Dear Home Secretary,
Britain does not need more of the dangerous (to civil rights and democratic values) and counter-productive (because these tend to alienate more than wining over those targeted as these start treating and perceive these laws as specifically created to target ‘just them’) ”laws”, but rather the nation needs a well-thought out sets of long-term policies to elevate grassroots Muslim communities (and the general British ethnics and British working and lower-middle classes) grievances; from the problems of social mobility, to postcode health services, poor education, poor employment chances, positive discrimination (real or imagined), to community cohesion and integration (not having communities either sealing themselves off from non-identical ethnicities or races), to a fair and representative policing and general local (and national) institutions of governance and security, to (accept it or not) playing down the ‘hawkish’ nature within our political-security sections who prefer ‘military adventures’ with ‘highly visible language and actual physical present’ (conduct foreign and defence policy with finesse, light foot print without a foot print visible, use of special forces, intelligence assets, local proxies, third parties, local allies etc but never ever open use of either language or actual British force). On issue of Palestine – dear to Muslim hearts around the world – try diplomatic approach, say nothing in public, play ‘supporting one-party or another’ behind doors. We should all remember that Modern Britain is no longer that of Old Britain. Its multicultural make-up does have a tremendous implications – whether acknowledged or not – on foreign, defence and domestic policies. Of course British Muslims will feel hurt when they see their home [British] government going after ‘their own kind’ (the nature of organized religions and cults, group identification), just like any Jews would do but rather chose other more refined ways, for example, political lobbying (eg AIPAC in US) to drum up support for Jews in Palestine etc, the local Muslim in the west (due to cultural and religious difference in how to express ones grievances will choose either [a] to shut themselves off from their own government, cooperation-wise, or [b] do something when a chance is handed to them (revenge-wise) and thus continuing supporting rather than weakening radicalization of their own youth or general communities. The logic of ‘minority influence over politics’ (as seen in US recently during the Presidential elections) extends even to those with roots from the former British [or general European] colonies who are now full British citizens, though who will also readily interpret the ‘primacy of military force’ within British foreign policy as just the same old continuation of British ‘colonialism and imperialism’.
In short, Madam Secretary, to defeat radicalization of the British Muslim (and non-Muslim, ground for conversion) youth the country does not need any more counter-productive and very dangerous ”anti-terror or radicalization” laws but instead the nation needs [a] the cut-down on already existing ‘free powers’ laws under earlier versions of counter-terrorism laws, [b] and most importantly, supporting well thought out long term policies aimed at grassroot grievances of social, economic, psychological, cultural and political nature. Please take Northern Ireland as a classic and very informative case study of when over-reactive laws fails and long-term thought out (or even half-baked) policies succeed (e.g. the Good Friday Accord).
A Grassroot [secular and democrat] Muslim.
Final Note (to my general readers):
ISIL or IS (Islamic State) is a Hezbollah, Hamas Like outfit. simple. In other words, it is an highly developed irregular force that which behaves and think like a ‘full sovereign state BY ARMS’ (the right to the monopoly of violence); medievalian practice.