advertisement


Is the Metropolitan Police institutionally corrupt?

Finnegan said:
By people like David Cameron in April 2002 stating that those who oppose Prevent are “enabling terrorism.” Or the fact that someone interviewed under the Prevent programme has their details held on a central database that can be shared with other agencies- regardless of whether any initial concerns were substantiated.

There have been several documented episodes of Muslim kids being referred for the most innocuous and spurious of reasons, including opposing British wars, supporting Palestine or wearing Muslim dress- not to mention the kid who misspelt ’terraced’ when writing in class that he lived in a ‘terrorist’ house. This is essentially the state policing people’s thoughts and beliefs, allowing repressive state intervention where no laws have been broken.
Click to expand...
So not quite criminalising people then? No charges and convictions? Which I would take to be 'criminalising', but perhaps you have a different definition.

And those Muslim kids referred: who did the referring? Isn't it the assessment after the referral that counts? I.e. what's actually done?

But diverting people from terrorism sounds fairly sensible to me, imperfect as it may be. Unless of course we disagree that there is a terrorist element within some communities. Sadly we've sen how that manifest itself and we also know how easily some people have been radicalised online and by other means . Is it wrong to try and divert easily manipulated minds back to a non-violent narrative?
 
Ginger said:
So not quite criminalising people then? No charges and convictions? Which I would take to be 'criminalising', but perhaps you have a different definition.
Click to expand...
Ok, if you don’t accept what I outlined above as de facto criminalisation (and racial profiling) then yes, I evidently do have a different definition.

Ginger said:
And those Muslim kids referred: who did the referring? Isn't it the assessment after the referral that counts? I.e. what's actually done?
Click to expand...
Teachers, social workers, health professionals etc. I repeat, someone interviewed under the Prevent programme has their details held on a central database that can be shared with other agencies- regardless of whether any initial concerns were substantiated.

Ginger said:
But diverting people from terrorism sounds fairly sensible to me, imperfect as it may be. Unless of course we disagree that there is a terrorist element within some communities. Sadly we've sen how that manifest itself and we also know how easily some people have been radicalised online and by other means . Is it wrong to try and divert easily manipulated minds back to a non-violent narrative
Click to expand...
Right, so we can fully expect those British citizens who have gone to Israel to volunteer to fight with the IDF to be reported to Prevent upon their return to the U.K.
 
Finnegan said:
Ok, if you don’t accept what I outlined above as de facto criminalisation (and racial profiling) then yes, I evidently do have a different definition.


Teachers, social workers, health professionals etc. I repeat, someone interviewed under the Prevent programme has their details held on a central database that can be shared with other agencies- regardless of whether any initial concerns were substantiated.


Right, so we can fully expect those British citizens who have gone to Israel to volunteer to fight with the IDF to be reported to Prevent upon their return to the U.K.
Click to expand...
IDF isn't a proscribed terrorist group, is it? I get your point and I don't agree for a minute about the Israel activity in Gaza, to be clear, but on the subject of the prevent programme, it doesn't fit.
 
Ginger said:
IDF isn't a proscribed terrorist group, is it?
Click to expand...
Does it matter? If it walks like a duck. Moreover, the U.K. is not officially at war with Hamas, so U.K. citizens fighting with the IDF are effectively mercenaries. I don’t know how much more radicalised you could become than to voluntarily travel to fight in Gaza. Diverting young men from terrorism is a noble principle, but this is not what Prevent is designed to do.
 
gez said:
Why would the state care about any form of non violent extremism? Isn't that tantamount to criminalising thought?
Click to expand...
Intel gathering on any level has long been controversial, regardless of the category it is gathered for. You have the extremes of, on the one side, gathering 'everything' so you can create the broadest picture and, on the other, gathering the least so as not impinge on civil liberty.

When dealing with unpredictability, these principles and issues will always be there.

I'm not stepping away from anything previously discussed in this thread regarding it's core premise. I'm just offering some thoughts.
 
Ginger said:
IDF isn't a proscribed terrorist group, is it? I get your point and I don't agree for a minute about the Israel activity in Gaza, to be clear, but on the subject of the prevent programme, it doesn't fit.
Click to expand...
But neither is the Islamic religion. So why are Muslims being treated as suspicious purely by virtue of their faith?

That said I do agree with the general statement that we should be trying to divert people from a path towards violence. That goes for all paths, including teenagers engaging with gangs, carrying knives "for protection" etc etc etc. The list goes on.
 
^ chicken and egg:
The UK govt supports illegal wars (Iraq), ethnic cleansing and daily murder of women and children.
It looks very much like persecution of Muslims. This radicalises some members of that religion.
UK govt sees a Muslim terrorist under every bed.
Rinse and repeat...
 
The blind-eye to far-right white nationalism is the most scary thing IMO. I’m all for monitoring potential extremism and preventing violence, but it can’t be politically loaded. It has to be impartial and evidence-based. The terrifying thing is so much far-right nationalism has been dragged into the mainstream of politics by the Tories and their gutter press. What should be viewed as incitement to racial hatred, targeted bigotry towards LGBTQ+ groups etc is now government policy.
 
Kids who exhibit far right leanings are also being referred to Prevent. For example, kids seen in photos giving Nazi salutes.
 
Sue Pertwee-Tyr said:
Kids who exhibit far right leanings are also being referred to Prevent. For example, kids seen in photos giving Nazi salutes.
Click to expand...
True, and government statistics suggest that referrals for right-wing extremism now outnumber referrals for Islamist radicalisation. However, the police have not kept accurate records of % of ethnicity and so call the figures into question.

www.gov.uk

Individuals referred to and supported through the Prevent Programme, April 2021 to March 2022

www.gov.uk www.gov.uk

www.theguardian.com

Police failed to record race of nearly two-thirds of people referred to Prevent

Human rights groups say lack of data hinders assessment of whether counter-extremism scheme is discriminatory
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
gez said:
But neither is the Islamic religion. So why are Muslims being treated as suspicious purely by virtue of their faith?

That said I do agree with the general statement that we should be trying to divert people from a path towards violence. That goes for all paths, including teenagers engaging with gangs, carrying knives "for protection" etc etc etc. The list goes on.
Click to expand...
It isn’t purely by virtue of faith .
 

Met officers dissuaded children from making sexual abuse claims, report finds​

Other failures listed in damning official report include blaming children for ‘making poor choices’

Metropolitan police officers tried to put off children from making complaints about alleged sexual abuse and privately blamed young people for crimes suffered, a damning official report has revealed.

Most investigations into child exploitation were rated as inadequate by His Majesty’s Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC). Of the 244 cases it examined, 43 were graded as good, more than half (121) as inadequate and 80 as needing improvement.

www.theguardian.com

Met officers dissuaded children from making sexual abuse claims, report finds

Other failures listed in damning official report include blaming children for ‘making poor choices’
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 

Thirty years after Stephen’s murder, 25 years after the official inquiry, why won’t the Met change?​

Doreen Lawrence

It’s sickening to feel that the same issues are still happening today. Every morning since Stephen’s death, whether I’ve got an alarm set or not, I get up fighting. Because no one is giving me anything, and the situation facing black communities will not get better on its own. The inquiry didn’t happen because the Labour government pushed for it – I pushed them to do so. I had to dig my heels in and remind everyone that my son was important. Just as all the other young black men and boys were important.
www.theguardian.com

Thirty years after Stephen’s murder, 25 years after the official inquiry, why won’t the Met change? | Doreen Lawrence

As we remember the Macpherson report, I rue the lack of progress, says Doreen Lawrence, Stephen’s mother, a life peer and a social justice campaigner
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top