Watch for Islamic groups to denounce this plan as “Islamophobic.” But in reality, it stems from the Australian government’s unwillingness to face the jihad threat squarely: there is a world of difference, much greater than an iota, between “jihadi watch” and “jihad watch.” Western authorities can’t and won’t confront the ideology and its provenance, so the Australians are trying instead to catch every Muslim who is influenced by it. If they’d deal instead with what is taught in the mosques and Islamic schools, their job would over time become easier.
“Teachers and students trained to spot potential terrorists in classroom ‘jihadi watch’ scheme,” by Carly Crawford, PerthNow, May 24, 2015:
TEACHERS and students would be taught how to spot potential jihadis in the classroom under plans before the Federal Government.
As the Islamic State threat moves closer to home, officials are exploring the introduction of a “jihadi watch” scheme to school curriculums.
Government officials, terror experts and Islamic leaders are engaged in talks about making lessons part of school life.
Attorney-General George Brandis says the aim is to develop teaching materials and deliver training to identify and steer individuals away from “ideologies of hate”.
“Just as parents and families have gained greater understanding of the dangers posed by online sexual predators, there needs to be increased awareness of the threat from online terrorist propaganda,” Mr Brandis said.
Education Minister Christopher Pyne will ask state education ministers to sign off on a plan to have a federal committee develop a “deradicalisation in schools strategy”.
The Council of Education Ministers, which meets on Friday, would have to sign off on any curriculum changes.
A confidential council briefing paper notes the reach of IS into Australian schools, saying “a national strategy to combat radicalisation and extremism in schools is required”.
Under the “jihadi watch” scheme, teachers and students would be taught to watch for shifts in behaviour such as students drifting away from their friends, running into minor trouble with the law and arguing with those who have different ideological views to their own.
Greg Barton, from the Global Terrorism Research Centre, said detecting a young person’s slide towards radicalisation was not as simple as checking social media, nor could it be done by authorities alone.
“It falls back on family and friends because they see what’s happening,” Prof Barton said….
Good luck with that, Mr. Barton. Muslim family and friends of jihadis have very, very seldom shown any interest in turning in their own to authorities. And the multiculturalist ethos militates against the families of converts to Islam showing any concern over their new convert’s Islamic activities, for to do so would be “Islamophobic.”
sahani says
All schools in each country should follow this idea and action plan.IF not implemented get ready to die. As all local converts in each nation they’ve proved they hate the place they live and hate the all who are not muslims.
simple solution..
1.deport them
2. No local citizenship or voting rights
3. No welfare to them
pdxnag says
Looks like a plan. It is the only plan with any hope of success.
particolor says
YEP !! Too Easy !!
Looks like Duck !
Quacks like a Duck !!
Its a Bloody Duck !!! 🙂
AJ Liberphile says
“If it looks like a duck, walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and swims like a duck, it probably is a duck.” If lots of those ducks keep blowing up then maybe there is something wrong with them. If the duck spokesman says there isn’t, then maybe he isn’t telling the truth and it’s time to look into the ducks more closely.
particolor says
I think our Dhimmi Government is starting to wake up to Duckophobia ? 🙂
Huck Folder says
Looks like a plan?
Looks like a trial balloon, a smokescreen, a diversion.
Run it up the flagpole and see who salutes.
nicu says
I agree .
Why so much effort for them ? They will never fit in cos they don’t want to !
Send them back and don’t let more into your country !
abad says
You have that right. it is the only solution.
sahani says
All local converts to islam should be told to leave islam or get ready to lose govt funds as aid.
All immigrants muslim should get no rights to vote , govt jobs , any aid fro support as ll are nat national.
Brian says
The ONLY way to stop all this is to ban Islam altogether. It is a murderous, fascist, supremacist ideology using religion as a cover, founded by a mass murderer, slave owner, serial rapist, and all round psychopath that all Muslims are exhorted to emulate.
PRODOS says
Brian writes: “The ONLY way to stop all this is to ban Islam altogether.”
Wouldn’t it be better to remove the prohibitions on free speech?
And also to ensure free speech is properly protected?
Giving politicians (or anyone) the power to ban ideologies creates more problems than it solves.
P0rkCh0ps says
They have banned Nazism. But I do agree, we cannot just ban Islam but we do need to make life a little more uncomfortable for them and give full protection to those that wish to leave Islam. We need to do as they would do and apply an extra tax ‘for their protection’. No more Mosques to be built. No Korans in public libraries or in book shops. No religious schools and no religious clothing. Islamic history to be taught in schools where mohammed is portrayed factually and his true nature revealed.
Demsci says
Impossible. The majority of citizens of Western democratic nations will NOT allow this, not for a long time. And we CANNOT revert to our own dictatorial minority rule. We need to unite with our friends.
First off; do not just differentiate between Western Citizens and Muslims, although in that you started well. But go on and also differentiate between True Democratic Citizens, and for arguments sake “ordinary Citizens”. The ordinary Citizens will never truly help the True Democratic Citizens against the Muslims, IMO.
We true Democratic Citizens also are a minority. But in time, I hope we: Get better organized, much more inspired by our own democratic meaningfull ideology and bigger, taking in many smart ex-Muslims and ordinary citizens.
My scheme; Muslims “eat” Ordinary Citizens, meaning that Muslims expand at the cost of Ordinary Citizens (in divers ways, one being massive immigration of Muslims). But “True Democratic Citizens” a 3rd party may or may not in future “eat” Muslims and “Ordinary Citizens”.
In the end, it’s all a question of “who eats who”? In the peaceful meaning of Which of the 3 groups expands and which shrinks?
dumbledoresarmy says
Now, introducing **”Jihadwatch”** to the curriculum, making Infidel parents and teachers aware of Jihadwatch, *that* might be of some use…
Something for all of us to think about, who are connected with young people in school – at any age – or at university or college.
How can one raise awareness – among them, and their kin, and their teachers – of the nasty reality that even the nicest, smilingest Muslims can – and do – Go Jihad?
Something else to think about: here in Australia we do have one thing going for us. We have *Christian* school chaplains, on campus in many schools – both primary schools and high schools.
Those chaplains need to be made Islamoaware – and Islamoleery. They need to know about Muslim dawa, how it is done. *They* could be sent Mark Durie’s book “Which God?” to immunise them against the “we all believe in one God/ Abraham religions/ we respect Jesus and Mary” nonsense that the Muslims spout when they want to sucker Christians. They could be provided with the very, very illuminating – and chilling – series of pamphlets – sober, scholarly, referenced, but not too long or over-dense – which discuss exactly how Muslim dawa works. They need to know about the Islamic apostasy law, so that they know *why* any Muslim kid who shows an interest in Christianity – the bright-eyed kid whom they might see in the school library surreptitiously reading a Christian book, the kid who asks them serious questions – is **risking his or her life** in so doing (they need to know the story of Rifqa Bary, and of Hannah Shah, both young Muslim girls who, in western countries, converted to Christianity and at once became the target of murderous threats from their own families).
If our school chaplains, all over the country, were properly warned, properly informed, properly equipped, they could make a huge difference. They could push back against the barrage of Muslim dawa, and help prevent kids from non-Muslim backgrounds from converting to Islam and going down the deadly path taken by Jake Bilardi. And they would know how to identify and help those kids from Muslim backgrounds who *do* want to leave Islam. Outright, publicly-declared apostasy from Islam is the *only* “deradicalisation” that matters.
gravenimage says
I hadn’t known about Christian school chaplains, DDA—that actually sounds very promising, even though I’m sure many of these fellows are as steeped in “interfaith political correctness” as everyone else in the West.
We have *nothing* like that here in the States, except in parochial schools.
particolor says
We have NOTHING like that here in Australia either ?? They have all been Dhimmified !! 🙁
We have spies in every Islamic Operation Now ! And they will never spot us in a Million Years !! We dress exactly the same as the Boofhead in the Header up there !! 🙂
Western Canadian says
The rot truly runs deep…. While spending a few days in a Canadian hospital a couple of years ago, I tried to get online to catch up on what had been posted on this, one of my favourite web sites….. and the patient access computer that had been made available for patient use….. would not allow access to JihadWatch….. it was falsely labeled a ‘hate’ site….. Very, very shameful situation.
And a commercial website access local (also did digital printing)…. would not display any articles either.
Shameful, and scary (complaints were a waste of time).
Wellington says
Your comment, Western Canadian, speaks to how ass backwards the world can be at times, where truth (e.g., Jihad Watch) is characterized as something wicked, and falsehood (e.g., Islam portrayed as a religion of peace and tolerance) is promoted as something good. Such prevalent ass backwardness often makes it difficult not to conclude that life is absurd. In any case, hope you and yours are staying sane and doing well in this goofy world we live in.
gravenimage says
Disturbing, Western Canadian—but I can’t say I’m surprised.
Peggy says
Agree and wonder if any Islamic sites wre also blocked. Betting they wouldn’t.
Aussie kaffar says
yeah sure……..ain’t gonna happen…….today we have another clown in charge this guy …….!
http://www.9news.com.au/National/2015/05/25/05/24/Former-diplomat-named-counter-terror-boss
notice this fool is another ” Regarded an authority on security and intelligence, Mr Moriarty will head a new counter-terrorism co-ordination office within Mr Abbott’s own department.
A former ambassador to Tehran and Jakarta, he has extensive knowledge of Islam and its radical variants and has experience as an inter-agency operator.
[ meaning this fool has never read the Koran ]
Angemon says
Huh, what? They want to prevent islamic terrorism and islamic leaders are part of the prevention program? Dumb, dumb, DUMB!
Oh, for f***’s sake. This is mind-numbingly stupid. We’re not talking about children believing a stranger telling them they have candy in their van. If they want to compare jihad to child abuse then a more correct analogy would be the family, friends and cleric of the child telling him since birth that he must abuse children and hate anyone who says otherwise.
Which is actually the truth – muhammad married a six-year-old girl and consumed the marriage when she was nine. Devout muslims consider muhammad to be the best example of conduct (as stated in the quran) and try to emulate him as closely as they can.
This is doomed to fail. First, because jihad is rooted in orthodox islam – recruiters can point out to islamic texts, commentaries and history to justify killing non-muslims. Second, because those kids spend most of their time outside school. So the school tries to tell them not to believe what islamic recruiters say after of years and years of hearing similar messages from family, friends and clerics? Non-muslims telling a muslim to disregard normative islamic teachings? How could that possibly fail, right?
Commendable as that is, it’s pointless in the grand scheme of things if the centers of radicalization are not the schools.
You k now, for something called “jihadi watch” there’s a notable absence of islam. “Arguing with those who have different ideological views to their own”? Really? So someone arguing AGAINST jihad could be signaled by a group of people who are FOR jihad?
Good luck with getting any family and friends of a jihadi going to the police and saying they’re worried about their kin or friend. Exactly in how many cases of Westerners joining the islamic state we’ve had family and/or friends saying they were terrorists? As far as I know, in zero. That never happens. Not even once. Whenever we learn about someone from a Western country joining a terrorist group, or being arrested while trying to join a terrorist group, or rying to support a terrorist group, family and friends always say that they’re not terrorists, that they don’t believe the charges, that the individuals were extremely well-adjusted, that no one was expecting that, etc.
Brian says
This idea by many that he only consummated his marriage to Aisha at 9 is preposterous. What he did with her from the age of 6 is just as bad…He used her tights to masturbate with his penis, ejaculating on her stomach…that is vile child sex abuse…
bobm says
Thighing….is practiced with infants .. I’m sure he did a lot of dry stuff.. anal has been relegated to acceptable for very young girls and boys… as it is somehow considered a somehow non sexual or in their twisted minds… an option before the main course..
Myxlplik says
Australia is also considering stripping citizenship of “second generation” citizens, and repatriating them back to their nations of orgin.
http://news.yahoo.com/australia-introduce-counter-terrorism-citizenship-changes-073230895.html
Brian says
Now that is what I like to hear, but I bet that will be stopped by the courts and human rights watchdogs etc.
Peggy says
What will happen when Pakistan says they don’t want them? You can’t parachute someone into a country in the middle of the night.
It’s a great idea but without the other countries’ cooperation it will not get anywhere. I can’t see Pakistan or Afghanistan or any Islamic country cooperating. The aim is to flood western countries with Muslims not try and if you don’t buy send back.
Personally I would round them up and put them on boats and send them off. They can see refuge somewhere else. What’s the UN going to do. bomb us?
Mark DeFord Eletion says
“What will happen when Pakistan says they don’t want them? You can’t parachute someone into a country in the middle of the night.”
Actually, it’s quite possible to toss somebody out of an aircraft at night, but that may not be useful, since a non-dead jihadi can sneak back to civilization.
My guess is that any western country doing the depatriation would have to send continuing monetary support to countries that agree to accept jihadis back.
My suggestion is for western governments to set up “martyrdom stations” in remote locations where any wannabe jihadi can walk up to a post that has a photo of something offensive to islam attached to it. The jihadi then pushes a “Button of Peace” on the post, causing an explosion that destroys the photo and himself. I doubt very many jihadis would make use of them, but setting up the martyrdom stations would be fun, I think.
particolor says
Send them all to Antarctica in thongs Shorts and T Shirts ! They will be too busy Shivering to give a Stuff about Mohammed !!:-)
Jaladhi says
Instead of following all these hair brained schemes they should stop Muslim immigration. Period.And start deporting those who don’t believe in Australian system and society!!
Jaladhi says
Oops Typo:
Instead of following all these harebrained schemes they should stop Muslim immigration. Period.And start deporting those who don’t believe in Australian system and society!!
voegelinian says
“And start deporting those who don’t believe in Australian system and society!!”
a) What Muslims really do believe in the system and society of any Kafir polity?
b) Is it mere ideological belief that would concern us enough to stop their immigration or even deport them? Or is it what this belief portends — our violent destruction in the context of a civilizational war already being waged against us by a combination of violence and stealth deceptions? I would assume reasonably the latter.
And as for (a) above: How would we be able to discern, reliably, that they do believe in the system and society of our Kafir polity?
From a 2007 Jihad Watch editorial by Robert Spencer:
…there is no reliable way to distinguish a truly peaceful Muslim from one who may sometime engage in jihad activity.
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2007/05/thailand-3000-police-on-guard-against-jihad-attacks-as-schools-reopen-in-the-south
The PC MC is the person out in the broad mainstream of the West (they are all over the place throughout the West, in all walks of life, institutions and professions, as we know all too well) who frames the problem through the TMOE meme (the Tiny Minority of Extremists). Not only does the PC MC think the only problem is a tiny minority of extremists, he also tends to detach that extremism from an Islam deemed to be a harmless participant in the broader “mosaic” of our modern multi-cultural society. This is why this “Jihadi Watch” program is soliciting “Islamic leaders” to be part of the Solution — since it is automatically assumed that mainstream Islam is a beneficial partner in our concern to do something about terrorism.
Since the PC MC is already thinking in terms of this framework, it doesn’t surprise us when they conclude that a viable profiling is workable.
But as Spencer has reminded us time and time again over the years — not only overtly, as in the quote above, but also by massive inference through the mountain of data reported daily here on Jihad Watch over the years, which includes as much data about stealth jihad and the false moderate as it does the violent, deadly and pernicious jihad — the two jihads, of course, operating in tandem, and effective only to the extent that Westerners remain stupid about their tandem co-operation and the broader source in mainstream Islam they imply.
Given the TMOE meme of the West’s PC MC, any profiling scheme trying to ferret out the dangerous Muslims and distinguish them from the assumed vast majority of Muslims Who Just Wanna Have a Sandwich (the Affleck Doctrine) is bound to be predicated upon a dangerously stupid fallacy, whose ridiculousness may be illuminated by way of an analogy: Imagine if, in 1942, a Western polity tried to ferret out Nazi spies by only looking out for Germans wearing S.S. uniforms, sporting Hitler moustaches, goose-stepping down the street, and pushing their arms into a Nazi salute every time someone said “Hi!” to them.
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“any profiling scheme trying to ferret out the dangerous Muslims and distinguish them from the assumed vast majority of Muslims Who Just Wanna Have a Sandwich (the Affleck Doctrine) is bound to be predicated upon a dangerously stupid fallacy, whose ridiculousness may be illuminated by way of an analogy: Imagine if, in 1942, a Western polity tried to ferret out Nazi spies by only looking out for Germans wearing S.S. uniforms, sporting Hitler moustaches, goose-stepping down the street, and pushing their arms into a Nazi salute every time someone said “Hi!” to them.”
*ahem*
http://www.jihadwatch.org/2015/05/here-we-go-mcclatchy-suggests-limits-on-free-speech-after-texas-jihad-shooting/comment-page-3#comment-1233303
“voegelinian says
May 5, 2015 at 7:02 pm
…one hopes for the day, nonetheless, when profiling will be more rational, and granularize the physiognomic factor — not eliminate it, just fine-tune it; since we already know (cf., the 911 hijackers) that Muslim attackers can also try to blend in appearance-wise).“
voegelinian says
I just noticed an incomplete thought in my comment above:
“But as Spencer has reminded us time and time again over the years…”
What Spencer has reminded us, of course, as my comment indicated elsewhere, is that we have no reliable way of discerning which Muslims are deadly and/or enabling terror, and which Muslims are really not.
Ordinarily, in other normal circumstances & contexts, this kind of lack of reliable knowledge about a potential danger does not paralyze us with fear nor move us to take generalizing actions of interdiction which we reasonably surmise in advance will likely entail discrimination and collateral damage. However, there are circumstances & contexts where we do take such generalizing actions. When, for example, it is learned that a small handful of cases of deadly toxic tainted beef have occurred in seemingly randomly spaced stores in a broad region of a polity, the state authorities will rule to interdict all the beef on the shelves as well as all the beef in the process of being transferred to the shelves (whether on trucks, in storage, or in the butcher’s) — even though they reasonably surmise that it’s highly likely that most of the beef is harmless.
Why should our societies treat the Muslim problem any less seriously, given that the dangers they portent are far more deadly than tainted beef?
voegelinian says
“…the dangers they portend*…”
voegelinian says
the “they” in “they portend” of course refers to Muslims in the plural, though my grammar was faulty…
smithpd says
Gee, wouldn’t it be nice to have some decent software that allows editing, deletion, and even up-down votes. I generally don’t comment here because of the software. Pamela Geller uses Disqus, which works pretty well.
Demsci says
I agree with your appraisal completely or almost so. – Muslims ARE in the end intent on our “destruction” if need be “violent destruction”. All are, the are only varying in strategy.
There is no reliable way to discern “dangerous” from “harmless Muslims”.
The PCMC’s, including all majorities in Western nations, so in Western parliaments and among Western leaders are clueless about this destruction-intention of Muslims.
I recognize in you a highly rational logical, not to mention intelligent, thinker. Who moreover is acting like a watchdog, continually warning his protege’s, harsh if needed. Right in his logic and urgent warnings.
It is only a question for me of what we, counterjihadists, and I, DO with, react to your logic and warnings.
Given that many of us are democratic and have the sacred intention to let the majority rule, no matter what, even if the majority is acting in a suicidal or at least detrimental way.
voegelinian says
We are in a long, protracted war of ideas, which is a complex, massive process of a Conversation of hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of voices. This Conversation is about persuasion in the marketplace of ideas. Such a phenomenon only makes sense, and provides even any hope at all, to the extent that the West remains relatively healthy and free. (Unfortunately, many in the Counter-Jihad have already, apparently, lost faith in their West, and they seem to be, psychologically, in Mad Max hunker-down-with-water-and-ammo-stockpiled mode; while others are irresponsibly purveying rhetoric that logically implies this, even as they protest disingenuously (or obtusely) that they are not really promoting this.)
This Conversation is further inflected by different levels of power & participation, politically and in terms of social influence. The Internet does a great deal to level the differences of power among individuals and groups — though one shouldn’t exaggerate this too optimistically.
I.e., to Demsci’s question about what we can DO — it is to continue to participate in this Conversation; for the war-of-ideas theater remains the most important theater of this war, because it is calculated to persuade our fellow Westerners to wake up. And if I am correct about two things —
1) the West is relatively healthy and free
2) once it wakes up, the West could easily manage the problem of Islam
— then the main point is to try to wake up the West. My efforts are only and mainly concerned with putting in my 2 cents about how this persuasion should proceed — and on what principles should it be grounded. I thus have my attention turned often back, toward the Counter-Jihad. It seems to me disastrously erroneous to have a main principle that assumes that innumerable Muslims are harmless in such a way as to be viably identified as such.
Angemon says
voegelinian posted:
“This Conversation is about persuasion in the marketplace of ideas. Such a phenomenon only makes sense, and provides even any hope at all, to the extent that the West remains relatively healthy and free.
Huh? That implies that all ideas are up to discussion . But we’ve seen that whenever someone tries to discuss your ideas (which have a totalitarian feel to it, but that’s for another time) you start with the thuggish behaviour – meeting valid criticism with scorn, derision, personal attacks on the critics, lying about what your critics say and do, etc. That’s no different, in nature, of how organizations like CAIR act.
“And if I am correct about two things —
1) the West is relatively healthy and free
2) once it wakes up, the West could easily manage the problem of Islam”
I’ll keep this in mind the next time you start rambling about how everyone is so PC MC that it seems all hope is lost. Also, since when are you concerned about the problem of islam? You have a long history of downplaying the problem of islam and focusing on muslims alone – according to you, deporting all muslims is the only possible solution.
“I thus have my attention turned often back, toward the Counter-Jihad.”
Fancy way to describe the Breivikian fashion in which you act – you repeatedly excoriate and downplay big names of the Counter-Jihad movement (people like Robert Spencer, Daniel Pipes, Hugh Fitzgerald, etc.) because, according to you, they’re “soft”. If we were to believe everything you say about, for example, Robert Spencer, then we would have zero trust on his skills as an analyst. All he would be good for was to compile reports of jihad attacks and nothing else. You spend a great deal of your time here hunting “contradictions” and “errors” in his work. The thing is, most of the time these so-called “contradictions” or “errors” are misunderstandings on your side, and the rest would be adequately explained in a good-faith discussion in the “marketplace of ideas” – something which you have never, ever been willing to do. You prefer to keep pumping misrepresentations, when not all-out lies, regarding Mr. Spencer’s work, acting like you could doing it better, instead of, you know, actually doing it better. And that attitude of yours extends to pretty much everyone else here who doesn’t blindly agree with you, as JW regulars can attest to.
TheBuffster says
Voegelinian: “I.e., to Demsci’s question about what we can DO — it is to continue to participate in this Conversation; for the war-of-ideas theater remains the most important theater of this war, because it is calculated to persuade our fellow Westerners to wake up.”
Buffster: This is why it’s so important to bang on about freedom of speech and to keep defying those who try to squelch it.
Voegelinian: “It seems to me disastrously erroneous to have a main principle that assumes that innumerable Muslims are harmless in such a way as to be viably identified as such.”
I don’t think the harmless ones can be safely identified, but given the accounts I’ve read from former Muslims, I’m hoping that by bravely defending free speech and using that freedom to make the case against Islam, including challenging nominal Muslims to read their own foundational texts, we can make it harder and harder for the truly decent Muslims to evade the nature of their religion.
By refusing to let up on the facts, refusing to be cowed by name-calling and terrorism, we can help create a situation where decent people come to feel that they can’t straddle the fence anymore. Keep making the moral case against Islam, which should include a statement of what a rational ethical code looks like.
In my recent posts I keep referring to the accounts of apostates that I’ve been reading – that many hadn’t read the Koran, but when they finally did it lead them to leave Islam.
Those accounts match what the Rev. Danny Nalliah found in his ministry to convert Muslims to Christianity. His main tactic, after befriending Muslims, was to get them to read the Koran, which many of them hadn’t done. Then he got them to read the New Testament. He had a lot of success with this approach. Normal human beings usually prefer love to hate.
I’ve also found that among my Muslims acquaintances, when I ask them about their religion, most of them admit that they haven’t read the whole Koran, just sayings here and there. They aren’t religious people.
It would be great if we could somehow make it safer for Muslims to apostasize, but I’m not sure how we could do that with any great effect. Aside from the emotional pain of very possibly being cut off from family and hurting parents and siblings with the truth (nothing we can help with there), even protecting people from any violent or deadly retribution isn’t guaranteed. I think the best that can be done is to insist that people who ask for help from authorities after leaving Islam be taken seriously.
All of these issues can be made better only by those who understand the nature of Islam refusing to shut up about it, confronting the world with it, helping people to face what has to be faced – including decent Muslims who are standing with a foot in two opposing worlds unable to quite pull their foot out of the muck of the religion of their forefathers.
voegelinian says
Buffster,
The measures you recommend won’t be proceeding in a vacuum in the years ahead; there will be two massive factors determining in great part the ongoing context in which the measures you recommend will proceed:
1) the dangers of Islam (= the dangers of Muslims putting Islam into practice), which may be viewed as three things:
a) metastasizing (getting worse)
b) systemic (broad-based amongst the totality of Muslims)
c) unknowable (we have no way reliably to tell the difference between harmless Muslims and dangerous Muslims, and “dangerous” does not just mean they might explode or stab you, it also means they are enabling violent jihad in myriad ways that may seem peaceful to the unsuspecting eye)
(Note: the above must be nformed by a literate awareness of what Islam entails — including the never-ending war which the God (and Prophet) of Islam envisions, inspires, commands, and plots out; a war that is proceeding in two parallel tracks: violent jihad and stealth jihad, the latter of which includes taqiyya, covert enablement, and immigration aggrandizement calculated to get us used to the irremovable, growing presence of Muslims in our societies.)
2) our ongoing comatose nap from which our West is slowly awakening, still largely asleep to the problem, and we can reasonably assume will be so for many years to come.
Given what I have learned over the years about the problem of Islam (a good deal of it on this bloody mountain on fire of Islamic data, Mt. Jihad Watch), the three features I listed under #1 above lead me to believe that various civilians here and there throughout the West trying to pursue your recommendations could well be recklessly endangering not only themselves, but also their friends, family, and fellow citizens — not only literally in direct relationships with the Muslims they would be trying to help, but also systemically, in terms of helping to reinforce the growing notion that Muslims “are here to stay, get used to it” — rather than cultivating the opposite: a growing attitude of making it clear that we do not want them in our society at all. Your recommendations also tend to telegraph this notion to our surrounding societies in the West, in the war-of-ideas context — namely, that the interpenetration of Muslims by the millions in our West is a fait accompli we must abide by and assimilate, rather than a foreign, hostile intrusion bringing in its train a horrible future of worsening (see #1a) violence in the context of the never-ending war which the God (and Prophet) of Islam envisions, inspires, commands, and plots out.
As if this all isn’t bad enough, the second factor, #2, meanwhile, only makes everything I said worse for our near future in the decades ahead. Again, the war-of-ideas theater and phase we are in should be calculated to try to guide the West as it wakes up, to hasten the speed of the awakening, and to help it take the most rational courses of action given the nature of the problem (see #1a-b-c).
bobm says
this has the feel about it of WW2 watch for Nazi stuff; but then at least they had some accurate focus.. They were at WAR with an ideology aqnd people were essentially uinited. The shape shifter deceitful character of islam ghosts its way into and amongst its prey and whether it’s fearfulness or denial; the chickens in the coop just go about their peckings in a state of box mindedness ….willing to rage against any who want them to LOOK at the facts soberly… to join organizations (Marxist, socialist, fascistic , anarchist, in their headlong dive into slavery and death or submission.
pdxnag says
Given the gradations from non-pious potential jihadi to manifest pious jihadi it all looks like a fool’s errand. To be effective they all must be expelled, other than those who dare to openly declare themselves apostates.
(Search on Jihadi Watch and JihadWatch.org pops to the top. 🙂 It must be by design.)
David says
Most recruitment is done secretly and in private. Stopping it outwardly will do nothing. Terrorist recruitment is already and has been going on underground for ages. How do you think ISIS have all their recruits. Watching Mosques is a waste of time and resources.
A counter ideology needs to be put forward by the nations that of all men are equal before God and no one person or Faith is superior to another.
Until the equality of man becomes international law upheld by proper legal bodies and is enforceable, extremism cannot be curtailed. All the countries of the world must uphold the equality of all men in their legal systems and it must become enforceable by law.
All schools worldwide from infancy must teach and promote the oneness and equality of all humanity and teach tolerance and eliminate prejudice and bigotry.
There is no other solution other than promoting worldwide the equality of all mankind. This is the only ideology that can defeat terrorism.
duh_swami says
All the countries of the world must uphold the equality of all men in their legal systems and it must become enforceable by law.
‘All men were created equal’…and that’s where equality stops.
To enforce such a law would require that some men felt themselves superior to the offender, rendering their testimony hypocritical…’Judge not lest ye be judged’, or what makes you so holy and superior? Obviously all men are equal, but some are a little more equal than others…
David says
I am only speaking about how we treat others and that we should treat people humanely as we are all members of the same human family.
But the rights of people must be protected by society.
duh_swami says
You want to legislate morality…That is doomed to failure…Treating people de3cently comes freely from within, not from without by force…
Mirren10 says
This strikes me as very similar to the UK plan, which was covered by JW.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/terrorism-in-the-uk/11323558/Anti-terror-plan-to-spy-on-toddlers-is-heavy-handed.html
I don’t like this Australian plan **at all**.
It strikes me as amounting to encouraging children to spy on each other, sniffing for signs of unorthodoxy. Not only on each other, either – parents ? School staff ? And given this scheme doesn’t appear to centre on **islam**, those signs of unorthodoxy will be more than likely directed towards anyone insufficiently PC/MC, certainly not *islam*. Hitler Youth, anyone ?
Angemon in his post has very eloquently pointed out much that is wrong with this idea, and I concur with what he says.
If this was concentrated on making children and staff aware of the tenets of **islam**, then I would have nothing to say against it, but this doesn’t appear to be the case.
”Under the “jihadi watch” scheme, teachers and students would be taught to watch for shifts in behaviour such as students drifting away from their friends, running into minor trouble with the law and arguing with those who have different ideological views to their own.”
Sounds very much like typical teenage behaviour, to me. And the fact this scheme is being done in conjunction with **islamic leaders** makes the alarm bells sound all the louder.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more pernicious this is sounding. A scheme to sniff out those of non PC/MC persuasion, perhaps; the ‘unorthodox’ ?
No, no, and no.
Peggy says
In fact, the more I think about it, the more pernicious this is sounding. A scheme to sniff out those of non PC/MC persuasion, perhaps; the ‘unorthodox’ ?
No, no, and no.
—————————
Actually I was just thinking along the same lines. They will train our kids to become spies but in the end we could be the ones being spied on. Teenagers don’t have the maturity to know they are being conned and can be used like they were used in WWII to flush out the ones who don’t conform.
If anyone is going to benefit from this it’s most likely Muslims. They will either know what to warn the parents about or use it as another tool to keep us in place.
TheBuffster says
”Under the “jihadi watch” scheme, teachers and students would be taught to watch for shifts in behaviour such as students drifting away from their friends, running into minor trouble with the law and arguing with those who have different ideological views to their own.”
That was exactly the paragraph that jumped out at me the most. “…arguing with those who have different ideological views to their own.”? That sounds like it’s people of independent, strongly held views that are being held suspect as an “extremist” or “radicalized” danger. Is it specifically Islamic jihadists they’re looking out for, or anyone who holds to some non-mainstream viewpoint and argues for it uncompromisingly?
Yes, such independent people can be considered “extreme” or “radical” by those who follow the mainstream line of thought. But it doesn’t mean that the person is in danger of doing a “jihadist” act in the name of that intensely held way of thinking.
How about someone who is arguing against the climate change orthodoxy, and whose friendships are strained because of it? Will he be considered a potential violent “jihadist” for climate change scepticism?
Just exactly what was meant by that paragraph?
Perhaps they’re just thinking that it’s better safe than sorry – anyone who doesn’t agree with their friends and who holds with a passion to ideas at odds with the most popular ideas might feel alienated and lonely and want to strike out? That it’s best to butt into the dissenters’ lives and step in with oversight, even if that interferes with intelligent, independent thinkers who have the self esteem to be able to stand alone?
The real danger is in strongly held beliefs that *don’t include respecting the rights of all individuals to their lives, property, and freedom.*
The reason jihadists are dangerous is because they don’t believe in individual rights for all (or even for themselves, really). They don’t believe in the right to think independently or to dissent from Islam.
So does the paragraph under scrutiny actually intend to target all the non-PC kids who are growing disgusted with their friends’ PC views and thus are drifting away from their friends, finding new ones with whom they identify, and arguing with their old ones about some contentious topic? Or is it that the paragraph was written in generic PC terms so as not to offend Muslims?
If it’s the latter, it just shows how placing pandering above accuracy and truthfulness can skew a message very badly.
On the other hand, could it be that in order not to offend Muslims the plan really *is* to crack down on anyone – whether Muslim or not – who displays intellectual independence and argumentativeness and a change of friends? You know, just so we don’t single out members of a particular religious or ethnic group? The point wouldn’t have to be to harass the free-thinking student, but simply to not “discriminate” against the students who are doing all of those behaviors because they’ve been radicalized by Islam – an ideology that damns free thinking and mandates Islamic supremicism? If we re-educate those students, too, then it won’t be discrimination, and we can, with a clear “conscience” say that we aren’t singling out potential Islamic jihadists, but all kinds of potential “jihadists”.
I should be surprised if the Abbott government would go for something like that, but I’m to the point where I’m starting to expect the absurd.
jayell says
Seems like muslims need watching anyway. Certainly in schools, where it’s not just pupils that need to be kept tabs on; you can’t trust ‘professional’ muslim teachers either. We’ve had several cases where staff have clearly been ‘playing the game’ (taqqyia-style) and appearing to be ‘good’, ‘trustworthy’ teachers, but have getting up to all sorts of things in their spare time. One was recently jailed because of his ‘activities’ (about to join jihad, I believe) and of course there was the ‘respectable’ classroom assistant who was one of the 7/7 London bombers. Muslim pupils need to watched for their ‘missionary’activities.
gravenimage says
Australia: Schools to introduce “jihadi watch” scheme
……………………………….
Hard to know how to regard this. On the one hand, this is enormously positive that anyone in the West is taking watching for Jihad seriously, and sees it as something the average patriotic person should be doing.
It is also good to see officials openly actually identifying the problem as *Jihad*, and not some ridiculous euphemism.
On the other hand, it is easy to see how this will be undercut, most notably, as Angemon pointed out, by having Taqiyya-spewing “Islamic leaders” involved in the plan.
And, as noted, expecting widespread support from most Muslim families and friends is quite foolish, and shows a serious misunderstanding of the problem. Most Jihad is learned at home, in the mosque, and from Jihadist’s thug buddies.
Being “radicalized on the internet”, while it can be a factor, is *rarely* the only influence. But it has become something the West has become obsessed with—probably because the idea of being “radicalized” by the anonymous internet is less distressing than the idea that future Jihadists are most influenced by what we like to consider intrinsically positive influences—family, friends, and faith.
I also wonder if teachers and—especially—students, will be made to understand how incredibly dangerous their sleuthing might be. How soon will they be urged to go to authorities? I could easily see Jihadists harming anyone they felt was getting suspicious.
And one wonders, of course, how soon some group like CAIR—its Australian counterparts, at any rate—will legally challenge this plan.
As it stands now, though, despite its possible flaws, this general plan sounds promising. I hope it is adopted by other Western countries. Consider the situation in Britain, where teachers have openly said that they are protecting students planning to head off to the Islamic State to wage violent Jihad, because they don’t want such youth “getting in trouble”.
The Australian scheme sounds pretty good in comparison…
mortimer says
“The Australian scheme sounds pretty good in comparison”… (in comparison with NOTHING!)
It’s a good start!
Peggy says
I too have never believed that these radicals have only the internet to influence them. Their parents always sound so shocked to hear that their son or daughter has gone overseas to fight. I think it’s completer rubbish. Their parents and extened family have a lot of influence on them not to mention the local mosque. Internet is only a tool they use to connect with other terrorists and get more information from.
Allowing the Muslim organisations to have anything to do with this is a mistake. It’s like allowing your enemy to sit in on a briefing just before attacking them.
particolor says
Would Radicalized Students please step forward ! 🙂
Western Canadian says
To turn people away from hate filled ideologies?? But if it works, what would we do with all the empty mosques????
Don McKellar says
Yes, it is not nearly the correct move — which would be to get the root of the problem and put Islam under the public microscope and put it on trial. But at least it’s something, I guess.
I just find it surreal that in the 21st Century, in a modern advanced country like Australia they’ve got to implement things like this to keep savages who follow a Dark Ages death cult from going mad dog crazy and murdering their classmates! Political correctness and delusional, foolish immigration policies have come to this! Astounding.
Nobody would have guessed this 20 years ago. They could have, knowing Islam’s history and creed, but nobody did.
bernie says
The Aussies are pretty smart in general. They rightly made Johnny Depp return his illegally-smuggled Terriers back to the U.S. Now, there are some other shaggy and possibly rabid creatures (namely, Islamofascist-extremist clerics and their acolytes) who also need to be told to bugger off out of Oz (though the cannot be euthanized under Aussie law).
Joseph says
Trying to stop future Jihadies this way is like mopping the puss leaking out of an infected wound. In order to stop the puss(Jihadies) you must go after the infection which is Islam, the mosques and the Imams.
Failure to do so and you can clean puss all year long with no effect on the cause.
Edgar Allen says
To lighten things up, I found this website today. It seems to be run by one who sees the truth about Islam, but takes the satiric route to make fun of the Religion of Peace.
https://khabaristantimes.com/world/moderate-atheists-claim-anti-theist-chappel-hill-killer-took-the-god-delusion-out-of-context/
gravenimage says
Edgar Allen, I found I could not access any of this site’s links, and that their Facebook information had been removed. Censorship? Has Khabaristan Times folded? I did find a few of their posts on other sites:
http://www.social-peek.com/Keywords/khabaristantimes.com
The funniest line I read here was this one:
“Newborn Pakistani Christians to be vaccinated with mild blasphemy accusations”
Here’s another tidbit:
http://www.reddit.com/domain/khabaristantimes.com/
This site appears to be run by a Pakistani Christian, and is *very* savvy and funny. I hope it isn’t defunct—and I hope whoever runs it is safe.
duh_swami says
How about this…You can go but you can’t come back…
particolor says
But We will be nice this time 🙂 (Taqiyya)
Wellington says
The fundamental problem with this Australian initiative is rooted in the massively ignorant assumption that jihad can be separated from Islam. It can’t. And one knows this or should know it.
After all, those who make up ISIS are the best of Muslims, which is to say they are the worst of human beings. One also knows this or should know it.
Herein lies the long and short of it. And Australian authorities, like virtually all other Western authorities, are not only clueless here but lethally clueless. And one knows this or should know it.
epistemology says
Robert is right, there’s a hell of of a difference between jihadi watch and jihad watch. We’ve got to confront this evil ideology and exterminate it. One of the five issues to reform Islam Ayaan Hirsi Ali presented in her latest book “Heretic” was “abandon jihad”.
You hit the nail again, Western authorities are clueless, they seem to revel in their ignorance. They often remind me of the three apes. As you know yourself, it’s very hard to fight against stupidity and ignorance.
Take care my friend
Infidela says
To Brian, the problem is how do you ban a religion? There’s got to be a way to do it, and one day people will figure out how to do it, and one day people will do it, but HOW to do it is a problem.
No Fear says
If my religion was Aztec and I promoted human sacrifice then I imagine my religion would be banned promptly.
By condemning apostates to death Islam proves that it is NOT just a religion but a political entity.
Most (percentage wise) of the texts of Islam are concerned with treatment, by muslims, of non-muslims. Therefore Islam must be a POLITICAL group.
Simon says
The way it was reported here in Australia, they will be teaching teachers and students to look out for “ideologies of hate” and anyone who shows a backbone with their beliefs ie Christians who believe the bible.
This is scary territory that will almost undoubtedly be used against anyone who does not toe the far left’s homosexual, multicultural, tolerance religion.
Just think of when that teacher or that student refuse to accept that homosexuality is normal and healthy – you got yourself an “ideology of hate” – off to the work camp/gulag/gas chamber for you, political dissident.
Peggy says
Seeing how there will be Muslim students in those classrooms won’t this be helping them not to get caught? They will learn how not to get caught.
particolor says
Your Right ! 🙂 They will start bringing Ham Sandwiches for lunch ! 🙂
Matthieu Baudin says
The current conservative Australian Government seems to have finally stopped aping the Obama nonsense that ‘Islam Is A Religion Of Peace’. In fact some recent pronouncement from their Prime Minister seems to have shifted the onus of proof to Islamic Leaders to demonstrate their commitment to meaningful dialogue and peaceful coexistence. These are a least movements in the right direction. I expect the Australian government, along with other conservative governments elsewhere, feel that they have to placate ‘trendy conservatives’, the type who are narrowly fixated with making money and chasing prestige; who are too lazy to seriously think through social policy issues, including the nature and place of Islam in todays world.
dumbledoresarmy says
The trick is for those in the Aussie public who *are* fully awake-and-aware to keep up the pressure on *all* our politicians, and to pour on the support for *any* politician who proposes any sensible Islamo-limiting measure, no matter how small.
The Muslims got where they are in our societies not only by threats/ corruption/ etc but by using the ‘ratchet’ method: getting a little bit here and a little bit there, a concession here, an accommodation there. Sharia creep.
Well: **two can play at *that* game**. There is really nothing to stop the Resistance from *also* using the ‘ratchet’ method. Push back against Islamisation everywhere and in every way we can; no matter how small.
In the USA, Brigitte Gabriel’s ACT for America *is* chalking up some runs on the board, right alongside the more obviously publicised efforts of Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer. ACT for America is busy lobbying US politicians, both in Washington and in the State Capitals. And not giving up. Keeping up the pressure, keeping up the information flow. They’re also active at local level – in the local PTA, for example; forming chapters here, there and everywhere. One of their campaigns involves keeping an eye on what is getting into school textbooks – and kicking up a stink when misleading or plainly false/ propagandistic stuff about Islam is detected. Another campaign – Thin Blue Line – aims at educating the average ordinary cop. And the “American Law for American Courts’ campaign is a flanking mvoement, aiming to build a firewall against sharia. Every single US jihadwatcher should be *also* a member of their local ACT for America chapter; and focusing on getting those runs on the board.
Gavin Boby’s “Law and Freedom Foundation” fights Islamisation at local council level in the UK, using the thickets of local legislation and regulations to prevent the building of mohammedan advance military bases aka mosques. They are fighting against jihad one neighbourhood at a time. (And they have inspired similar acts of resistance in places like Australia, where more and more there is community resistance to mosque-building; councils are finding that they just *cannot* ‘rubber-stamp” a mosque). *Every* UK jihadwatcher should be involved with the Law and Freedom Foundation in some way. (And I could see similar bodies springing up in other countries across the West, and beyond).
In Australia, there is Q Society: and *every* Aussie jihadwatcher should be a member, even if only a financial supporter.
This battle has to be fought school by school, neighbourhood by neighbourhood, suburb by suburb, electorate by electorate. Start there. right there at ground level; and start pushing back. Take back our *own* systems, and make them work for *us*, like they’re supposed to.
No Fear says
Off topic:
ABC Australia report:
“The Islamic State group executes at least 217 people in just nine days, including women and children, near the ancient Syrian city of Palmyra, a monitoring group says.”
That Australian doctor who went over and joined ISIS and made the video implying that the only casualties he had seen were caused by drones…….I wonder how he will try and weasel word his way out of the killing of 217 people by his employer. He will probably try to blame all 217 people on the Joooooos.
“Ooooooh oooooooh , it’s always the fault of the Joooooos……ISIS are all sweetness and light.”
Bronson says
Nothing to do with Islam the Australian politicians say. So why get Muslim ‘leaders’ involved?
dumbledoresarmy says
Exactly.
Let’s face it: nobody’s worrying about what the Buddhists, the Hindus or the Jews might be getting up to in the school-yard or off it; and only some of the more militant New Atheists really get their knickers in a knot about Christians (and even those, at some level, know that kids who take a Bible from the school chaplain and then choof off to a Scripture Union camp during the school holidays or regularly attend meetings of the “Evangelical Union” at university are extremely unlikely to qualify for the anxious attentions of ASIO either during their school years or afterward; the most ‘extreme’ thing such kids might do is discover a vocation for the Christian priesthood or join the Church Missionary Society or a Christian NGO such as TEAR fund dispensing practical charity either at home or abroad.)
particolor says
Your Bosses Head is spinning ! Get the Priest !! 🙂
Herb Benty says
Bravo Australia! The West is starting to realize the danger of political correctness, die-versity, and “multiculturalism”( sideline Western culture!). The awakening begins.
jdow says
Somebody should inquire of the Australian government when they started dealing retail rather than wholesale. I should hope they purchase wholesale direct from the manufacturer when they want cheap and effective purchasing. Here, however, they have dropped all the way back to mom and pop stores on the corner level retail in catching proto-jihadis. They need a strategy to go after the phenomenon at a wholesale level or at least big box discount house. Otherwise they will have no hope of winning. (It might be better than the chances of the US where we’re doing next to nothing.)
{^_^}
Frank Castle says
Involving mozlems to monitor for jihadists?
WTF. . .
sounds like putting foxes in charge of the henhouse. How long before a truck is backed up to the henhouse and the chooks disappear under ‘mysterious/ baffling’ circumstances
Kasey says
It’s rather dubious how this will be done in large populations of State funded Islamic schools and colleges here, [many millions in fact of which some has been rorted]., many of whom have an aim to produce every child as a “total” Muslim,able to interact successfully with the larger non-Muslim community. Integration or assimilation is rarely if ever mentioned. Obviously they want to be seen as a “race” apart although Islam is not a race. But they do want to be always noticed and seek influence and concessions on that basis.
particolor says
And they Howled Pauline Down for warning against them ? 🙁