The idea of creating a programme to identify potential “terrorist” thinking was put forward under the Blair Labour Government by Sir David Omand, a former GCHQ intelligence officer. The programme called “Prevent,” was designed to focus on speech and/or behaviours, identified by social workers, teachers, students, and others as indicative of an individual’s potential journey from radicalised thinking to committing acts of terrorism. Although heavily criticised by Liberty and other human rights organisations because it relied on and encouraged people to spy on one another, the government programme has not been disbanded.
Given this controversy, it is interesting to consider exactly what the programme prevents and who it protects. Designed shortly after the 9/11 attacks in New York, the programme primarily identified “radicalised thinking and terrorism” as originating within Islamic societies. Little, if any, attention was paid to extremist elements within other religions; consequently mosques, rather than churches or synagogues, became the focus of scrutiny. Christian and Jewish eschatological “end time” Zionist thinking was not identified as either radical or dangerous.
When the programme was introduced, it was sold to the public as a tool to enable the intelligence services to detect individuals with the potential to carry out terrorist acts. However more than two decades later, we are seeing how the definition of identifying “who might become a terrorist threat within the UK” has evolved into “who poses a threat to Britain’s security interests with Israel through exposure of Israel’s crimes.” It is hard not to see the irony in this. Throughout both the past and current centuries, Israel has shown itself to be a state that has committed acts of terror, not only against the people whose land it occupies, but against neighbouring countries in West Asia.
In an Orwellian inversion of truth, a programme designed to prevent terrorism is currently being used to identify and arrest individuals whose words or activities are actually aimed at preventing acts of terror. Private messages on facebook and other social media platforms criticising Israel, have led to police raids on homes and subsequent arrests. Such intensive surveillance and thought-based arrests serve as a chilling warning of how states once considered sovereign and democratic can, through incremental steps, descended into fascism.
The actions of Palestine Action in destroying quadcopter drones which were designed to fire upon civilians, prevented those weapons from killing a large number of people in Gaza, many of whom would have been children. Doctors have reported distinct patterns of fatal and near-fatal injuries among children targeted by quadcopters, with trauma concentrated on the head and limbs. Given the unprecedented numbers of child fatalities and amputees in Gaza, evidence suggests that the targeting of infants and children does not stem from isolated incidents. Reports indicate that in Gaza, the West Bank, and South Lebanon, children have been, and continue to be, systematically targeted by Israel soldiers.
To date over 3,000 mostly elderly protesters have been arrested under section 12 of the Terrorism Act 2000, for holding signs that read, “I oppose genocide – I support Palestine Action.” In doing so, they have drawn a sharp public distinction between those committing genocide and those trying to prevent it. This heavy-handed inversion of UK justice has not gone unnoticed and has sparked widespread criticism far beyond the 3,000-plus arrests.
Israel commits extreme acts of terror, yet within the UK it is Hamas, an organic resistance movement grown out of the need to defend its people, that is labelled terrorist. Proscribing Hamas as a terrorist organisation is designed to block any opportunity for an independent inquiry into the 2023 events of 7th October. In this repressive atmosphere, where truth has become a controlled substance, if one shares the official statement put out by Hamas, one runs the risk of arrest under charges of supporting a terrorist organisation.
In the Hamas document, which is not allowed to be shared, Hamas provides historical context to the breakout from their Gaza open-air, concentration camp. They describe that, besides looking to take hostages for the purpose of a prisoner exchange, the aim of “Al-Aqsa Flood” grew out of a deep seated desire to express heroism and dignity in breaking free from the longest-ever occupation.
From the beginning Hamas was willing to hand over the hostages. However, after three years of genocide it has become apparent that Israel’s primary objective was not the return of the hostages, but to create a false narrative to demonise Hamas as justification for adding Gaza to Israel’s already acquired, stolen Palestinian territory.
Hamas is a deeply morally religious, Islamic organisation. They have stated that it is inconceivable that any Hamas resistance fighter would contemplate raping women or harming children. Hamas was not aware that the Nova Music Festival was taking place, but came upon the festival by accident. While it is not disputed that Israelis and Palestinians died in crossfire, photographic evidence indicates that the majority of those who perished were found in burned out cars that had been targeted by aerial gunfire. Palestinians do not have helicopters, fighter jets or tanks. During the breakout Palestinian resistance fighters carried AK 47 assault rifles. Placing the blame on Hamas for the large number of Israeli deaths could be easily refuted were the facts allowed to be widely available within the public domain.
Three years on, and the Israeli narrative of 1,200 Israelis killed by the Hamas resistance fighters, continues uncontested from within the British establishment and mainstream media. Absent from their discourse is mention of Israel’s Hannibal directive – a programme where it was considered acceptable to kill Israeli citizens along with Palestinians rather than allow Israelis to be taken prisoner.
The false accusations of the forty beheaded babies and charges of mass rape have, through a lack of any credible evidence, been largely buried outside of Israel. However within the Israeli State the false narrative continues and has been used to foster a policy of revenge which has encouraged the deliberate targeting of babies and children. This fixation on victimhood has taken widespread hold of the Israeli imagination with events of 7th October, (not the genocide in Gaza), being described as their second Holocaust.
As anger grows around the world, there is hope that change is coming and that we will see a time when those committing genocide, and those shielding the perpetrators, will be held accountable. However, that time has yet to arrive. By bringing criminal charges against those who try to prevent terrorism and by censoring activists and journalists, the UK Government has enacted laws relating to terrorism that, far from preventing it, arguably allow Israel’s genocide of Gaza to continue.