One of the founding members of the Crisis Group initially alerted community members about this meeting and the need to set the record straight for the benefit of the other faith communities and voluntary sector representative who would be in attendance. This alert was well received and supported by key community organisations and the whole community was subsequently mobilised!

Unable to defend their own position and handling of PVE, the Local Authority in Reading shuttled in a Muslim from the Regional Government Office to give a talk and take questions. During the Q&A session the Regional Government Officer received a blasting from the Muslim organisations and some members of other faith groups. Every single question during the Q&A session, bar one, was critical of PVE and the session was ended despite many questions still outstanding from people who had not had a chance to raise their views despite this event being entailed a “Community Forum“.

The representatives of the 20 Muslim organisations and Mosques all left the meeting after this session and did not take part in the workshops in session two. This was in order in to show solidarity with the people who were able to raise points and to show that they are not interested in discussing the finer details of how to implement the divisive PVE agenda. Interestingly the Head of Reading Police, the Regional Government Officer, Councillors, PVE Police Officers and others involved with implementing PVE abandoned participating in the rest of their own event and joined the Muslim community outside where the debate continued for another hour!

Two of the key questions that were ignored during the Q&A session included:
A challenge from a Muslim professional in the audience that if the Local Authority are not ‘spying’ on the Muslim community through PVE then why don’t they release into the public domain the “mapping” of the Muslim community and the “Rich Picture” profiles of local “Muslim extremists” that are being “developed through PVE/Contest”?
One elder from the community asked what “Community Mapping” and “radicalisation” monitoring are the other Reading communities receiving given that it has been alleged that some have “links” with those serving in the Israeli army/ IDF during the Gaza massacre.

In addition to the 20 Muslim organisations, attendees of the event included members of the local Council, local Police, Race Equality Representatives, Voluntary sector members, other faith community groups, and other groups representing groups defined by ethnicity.

Unlike previous Community Forum meetings and despite the fact that this event was promoted in the local media [http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2061894_prevent_violent_extremism_forum_tonight]. in the days leading up to the event there was no press release issued to the local media by the Local Authority with post event coverage. However one of the attendees recorded some of the calmer aspects of the proceedings. A video of some of the answers to the questions at this event has been circulated and can be viewed below:

Interesting the Regional Government Officer admits at the end of this video that despite being the lead from the Government Office of the South East even he is not privy to the “community mapping” of the Muslim community which the police are undertaking under PVE/CONTEST.

Issues covered in this part include:

• ‘Islamism’
• Who are training the PVE police?
• PVE action plans
• Concluding remarks

Issues covered in this part include:

• The prioritiation of PVE in Reading through the adoption of National Indicator 35 (NI35)
• Are British Citizens that who serve in the Israeli Army targeted by PVE?
• Local ‘Profiling of Muslims’ that is being shared with Government Agencies
• The role of the new local Counter Terrorism Intelligence Officer (CTIO)

Issues covered in this part include:

• Background to PVE
• Definition of Extremism
• The continuing changing nature of the PVE agenda
• CONTEST 2
• PVE Schools Tool-Kit
• ‘Intellegence gathering’ under CONTEST 2 / PVE

Below are some of the key points from the statement:

‘The undersigned organisations, representing a broad section of Reading’s Muslims, are very concerned that the new CONTEST 2 strategy and NI35 indicators are going to prove counterproductive…. Given that alienation is one of the key drivers for ‘violent extremism’, this strategy is going to have the opposite effect to the one intended….there is strong interest from organisations to continue to work through the mainstream to decrease alienation and marginalisation and increase community cohesion in Reading. However, the undersigned organisations believe this must be outside of and clearly independent from the Prevent framework, as the issues with CONTEST 2 are insurmountable in that it stigmatises all Muslims as potential ‘extremists’ due to their personal beliefs and convictions.’

An additional question was submitted by Mr Khan regarding if the Council will acknowledge that the majority of the Muslim community have rejected the PVE agenda. Unfortunately the answer has much to be desired:

QUESTION NO. 4 Preventing Violent Extremism

Despite the existence of over 20 Muslim organisations and Mosques in Reading there is only one Muslim group that is currently ‘on-board’ with the Preventing Violent Extremism agenda in Reading. This organisation has no credibility at the grass roots regarding PVE as they have not consulted the community that they claim to represent on this issue and it would appear that they are being dictated to. Does the leader of the council acknowledge that the majority of Muslims in Reading are not ‘on board’ with this work and if she disagrees with this assertion can she inform us how the Muslim community can articulate this position such that she will acknowledge it?

REPLY by Councillor Lovelock (Leader of the Council): There has been a range of activities to engage groups across Reading with the direction, shape and delivery of Prevent based work. It is recognised that this is challenging and that work continues to be needed to support knowledge and understanding of the agenda in Reading. It is disappointing that our local approach and activities in response to the national agenda have not been fully clear to some people, and that some misinformation appears to be circulating, which needs to be further explained. We have always understood that there are concerns about the way in which this has been framed nationally. Many people from across all our communities remain in dialogue with us, sometimes in critical dialogue, but are nevertheless supportive of what we are trying to do. We must continue to find ways to engage with the widest number of residents so that people do understand that we are focussed on community cohesion and challenging extremism from all sections of the community and that this work is not just aimed at Muslims. I think it is important for people to understand that the Council and its partners do not have a choice about whether to engage with this national agenda. What we have sought to do is work with a range of community groups to make this appropriate for Reading. We need to ensure that we engage with as many people as possible as we take the work forward.

June 24, 2009

A Government plan to counter violent extremism could “isolate, stigmatise and alienate” the Muslim community.

Yet in Reading, the only cases of violent extremism in recent years involved an animal rights activist and a white supremacist.

Last night, the target of general criticism at Reading borough’s full council meeting was Government indicator NI 35 on building resilience against violent extremism.

Tory councillor Jamie Chowdhary said of NI 35: “If ever a document qualified for the charge of inciting racial hatred, then this is it.”

He said it mentioned the word Muslim 180 times and that it would “isolate, stigmatise and alienate one community, my community”.

Reading councillors tried to hammer out an action plan to work within the Government’s agenda which comes with funding of £125,000 this year and a possible £131,000 next  year for community projects.

But Conservative councillors objected to the targeting “of any individual community or ethnic group”.

Councillors across all parties recognised the problems with the NI35 indicator.

For more see Friday’s getreading

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2053043_muslims_target_of_government_plan

At a recent meeting in the Town Hall it was confirmed that the Local Authority in Reading are not distancing themselves from the national PVE agenda, this despite the huge concerns that have been caused by the Governments revised CONTEST2 strategy within which PVE sits.

The Reading Muslim PVE Crisis Group was a short term initiative aimed to communicate the change in position of the Muslim community in Reading from the initial RFAE pathfinder work in 2007. It was felt that the discussions in numerous community meetings and community workshops concluded that the overwhelming majority of the 7 PVE objectives were ‘unworkable’. Consultations with the Local Authority were being ignored and the PVE agenda was spiralling dangerously out of control. To that end RM PVE Crisis group has been immensely successful in providing:

• A framework within which the principled concerns related to PVE can be understood.

• Educating people about these principled concerns which the majority of Muslims in Reading share.

The An-Nisa Society is a womens group that was established over 20 years ago and is based in West London. They initially received PVE funding during the Pathfinder stage and undertook a project called ‘British Muslim or WOT?’.

However once the PVE agenda began to develop and after further research the An-Nisa society have since refused PVE funding and have written their own report about the dangers of the PVE agenda which can be downloaded here

Hazel Blears

By Anika Bourley: Bradford councillors have hit out at claims that local authorities are not doing enough to tackle violent extremism.

Communities Secretary Hazel Blears said councils must come out of their comfort zone and tackle extremism in any way needed.

She said a point had been reached where work needed to be stepped up, hardened, and the challenges better understood.

She said: “Building community cohesion is not the cure-all in protecting vulnerable young people or wider society from the threat of violent extremism.

“That means working with the whole community and a focus on shared values alongside activity targeted specifically at individuals who are most at risk.

“That requires tough decisions, difficult debates, moving into uncomfortable and new territory and going beyond the usual people, usual ways of doing things and usual places of doing them.

“But that is the challenge and one that we have already seen many people rise to.”

Bradford Council leader Kris Hopkins hit out at any implication not enough was being done. He said the leadership of the Council had engaged with all other political parties on the issue and regularly challenges local residents and the Government to work with them to promote community cohesion.

He said: “It is the responsibility not just of local authorities but also of Government to tackle extremism. Equally, it is our shared task to promote community cohesion.

“However, both issues are very obviously coupled together and sometimes it appears that Ministers do not fully understand this reality. Alternatively, one might conclude that chasing headlines is of greater importance.”

Labour group leader Councillor Ian Greenwood said: “It is not limited to one community – we need to tap into the undercurrent. The vast majority of people in the district hold decent values.”

Councillor David Ward, deputy leader of the Liberal Democratics, criticised Miss Blears saying she had a “damn cheek”. He said: “Authorities have been asked to pick up the pieces on extremism that has come from the Iraq war. To say we are doing nothing is wrong.”

As part of the latest drive to tackle extremism, local intelligence profiles detailing the activities of extremists in every area will be drawn up to identify radical preachers and groups promoting hate. New guidance from the Association of Chief Police Officers will also enable senior officers to share “sensitive information” with council chief executives.

Here is a summarised version of the documentary with comments from Lord Nazir Ahmed, RM PVE Crisis Group and Secretary of State Hazel Blears.

In video messages explaining their motivations the culprits make a clear and explicit linkage between their intentions and the impact of Western foreign policy in Muslim lands.

Yet despite it coming from their own mouths that it is anger over foreign policy driving their hate, the Government continues to deny it as the primary factor.

Instead it blames a “dangerous Islamist ideology” for creating “a hatred of the Western way of life” as if such ideology is free standing and exists in some kind of vacuum.

In this discourse all Islamic political or social activists who are critical of the Government, from whatever political hue, get lumped together with the sinister description of ‘Islamists’.

The impression is created that all Muslims who are critical of the impact of foreign policy – and certainly any Muslim who recognises the rights of those in Palestine, Afghanistan and Iraq to resist the occupation of their countries – give succour to those who preach the language of violent extremism here.

This thinking runs through the Government’s PREVENTING EXTREMISM AGENDA (PVE). It has dangerous implications.

By denying the legitimacy of democratic opposition to Government foreign policy from Muslims, and by promoting and recognising only those Muslims who toe the line, Government policy is serving to strengthen the hands of the genuine extremists; those who say that our engagement in the democratic process is pointless or wrong.

The Government now increasingly tars all Islamic organisations and individuals that openly oppose Western oppressive polices in the Middle East with the ‘extremist’ brush. Hence, their recent attacks on the mainstream Islam Expo event in London. This was attended by 50,000 people, and combined a celebration of Islamic cultural life with political debate. But rather than engage with discordant, but much more representative voices, from within the Muslim community, the Government very publicly boycott it. Instead they are keen to promote on PVE platforms ex-Islamic radicals like Ed Hussein, author of The Islamist. Hussein is happy to pronounce his support for the invasion of Iraq, denies the existence of Islamophobia, and routinely describes his and Government critics as ‘Islamofascist’. As such he is regarded by most Muslims as a Government stooge interested only in his self advancement.

The danger of this approach is that it serves to squeeze the democratic space for dissent within the Muslim community. If Muslims organisations are reluctant to provide the space for sensitive discussions for fear of extremist’s accusations, where are these young people to go? Where will their views and concerns get an airing? The answer is obvious. They will be expressed in private and secret, with the genuine extremists keen to be provide listening ears and simplistic solutions.

I regularly speak to young Muslim school students. In my discussions with them they often express their sadness at the way events post 9/11 have cast a shadow over their world. Teachers are often surprised at the depth of feelings expressed and the negative impact the current climate has on their students. It highlights to me the lack of opportunity for Muslim students to express how they really feel. Many are angry because all you need to get angry is to switch on a TV or pick up a newspaper.

Instead of trying to deny or sweep under the carpet the real impact of Government policy on the Muslim community, we need to consciously engage with it. We must create the space within the community where our young people feel free to speak openly about how they feel as young Muslims growing up in a country where their identity is constantly contested. The best antidote to the appeal of extremism is to create a model of critically engaged citizenship.

That will only happen when more young Muslims engage in the political process and are confident and assertive about expressing their concerns, irrespective of whether it offends the Government or not.

To that end we need more Muslim role models prepared to speak out, not stooges prepared only to do their masters bidding. It is a waste of PVE funding if it is used simply to finance tokenistic, window dressing initiatives that simply reinforce Government spin and increase cynicism in the democratic process.

I welcome the fact the money is being made available to tackle the threat of violent extremism. This is undeniably a public safety issue which we all have a duty to minimise. But this money needs to be spent effectively. That’s why in Birmingham I have raised my concerns in the city council at the manner in which the PVE agenda has been implemented in the city.

I complained about the lack of transparency in this whole process and the lack of engagement with elected representatives. I have also highlighted the manner in which the funding has become a gravy train for some private consultancy firms who have no particular expertise in counter terrorism but do have close links to Government. The result, at best, is funding for a hotch potch of projects which may be worthy in themselves but have little connection to tackling violent extremism. At worst, the agenda is encouraging a climate of self censorship in the community whereby only those who buy into the Government framework are accepted and the rest are marginalised. These issues need to be aired in public as does a critique of the politics running through the PVE agenda.

Salma Yaqoob is a Councillor for Birmingham Sparkbrook and is a vice-Chair of Respect, The Unity Coalition Party.

http://www.muslimnews.co.uk/paper/index.php?article=3795

We have therefore witnessed various ‘publicity stunts’ by Hazel Blears’ local recruits in Rochdale, who themselves lack any standing in our community and are no where to be seen for debate and discussion on their views which they advocate, in an effort to publicize the government strategy in this area.

Spin, deception, manipulation of facts- whatever we would like to call it- we have seen it all lately in Rochdale- especially after Hazel Blears singled out this peaceful town as some form of Radical hotspot.

Despite being challenged on this fringe minority view held by individuals not known for their discourse abilities, no discussion has been really led in the public domain.

The Rochdale Muslim community can learn from how Muslims in Reading are tackling this debate on a community level and work to mobilize the whole community against such projects which treats the Muslim community and her sons and daughters with suspicion and hampers relations built with various other communities in the borough.

A crisis group was set up in Reading with the support of more than 1,000 Muslims who objected to the local steps being taken under the Government’s Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) strategy launched this year.

As part of the scheme, £10,000 was awarded to the Reading Forum Against Extremism and another £80,000 to establish the Berkshire Forum Against Extremism. But Reading Muslim Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) Crisis Group said since it started, Muslim groups in the town have become disillusioned with the project which started off as a collaborative effort between organizations and community groups in Reading.

The Reading Muslim PVE Crisis Group particularly objected to the council’s adoption of the National Indicator NI35 – a controversial framework which singles out the Muslim community as the main group to look out for in building communities resilient to violent extremism.It is also took concern about a new PVE toolkit which will be provided to school teachers to look out for signs of “radicalization” in pupils – a move which the group labeled “absurd and disturbing”.

A statement from the group to Michael Coughlin, chief executive of Reading Borough Council, and Superintendent Steve Kirk said:

“The PVE work relies on a number of volatile terms such as ‘extremism’, ‘violent extremism’ and ‘radicalization. These terms are undefined but have been used by members of the Government to demonize the Muslim community by equating Islamic values such as the desire for Muslim unity and adherence to Sharia law with ‘extremism’ or ‘violent extremism’.

“Communities don’t commit crimes, individuals do……However, the Government narrative on the causes of the cycle of violence we see occurring in the context of PVE blames an ‘ideology’ as the overriding cause for people’s radicalization.

“This is in stark contrast to the way that the political troubles in Northern Ireland, South Africa and Sri Lanka was identified……This narrative firmly puts the blame for the cycle of violence at the door of Islam and the Muslim community.”

Community leaders in Rochdale must step up to their responsibility in challenging the government narrative which is built on achieving governmental goals as opposed to addressing the real issues and factors behind the loose terms of Radicalization and extremism.

The case study is there for us to see- Are we willing to take the next step forward?

The real side of PVE

The above diagram highlights the type of attention Muslims can expect to receive purely due to their Religious or Political views.

This diagram can be downloaded from the following PVE document:   http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2008/07//403360.pdf

Interestingly earlier this year RCRE admitted that the approach of engaging all communities was just a tactic to get to the Muslim community:

” our work has always been cross-community. This has made it easier to engage with the Muslim community, and we propose to continue our approach.” (Document attached)

This comes as no surprise considering the government will be pursuing the Local Authority in Reading on how they are changing the Muslim Community. (Now that NI35 has been adopted)

Full Article:

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2038946_bid_for_extremism_fight_to_involve_all

Dowload the doc below

rave-2008-lsp-paper

A Tilehurst man appeared in court today charged with terror offences after being arrested at a railway station.

Neil Lewington appeared before City of Westminster Magistrates’ Court charged with 11 offences – 10 under the Terrorism Act and the other under the Explosives Act.

He was arrested after police discovered a suspected explosive device when they searched a man at Lowestoft railway station in Suffolk on October 30.

Bomb disposal experts were called to make it safe.

Lewington, 43, of Church End Lane, was originally arrested and charged with possession of an article to cause criminal damage.

He was brought before Lowestoft magistrates on Saturday, bailed and immediately arrested by the Metropolitan Police.

Lewington is accused of being in possession of a number of articles connected with the commission, preparation or instigation of an act of terrorism, contrary to the Terrorism Act 2000 and 2006.

These include two improvised explosive devices, seven timers, four containers of Sodium Chlorate weed killer, three tennis balls and firelighters.

He is also suspected of having a book entitled Counter Bomb, and a UK members handbook for the Waffen SS, the combat arm of Hitler’s paramilitary forces.

He was remanded to appear at the Central Criminal Court for a preliminary hearing on November 28.

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2038937_tilehurst_man_on_terror_charges

Reading Islamic Centre has said it did not back a statement issued by the Reading Council for Racial Equality (RCRE) regarding a Government initiative to prevent extremism.

A group of Muslims in the town has recently launched the Reading Muslim Preventing Violent Extremism (RMPVE) crisis group following concerns that the town’s involvement in the national Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) strategy is alienating the Muslim community.

The group was against the focus on the Muslim community as the most likely to be involved in violent extremism and the potential conflict that could arise if PVE officers are enlisted in to Thames Valley Police.

Following a meeting between community leaders, Reading Borough Council and Thames Valley Police on Wednesday, October 29, the RCRE released a statement on behalf of community leaders saying they condemned the PVE Crisis Group.

But the Reading Islamic Centre has said it still has concerns about PVE and is in support of the crisis group.

The number of community groups and individuals that have shown support for the crisis group has grown in the past few days

http://www.getreading.co.uk/news/s/2038840_islamic_centre_backs_crisis_group

Ibrahim and Peter’s advice has already proven invaluable and we welcome their support for RM PVE Crisis Group.

You can get the mp3 file from:

http://www.filedropper.com/pccpveclip280908

IslamOnline.net & Newspapers

The new strategy will be based on “neighboring profiling.”
CAIRO – Scotland Yard will map nook and cranny in Britain to prevent British Muslims from turning to extremism and to stamp out zones potential to create extremists or terror sympathizers.

“You have to assess where the need is greatest. Just relying on the census data for the number of Muslims in an area is not detailed or sophisticated enough,” a senior police source privy to the new strategy told the Guardian on Thursday, February 28.

The plan, marked restricted and approved by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) this week, will be rooted in “neighboring profiling.”

“This will allow us to connect with all groups and to understand what is normal and what is unusual,” reads the 40-page document, a copy of which was obtained by the daily.

“We need to continually improve our knowledge about communities and how they function both in a social and religious context.”

The ACPO, a top-level counter-terror committee, has put forward the new plan on the ground that little progress had been made to fight terror despite police efforts.

“It’s a recognition that it is a major and important new area of work and the police should see it as a mainstream area of work,” said the senior police source.

All-inclusive

The plan, expected to enter into fruition within weeks, is all-inclusive as it targets schools, colleges, prisons and even websites.

It envisages anti-extremism guides to parents on how to protect their children from visiting extremist websites.

“The internet is a potential area where a tendency towards violent extremism can be exploited,” reads the document.

“Parents and carers have a need for advice on how to control access for their children and to understand what defines the legal/potentially illegal divide.”

The new strategy stipulates that all state-maintained educational establishments from primary schooling through to universities will have an anti-extremism guide as of the 2008/9 academic year.

It says there is a “pressing need to develop the growing relationships between the police and the education sector at every level with regard to preventing violent extremism.”

The Higher Education Ministry issued on Tuesday, January 22, a guidance for university and college campuses to combat “the threat of violent extremism.”

The “tool kit” advises universities to avoid “segregation” of pupils by declining requests for Muslim prayer and ablution facilities.

The ministry also calls universities to have a clearly publicized code of practice on freedom of speech and share information with security services regarding suspicious pupils and external speakers.

The guide drew rebuke from student groups, Muslim and non-Muslim, as well as professors over would provoking suspicion and animosity towards innocent students.

Building Trust

The new strategy, at the same time, says police must try rebuilding burnt bridges of trust with the Muslim minority, estimated at two million.

“Research last year revealed that the police service would be very low on the list of agencies that the Muslim community would turn to if they had concerns about a member of their community who embraced violent extremism,” it admits.

“…the police service has a long way to go in building a relationship of trust around these issues.”

The Muslim minority has been in the eye of the storm since the 9/11 attacks, complaining of a growing Islamophobic climate in the European country.

Unlike similar plans in the past, the new document does accept that foreign policy can be a key factor in fueling terrorism.

Stopping short of mentioning the Iraq war, the document urges police officers to “effectively address grievances” sparked by British foreign policy.

“This objective is not for the police alone. Some grievances will be international in dimension.”

The London-based Royal Institute of International Affairs has said that the Iraq war gave a momentum to Al-Qaeda’s recruitment and fundraising and made Britain more vulnerable to terror attacks.

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1203757514112&pagename=Zone-English-News%2FNWELayout

IslamOnline.net & Newspapers

Under the strategy, 300 officers have been deployed to monitor areas of potential “radicalization” in Muslim areas.
CAIRO – Muslims in the southern British town of Reading are protesting a government strategy to fight extremism for targeting the Muslim community in the city.

“We hope that there can be face to face dialogue with the council and the police where we can address our concerns,” a spokesman for the Muslim Crisis Group, which has been formed to protest the Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) strategy, told the Reading Evening Post on Friday, October 31.

The Group has sent a letter to Reading Borough Council Chief Executive Michael Coughlin and Thames Valley Police Steve Kirk to protest local steps taken under the PVE strategy.

“The PVE work relies on a number of volatile terms such as ‘extremism’, ‘violent extremism’ and ‘radicalization’,” the letter reads.

“These terms are undefined but have been used by members of the government to demonize the Muslim community by equating Islamic values with ‘extremism’ or ‘violent extremism’.”

Reading Muslims objected to the adoption of the National Indicator NI35 – a controversial framework which singles out the Muslim community as the main group to look out for in building communities resilient to violent extremism.

They also rejected a new PVE toolkit, which will be provided to school teachers to look out for signs of “radicalization” in pupils.

“That may be prevalent in 5 year old Muslim students, something quite absurd and disturbing.”

Reading, home to 10,000 Muslims, has been picked as a pilot area to apply the government’s PVE strategy.

Under the strategy, 300 officers have been deployed to monitor areas of potential “radicalization” in Muslim areas.

Disillusioned

Reading Muslims denounced the government’s generalization approach in implementing the anti-extremism strategy.

“Communities don’t commit crimes, individuals do,” said the Muslim Crisis Group.

“However, the Government narrative on the causes of the cycle of violence we see occurring in the context of PVE blames an ‘ideology’ as the overriding cause for people’s radicalization.

“This is in stark contrast to the way that the political troubles in Northern Ireland, South Africa and Sri Lanka was identified.

“This narrative firmly puts the blame for the cycle of violence at the door of Islam and the Muslim community.”

The Muslim group said that the Muslim community has become disillusioned by the PVE.

“We are now faced with an agenda has evolved considerably and is so misguided that it is causing anxiety within the Muslim community,” it said.

Several Muslim organizations are planning to meet next Monday to announce their refusal to cooperate in the anti-extremism strategy.

“(It) has the potential to cause mass alienation and is proving to be counter productive against some of its own stated aims.”

British Muslims, estimated at nearly two million, have been in the eye of storm since the July 2005 bombings, which killed 56 people, including four Muslim bombers.

http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?c=Article_C&cid=1225200846459&pagename=Zone-English-News/NWELayout

By Chine Mbubaegbu
31/10/2008

A group of Muslims in Reading feel victimised by a Government initiative designed to tackle violent extremism and feel it could cause more harm than good.

A crisis group has been set up with the support of more than 1,000 Muslims in Reading who object to the local steps being taken under the Government’s Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) strategy launched this year.

Reading Borough Council was picked as a pilot area for the Department for Communities and local Government’s counter-terrorism strategy which aims to challenge violent extremist ideology, support vulnerable individuals being targeted and recruited to extreme causes and increase the resilience of the community towards violent extremism.

As part of the scheme, £10,000 was awarded to the Reading Forum Against Extremism and another £80,000 to establish the Berkshire Forum Against Extremism.

But Reading Muslim Preventing Violent Extremism (PVE) Crisis Group said since it started, Muslim groups in the town have become disillusioned with the project which started off as a collaborative effort between organisations and community groups in Reading.

The Reading Muslim PVE Crisis Group particularly objects to the council’s adoption of the National Indicator NI35 – a controversial framework which singles out the Muslim community as the main group to look out for in building communities resilient to violent extremism.

It is also concerned about a new PVE toolkit which will be provided to school teachers to look out for signs of “radicalisation” in pupils – a move which the group labels “absurd and disturbing”. Members are also concerned about the possible appointment of special PVE officers at Thames Valley Police.

A statement from the group to Michael Coughlin, chief executive of Reading Borough Council, and Superintendent Steve Kirk said: “The PVE work relies on a number of volatile terms such as ‘extremism’, ‘violent extremism’ and ‘radicalisation’.

“These terms are undefined but have been used by members of the Government to demonise the Muslim community by equating Islamic values such as the desire for Muslim unity and adherence to Sharia law with ‘extremism’ or ‘violent extremism’.

“Communities don’t commit crimes, individuals do.

“However, the Government narrative on the causes of the cycle of violence we see occurring in the context of PVE blames an ‘ideology’ as the overriding cause for people’s radicalisation.

“This is in stark contrast to the way that the political troubles in Northern Ireland, South Africa and Sri Lanka was identified.

“This narrative firmly puts the blame for the cycle of violence at the door of Islam and the Muslim community.”

In April, Home Secretary Jacqui Smith announced 300 PVE police officers in forces – including Thames Valley – would be appointed to monitor areas of potential radicalisation in Muslim communities and get engaged with the communities themselves in order to prevent extremism.

But the crisis group feels these officers are not needed in Reading as the town does not suffer from significant violent extremism.

Speaking to the Evening Post, a spokesman for the crisis group, said: “We hope that there can be face to face dialogue with the council and the police where we can address our concerns.”

For more information, visit pvecrisisgroup.wordpress.com.

Police and council give their response

Representatives from the Pakistan Community Centre, South Street Mosque, Central Jamme Mosque and Reading Council for Racial Equality were at a meeting on Wednesday with the council where they discussed the crisis group.

A spokesman for the Pakistan Community Centre said the centre had not signed up to it.

A statement in response to the PVE group from the council and police said: “Over the years Reading has enjoyed excellent community relations and it has already undertaken good work around PVE, including project ambassadors, consultation, awareness raising and awareness events, which have all been widely recognised as good practice.

“It should be noted however that Thames Valley Police and Reading Borough Council did not apply for PVE funding.

“This money is allocated by the Government, as part of the national Prevent Strategy, according to a set criteria, namely any town with a Muslim population of more than 4,000. Reading falls in this category.

“In Reading’s Local Area Agreement with the Local Strategic Partnership and councils, the Government pushed ahead for NI35 including in areas where money had been allocated.

“The focus of the PVE work is to continue to ensure our young people are not subjected to any form of radicalisation and we are working with all members of our community to challenge all forms of violent extremism.

“We are required to produce an action plan setting out what we intend to do and a draft has been prepared by a small cross-community working group for consideration by the Ethnic Minorities Forum.

“This is an emerging piece of work in progress, which will be open to consultation. Consideration is also being given on how best to manage and co-ordinate projects of this kind.

“A draft ‘Governance’ strategy is also to be considered by the Ethnic Minorities Forum. The Ethnic Minorities Forum will lead with consultation and engagement and inform the community about decisions and actions that are taken around PVE.

“It is essential that the members of the community engage with the process as this is an excellent opportunity to use Government funding to promote and support community projects in Reading and build on the trust, understanding and tolerance that already exists.”

RM PVE Crisis Group is supported by local Mosques and Muslim organisations and backed by a petition of over 1,000 signatures from the Muslim community in Reading.

It was felt that the discussions in numerous community meetings and community workshops concluded that the overwhelming majority of the 7 PVE objectives were ‘unworkable’. Consultations with the Local Authority were being ignored and the PVE agenda was spiralling dangerously out of control. To that end RM PVE Crisis group has been immensely successful in providing:

• A framework within which the principled concerns related to PVE can be understood.

• Educating people about these principled concerns which the majority of Muslims in Reading share.

RM PVE Crisis Group is supported by local Mosques and Muslim organisations and backed by a petition of over 1,000 signatures from the Muslim community in Reading.

Selection of Committee members for PVE Crisis Group:
Shahid Sadik – West Reading CC
Khateeba Chechi – SEEN
Omair Zaman – 1UMMAH FM
Naz Mahmood – Reading Muslim Scouts
Abdul Razzak – South St Mosque
Mr. Sajid – As-Sabeel Bookshop
Shah jahan – Liberation Party, Hizb-ut-Tahrir

Selection of community members who advise and support RM PVE CG:
Mr Chaudary – Waylen St Mosque and Bangladesh Association Greater Reading
Babar Chechi – Planet Islam
Peter Burt
Dr. Ibrahim Nasr – Chairman Berkshire Arab Community Association

To: Mr. Michael Coughlin, Chief Executive, Reading Borough Council, Mr. Steve Kirk, Thames Valley Police

27^th October 2008

Re: Position of the Muslim Community in relation to PVE in Reading

We are writing to you to explain the position of the Muslim community in Reading with regards to the Preventing Violent Extremism Fund (PVE) that Central Government has been rolling out to some Local Authorities. During the course of this year we feel that a large gap has developed between the perception of the Muslim community’s views in relation to PVE and our actual sentiments. As you will know the Home Secretary has taken the decision to appoint 300 PVE officers of which several have been assigned to Reading. Before this takes place we would like to take this opportunity to explain our principled position on the PVE strategy.

The reality of the PVE agenda has changed considerably from the time when the initial Reading Forum Against Extremism (RFAE) pathfinder was announced 2 years ago. The intention of this letter is to clarify our position and this letter should abrogate any other views which may have been attributed to the Muslim community in Reading. The initial RFAE was described as a short term project and was received with good will from the Muslim community. However we are now faced with an agenda that has evolved considerably and is so misguided that it is causing anxiety within the Muslim community, has the potential to cause mass alienation and is proving to be counter productive against some of its own stated aims.

The Muslim Community in Reading values and works towards safeguarding peaceful and positive community relations and have always denounced terrorist attacks as something that Islam does not permit.

Earlier this year (16^th April 2008) a workshop was held at the Oakwood centre to discuss PVE in Reading. This was attended by representatives of different communities and senior members of the Local Authority (LA). It was mentioned in the introduction of this meeting that:

“The Muslim community has a long history of engaging with Reading’s statutory bodies and want to continue to do so. However, the PVE agenda raises a number of concerns that need to be addressed. Not addressing these concerns could undermine any work on this agenda. The Muslim community needs to be comfortable with how its concerns are dealt with. Addressing these concerns will serve to bring the vast majority of the community on board any program. This will enable the steering group to have unprecedented engagement across the community.”

Members of the Muslim Community also stated to senior members of the LA at the close of the event that any questions raised should be responded to sooner rather than later. However six months on we have not received any answers from the LA that address the issues raised, but rather there have been a number of developments and announcements related to PVE that have increased the level of concern related to PVE manifold. The latest of these announcements being a PVE school toolkit where Primary School teachers will be advised on signs of ‘radicalisation’ that may be prevalent in 5 year old Muslim students, something quite absurd and disturbing. There are a number of points in the PVE agenda which we have issue with. However four of the most damaging are:

1. Implementation of National Indicator 35 in Reading

A few months ago the Local Authority in Reading chose to adopt National Indicator (NI35).¹ NI35 is a highly controversial indicator related to PVE which in effect singles out the Muslim community as a problematic community. Under the PVE agenda, and NI35, the Local Authority will be accounted by Central Government on how the Muslim Community is effectively being ‘reformed’. It has been mentioned in a number of national newspaper articles² how controversial this indicator is. Only a minority of the 70 LA’s that are receiving the PVE fund have implemented NI35. The Chief Executive of Bradford Council, Kris Hopkins, an area with over 60,000 Muslims and 2^nd on the governments PVE heat map, said in September 2008 that he rejected NI35 because local councils “should not become a wing of the security services”.³

We are also confused by the fact that at the same time the LA were pushing through NI35 in Reading, members of the LA were admitting to the Muslim community that they don’t feel there is an ‘extremism’ problem in Reading. This leads us to believe that the LA has prioritised PVE money from central government along with additional resources in the form of PVE Police offices over the safeguarding of community relations.

It also strikes us as odd that on the one hand members of the Local Authority have on many occasions tried to package the PVE work in Reading as something distant from the intention of Central Government but have now clearly joined the local work in Reading with the agenda of Central Government through NI35.

2. Undefined Terms of Reference

The PVE work relies on a number of volatile terms such as ‘extremism’, ‘violent extremism’ and ‘radicalisation’. These terms are undefined but have been used by members of the government to demonise the Muslim community by equating Islamic Values such as the desire for Muslim unity and adherence to Sharia law with ‘extremism’ or ‘violent extremism’. The PVE guidance to LA’s and Police officers is littered with these terms and it is unfortunate that the LA have not asked Central Government for a clear definition of these terms before adopting the NI35 indicator. In July 2008 The Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government in a speech on PVE explained how people’s political views, such as views on the Israel-Palestine conflict, fall under her definition of extremism.⁴

3. Government Narrative

Communities don’t commit crimes, individuals do. However the government narrative on the causes of the cycle of violence we see occurring in the context of PVE blames an ‘ideology’ as the overriding cause for peoples ‘radicalisation’. This is in stark contrast to the way that the political troubles in Northern Ireland, South African, and Sri-Lanka were identified. This narrative firmly puts the blame for the cycle of violence at the door of Islam and the Muslim community. This sets the tone and is found to be an inseparable part of the PVE philosophy.

The outcome being that the views of members of the Muslim Community are constantly scrutinised (Mapping) to determine those who are deemed more Islamic and Political. We feel that these members of the Muslim community will be unfairly seen as a threat.

4. PVE Police Officers

The day after the Oakwood centre workshop in April the Home Secretary announced that 300 PVE officers⁵ will be allocated in the UK to police areas of ‘radicalisation’ such as ‘community centres’. The allocation of specific police officers along with the misguided government narrative and undefined PVE terminology is in our opinion a cocktail for disaster.

We have already seen the first ‘PVE raids’ that have occurred in Stoke-On-Trent⁶ (a pilot area for PVE like Reading) where 5 Muslim households were raided under the guise of preventing the promotion of ‘extremist views’. We further note that PVE guidance for the Police calls for an ‘interventionist’ approach towards those who may be ‘moving towards extremism’ but not breaking any criminal law.⁷

In light of the above four points and other concerns we would like to state that the PVE work in Reading does not have the support, consent or credibility from the majority of Muslims in Reading.

At the Oakwood centre workshop in Woodley on the 16^th of April 2008 it was mentioned in the introduction that there exists a petition with over 1,000 signatures from members of the Muslim Community in Reading. This petition states the desire of those who wish to publicly distance themselves from PVE in Reading but are still committed to dialogue. This petition was gathered in only 2 weeks and is an unprecedented statement considering there are only 10,000 Muslims in Reading. Never has such a petition been arranged in such a short space of time in the history of the Reading Muslim community.

In addition to this it should be noted that the following Muslim organisations in Reading are on the record as having distanced themselves from PVE funding in Reading:

· Reading Islamic Centre (South St Mosque)

· Central Jamme Mosque (Waylen St Mosque)

· Bangladesh Association Greater Reading

· Pakistan Community Centre

· Sri-Lankan Muslim Association

· South East Education Network

· Reading Muslim Scouts

· 1Ummah FM – Ramadan Radio Reading

· As-Sabeel Bookshop

· Planet Islam

· Imaan FC

· West Reading CC

We are committed to dialogue and we invite you to meet with the Reading Muslim PVE Crisis group at 8pm on Monday 3^rd November 2008 in Reading. The above list of organisations is only a selection. There are more Muslim organisations that want to distance themselves from PVE funding in Reading and will be represented at the meeting on 3/11/08. It should also be noted that the number of organisations from the Muslim community who may be willing to undertake projects under the PVE fund is negligible. It has already been communicated to the LA that our community believes that the overwhelming majority of the 7 PVE objectives are unworkable.

Our Recommendations

1. The LA did not have to apply for the PVE fund. In the interests of safeguarding community relations we would recommend the LA withdraw from PVE.

2. We hope this letter helps to clarify the position of the majority of Muslims in Reading and recommend this position to be cited in further PVE discussion and reports.

3. There is a need for a community cohesion forum to be established in Reading which we would like to participate in. This however must be completely independent of PVE. Any talk of cohesion under the PVE fund where one community has in effect been labelled as a problem community needing reform makes all talk of cohesion unworkable.

We will be sending this letter to other faith groups and interested parties in the interests of the transparency of our principled position and look forward to meeting with you.

Yours sincerely

Reading Muslim PVE Crisis Group

E: pvecrisisgroup@googlemail.com

T: 07876 623643

W: pvecrisisgroup.com

The Reading Muslim PVE Crisis Group is made up of Muslim organisations, Mosques and individuals from Reading who share concerns about PVE in light of Community Cohesion.

1. http://security.homeoffice.gov.uk/news-publications/publication-search/prevent-strategy/prevent-strategy-part-2?view=Binary

2.http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/career_and_jobs/public_sector/article3520995.ece

3. http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=vNYiVXAWnwI

4. http://www.policyexchange.org.uk/Events.aspx?id=688

5. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/apr/17/islam.religion

6. http://www.islamophobia-watch.com/islamophobia-watch/2008/7/5/muslims-after-police-raid-we-feel-betrayed.html

7. http://www.indymedia.org.uk/media/2008/07//403360.pdf