says? What we do know is that it gives the Chinese Communist Party—an avowedly atheist regime—a direct role in the appointment of Catholic bishops and that it has already led to the forced retirement of several underground bishops loyal to the Vatican in favor of state-approved bishops until recently out of communion with the church.

And it has not led to any improvement in freedoms for Catholics. If anything, the situation has worsened. No clergy imprisoned before the deal have been released, and several have been arrested, detained, and disappeared since the deal was agreed. Far from bringing the desired unity or protection for the church, it has caused greater division and more repression.

But that deal had the effect of silencing Francis, for whatever reason, and it breaks my heart. As the last British governor of Hong Kong, Chris Patten, wrote in the Tablet recently, it seems that the Vatican “may be cosying up to a Chinese Communist Party at the worst conceivable moment, just as it is embarking on a loutish rampage in China and beyond.”

I spoke out early on, two years before the deal with Beijing was signed, in an open letter. I tried to warn the Holy See again of the dangers it may be entering into. And while never questioning the pope’s motivations—which are noble and are about protecting people in China and renewing his fellow Jesuit Matteo Ricci’s engagement with the country—I profoundly question the judgment of those around him. Out of naivety, Francis’s Vatican has sold out to one of the world’s most repressive and aggressive regimes.

That is the story so far. But it need not be the end of the tale.

It is not inevitable that the wonderful Board of Deputies of British Jews, Britain’s former chief rabbi, Nawaz, a few of my friends, and I stand with the Uighurs in the face of one of the contemporary world’s worst atrocities and that Francis and Welby do not. Welby’s silence is difficult to explain—other than, like Francis, a naive belief that China’s is a regime with which one can still engage and reason. The reality is that the regime has moved from a pragmatic desire to exercise certain controls over religion to one driven by a repressive, ideological urge to tighten its grip. That was clearly signaled by the abolition of the State Administration for Religious Affairs in 2018, which had working relationships with most faiths. Those relationships are now handled, much more crudely and brutally, by the United Front Work Department, which is directly responsible for ideological control of non-party groups.

So it is now time that these two key Christian leaders wake up, review their position, cross the Rubicon, and say enough is enough.

They need to signal clearly that they believe in the teachings of their faith—of human dignity, freedom, and justice—which matter more than any shady deals with brutal regimes.

They need to abandon naivety. They need to say they won’t compromise when it comes to human life and dignity.

And they need to recognize that Dietrich Bonhoeffer, the Protestant pastor who stood up against Adolf Hitler, was right when he said: “Silence in the face of evil is itself evil. … Not to speak is to speak. Not to act is to act.”

They need to respect the memory of Maximilian Kolbe, venerated as a saint for giving his life for another’s at the gas chambers of Auschwitz.

They need to say clearly: We are all Uighurs, Hong Kongers, Chinese Christians, Tibetans, and Falun Gong practitioners now.

Let Francis and Welby say so.

Or forever lose their—and our—peace.

[schraubd]

#NeverIsNow is the ADL at its Best

I just got back from the ADL's "Never is Now" summit against antisemitism and all other forms of bigotry and hate. My relationship with the ADL is somewhat complicated, though on the whole I'd characterize myself as a friendly gadfly. I've said nice things about them when they're doing their job right, and I've been sharply critical of the them when they're screwing that important job up. That said, it was the ADL staffer who is probably the most common recipient of my ... let's call it "constituent concerns" (to be clear -- it's never her who is the problem, she's just my primary point of contact) ... who invited me to the conference as her guest. So while I've had my differences with the ADL along with my points of agreement, I've never found them unreceptive to critique and conversation. And I have to say, this conference was exactly what the ADL should be. The ADL is in a bit of a tough spot right now. If you talk to people on the left, they'll say the ADL is basically a tool of the establishment, acting as if the "alt-left" is equivalent to the alt-right, embedded in a pattern of policing left-wing Jewish activism while dancing around the fact that vicious hate and bigotry have penetrated the mainstream, elected-office level right. Meanwhile, on the right, they're trying to push the narrative that the ADL is basically a liberal advocacy group (Jonathan Greenblatt was part of the Obama administration, didn't you know?), a partisan political organization that's barely distinct from the NJDC, committing the cardinal sin of attacking the hatred and bigotry of figures even when they call themselves pro-Israel. As far as I'm concerned, the liberal critics are closer to the mark than the conservative ones, though the ADL isn't quite the hopeless establishment toady they're sometimes made them out to be. Still, it has been my observation that the fear of these right-wing attacks causes the ADL to get a bit gunshy in clearly and unequivocally (a) calling out right-wing bias when it isn't simply the province of neo-Nazis and (b) making clear that it will stand up for and protect the right of liberal Zionists (particularly young liberal Zionists) to express their Zionism in ways that include often sharp criticism of Israeli state policies. But say what you will about the ADL generally: based on what I saw at this conference, they were hitting the right notes. The first breakout session I attended in the afternoon was about "What young Jews are saying about Israel and why we have to listen." The tenor of the panel was generally one of quieting alarm rather than raising it: young people are not abandoning Israel in droves. They are not crazed radicals (they are a bit resentful that a small sliver of students on the extremes dominates news coverage and the public perception of young college students). They do often have serious concerns and criticisms about Israeli policies -- as is their right -- and any engagement efforts which don't give those criticisms room to breathe will and should fail. And while BDS certainly was raised as an issue (as it should), it didn't dominate the discussion and there was no effort by the moderator or by anyone else to turn the conversation in that direction. Perhaps the most powerful moment in that panel was when one of the panelists spoke of how J Street U students were treated at a UN anti-BDS conference (a non-Jewish panelist called them all antisemites -- to roaring applause -- and then they were told they should go to Gaza and be beheaded by Hamas). That story got audible gasps from the room. I don't think many of the people in attendance had heard about that happening, and it very vividly illustrated the degree to which certain conservative elements in our community have been abusing young liberal Zionists in the name of "pro-Israel" advocacy. At other times, conference speakers were quite explicit in linking the rise in antisemitism and other forms of hatred to the Trump candidacy and administration. Threats were illustrated not just with sound bites from Charlottesville (this was the first time I'd actually heard the chant "Jews will not  replace us", and it was genuinely chilling) but with excerpts from Donald Trump speeches. It never devolved into a bash-the-GOP-fest -- nor should it have -- but there were no kid gloves around the fact that the Republican Party coalition, as currently constituted, is part of the problem. Several other panels I witnessed were likewise simply outstanding. A conversation on diversity within the Jewish community (including African-American Jews, a Canadian-American member of the Bene Israel community, and the head of the Ugandan Jewish community) was superb and nuanced on an issue near and dear to my heart (a side note -- while I think there could have been more diversity across the different panels, it did not seem like all the ethnic minorities were shunted into this one "diversity" panel). During the afternoon plenary, a conversation featuring American University student body President Taylor Dumpson, former White Supremacist-turned-counterextremism activist Christian Picciolini, and Whitefish, Montana Rabbi Francine Roston stole the show. Dumpson (the first African-American woman to hold her position) spoke powerfully about the vicious harassment she received upon her election, and how the response of her community and the ADL offered a model for activism and effective anti-hate response. Piccilioni gave a deeply personal account of his path into and eventually away from White Supremacy, and gave hope to those who believe that any remotely cohesive effort against racism and bigotry needs to think about how to get racists and bigots to ... do something else (he also had the funniest line of the conference when he said he'd been "working with the ADL for twenty-five years ... if you count the period where they included me on lists of top White supremacist leaders"). Overall, it was a conference that had its eye firmly on the ball. It wasn't a left-wing hatchet factory, but it wasn't shy about its progressive orientation. It wasn't going to give BDS a free pass, but it wasn't going to act as if that was the be-all-end-all of young Jewish communal experience. It was proud of Jewish diversity, but it was also well aware that we have a lot of work to do inside our own synagogues and centers to make sure our spaces are welcoming and equitable to Jews of all hues. It was, in short, the ADL at its very best. Kudos to them, for putting on a great conference. via The Debate Link http://ift.tt/2AFn7qb

[muslims-and-exmuslims]

Persecution of Christians: What is it? How can Muslims and Ex-Muslims protect the Christian Community?

Image: Destroyed Statue of the Virgin Mary in the aftermath of terror attack in Sri Lanka, 2019.

Following the recent Islamist terror attack in Sri Lanka targeting Christian places of workship that killed over 200 people on 21st April 2019, it is no suprise that anti-Christian sentiment is a serious and ongoing global problem. Violence against Christians, such as persecution of Christian woman Asia Bibion false allegation of blasphemy or terror attacks targeting Coptic Christians in Egypt, prejudice and hate speech against Christians in countries such as Pakistan and Egypt where they are a minority is a continuous problem, if not a growing one. If you are a Muslim or Ex-Muslim in a country or community where Christians are a minority and you have have witnessed unfair treatment of Christians, there are ways you can reach out to them with compassion to understand their situation and look after them during difficult times. Here are some ways you can support the Christian community:

Understand the history and context behind Christianity. It’s one of the oldest religions in the world, and like other religions, has gone through various reformations. In some parts of the world, much of Christianity is practiced in a secular context. While in others, some work is required to disentangle it from lobbying on harmful policies on anti-abortion, hate speech against LGBT+ people that is rooted in the religion.

If you know a Christian friend or neighbour who may have been affected by anti-Christian hate speech or discrimination, reach out to them with empathy and offer support such as listening to their experience over a cup of coffee should they need them.

If you are studying at a school or university, getting involved in multicultural activities such as Easter and Christmas are fantastic ways to understand the Christian culture. You can offer your Christian friends a gift such as the Advent Calendar as a token of respect to celebrate Christmas.

If you see a Christian person is being discriminated or being bullied, do not ignore it. If this is a situation of potential violence, call the police immediately. If you see anti-Hindu discrimination happeneing at a workplace, speak to your line manager.

If you want to assume a leadership role in raising awareness about tackling anti-Christian sentiment in your community, team up with organisations that support Christian minorities. Ask them how you can make a difference by volunteering your time and skills.

We plan to take more tailored and effective initiatives in the future to help everyone with anti-Christian hate speech, in the spirit of multiculturalism that binds us all together. If you have any ideas on how we can better support the Christian community in dealing with hate-speech and would want us to add to this blog post, you can directly contribution suggestions in the publicly editable version of the blog here. All contributions are subject to review.

[omgstupendousbouquetbasement]

No Place for Right-Wing Extremists in Ranks, German Army Says

As reports about the threat of far-right recruitment among Europe's law enforcement and military grow, German armed forces, or Bundeswehr, told VOA that they are working to keep far-right extremists away from their units or to remove them once they have been identified.    A spokesperson for the Military Counterintelligence Service (MAD) told VOA the military was expanding its cooperation with German security authorities and international partners to analyze links and connections of suspected right-wing extremists to try to expose them.    "There is no place whatsoever for extremists in any form, but especially right-wing extremists, in the Bundeswehr with its over 250,000 members," the MAD spokesman, who did not wish to be named, said.    He said the military has taken several approaches to prevent infiltration by far-right extremists, including carrying out 16,000 security checks annually for all its applicants.    "We also take other preventive measures, aiming to encourage an improved reporting culture within the units through advisories, talks and our own publications," the spokesperson added. 

FILE - Members of the German army's special forces secure an area while demonstrating their skills in training in Claw, near Stuttgart, July 14, 2014.

German media Sunday reported that the Bundeswehr had suspended an officer of its elite special forces, or Kommando Spezialkräfte, who had ties to right-wing elements. The Bild am Sonntag newspaper reported the officer and two other soldiers had been covertly investigated for months, which had exposed their neo-Nazi activities.    On Wednesday, outrage erupted on social media after the Bundeswehr posted on its Instagram channel a picture of a Nazi swastika uniform with the word "retro" on the top of it. Following the backlash, the Bundeswehr removed the post and apologized, saying its intention in the post was to show in the photo "a centuries-long influence of uniforms on fashion."    VOA reached out to the German military officials for a comment on the officer's suspension, but a Military Counterintelligence Service spokesperson said they were unable to comment on "specific operations."    Far-right tendencies    In recent years, some German officials and counterextremism experts have cautioned against the rise in anti-Semitic and anti-immigration rhetoric among the country's law enforcement following multiple reports of members showing far-right extremist tendencies.    Fabian Virchow, a professor at the University of Applied Sciences Düsseldorf and the director of the Research Unit on Right Wing Extremism, told VOA that many far-right groups see police and the military as attractive recruitment grounds to expand their membership and enforce their ideology.    As an example, Virchow said, Alternative for Germany, a right-wing political party founded in 2013, has named a number of police officers as its leading personnel.    "Far-right extremists guess rightly that these two bodies are, on average, more conservative than the rest of the society. This refers mainly to the idea of law and order, which, from the perception of many, has been violated, especially during the crisis of the migration regime in 2015," he said.    The penetration of far-right extremists and neo-Nazis into Germany's law enforcement gained attention in April 2017, when German army officer Franco A. was accused of plotting a right-wing terror attack he seemingly hoped would be mistaken for Islamist extremism. 

FILE - Soldiers of the German KSK attend an exercise close to Putgarten, Germany, Sept. 28, 2015.

The chief of MAD, Christof Gramm, recently said 20 soldiers at Kommando Spezialkräfte (KSK), the special forces command composed of soldiers selected from the Bundeswehr, are under investigation for suspicious ties to right-wing extremists.    Earlier this year, MAD admitted it had underreported the numbers of alleged cases, saying it could be as many as 450, newsmagazine Der Spiegel reported. Of those cases, MAD said 64 were suspected of membership in the Identitarian movement, while another 64 were tied to Reichsbürger.    Originating in France and active in Germany since 2012, Identitarian is a right-wing movement asserting the need to preserve the "European" culture from immigrants, especially Muslim immigrants. Reichsbürger, another far-right group, does not recognize the legitimacy of the modern German state, but instead believes in reviving the 1871 borders of the German empire.    Virchow, of the University of Applied Sciences Düsseldorf, said the risk of radicalization in the military has been downplayed. He said many officials fear that an investigation could lead to exposing structural problems with racism in the police.    "A very urgent task to do should be a scientific investigation of to what an extent police units hold racist and anti-Semitic ideas. To make sure that the police and the military, as the two armed structures in society, stay absolutely loyal to democracy and actively defend it is key," he said.    Transnational issue    Some experts say combating the threat of right-wing infiltration of the police will likely require collective action from European countries. They say similar reports of radicalization among law enforcement of other European countries show the issue is transnational. 

FILE - This Dec. 2, 2016, photo shows the headquarters of Europol in the Netherlands.

The European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Cooperation, known as Europol, concluded that violence related to right-wing extremism was rising in many EU states, according to a confidential report cited by Germany's Süddeutsche Zeitung, one of the country's main daily newspapers, in September.    The report said the groups were pursuing military and police members to boost their "combat skills."    Daniel Koehler, the director of the German Institute in Radicalization and De-Radicalization Studies (GIRDS), told VOA that by infiltrating law enforcement and the military of European countries, right-wing groups are trying to secure a long-term power base and shield themselves against any potential future repression by their governments.    "The hope to easily connect to soldiers and police officers ideologically is not that far off, since the far right's approach through patriotism, nationalism, anti-communism or even blatant racism and anti-Semitism, as well as a positive stance towards violence, might resonate with many others who feel attracted to serve in the military or police," Koehler said.    He said certain European countries have taken important steps in countering this potential threat, particularly in the United Kingdom, where mandatory training is provided to officers to more easily spot far-right radicalization.    However, "a more proactive approach” to embedding the concept of countering violent extremism (CVE) — actions to thwart extremist efforts to recruit, radicalize and mobilize followers to violence — within law enforcement “should be taken,” he said.  

from Blogger https://ift.tt/38hzWJ7 via IFTTT

[todaybreakingnews]

Terrorists being released from UK prisons could 'slip through the net' and attack, government warned

Exclusive: Prison officer brands government counterextremism policies 'laughable' amid crisis in UK jails from The Independent - UK https://ift.tt/2NzgNf4 from Blogger https://ift.tt/2DqIGRF

[pnwdoodlesreads]

By RON NIXON, ADAM GOLDMAN and MATT APUZZOFebruary 2, 2017

WASHINGTON — Community groups in Michigan and Minnesota have decided to reject hundreds of thousands of dollars in federal aid to fight violent extremism because of what they call the Trump administration’s vilification of Muslims.

Last month, the Department of Homeland Security, under the Obama administration, awarded $10 million in grants to more than two dozen community groups and cities for programs to counter recruitment efforts by terrorist and white supremacist groups.

The group in Minnesota decided to reject the money after Trump administration officials were reported to be considering reshaping the program to target only Muslims. The effort, now known as Countering Violent Extremism, or C.V.E., would be renamed Countering Radical Islamic Extremism, Reuters reported on Thursday.

That group, Ka Joog, which works with Somali youths in Minneapolis, said in a statement that its board had decided not to take the nearly $500,000 it was awarded last month because it believed that its efforts had “been hindered by the Trump administration to instill fear, uncertainty and anti-Muslim sentiments.”

The Michigan group, Leaders Advancing and Helping Communities, in Dearborn, said it would also reject $500,000 in federal aid. Suehaila Amen, an executive board member, said that her group had already been discussing before the Reuters report came out whether to accept the grant, because some in the community see the hotly disputed program as a way to spy on Muslims. But the decision was sealed by Mr. Trump’s statements and actions, Ms. Amen said.

“You’re talking about a president who has maligned the Muslims throughout the entire campaign,” she said. “We don’t feel like we need to compromise our integrity, transparency and integrity in the community for some money or funding.”

Another organization, the Muslim Public Affairs Council Foundation, which has offices in Washington and Los Angeles, said it was waiting to see whether the administration moved forward with changes to the program before deciding whether to keep its nearly $400,000 grant.

And Jihad Turk, the president of Bayan Claremont, a graduate college in Claremont, Calif., for Muslim scholars and religious leaders, said it would not accept its $800,000 grant, one of the largest awarded, if the administration renamed the program and entirely shifted it focus.

The Department of Homeland Security declined to comment, though people briefed on the matter said there was fierce resistance inside the department against making changes to the program that could further alienate Muslim communities assisting antiterrorism efforts. During his confirmation hearing as department secretary last month, John F. Kelly stressed the need to build trust with Muslim communities.

But the administration’s possible move aligns with Mr. Trump’s campaign promises to defeat what he called “radical Islamic terrorism,” as well as with the views of some of his advisers. Stephen K. Bannon, the president’s top strategist, has said that Islam is not a religion of peace, while Mr. Trump’s national security adviser, Michael T. Flynn, once said that fear of Muslims was rational.

Counterterrorism experts say that the administration risks eroding years of bridge building between the government and Muslim communities, which have long been suspicious of the counterextremism programs.