FBI’s “Shared Responsibility Committees” to Identify “Radicalized” Muslims Raise Alarms
<blockquote>
The FBI’s plan to enlist community leaders in “Shared Responsibility Committees” all across the country with the goal of identifying “radicalized” individuals is raising alarm among civil rights activists.
</blockquote>
“Shared Responsibility Committees” …
“SRC”. They just missed one letter and one permutation while comparing it with “CDR”.
They keep out-1984ing -1984 itself. Castro communism and Chávez socialists call them CDR, Nazi’s institutionalized Jewish Ghetto Police (not “Jüdische gemeinsame Verantwortung Ausschüsse”)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jewish_Ghetto_Police
and Jewish people asked even Nazis for clemency from their brutality, but of course when we do it it is called “Shared Responsibility Committees” only freedom hating lowlifes would do such things as socially persecuting other people.
All building superintendents in NYC are forced by their landlords to double as snitches for the the NYPD (I doubt they get any money for “working” for them) and they have instituted something called “nexus” in NYC. Basically all business owners from University Departments to barbershops (including filthy bodegas) must include snitching cells for the NYPD/FBI.
<blockquote>
The FBI’s ideas is to have social service workers, teachers, mental health professionals, religious figures, and others interdict young people they believe are on a path towards radicalization.
</blockquote>
… and we will not only pay you to do “believe” young people are “‘on a path’ towards radicalization”, but we will leave to your own creative fancy the interpretation of what that “being ‘on a path’ towards radicalization” could possibly mean.
Sorry, since we are “responsible” we can’t share with you our own interpretations of “”‘on a path’ towards …” thing
<blockquote>
Experts acknowledge the need to have options beyond sending young people to jail for making threatening statements.
</blockquote>
Wouldn’t those self-considered “experts” acknowledge the need to do something about USG greatly surpassing the genocidal ratio of Nazi Germany during WWII?
Oh, wait! How is it they say? “if you see something, say something” so the problem may be those “experts” don’t see any of that.
<blockquote>
Arun Kundnani, an adjunct professor at New York University and expert on U.K. counterterrorism policy, said he worries that the U.S. program would “suffer from the same problems, such as drawing non-policing professionals into becoming the eyes and ears of counter-terrorism surveillance, and thereby undermining professional norms and relationships of trust among educators, health workers and others.”
</blockquote>
There goes U.S. Academia
Here you have NYU graduate Imam Khalid Latif
// __ Faith Under Fire: A Response from Imam Khalid Latif
youtube.com/watch?v=GdqbyUQPzzs
~
even though I do see he is trying to soften animosity against Muslim people and from his position he could do that very well, I can’t understand at all how he could work for the police.
That to me is way more than enough to not even be able to listen to him in a physical sense regardless of whatever he says, how poetic he tries to sound and how “funny” he tries to be as part of his persuasive appeal.
Do you have to become a pig to defend justice? Probably he just finds cool dressing a NYPD uniform and wearing a taqiyah.
As he relates, he has found himself in really odd situations. He makes fun of the FBI and points out to them their hypocrisy, but he doesn’t see his own. Do you have to become a pig to defend justice, stand against abuse?
<blockquote>
But this is completely contrary to both the experience of the U.K., where about 80 percent of Channel referrals are rejected as unfounded.
</blockquote>
It is exactly that 20% they find very profitably substantial. They say one man’s trash is another man’s treasure, right?
<blockquote>
there are no predictors or indicators of who is going to become a terrorist
</blockquote>
but they need “terrorists” (other than themselves) how on earth will they justify their salaries? I haven’t still gotten an explanation from USG as to why the have included me in the FBI criminal index.
USG: “Sorry, we can’t share with you our predictors or indicators, because if we do, then it will be all too clear we got them from the “personality profiles” from Nazi era and stasi psychopathic psychologists.
In fact there is no rocket science as to how USG has been using those “predictors” and “indicators”: the NSA stratifies the patterns of behavior of every one of us (super basic Math + data analysis + More Law’s when it comes to hardware) and if you show just a shred of “unnorm” or just “peculiar” individuality (for example, I don’t own a cell phone or TV set, nor am I on facebook …) they first start messing with you (breaking your car’s windows, switching lights on and moving things around in your apartment …), afterwards they make one of their snitches whom you are acquainted with come up to you or someone (dressed in expensive shoes …) stand on a street corner or place you regularly frequent and suggest to you to “share responsibility”; then, if you refuse to become a snitch then you become a “targeted individual” for the rest of your life, which includes character assassination and -physical- torture to you and your family members:
<blockquote>
Law enforcement agencies faced with a mandate of preventive policing of terrorism cases say that they are often compelled to err on the side of making arrests
</blockquote>
There wouldn’t be anything wrong with “erring on the side of making arrests” if they would apply it in a just way. What about implicating as terrorists those patriots killing at times hundreds of people without even knowing who they are (you just fit their pattern recognition metrics), just because they can?
Oh, no wait! Of course, those rules don’t apply to them because they are our glorious, patriotic freedom lovers! Also, they are not killing them they are just using high tech to degrade their biological live to a baseline physical one. Besides the people they kill are not even human beings to begin with. Are they describe by Western media as such?
<blockquote>
There are a lot of attacks on heavy handed counterterrorism approaches, like informants and agent provocateurs, but that’s the status quo now until we have other options.”
</blockquote>
… “until we have ‘other options'”?
<blockquote>
But, Hughes said, the responsibilities of the interveners would need to be well defined
</blockquote>
I keep suggesting to USG to come out of the closet. If you actually believe in something you should do it in the open and transparently.
Castro’s CDRs sport a big sign “in very street block” (“en cada cuadra un comité”).
If they have survived both an inhuman embargo (actually costing human lives) and such things as “freedom-lovingly” blowing up in mid flight a plane packed with teenagers
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cubana_de_Aviaci%C3%B3n_Flight_455
and the end of their life line: the fall of the soviet union, sporting a life expectancy higher than the U.S. and even Denmark, sure can gringos survive “terrorism” just fine
<blockquote>
if SRCs are going to succeed. For instance, there are concerns that the social worker or mental health professional who fails to tell the FBI someone poses a threat before they go out and commit an attack might be held civilly liable by families of the victims.
</blockquote>
this is past sarcasm, really callous joke!
<blockquote>
“But the FBI is not listening to the community advocates, they’re listening to the people receiving grants, who are paid to put programs like this into place.”
</blockquote>
How strange, right?
truth and peace and love,
RCL
Homo Symbolicus's Blog 