{"id":54571,"date":"2015-03-02T12:00:04","date_gmt":"2015-03-02T12:00:04","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/?p=54571"},"modified":"2015-05-05T21:26:03","modified_gmt":"2015-05-05T20:26:03","slug":"the-circus-how-british-intelligence-primed-both-sides-of-the-terror-war","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/2015\/03\/the-circus-how-british-intelligence-primed-both-sides-of-the-terror-war\/","title":{"rendered":"The Circus: How British Intelligence Primed Both Sides of the \u2018Terror War\u2019"},"content":{"rendered":"
\"Nafeez<\/a>

Nafeez Ahmed<\/p><\/div>\n

\u2018Jihadi John\u2019 was able to join IS for one simple reason: from Quilliam to al-Muhajiroun, Britain\u2019s loudest extremists have been groomed by the security services.<\/em><\/p>\n

Every time there\u2019s a terrorist attack that makes national headlines, the same talking heads seem to pop up like an obscene game of \u201cwhack-a-mole\u201d. Often they appear one after the other across the media circuit, bobbing from celebrity television pundit to erudite newspaper outlet.<\/p>\n

A few years ago, BBC Newsnight proudly hosted a \u201cdebate\u201d between Maajid Nawaz, director of counter-extremism think-tank, the Quilliam Foundation, and Anjem Choudary, head of the banned Islamist group formerly known as al-Muhajiroun, which has, since its proscription, repeatedly reincarnated itself. One of its more well-known recent incarnations was “Islam4UK”.<\/p>\n

Both Nawaz and Choudary have received huge mainstream media attention, generating press headlines, and contributing to major TV news and current affairs shows. But unbeknown to most, they have one thing in common: Britain\u2019s security services. And believe it or not, that bizarre fact explains why the Islamic State\u2019s (IS) celebrity beheader, former west Londoner Mohammed Emwazi \u2013 aka \u201cJihadi John\u201d – got to where he is now.<\/p>\n

A tale of two extremists<\/strong><\/p>\n

After renouncing his affiliation with the Islamist group Hizb ut-Tahrir (HT), Maajid Nawaz co-founded the Quilliam Foundation with his fellow ex-Hizb member, Ed Husain.<\/p>\n

The Quilliam Foundation was set-up by Husain and Nawaz in 2008 with significant British government financial support. Its establishment received a massive PR boost from the release of Ed Husain\u2019s memoirs, The Islamist<\/em>, which rapidly became an international bestseller, generating hundreds of reviews, interviews and articles.<\/p>\n

In Ed Husain\u2019s book – much like Maajid Nawaz\u2019s tome Radical<\/em> released more recently to similar fanfare – Husain recounts his journey from aggrieved young Muslim into Islamist activist, and eventually his total rejection of Islamist ideology.<\/p>\n

Both accounts of their journeys of transformation offer provocative and genuine insights. But the British government has played a much more direct role in crafting those accounts than either they, or the government, officially admit.<\/p>\n

Government ghostwriters<\/strong><\/p>\n

In late 2013, I interviewed<\/a> a former senior researcher at the Home Office who revealed that Husain\u2019s The Islamist<\/em> was \u201ceffectively ghostwritten in Whitehall\u201d.<\/p>\n

The official told me that in 2006, he was informed by a government colleague \u201cwith close ties\u201d to Jack Straw and Gordon Brown that \u201cthe draft was written by Ed but then \u2018peppered\u2019 by government input\u201d. The civil servant told him \u201che had seen \u2018at least five drafts of the book, and the last one was dramatically different from the first.\u2019\u201d<\/p>\n

The draft had, the source said, been manipulated in an explicitly political, pro-government manner. The committee that had input into Ed Husain\u2019s manuscript prior to its official publication included senior government officials from No. 10 Downing Street, the Joint Terrorism Analysis Centre, the intelligence services, Foreign & Commonwealth Office and the Home Office.<\/p>\n

When I put the question, repeatedly, to Ed Husain as to the veracity of these allegations, he did not respond. I also asked Nawaz whether he was aware of the government\u2019s role in \u201cghostwriting\u201d Husain\u2019s prose, and whether he underwent a similar experience in the production of Radical<\/em>. He did not respond either.<\/p>\n

While Husain was liaising with British government and intelligence officials over The Islamist<\/em> from 2006 until the book\u2019s publication in May 2007, his friend Nawaz was at first in prison in Egypt. Nawaz was eventually released in March 2006, declaring his departure from HT just a month before the publication of Husain\u2019s book. Husain took credit for being the prime influence on Nawaz\u2019s decision, and by November 2007, had joined with him becoming Quilliam\u2019s director with Husain as his deputy.<\/p>\n

Yet according to Husain, Nawaz played a role in determining parts of the text of The Islamist<\/em> in the same year it was being edited by government officials. \u201cBefore publication, I discussed with my friend and brother-in-faith Maajid the passages in the book,\u201d wrote<\/a>\u00a0Husain about the need to verify details of their time in HT.<\/p>\n

This is where the chronology of Husain\u2019s and Nawaz\u2019s accounts begin to break down. In Radical<\/em>, and repeatedly in interviews about his own deradicalisation process, Nawaz says that he firmly and decisively rejected HT\u2019s Islamist ideology while in prison in Egypt. Yet upon his release and return to Britain, Nawaz showed no sign of having reached that decision. Instead, he did the opposite. In April 2006, Nawaz told Sarah Montague on BBC Hardtalk<\/a> that his detention in Egypt had \u201cconvinced [him] even more\u2026 that there is a need to establish this Caliphate as soon as possible.\u201d From then on, Nawaz, who was now on HT\u2019s executive committee, participated in dozens of talks and interviews in which he vehemently promoted the Hizb.<\/p>\n

I first met Nawaz at a conference on 2\u00a0December 2006 organised by the Campaign Against Criminalising Communities (CAMPACC) on the theme of \u201creclaiming our rights\u201d. I had spoken on a panel about the findings of my book, The London Bombings: An Independent Inquiry<\/em>, on how British state collusion with Islamist extremists had facilitated the 7\/7 attacks. Nawaz had attended the event as an audience member with two other senior HT activists, and in our brief conversation, he spoke of his ongoing work with HT in glowing terms.<\/p>\n

By January 2007, Nawaz was at the front of a HT protest at the US embassy in London, condemning US military operations in Iraq and Somalia. He delivered a rousing speech at the protest, demanding an end to \u201ccolonial intervention in the Muslim world,\u201d and calling for the establishment of an Islamic caliphate to stand up to such imperialism and end Western support for dictators.<\/p>\n

Yet by his own account, throughout this very public agitation on behalf of HT from mid-2006 onwards, Nawaz had in fact rejected the very ideology he was preaching so adamantly. Indeed, in the same period, he was liaising with his friend, Ed Husain \u2013 who at that time was still in Jeddah \u2013 and helping him with the text of his anti-HT manifesto, The Islamist<\/em>, which was also being vetted at the highest levels of government.<\/p>\n

The British government\u2019s intimate, and secret, relationship with Husain in the year before the publication of his book in 2007 shows that, contrary to his official biography, the Quilliam Foundation founder was embedded in Whitehall long before he was on the public radar. How did he establish connections at this level?<\/p>\n

MI5\u2019s Islamist<\/strong><\/p>\n

According to Dr Noman Hanif, a lecturer in international terrorism and political Islam at Birkbeck College, University of London, and an expert on Hizb ut-Tahrir, the group\u2019s presence in Britain likely provided many opportunities for Western intelligence to \u201cpenetrate or influence\u201d the movement.<\/p>\n

Dr Hanif, whose doctoral thesis was about the group, points out that Husain\u2019s tenure inside HT by his own account occurred \u201cunder the leadership\u00a0of Omar Bakri Mohammed,\u201d the controversial cleric who left the group in 1996 to found al-Muhajiroun, a militant network which to this day has been linked to every major terrorist plot in Britain.<\/p>\n

Bakri\u2019s leadership of HT, said Dr Hanif, formed \u201cthe most conceptually deviant period of HT\u2019s existence in the UK, diverting quite sharply away from its core ideas,\u201d due to Bakri\u2019s advocacy of violence and his focus on establishing an Islamic state in the UK, goals contrary to HT doctrines.<\/p>\n

When Bakri left HT and set-up al-Muhajiroun in 1996, according to John Loftus, a former US Army intelligence officer and Justice Department prosecutor, Bakri was immediately recruited by MI6<\/a> to facilitate Islamist activities in the Balkans. And not just Bakri, but also Abu Hamza al-Masri, who was recently convicted in the US on terrorism charges.<\/p>\n

When Bakri founded al-Muhajiroun in 1996 with the blessings of Britain\u2019s security services, his co-founder was Anjem Choudary. Choudary was intimately involved in the programme to train and send Britons to fight abroad, and three years later, would boast to the Sunday<\/em> Telegraph<\/em> that \u201csome of the training does involve guns and live ammunition\u201d.<\/p>\n

Historian Mark Curtis, in his seminal work, Secret Affairs: Britain\u2019s Collusion with Radical Islam<\/em>, documents how under this arrangement, Bakri trained hundreds of Britons at camps in the UK and the US, and dispatched them to join al-Qaeda affiliated fighters in Bosnia, Kosovo and Chechnya.<\/p>\n

Shortly before the 2005 London bombings, Ron Suskind, a Wall Street Journal<\/em> Pulitizer Prize winning investigative reporter, was told by a senior MI5 official that Bakri was a longtime informant for the secret service who \u201chad helped MI5 on several of its investigations\u201d. Bakri, Suskind adds in his book, The Way of the World<\/em>, reluctantly conceded the relationship in an interview in Beirut – but Suskind gives no indication that the relationship ever ended.<\/p>\n

A senior terrorism lawyer in London who has represented clients in several high-profile terrorism cases told me that both Bakri and Choudary had regular meetings with MI5 officers in the 1990s. The lawyer, who works for a leading firm of solicitors and has regularly liaised with MI5 in the administration of closed court hearings involving secret evidence, said: \u201cOmar Bakri had well over 20 meetings with MI5 from around 1993 to the late 1990s. Anjem Choudary apparently participated in such meetings toward the latter part of the decade. This was actually well-known amongst several senior Islamist leaders in Britain at the time.\u201d<\/p>\n

According to Dr Hanif of Birkbeck College, Bakri\u2019s relationship with the intelligence services likely began during his \u201csix-year reign as HT leader in Britain,\u201d which would have \u201cprovided British intelligence ample opportunity\u201d to \u201cwidely infiltrate the group\u201d. HT had already been a subject of MI6 surveillance abroad \u201cbecause of its core level of support in Jordan and the consistent level of activity in other areas of the Middle East for over five decades.”<\/p>\n

At least some HT members appear to have been aware of Bakri\u2019s intelligence connections, including, it seems, Ed Husain himself. In one passage in The Islamist<\/em> (p. 116), Husain recounts: \u201cWe were also concerned about Omar\u2019s application for political asylum\u2026 I raised this with Bernie [another HT member] too. \u2018Oh no\u2019, he said, \u2018On the contrary. The British are like snakes; they manoeuvre carefully. They need Omar in Britain. More likely, Omar will be the ambassador for the khilafah here or leave to reside in the Islamic state. The kuffar know that – allowing Omar to stay in Britain will give them a good start, a diplomatic advantage, when they have to deal with the Islamic state. Having Omar serves them well for the future. MI5 knows exactly what we\u2019re doing, what we\u2019re about, and yet they have in effect, given us the green light to operate in Britain.\u201d<\/p>\n

Husain left HT<\/a> after Bakri in August 2007. According to Faisal Haque, a British government civil servant and former HT member who knew Ed Husain during his time in the group, Husain had a strong \u201cpersonal relationship\u201d with Bakri. He did not leave HT for \u201cideological reasons,\u201d said Haque. \u201cIt was more to do with his close personal relationship with Omar Bakri (he left when Bakri was kicked out), pressure from his father and other personal reasons which I don\u2019t want to mention.\u201d<\/p>\n

Husain later went on to work for the British Council in the Middle East. From 2003 to 2005, he was in Damascus. During that period, by his own admission, he informed on other British members of HT for agitating against Bashar al-Assad\u2019s regime, resulting in them being deported by Syrian authorities back to Britain. At this time, the CIA and MI6 routinely cooperated with Assad on extraordinary rendition programmes.<\/p>\n

Husain then worked for the British Council in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, from late 2005 to the end of 2006.<\/p>\n

Throughout that year, according to the former Home Office official I spoke to, Husain was in direct contact with senior Whitehall officials who were vetting his manuscript for The Islamist<\/em>. By November, Husain posted on DeenPort, an online discussion forum, a now deleted comment referring off-hand to the work of \u201cthe secret services\u201d inside HT: \u201cEven within HT in Britain today, there is a huge division between modernisers and more radical elements. The secret services are hopeful that the modernisers can tame the radicals\u2026 I foresee another split. And God knows best. I have said more than I should on this subject! Henceforth, my lips are sealed!\u201d<\/p>\n

Shortly after, Maajid Nawaz would declare his departure from HT, and would eventually be joined at Quilliam by several others from the group, many of whom according to Nawaz had worked with him and Husain<\/a> as \u201ca team\u201d behind the scenes at this time.<\/p>\n

The \u2018ex-jihadists\u2019 who weren\u2019t<\/strong><\/p>\n

Perhaps the biggest problem with Husain\u2019s and Nawaz\u2019s claim to expertise on terrorism was that they were never jihadists. Hizb ut-Tahrir is a non-violent movement for the establishment of a global \u201ccaliphate\u201d through social struggle, focusing on the need for political activism in the Muslim world. Whatever the demerits of this rigid political ideology, it had no relationship to the phenomenon of al-Qaeda terrorism.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, Husain and Nawaz, along with their government benefactors, were convinced that those personal experiences of\u00a0 \u201cradicalisation\u201d and \u201cderadicalisation\u201d could by transplanted into the ongoing \u201cwar on terror\u201d – even though, in reality neither of them had any idea about the dynamics of an actual terrorist network, and the radicalisation process leading to violent extremism. The result was an utterly misguided and evidence-devoid obsession with rejecting non-violent extremist ideologies as the primary means to prevent terrorism.<\/p>\n

Through the Quilliam Foundation, Husain\u2019s and Nawaz\u2019s fundamentalist ideas about non-violent extremism went on to heavily influence official counter-terrorism discourses across the Western world. This was thanks to its million pounds worth of government seed-funding, intensive media coverage, as well as the government pushing Quilliam\u2019s directors and staff to provide \u201cderadicalisation training\u201d to government and security officials in the US and Europe.<\/p>\n

In the UK, Quilliam\u2019s approach was taken up by various centre-right and right-wing think-tanks, such as the Centre for Social Cohesion (CCS) and Policy Exchange, all of which played a big role in influencing the government\u2019s Preventing Violent Extremism programme (Prevent).<\/p>\n

Exactly how bankrupt this approach is, however, can be determined from Prime Minister David Cameron\u2019s efforts to express his understanding of the risk from non-violent extremism, a major feature of the coalition government\u2019s Orwellian<\/a> new Counter-Terrorism and Security Act. The latter establishes unprecedented powers of electronic surveillance and the basis for the \u201cPrevent duty,\u201d which calls for all public sector institutions to develop \u201crisk-assessment\u201d profiles of individuals deemed to be \u201cat-risk\u201d of being drawn into non-violent extremism.<\/p>\n

In his speech at the UN last year, Cameron explained that counter-terrorism measures must target people who may not \u201cencourage violence, but whose worldview can be used as a justification for it.\u201d As examples of dangerous ideas at the \u201croot cause\u201d of terrorism, Cameron pinpointed \u201cconspiracy theories,\u201d and most outrageously, \u201cThe idea that Muslims are persecuted all over the world as a deliberate act of Western policy.\u201d<\/p>\n

In other words, if you believe, for instance, that US and British forces have deliberately conducted brutal military operations across the Muslim world resulting in the foreseeable deaths of countless innocent civilians<\/a>, you are a non-violent extremist.<\/p>\n

In an eye-opening academic paper published last year, French terrorism expert and Interior Ministry policy officer Dr Claire Arenes, noted that: \u201cBy definition, one may know if radicalisation has been violent <\/em>only once the point of violence has been reached, at the end of the process. Therefore, since the end-term of radicalisation cannot be determined in advance, a policy intended to fight violent <\/em>radicalisation entails a structural tendency to fight any form<\/em> of radicalisation.\u201d<\/p>\n

It is precisely this moronic obsession with trying to detect and stop \u201cany form of radicalisation,\u201d however non-violent, that is hampering police and security investigations and overloading them with nonsense \u201crisks\u201d.<\/p>\n

Double game<\/strong><\/p>\n

At this point, the memorable vision of Nawaz and Choudary facing off on BBC Newsnight appears not just farcical, but emblematic of how today\u2019s national security crisis has been fuelled and exploited by the bowels of the British secret state.<\/p>\n

Over the last decade or so – the very same period that the British state was grooming the \u201cformer jihadists who weren\u2019t\u201d so they could be paraded around the media-security-industrial complex bigging up the non-threat of \u201cnon-violent extremism\u201d – the CIA and MI6 were coordinating<\/a> Saudi-led funding to al-Qaeda affiliated extremists across the Middle East and Central Asia to counter Iranian Shiite influence.<\/p>\n

From 2005 onwards, US and British intelligence services encouraged a range of covert operations to support Islamist opposition groups, including militants linked to al-Qaeda, to undermine regional Iranian and Syrian influence. By 2009, the focus of these operations shifted<\/a> to Syria.<\/p>\n

As I documented in written evidence to a UK Parliamentary inquiry into Prevent<\/a> in 2010, one of the recipients of such funding was none other than Omar Bakri, who at the time told one journalist: \u201cToday, angry Lebanese Sunnis ask me to organise their jihad against the Shiites\u2026 Al-Qaeda in Lebanon\u2026 are the only ones who can defeat Hezbollah.\u201d Simultaneously, Bakri was regularly in touch with his deputy, Anjem Choudary, over the internet and even delivered online speeches to his followers in Britain instructing them to join IS<\/a> and murder civilians. He has now been detained and charged by Lebanese authorities for establishing terror cells in the country.<\/p>\n

Bakri was also deeply involved<\/a> \u201cwith training the mujahideen\u00a0[fighters]\u00a0in camps on the Syrian borders and also on the Palestine side.” The trainees included four British Islamists \u201cwith professional backgrounds\u201d who would go on to join the war in Syria. Bakri also claimed to have trained \u201cmany fighters,\u201d including people from Germany and France, since arriving in Lebanon. Was Mohammed Emwazi among them? Last year, Bakri disciple Mizanur Rahman confirmed<\/a> that at least five European Muslims who had died fighting under IS in Syria had been Bakri acolytes.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless in 2013, it was David Cameron who lifted the arms embargo to support Syria’s rebels<\/a>. We now know that most of our military aid went to al-Qaeda affiliated Islamists<\/a>, many with links to extremists at home. The British government itself acknowledged<\/a> that a \u201csubstantial number\u201d of Britons were fighting in Syria, who \u201cwill seek to carry out attacks against Western interests… or in Western states\u201d.<\/p>\n

Yet according to former British counterterrorism intelligence officer Charles Shoebridge, despite this risk, authorities \u201cturned a blind eye to the\u00a0travelling of its own jihadists to\u00a0Syria, notwithstanding ample video etc. evidence of their\u00a0crimes there,\u201d because it\u00a0\u201csuited the US and UK\u2019s anti-Assad\u00a0foreign policy\u201d.<\/p>\n

This terror-funnel is what enabled people like Emwazi to travel to Syria and join up with IS – despite being on an MI5 terror watch-list<\/a>. He had been blocked by the security services from traveling to Kuwait in 2010: why not Syria? Shoebridge, who was a British Army officer before joining the Metropolitan Police, told me that although such overseas terrorism has been illegal in the UK since\u00a02006, \u201cit\u2019s notable that only towards the end of 2013 when IS turned against the West\u2019s preferred rebels, and perhaps also when the tipping point between foreign policy\u00a0usefulness and MI5 fears of domestic terrorist blowback was reached, did the UK authorities begin to take serious steps to tackle the\u00a0flow of\u00a0UK jihadists.\u201d<\/p>\n

The US-UK direct and tacit support for jihadists, Shoebridge said, had made Syria the safest place for regional terrorists fearing drone strikes \u201cfor more than two years\u201d. Syria was \u201cthe only place British\u00a0jihadists could fight without fear of US drones or\u00a0arrest\u00a0back home\u2026 likely because, unlike if similar numbers of UK jihadists had been travelling to for example\u00a0Yemen or Afghanistan,\u00a0this suited the anti-Assad policy.\u201d<\/p>\n

Having watched its own self-fulfilling prophecy unfold with horrifying precision in a string of IS-linked terrorist atrocities against Western hostages and targets, the government now exploits the resulting mayhem to vindicate its bankrupt \u201ccounter-extremism\u201d narrative, promoted by hand-picked state-groomed \u201cexperts\u201d like Husain and Nawaz.<\/p>\n

Their prescription, predictably, is to expand the powers of the police state to identify and \u201cderadicalise\u201d anyone who thinks British foreign policy in the Muslim world is callous, self-serving and indifferent to civilian deaths. Government sources confirm that Nawaz\u2019s input played a key role in David Cameron\u2019s thinking on non-violent extremism, and the latest incarnation of the Prevent strategy; while last year, Husain was, ironically, appointed to the Foreign Office advisory group on freedom of religion or belief.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, Bakri\u2019s deputy Choudary continues to inexplicably run around as Britain\u2019s resident \u201cterror cleric\u201d media darling. His passport belatedly confiscated after a recent pointless police arrest that avoided charging him, he remains free to radicalise thick-headed British Muslims into joining IS, in the comfort that his hate speech will be broadcast widely, no doubt fueling widespread generic suspicion of British Muslims.<\/p>\n

If only we could round up the Quilliam and al-Muhajiroun fanatics together, shove them onto a boat, and send them all off cruising to the middle of nowhere, they could have all the fun they want \u201cradicalising\u201d and \u201cderadicalising\u201d each other to their hearts content. And we might get a little peace. And perhaps we could send their handlers with them, too.<\/p>\n

______________________________<\/p>\n

Nafeez Mosaddeq Ahmed, Ph.D. is a member of the TRANSCEND Network for Peace, Development and Environment. He is<\/em> an\u00a0investigative journalist<\/a>, international security scholar and bestselling author who tracks what he calls the ‘<\/em>crisis of civilization<\/a>.’ He is a winner of the Project Censored Award for Outstanding Investigative Journalism for his <\/em>Guardian reporting on the intersection of global ecological, energy and economic crises with regional geopolitics and conflicts. He has also written for<\/em> The Independent,\u00a0Sydney Morning Herald, The Age, The Scotsman, Foreign Policy, The Atlantic, Quartz, Prospect, New Statesman, Le Monde diplomatique, New Internationalist.\u00a0His work on the root causes and covert operations linked to international terrorism officially contributed to the 9\/11 Commission and the 7\/7 Coroner\u2019s Inquest.<\/em><\/p>\n

Go to Original \u2013 middleeasteye.net<\/a><\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

\u2018Jihadi John\u2019 was able to join IS for one simple reason: from Quilliam to al-Muhajiroun, Britain\u2019s loudest extremists have been groomed by the security services.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[40],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-54571","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","hentry","category-transcend-members"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54571","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=54571"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/54571\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=54571"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=54571"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.transcend.org\/tms\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=54571"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}