Big Brother is watching you Muslims
-
From http//www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/jun/04/surveillance-cameras-birmingham-muslims >>>
Surveillance cameras in Birmingham track Muslims' every move
About 150 car numberplate recognition cameras installed in two Muslim areas, paid for by government anti-terrorism fund
Counterterrorism police have targeted hundreds of surveillance cameras on two Muslim areas of Birmingham, enabling them to track the precise movements of people entering and leaving the neighbourhoods.
The project has principally been sold to locals as an attempt to combat antisocial behaviour, vehicle crime and drug dealing in the area. But the cameras have been paid for by a ?3m grant from a government fund, the Terrorism and Allied Matters Fund, which is administered by the Association of Chief Police Officers.
About 150 automatic numberplate recognition (ANPR) cameras have been installed in Washwood Heath and Sparkbrook in recent months. Birmingham's two predominantly Muslim suburbs will be covered by three times more ANPR cameras than are used to monitor the entire city centre. They include about 40 cameras classed as "covert", meaning they have been concealed from public view.
The funding arrangement was not made clear to the handful of councillors who were briefed that the cameras would appear in their area. Instead, they were told only that the money had come from the Home Office. "I raised my concern then is this really about spying?" said Salma Yaqoob, a member of the Respect party and councillor for Sparkbrook.
"The terrorism aspect was certainly not emphasised in that meeting. In fact it was me having to be portrayed as the awkward squad, or even paranoid, for even raising the issue of whether this was really about counterterrorism. They were very much saying, 'No, this is about burglary and crime.'"
The criteria for TAM funds state clearly that a police force must prove a project will "deter or prevent terrorism or help to prosecute those responsible".
Police sources said the initiative, code-named Project Champion, is the first of its kind in the UK that seeks to monitor a population seen as "at risk" of extremism.
When the cameras become operative, residents will not be able to drive into or leave the two neighbourhoods without their movements being tracked.
Officials maintain the cameras will prove useful for tackling a whole range crime. The areas were ringfenced for intense surveillance in 2007 after a police investigation into a suspected plot to kidnap and kill a British soldier in the area.
The Safer Birmingham Partnership, a joint initiative between police and the local authority which will run the cameras, expressed "regret" there had not been fuller consultation. Senior SBP officials said they only became aware that the cameras were paid for by counterterrorism funds as a result of Guardian inquiries.
Jackie Russell, the director of the partnership, said "Just because the funding has an interest in counterterrorism doesn't mean that for us, that is our focus. For us, it is about community safety."
Steve Jolly, a local activist leading a campaign to have the cameras removed, called on the deputy prime minister to intervene "Nick Clegg has made a real point of emphatically drawing attention to the surveillance society and promising to stop unnecessary infringements of privacy," he said. "I think we should hold him to his word, and say, 'Look at what is happening in Birmingham ? are you going to allow it to go ahead?'"
-
From http//www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2010/sep/30/police-surveillance-muslims-no-regard-law >>>
Police surveillance of Muslims set up with 'no regard for law'
Police covered up counter-terrorism unit's ?3m camera operation which spied on Muslims in Birmingham
A secret police operation to place thousands of Muslims living in Birmingham under permanent surveillance was implemented with virtually no consultation, oversight or regard for the law, a report found today.
Project Champion was abandoned in June after an investigation by the Guardian revealed police had misled residents into believing that hundreds of counter-terrorism cameras installed in streets around Sparkbrook and Washwood Heath were to be used to combat vehicle crime and antisocial behaviour.
In fact, the ?3m project was being run from the West Midlands police counter-terrorism unit with the consent of security officials at the Home Office and MI5.
The network of CCTV and automatic number plate reading (ANPR) cameras, which were weeks away from being switched on, were intended to monitor people entering and leaving the predominantly Muslim suburbs.
Revealing the findings of her damning report into the project, Sara Thornton, chief constable of Thames Valley police, revealed how
? Police devised a "storyline" that concealed the true purpose of the cameras. Counter-terrorism insignia was removed from paperwork as part of a deliberate strategy to "market" the surveillance operation as a local policing scheme to improve community safety.
? Top police officers failed to ask questions about the operation's "proportionality, legitimacy, authority, necessity, and the ethical values inherent in the proposed course of action". The report documented 11 instances when "oversight" mechanisms offered limited or no scrutiny.
? Police assurances that security cameras would be used for local policing were highly misleading. Although ANPR data was to be shared on regional and national databases, the network was controlled by the counter-terrorism unit. There was "no local facility to view the cameras" and "nobody in place to monitor them".
? Attempts by police to conceal the true purpose of the project caused "significant damage to community relations" in the West Midlands. One community leader was quoted as saying the project had "set relations back a decade".
? Officers failed to comply with national CCTV regulations or conduct proper consultation. They did not obtain statutory clearance for the use of covert cameras and, Thornton said, there was "very little evidence" that police had even considered their legal obligations.
Sir Christopher Rose, the chief surveillance commissioner, confirmed in a statement that 29 covert cameras had been removed. Police had planned a total of 218 cameras in the area, 72 of which would be covert.
The West Midlands chief constable, Chris Simms, said in a statement that he fully accepted Thornton's findings. "I am sorry that we got such an important issue so wrong and that it has had such a negative impact on our communities."
His force has declined repeated requests for an interview with a senior officer since June. Today the force again declined to provide a senior officer to answer the Guardian's questions.
There have been no resignations or disciplinary action over Project Champion. The West Midlands police authority, the force watchdog, is considering complaints from councillors who say they were misled by senior police officers.
Assistant chief constable Anil Patani, who had overall responsibility for Project Champion, is not known to have made any public statement about the fiasco. The project was removed from his command in July.
Thornton said the scheme was funded out of a counter-terrorism fund administered by the Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) as a direct response to the perceived concentration of terrorist threats in 2007. In their proposal police said they intended to place a surveillance "net" around two Birmingham neighbourhoods identified as containing a high proportion of terror suspects.
The bid for the funding was submitted in January 2008 and the following month the project received the backing of the police authority, which Thornton said failed to ask the obvious question "Is this the right thing to do?"
In January 2009 the project was well underway and senior officers turned to public relations. Minutes from meetings chaired by Patani reveal officers decided to "formulate a narrative" that concentrated on tackling crime.
Seeking to find "a storyline on which to hang the project", it was decided to remove the counter-terrorism "badge" from documentation. The logos were replaced with a new brand ? the Safer Birmingham Parternship (SBP) ? which was given nominal responsibility for the cameras.
Senior officers were aware of the dangers. "We are not going to install 150 plus cameras without questions being asked," the officers noted.
-
Peace all
The minority are never the threat the majority are .In the UK the majority are white European .every thing that is being done in the name of security is actual being done to control the majority ,The sheeple can not see it.
As I have always said the Selfish ones who see them selves in control do not care if you are white black brown pink yellow red or what ever co lour, they use the differences to control for there own selfish desire .
Peace Salim G
LIVE LONG AND PROSPER
-
cameras are all over UK and have been for years. There are more in high risk areas such as Sparkbrook because more crimes happen in these places. It has nothing to do with tracking muslims every move and more to do with the safety of all people, muslim or otherwise.
-
http//www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/cia-given-details-of-british-muslim-students-1932727.html
CIA given details of British Muslim students
Outrage as personal files of undergraduates at Detroit bomb suspect's college handed to US
By Syma Mohammed and Robert Verkaik
Thursday, 1 April 2010
Personal information concerning the private lives of almost 1,000 British Muslim university students is to be shared with US intelligence agencies in the wake of the Detroit bomb scare.
The disclosure has outraged Muslim groups and students who are not involved in extremism but have been targeted by police and now fear that their names will appear on international terrorist watch lists. So far, the homes of more than 50 of the students have been visited by police officers, but nobody has been arrested. The case has raised concerns about how the police use the data of innocent people and calls into question the heavy-handed treatment of Muslim students by UK security agencies.
This week, MPs criticised the Government's key policies on countering extremism which they said were alienating Muslim communities.
Last year, The Independent reported on the alleged harassment of young Muslims by the police and security service, MI5, whose officers had tried to recruit them as spies. In the latest case, details of students from University College London (UCL) were handed over to police by the university's student union, after detectives visited the campus in early January 2010 during their continuing investigation into the attempted Christmas Day bombing in Detroit by Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. Abdulmutallab studied engineering at UCL in 2005-08, and was president of the UCL Islamic Society in 2006-07.
Police had first approached UCL's Islamic Society, which refused to hand over the information. Mojeed Adams-Mogaji, the society's president, said "I was concerned about what they would do with the data. At another meeting with the Metropolitan Police, they told us they would keep it for seven years and would share the data with other intelligence agencies if requested. Obviously, I'm very concerned with what they plan to do with this information."
Gareth Peirce, the prominent human rights lawyer, advised the Islamic Society during the affair. Last night she described the police's actions as "completely inappropriate".
She said "You wonder if he had been a member of a society without the name Islamic on it, then would there have been such an appetite to grab the information. It adds to the fear that the Muslim community is a suspect community. The whole concept of data protection was meant to nail down absolute privacy and here it is being breached without a legal reason being imposed on the university to comply."
Eric Metcalfe, at the Justice student human rights network, said he believed it was another example of "heavy-handed" policing aimed at countering radicalism rather than investigating alleged crime. "There is no reason why the police can't go to court and persuade a magistrate to issue a warrant with which the university would have to comply," he said. "But this seems more about heavy-handed intelligence gathering, which may not have respected the privacy rights of the students."
Zubair Idris, 21, a second-year international medical student at UCL, said "I feel frustrated and outraged. To pass on 900 student details because they were members of UCL Islamic Society is ridiculous. The reason I joined the society was for socio-cultural reasons. I've never seen the guy . I wasn't here when he was at university. "
Sayyida Mehrali, 19, a first-year neuroscience student, added "I feel that it is a bit extreme that my information has been passed onto the Metropolitan Police as I joined UCL after Umar Farouk had left. There was never any opportunity to meet this individual and I think it's shocking that they have my details on a database."
From 2005 to 2007, Muslim students at Dundee University were harassed by Tayside Police's Special Branch community contact unit, who targeted "ethnic religious groups" in order to gather intelligence on activities that "could be considered extremist."
The university's Student Advisory Service allowed the police to attend the Freshers Fair to speak to students, but there was an outcry after branch officers posed as community officers and spoke to students covertly. They also approached students on campus, attended university meetings and events and visited students at their homes. They repeatedly harassed members of the Dundee University Islamic Society, and during the Israel-Lebanon war in 2006, visited Muslim students at their flats late at night.
The police initially approached the UCL Islamic Society on 4 January 2010 for a list of names of their members between 2005 and 2008. Following legal advice, the society declined to give the information. The police then approached the student union with a personal data request. The union provided names and email addresses of members of the UCL Islamic Society and Royal Free and UCL Medical Islamic Society between September 2005 and June 2009. The police then approached the university for telephone numbers and home addresses. These were passed on by the UCL Registry.
There are further concerns about the role of the student union in the disclosure of the data. Mr Adams-Mogaji said "We also realised that the student union gave the details of the UCL Medical Islamic Society without being requested for it. The union is supposed to protect the societies under it and not hastily succumb to pressure without the need to. We're clearly not safe with the union and our trust in them is undoubtedly diminishing."
Qasim Rafiq, a former president of the UCL Islamic Society and spokesman for the Federation of Student Islamic Societies (FOSIS), said "Giving unnecessary personal data to the police seems to demonstrate a lack of regard for the personal data of its members. For me, it goes against the principles of the union to act in a flagrant manner towards its constituents. We had to demand the student union to email the students whose details were given to the police, and had we not had done so students who have been contacted by the police wouldn't have been aware that their details had been passed on."
In a statement, the Metropolitan Police said "As part of enquiries police spoke to a number of people who may have been able to provide information relating to the background of Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab. This has included liaison with UCL, the student union, the Islamic Society and the FOSIS.
"Inquires made at UCL ? where Abdulmutallab studied between 2005 and 2008 ? are just one strand of the investigation. We have been careful to ensure that all inquiries and information gathered is treated sensitively."
A spokesman from UCL's press office refused to comment on the matter. A spokeswoman from the student union said "The police asked the student union to provide details of members of the UCL Islamic Society and the Royal Free and UCL Medical Islamic Society between 2005 and 2008. The union provided the names and email addresses of student members only."
-
http//www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/time-to-change-the-record-and-cooperate-with-muslim-community-1932738.html
Time to change the record and co-operate with Muslim community
Comment
Thursday, 1 April 2010
Failed by our government. Failed by our security services. The shocking findings in The Independent today about the extent to which security services have tried to intimidate and collect private information on British Muslims ? from one of our foremost educational institutions, no less ? will have clear ramifications for young British Muslims.
It isn't so much that a Students' Union felt the need to succumb to the "requests" of anti-terror police and give away the names, addresses and telephone numbers of more than 800 innocent British Muslim students. It is more that it felt it could do this with impunity in an environment where it has become acceptable to treat Muslims differently and to stigmatise and criminalise a whole community.
That our security services are sharing this information with a government with whom we are supposed to have a "special relationship" really rubs salt in the wounds. When we have a one-way extradition treaty to a country whose own lawmakers accept that it cannot be trusted with its civil liberties, what heritage and pride have we left to talk about?
Britain today is failing its Muslim citizens. Places where free debate is part of the moulding of one's character and the basis of understanding and appreciating our democracy are being shut off to this community.
Thanks to one individual who wasn't even British, and someone who was radicalised in another country after he left Britain, Islamic societies across our universities are being harassed and young British Muslims are being treated as suspects.
The fight against terrorism cannot be fought without intelligence. It is when those gathering it lose sight of the very liberties that they are trying to protect that we have to start questioning ourselves.
The Communities and Local Government select committee report on the Government's Prevent programme concluded that it "stigmatised and alienated those it is most important to engage with". When our security services are left without proper checks and controls, and a climate of fear and suspicion makes it acceptable to allow people to look through neoconservative lenses when dealing with a minority, we are on a slippery slope to a society that is the complete opposite of the one that many are dying to protect every day.
The writer is the chairman of the Kentish Town Community Centre
-
cameras are all over UK and have been for years. There are more in high risk areas such as Sparkbrook because more crimes happen in these places. It has nothing to do with tracking muslims every move and more to do with the safety of all people, muslim or otherwise.
that's weird.. i remember on the news there was a video of a women putting a live cat in a bin.. from uk an outside vid.. never knew videos were used in just ordinary streets.. who would watch it all.. some life.
-
that's weird.. i remember on the news there was a video of a women putting a live cat in a bin.. from uk an outside vid.. never knew videos were used in just ordinary streets.. who would watch it all.. some life.
its ordinary streets that have ordinary houses that get robbed. Also individuals have cameras outside their houses so they can see who is at the door or prowling the area, my daughter had one.
-
Peace all
The minority who participate in criminal behavior do not care about cameras Fact of life. These cameras are their to keep the majority of public in check As long as they control the majority of public the selfish ones stay in control.Peace Salim G
LIVE LONG AND PROSPER
THEY LIVE WHILE WE SLEEP
-
America's Holy Crusade against the Muslim World.
by Michel Chossudovsky
Global Research, August 30, 2010
We have reached a decisive transition in the evolution of US military doctrine. The "Global War on Terrorism" (GWOT) directed against Al Qaeda launched in the wake of 9/11 is evolving towards a full-fledged "war of religion", a "holy crusade" directed against the Muslim World.
US military dogma and war propaganda under the Bush administration were predicated on combating Islamic fundamentalism rather than targeting Muslims. "This is not a war between the West and Islam, but .. a war against terrorism." So-called "Good Muslims" are to be distinguished from "Bad Muslims"
"The dust from the collapse of the twin towers had hardly settled on 11 September 2001 when the febrile search began for "moderate Muslims", people who would provide answers, who would distance themselves from this outrage and condemn the violent acts of "Muslim extremists", "Islamic fundamentalists" and "Islamists". Two distinct categories of Muslims rapidly emerged the "good" and the "bad"; the "moderates", "liberals" and "secularists" versus the "fundamentalists", the "extremists" and the "Islamists"." (Tariq Ramadan, Good Muslim, bad Muslim, New Statesman, February 12, 2010)
In the wake of 9/11, the Muslim community in most Western countries was markedly on the defensive. The "Good Muslim" "Bad Muslim" divide was broadly accepted. The 9/11 terrorist attacks allegedly perpetrated by Muslims were not only condemned, Muslim communities also supported the US-NATO invasion and occupation of Afghanistan, as part of a legitimate campaign directed against Islamic fundamentalism.
Washington's objective was to instill a sentiment of guilt within the Muslim community. The fact that the 9/11 attacks were not instigated by Muslims has rarely been acknowledged by the Muslim community. Al Qaeda's ongoing relationship to the CIA, its role as a US sponsored "intelligence asset" going back to to the Soviet-Afghan war is not mentioned. (Michel Chossudovsky, America's "War on Terrorism" Global Research, Montreal, 2005)
Since the early 1980s, Washington has covertly supported the most conservative and fundamentalist factions of Islam, largely with a view to weakening secular, nationalist and progressive movements in the Middle East and Central Asia. Known and documented, the fundamentalist Wahhabi and Salafi missions from Saudi Arabia, dispatched not only to Afghanistan but also to the Balkans and to the Muslim republics of the former Soviet republics were covertly supported by US intelligence. (Ibid) What is often referred to as "Political Islam" is in large part a creation of the US intelligence apparatus (with the support of Britain's MI6 and Israel's Mossad).
(Emphasis added)
Read the rest here http//www.globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=20818
-
that's weird.. i remember on the news there was a video of a women putting a live cat in a bin.. from uk an outside vid.. never knew videos were used in just ordinary streets.. who would watch it all.. some life.
Peace be upon you,
with all due Respect.I guess some people have too much time on their hands .... and eyes. lol.
I don't have time for such stuff.
Right now, literally, I gotta log off and go. It's maghrib salat here.Peace be upon you.
-
Youtube - RTAmerica
"Sad to be a goddamn American today"
The US Federal Bureau of Investigation is suppose to protect citizens from would be crimes. But a recent New York case, known as the Newburgh Four, has many asking if the FBI is leading Americans towards crimes rather than diverting them.
US terror Homegrown entrapment
Lawyer Lynne Stewart was arrested by the FBI in 2002 for a press release she wrote for her client, Sheik Abdel Omar Rahman. This came after Stewart signed an agreement to keep information related to Rahman's case from the media. The Justice Department is pushing to have her serve 30 years in prison.
-
FBI Uses Paid Informants to Entrap Muslims
Entrapment or Foiling Terror? FBI's Reliance on Paid Informants Raises Questions About Validity of Terrorism Cases
Prosecutors and defense attorneys made their final arguments this week in the trial of the Newburgh Four--a high-profile case that has made national headlines as a potent example of so-called "homegrown terror." The defense has argued that the defendants were entrapped by government agents and not predisposed to commit a terrorist crime. For several months, Democracy Now!'s Anjali Kamat and Jacquie Soohen of Big Noise Films traveled through Muslim communities in New York and New Jersey to track the Newburgh case and two others. In all three, Muslim men were arrested on terrorism charges. In all three, no terrorist crime was actually committed. And all three cases relied heavily on hundreds of hours of surveillance recorded by a paid government informant. Today, a Democracy Now! special investigation.
<<<
Part 1
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqNid4s-AFg&feature=relatedPart 2
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=MRYnNySWvw8&feature=relatedPart 3
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=bLt826j4mC8&feature=relatedPart 4
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=C6Jd3bQiavM&feature=related -
Muslims, the "Thought Criminals"
Should the FBI be allowed to entice teenagers to become a terrorist?
"The FBI successfully thwarts its own terrorist plot."
Friends, Defense Say Teenage Portland Patsy Set-up by FBI
"Government needs a steady stream of homegrown patsies to argue for increasing the size and scope of the homeland police state."
FBI creates crime, prosecutes innocent
"The United States government is prosecuting suspected terrorists on the basis of their intentions, not actions. The government calls it pre-emptive prosecution and many argue the FBI is using entrapment techniques to prosecute innocent people. Criminal defense attorney Martin Stolar says that by entrapping these people the US government is politically and criminally wrong!"
FBI preemptively prosecuting
"Like preemptive strikes abroad, activists say Washington is waging similar an offensive here at home. Targeting citizens who one day could...maybe...possibly...commit a crime. Meanwhile, Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch are turning a blind eye to these injustices."
-