老澳门开奖结果

Despite evidence to the contrary, the government continues to embrace a theory that adopting radical ideas is a first step toward terrorist violence. Based on this discredited model, "preventive" policies are being pursued, resulting in discrimination, suspicionless surveillance of entire communities, and selective law enforcement against belief communities and political activists. The following is the second installment in the 老澳门开奖结果 blog series "Radically Wrong," which highlights counterterrorism policies that are not only ineffective, but also undermine our constitutional rights.

None. Zero. That鈥檚 the number of fatalities or injuries from terrorist acts by American Muslims over the last two years, according to a from the Triangle Center on Terrorism and Homeland Security. Here are some other numbers from the report worth noting: In the United States in 2012, there were nine 鈥渢errorist plots鈥� by American Muslims鈥攐nly one of which led to violence. Of those nine plots, only 14 suspects were indicted. Separately, six suspects were indicted for support of terrorism.

Terrorism is not a 鈥淢uslim鈥� phenomenon. Indeed, , the author of the report terrorism by American Muslims 鈥渁 minuscule threat to public safety.鈥� Yet far too many policymakers assume the opposite is true, and too many policies are predicated on the false and bigoted assumption that Muslims are more likely to engage in terrorism than other Americans. The numbers above show how false the premise is. So why are we willing to undermine civil liberties, target an entire religious community, and devote countless resources to this 鈥渕inuscule threat?鈥�

The answer: a widely 鈥渢heory鈥� on describing the 鈥減rocess鈥� that drives people to become terrorists. This 鈥渢heory鈥� is based on the mistaken notion that adopting 鈥渞adical鈥� ideas (which, under the theory, includes religious beliefs) is a dangerous first step toward committing terrorist acts. Countering terrorism, the thinking goes, begins with countering 鈥渞adicalization.鈥�

Although it鈥檚 , the 鈥渢heory鈥� continues to drive policy. Recent Congressional Research Service reports cite it, and the White House issued a plan to based on it. While the White House deserves some credit for using more careful language and for emphasizing the need for community engagement, it still perpetuates the notion that 鈥渉ow individuals are radicalized to violence鈥� is something we can and should study and understand. And the number of agencies, task forces, working groups, and committees across government that are engaged in the White House鈥檚 plan is, well, staggeringly high.

Not surprisingly, when flawed theory drives policy, implementation of the policy is flawed too. If counterterrorism officials believe that adopting radical beliefs is a necessary first stage to terrorism, they will obviously target religious communities and political activists with their enforcement measures.

Take for example, the practice of 鈥減reventive policing鈥� by which law enforcement doesn鈥檛 focus on crime, but rather . It has a real and negative impact on individuals: the FBI conducts 鈥�assessments鈥� or uses informants, conducts interviews, and surveils people based on their ideas or religious beliefs, or whether they are a certain religion, race, or ethnicity rather than information suggesting they might be involved in criminal activity. Preventive policing also affects entire communities. Through 鈥渄omain management,鈥� the FBI monitors and tracks entire religious, ethnic, and racial communities based on false stereotypes that ascribe certain types of crimes to entire minority communities. Targeted groups include Muslim- and Arab-Americans in Michigan, and also African-Americans in Georgia, Chinese- and Russian-Americans in California, and broad swaths of Latino-American communities in multiple states.

The FBI has increasingly relied on another tactic based on this flawed theory: the agent provocateur. Remarkably, of the nine terrorist plots carried out by American Muslims uncovered in 2012 involved informants and undercover agents. According to a , undercover agents and informants have targeted 鈥淢uslims who espouse radical beliefs, are vocal about their disapproval of American foreign policy, or have expressed sympathy for international terrorist groups鈥濃�攐therwise known as First Amendment-protected activity. The investigation shows that these targets are fairly unsophisticated and 鈥溾�� on their own. With all essential materials (like money and weapons) coming from government agents and informants, these plots are more manufactured by the government than interdicted.

It鈥檚 also clear that preventive policing won鈥檛 be tied to an empirical analysis of where significant violence occurs. According to , violent acts by far-right extremists significantly outnumber those by American Muslims, but have been virtually ignored by policy makers (though the report has its own problems). While there have been of Muslims, there have been none on political violence emanating from the Far Right.

When we implement law enforcement practices that say those who hold 鈥渞adical鈥� political ideas or religious beliefs, for instance, are dangerous, we could all be in danger. What鈥檚 a 鈥渞adical鈥� idea or belief? It鈥檚 one that 鈥�.鈥� It鈥檚 not hard to imagine that almost all of us hold some 鈥渞adical鈥� beliefs, which is why it鈥檚 not surprising that so many groups come under government suspicion. Anti-government , misfit , have already been targeted. Who鈥檚 to say the group you belong to won鈥檛 be next.

Previous posts in the "Radically Wrong" series:

Part 1: A Counterproductive Approach to Counterterrorism

Part 3: The Right to Think Dangerous Thoughts

Learn more about religious discrimination and other civil liberty issues: Sign up for breaking news alerts, , and .