Muslim Groups Behind Unintentionally Satirical Anti-Radicalization Handbook Respond to RCMP Denunciation

The groups are now doing major damage control:

In a joint statement, the Islamic Social Services Association (ISSA) and the National Council of Canadian Muslims pointed out that the handbook includes a disclaimer that says: "Contributors are only responsible for their respective contributions and do not necessarily endorse other material contained in this publication. 

"This is a handbook for use by Canadian Muslim communities to help them identify radicalization, prevent violent extremism, build civic engagement and uphold civil rights. Canadian Muslims are entitled, like all other Canadians, to know their legal rights when interacting with law enforcement. This is a basic Canadian and core democratic concept which we all uphold," the groups' statement reads in part. 

"Our recommendations to security agencies are based on years of direct experience with grassroots communities and the concerns aired by Canadian Muslims during local town hall forums in 2013 in the presence of law enforcement participants," the statement added.

Maybe so, but their recommendations are also based on their own refusal/inability to come to terms with the jihad imperative that's been a feature of Islam since the get-go, along with an overwhelming and undeserved sense of victimhood that they need to shed if they have any hope of moving forward.

The salient questions here: how could the RCMP put its imprimatur on something like this? Who is responsible for giving it the thumbs up? (Considering its problematic content and its many typos, it's hard to believe that anyone at the RCMP actually bothered to read it.) 

I was going to say that heads should roll at the Mounties, but under the circumstances, perhaps that's not the best way to put it.

Update: Here's the NatPo's report about the fiasco. And here's my letter:

So the RCMP is revoking support for the anti-radicalization handbook on which it put its imprimatur because of the book's "adversarial tone"? 

Having read it for myself, and having found it shot through with misinformation about Islam and the jihad that, on occasion, could easily be mistaken for satire--not to mention the plentiful typographical errors--the book's "adversarial tone" should be the least of the Mounties' concerns. 

Which rather begs the question: did anyone at the RCMP bother reviewing the handbook before it went to press? If the answer is "no," then that's a big problem. If, however, the answer is "yes," then that's an even bigger problem: it tells us that not only were one or more RCMP employees involved in creating this problematic document, one or more of them had no qualms about giving it the go-ahead.  

Either way, someone at the RCMP should be held accountable for what can only be seen as an epic failure.

Update: The NCCM's media release--the one issued after the crap hit the fan (some of it was quoted in the first part of this post)--sheds some light on how the handbook came to be:

"As might be expected, the content of the handbook was shared with all contributors for constructive feedback throughout the 14 month development process.  All feedback received was incorporated.  The handbook also contains a clear disclaimer on page 1 that states: 'Contributors are only responsible for their respective contributions and do not necessarily endorse other material contained in this publication.' 

Hey, RCMP--you got some 'splaining to do.

Update: The Ceeb's Diana Swain interviewed the NCCM's "human rights" official about the handbook without challenging a single one of the her assertions. What--did the Ceeb think it would be too "Islamophobic" to look beyond the book's cover and ask questions about its problematic contents?

 

Update: Looks the the CTV talking head didn't bother to read the handbook either--or challenge the NCCM chief's contention that Islam has nothing to do with "violent extremism":

 

 

The sad but obvious conclusion: Canadians are not being served by their largely supine media.