Islam

Study: 95% of terror convictions used “preemptive prosecution”

‘Inventing Terrorists’ Study Offers Critical Examination of Government’s Use of Preemptive Prosecutions

Nearly ninety-five percent of individuals on a Justice Department list of “terrorism and terrorism-related convictions” from 2001-2010 included some elements of preemptive prosecution, according to a study by attorneys which they say is the first to “directly examine and critique preemptive prosecution and its abuses.”

The study is called “Inventing Terrorists: The Lawfare of Preemptive Prosecution” [PDF]. It was released by Project SALAM, which stands for Support and Legal Advocacy for Muslims, and the National Coalition to Protect Civil Freedoms (NCPCF), a coalition of groups that “oppose profiling, preemptive prosecution and prisoner abuse.”

What does “preemptive prosecution” look like? Well, try to put yourself in the shoes of a young Muslim. 18, 19, or 20  years old. You watch the news. You may be more politically literate the most, particularly on foreign affairs. And you see Muslims getting killed by the United States overseas on a daily basis.

Naturally, over time you begin to develop radical feelings. (This is now known as blowback.) You join an Internet forum of people who share your newly developed radicalism. And the topics of discussion bolster the collective ire and radicalization of all involved.

Eventually you make a good friend. You meet in real life. Coincidentally (wink, wink) he just happens to lives in your city. He may have an interesting background. For example, he may be a refugee. He may be the relative of a martyr. He or his family may have been victims of the American war on terror.

You and your new friend start attending a mosque and praying together. You continue your discussions on the unjust wars in Afghanistan, Pakistan and Yemen. You read about innocent people killed daily by drones. And the media inundates you with reports of torture and abuse out of Guantanamo Bay. The environment you have been inducted into is a further breeding ground for radicalism.

Then one day your new friend suggests that you commit a violent act. You may not even want to. But the rationale is sound: the United States has committed war crimes. The act would be legitimate. You would be a martyr. The response would be justified. Your new friend also says he knows people affiliated with real terror group. Militants that can provide explosives. After a long period of rage, ire, abuse and feeling powerless you decide to commit to an act of war. You consent to the violent plan. The trap is set.

Your friend talks to his foreign contact to acquire the materials. The explosives are delivered. You take them to an agreed point to carry out your attack: a public gathering, a park, or a mall. Upon your arrival the police rush in. They are sporting black balaclavas pointing rifles in your face. You’re under arrest.

You’re a terrorist, now. Your life is over. Your friend was an informant all along. There were no explosives. They were an inert dummy. Even the forum where you met  your friend — the place that contributed most to your radicalization — turned out to be an FBI honeypot.

The entire terror plot, from the planting of radical seeds, to singling out vulnerable individuals, to religious rhetoric and the focus on (justified) feelings of abuse, have all been set up and fostered by the FBI. They pulled the long con with a finesse that would put the professional grifter to shame.

That’s the modus operandi of the FBI. This, more or less, how 95% of “terrorist attacks” have been prevented. Few of these individuals would have engaged in an attempt at violence if not guided by the bit by the FBI.

That is your “terror threat.” That is how the state manufactures terrorism.

Paul Weston Arrested for Quoting Churchill

Paul Weston is the chairman of the Liberty GB Party in the United Kingdom. Despite the name, Liberty GB seems to have a fascist agenda. Liberty GB’s mission statement reads:

The Liberal Democrats, Labour and Conservatives manifestly refuse to discuss the most important issues of our time, namely mass immigration from the EU and Third World, the steady rise of fundamentalist Islam and the hijacking of traditional British culture and institutions by well-organised left-wing ‘progressives’. There is no guarantee at such a late stage that Britain can be saved, but Liberty GB will endeavour to put a stop to our rapidly accelerating descent into economic, educational, moral, cultural and social ruin. Britain could be a wonderful country again, but it will take politics bordering on the revolutionary to achieve this vision.

So they’re a fascist party. Why are we even talking about them?

Despite the Liberty GB Party having very little to do with liberty there is an issue in the United Kingdom that many people are unaware of. It is the stifling of liberty due to authoritarian censorship laws.

Paul Weston was recently arrested at the Winchester Guildhall for reading a passage from former Prime Minister Winston Churchill’s book The River War: An Historical Account of the Reconquest of the Soudan. He faces the potential of two years in prison for charges of “religious or racial harassment.”

This is one of many “blasphemy laws” that prohibit free forms of expression if perceived to cause religious offense. The Racial and Religious Hatred Act 2006, one of the more notorious modern blasphemy laws, prohibits vague and subjective forms of expression such as “[an attempt] to stir up religious hatred.” (Section 29B)

While we might not agree with Paul Watons’s fascist agenda this is an important issue for any individual who holds a strong opinion on religion. If you believe that, say, “religion is the opium of the people” this may apply to you. And even if you don’t believe this — even if you have a positive view on religion — as long as you support an individuals’ right to criticize religion then this should be important to you.

This is a quote from Churchill’s The River War:

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity. The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property – either as a child, a wife, or a concubine – must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men.

You can be arrested for reading this in a public place in the United Kingdom.

That is the only point.

Paul Weston describes the event: