Creating President Donald Trump against excessive government and abuse tactics are numerous. But will he refer his administration not to repeat these abuse of power? Trump’s spokesman, Alex Pfeiffer, claimed that the nominated director of the FBI Patel “would end the weapon of law enforcement” and “target crime”. I consider it unlikely. Patel’s statements suggest that instead of ending such practices, Trump’s administration will only increase persecution and attacks, both criminal and civic, to those considered political opposition.
For those who wonder how a administration that favors the collection of titles and legality could arrange a weapon to implement the law, unfounded investigations and political retaliation against those who have different views, from the experiences of US Muslims can be learned.
It’s the same old story for us.
After September 11, a wide range of Muslim organizations based in the United States was targeted by implementing a law under the pronunciation of the fight against terrorism. This campaign included high investigations, asset attacks and public accusations. The staff of American Civic Freedom (ACLU), in their report on the blocking of faith, freezing of a charity organization, reported that “According to the person of the Commission on September 11, the cash register admitted that they were in the period after 9/11,” some of the evidentiary foundations Early markings were quite weak, ‘and that a hurry to determine charity organizations would be a September 11th’ [have] result[ed] At a high level of false marks. “Many other groups, including Council for US-Islamic Relations (Cair), the largest Muslim organization for civil rights and advocacy in the US, where I work, were similarly spoiled. The consequences of these smears last to this day.
Let’s take a Cair. If you are a Muslim in the United States -us political opinion, especially on civil rights or issues that affect the marginalized minorities, you have been subjected to government control. Until 2011, then General Eric Holder, then, concluded that “the facts and the law” had not supported any legal proceedings against Cairo. Bush’s administration has previously reached the same conclusion. However, undiscovered by facts or law, the Internet warriors claimed that the decision was due to political interference. American lawyer James Jacks, a key figure in one prosecution, later published a statement related to these allegations, saying: “The decision of accusation or accusation of accusation is based on analyzing evidence and law. This happened in this case.”
Still, stickers and rumors last. Be prepared, because this is probably what you will – together with anyone publicly express disagreement or standing opposition to a government position – face Trump’s 2.0. Facts? Law? Not in this case. The same old story: disinformations that serve political programs. It will make your allies hesitates to come to your defense. They will make donors nervous. This will obstruct your ability to improve charity causes.
In the case of American Muslims, analysts have identified various motivations behind these attacks, many of which are not related to “public security”.
After September 11, the US government was under a strong pressure to prevent further attacks. The persecution or exploration of Muslim organizations enabled officials to promote a narrative of active fight against domestic terrorism.
The antimuslim racism, not evidence of criminal activity, led to perception that Muslim organizations were inherently suspicious. Recently, Elon Musk, the owner of the billionaire X who led Trump’s newly married Department of Government Efficiency, used his social media platform to perpetuate a narrative of Muslim villains dealing with Moustache.
Since September 11, US government agencies have been repeatedly awarded with increased funding and expanded authority for the implementation of the anti -therial programs that target Muslims, even when these programs were based on stereotypes and unfounded science, and nothing contributed to public security. Muslim supervision and mapping programs of NYPD resulted in zero persecution. Programs of violent extremism (Cve) Obama’s administration produced suspicious indicators, such as the idea of breeding or shaving one’s beard could be a sign of malicious intention. In the meantime, they diminished concern about the threat of ideological extremists such as white superiors.
In 2009, a report of an extremism branch and radicalization of the Department of Analysis of the Threats of the Homeland Environment warned of the growing threat of white superiors and violent anticover groups. Congress threw him away. The Homeland Security Department (DHS) rejected the report. DHS analyst left his job behind him. His team was dissolved.
Until 2011, journalist R Jeffrey Smith said that “as many as 40 analysts” focused on Al-Qaeda and his ideological allies. In contrast, in 2012, wire journalist Spencer Ackerman reported that DHS had only one analyst who was given the task of monitoring all forms of domestic non -Islamic extremism. In 2017, the Government’s Liability Office reported that white nationalists performed 62 out of 85 extremist terrorist incidents in the US after 9/11.
Through this government’s overcome, American Muslims have learned a severe lesson: when they want to target you in power, you can do little to stop it. Removing to cover or alleviate your oppressors are not a sustainable strategy. However, there are steps you can take: to prioritize the community serving, develop resistance, refuse to change who you need to please those in power, improve legal willingness and build your ability directly to communicate with the American people. It’s a difficult path, but the movements that Champion Justice will thank you.
The views expressed in this article are the author’s and do not reflect the editorial stance of Al Jazeera.
