The objective of counter-extremism messaging should be to dissuade people from supporting violence, not to defend policy choices made by lawmakers and politicians. This messaging is best done by non-government actors,
This might be the single most intelligent thing I've read on counter terrorism since 9/11.
We've engaged in mountains of bullshit - preemptive wars, torture chambers, totalitarian surveillance. There is very little evidence that any of it is effective and its all stuff we should have known wasn't going to work.
What people want is "pre-crime." But "pre-crime" is by definition not criminal and so its something that law enforcement simply isn't equipped to deal with.
This is more like suicide counseling than law enforcement. Instead of identifying at risk individuals and throwing them in dungeons, you identify at-risk individuals and you help them make better choices.
Why has this insight been missing from the dialog for so long?
Humera Khan | Washington's Top-Down Approach to Countering Violent Extremism Fails to Include Civil Society | Foreign Affairs