Closer vigilance of UK Muslims now needed

Closer vigilance of UK Muslims now needed

Scotland Yard commander Mak Chishty, above – Britain’s most senior Muslim police chief  – has warned that Islamist propaganda has become so toxic that it is influencing children as young as five.

He said in a Guardian interview that this propaganda should be countered with intensified monitoring to detect the earliest signs of anti-Western sentiment.

Chishty said children aged five had voiced opposition to marking Christmas, branding it as “haram”. He also warned that there was no end in sight to the parade of British Muslims, some 700 so far, being lured from their bedrooms to Syria by Islamic State (Isis) propaganda.

He said there was now a need for “a move into the private space” of Muslims to spot signs that could show the beginning of radicalisation far earlier. These signs include “subtle changes in behaviour”, such as shunning certain shops. He cited the example of the Marks & Spencer chain, which is sometimes mistakenly perceived to be Jewish-owned.


Other signs could be sudden negative attitudes towards alcohol, social occasions and Western clothing. Parents should challenge and understand what caused such changes in behaviour, the police commander said, and seek help, if needs be from the police, if they are worried.

He said Isis propaganda was so powerful he had to be vigilant about his own children.

But some, said the report:

Will argue that his ideas walk a fine line between vigilance in the face of potent extremist propaganda and criminalising thought.

Scotland Yard has recently said police are making nearly an arrest a day as they try to counter a severe Islamist terrorist threat. On Friday, the Met confirmed it is investigating the potential grooming and radicalisation of a 16-year-old east London girl to run away and join her sister in Isis to become a “jihadi bride”.

Police estimate that about half the 700 thought to have gone to Syria to support Isis have since returned to Britain.

Chishty said communities in Britain had to act much earlier:

We need to now be less precious about the private space. This is not about us invading private thoughts, but acknowledging that it is in these private spaces where this [extremism] first germinates. The purpose of private-space intervention is to engage, explore, explain, educate or eradicate. Hate and extremism is not acceptable in our society, and if people cannot be educated, then hate and harmful extremism must be eradicated through all lawful means.

He said that what was new about Isis is the use of social media and the internet to spread its message and urge people lured by it to join the group or stage attacks in their home country.

Asked to define “private space”, Chishty said:

It’s anything from walking down the road, looking at a mobile, to someone in a bedroom surfing the net, to someone in a shisha cafe talking about things.

He said friends and family were best placed to intervene. Questions should be asked, he said, if someone stops shopping at M&S or starts voicing criticism. He said it could be they were just fed up with the store, but alternatively they could have “hatred for that store”. He said the community should “look out for each other”, that Isis was “un-Islamic”, as proven by its barbarity.

He said his message to fellow Muslim parents was:

I am not immunised. If I feel the need to be extra vigilant, then I think you need to feel the need to be extra vigilant.

He said he had heard of cases of children seemingly influenced by Islamist views in stable families in which the parents or guardians had moderate views.

In the example of primary school children defining Christmas as “haram”, he insisted this was “factual” and said that while it may not be a police matter, parents and family needed to ask how children as young as five had come to that view, whether it be from school or their friends. Chishty said:

All the ugly bits of the problem, which are uncomfortable, you have to … deal with them properly, as a state, as a nation, as a community.

He added that Muslim communities had done a lot to fight extremism but, given that there was no end in sight to the struggle and no slowing up in the stream of young people being attracted to extremism, it would need a level of vigilance not seen before. He said that current strategies were not working.

We are in unchartered water … We are facing a risk, a threat which is global, which is powerfully driven by social media, reaching you on your own through your mobile phone.

21 responses to “Closer vigilance of UK Muslims now needed”

  1. Dennis says:

    Well this street fighting man in TEXAS is up to his elbows with evangistic xtians. I am a little bzy. Thanks for reminding me the good fight never ends. CHARGE! I am not a Clinton supporter but remember it does take a village to raise a child or help a virus infected adult.

  2. Brummie says:

    All Muslims, as well as Islamic extremists, work from the same manual; the same instruction book. The non-extremists choose to ignore or disobey certain parts of the manual. One could argue that they are the bad Muslims…

  3. Broga says:

    A start to pull up the roots of extremism would be to give greater opportunity for atheists and others to expose the incredible beliefs on which religion is based. Instead everything is done to curb and censor rational analysis. It is worse than that as the BBC filches licence fee money the propagate the most bizarre beliefs by smug preachers and we have the government supporting faith schools.

    Strike at the roots. Introduce children and others to challenges to religion and encourage rational thought.

  4. jay says:

    Wow. Unfreakin believable.

    “It’s anything from walking down the road, looking at a mobile, to someone in a bedroom surfing the net, to someone in a shisha cafe talking about things.”

    “The purpose of private-space intervention is to engage, explore, explain, educate or eradicate.”

    The land of Orwell.

    Wrong thoughts. Shopping the wrong places. Saying the wrong things. I’m not defending jihadis, but this is thoughtcrime at its most dangerous.

    “if someone stops shopping at M&S or starts voicing criticism”–I wonder what he’s going to do about all the lefty intellectuals who actively seek to boycott Israel?

    It’s not terrorist who take our freedom, it’s our reaction to terrorism that destroys freedom.

  5. Brummie says:

    Well said Jay.

  6. TrickyDicky says:

    Well what do we expect considering the discrimination they suffer.;<)

    For example:

  7. Rob Andrews says:

    “Strike at the roots. Introduce children and others to challenges to religion and encourage rational thought”.

    Right! we need courses on comparative religion tought in high schools. That’s the right way to go. Not with what reminds me of the ‘red scares’ we had during the 1960s and 70s–remember communism.
    But the west also should stop alloing new muslims into it’s midst.

    “An atheist is a person with no invisable means of support”.–from the web.

  8. Trevor Blake says:

    As always in religion, “extremist” means traditional and “moderate” means distorted. Islam as practiced by billions over centuries, that is the problem. But to avoid offending the Muslim (which must never be done, ever) traditional Islam is called extremist and distorted Islam is presented as the solution. But that’s broken bones as a solution to cancer. Atheism is the solution to Islam (and the rest).

  9. sailor1031 says:

    One could start by repatriating all those imams who were exported by Saudi Arabia for the express purpose of undermining the West. ( The secondary purpose being to get them out of SA to stop them undermining the Saudi regime).

    One could continue by sending one’s child to a non-religious school.

  10. Cali Ron says:

    “…it’s our reaction to terrorism that destroys freedom.” Well said.

    @Rob Andrews
    “But the west also should stop allowing new muslims into it’s midst.” Exactly how do you suppose we do that? We’d have to start by changing our constitution. Every child born to a muslim is a “new muslim” so sterilize them or deport the babies? Do you ban muslims from immigrating only or would you also stop them from visiting as well. The vast majority of muslims are not terrorists, so you would be banning them for their religion alone, without any real proof that they pose a threat. I’m not prepared to let the government take away my freedom based on fear of a religion.

    The only way to combat islam (and christianity) is through education. I took an elective course in High School called “Logic and Clear Thinking” that taught students to think for themselves and how to evaluate others teachings and beliefs. Something like that should be a requirement for every child because when logic is applied to religion it’s foundations crumble and it’s grip of fear can be broken. Bans never work. Banning alcohol led to the mafia, banning marijuana made it the most popular drug of choice and banning books created black markets.

    Christianity has only recently started to loose it’s grip on the western world, not because of any overt work, but because people have gotten smarter due to education and abandoned the lies of religion. Knowledge is the enemy of religion and friend to the atheist, because it’s light reveals the lies, contradictions, depravity and moral bankruptcy of religion. Why do you think catholics and the RCC have schools that they try to get all their followers to attend instead of public schools. To control the education children receive. It will take a sea change over multiple generations to break islam’s power because most muslims come from under educated countries where the religious leaders can control the flow of information.

  11. Lurker111 says:

    Broga has a point. If propaganda is the issue, what’s wrong with using counterpropaganda? On billboards and in ads on radio and television?

    I’ll tell you what’s wrong: It’d be considered anti-Muslim to expose the idiocies of the religion and not also have ads against the idiocies of the Christian religion. In a way, this has its points. But in another way, it’s a false equivalence as Christians currently aren’t using children as suicide bombers.


  12. RussellW says:

    The solution is to apply more multi-culti pixie dust and undertake an intensified campaign against Islamophobia, then we all assume the dhimmi position.

  13. Cali Ron says:

    As long as the counter propaganda is truthful it is knowledge and a form of education. I agree with Broga and Lurker111, we should be educating (sounds better than propagandizing) people about the realities of both religions. Currently, Islam is more violent, but historically it would be hard to pick which is the worse religion.

    I know what dhimmi is, but what is the dhimmi position?

  14. Laura Roberts says:

    A first step is to completely separate government and religion: absolutely no public funding of any religious schools. If parents want their kids to go to an Islamic/Christian/Hindu/whatever school, they can damn well pay for it themselves rather than expecting the rest of us to foot the bill. (Good luck getting Christian conservatives to go along with that one. They love government handouts as long as they’re on the receiving end.)

    A second step is solid education in civics: how to be a good citizen. Extoll the rights afforded people in civilized cultures, such as freedom of speech (including the freedom to mock stupid ideas), freedom of expression and fundamental equality between the sexes, races, religious denominations, sexual preferences, etc.

    Third, and probably the only real need for informing the public (not really propaganda in my book): clearly delineate the differences between civil law and religious expression. Religious freedom ends the instant it conflicts with civil law. Yes, it’s OK if you want to wear a hijab. No, it’s not OK to force someone else to do so. Yes, it’s OK if you want to spew hatred for gays, non-whites or other religious groups. No, it’s not OK for your business or agency to discriminate based on your beliefs. If you don’t like it, state your case for having the law changed, or go live somewhere else.

  15. Newspaniard says:

    All this yadda yadda about making muslims become nice people when there is an invading force getting in boats and heading for Italy. From there they are spreading out through Europe and eventually reaching Calais and using any and all methods to cross the channel. We are being invaded and doing nothing about it. If the slovenly authorities say “No, you can’t stay”. They stay anyway and the “authorities do nothing about it. Second or third generation “refugees” go to Syria for training then return, fully trained, to await the call. This “nice” policeman waffles on but, generally, the police do nothing about islamic crime for fear of losing their careers having been called racist or (the terrorist word) islamofascist, which the muslim ridden “authorities” accept without question. Islam is hate for any and all infidels. We should protect ourselves as the Japanese who say categorically, “NO MUSLIMS HERE” and deport anyone proselytizing islam. We have got to learn very soon or there will be a lot more Lee Rigbys and the AK 47’s will be on our streets. Start by admitting that there are no-go areas in Birmingham.

  16. AgentCormac says:

    Apologies for going OT, but here’s more proof, should ever you need it, that Frankie’s ‘church for the poor’ is actually a bank for the rich.

    Whatever would that chap who kicked out the money lenders think?

  17. RussellW says:

    Cali Ron,

    The dhimmi position? Lying on the ground with your head about 30 centimetres away.

    As to which is inherently the worse religion, Islam wins by a mile, it was invented by a psychopathic Arabian bandit and unlike Christianity was violent from its inception. In terms of total victims, I’d agree, it’s difficult to determine which is worse.

  18. Rob Andrews says:

    NO MUSLIMS HERE” and deport anyone proselytizing islam. We have got to learn very soon or there will be a lot more Lee Rigbys and the AK 47’s will be on our streets. Start by admitting that there are no-go areas in Birmingham.

    I agree as said in my first post. But as Cali Ron responded ” how do you do this in a constitutional democracy”? You can’t deport citezens. BUT DON’T let any more in from predominently muslim countries.
    And I disagree with all the posters that talk about counter propaganda. Charlie Hebdo has moved us to a new possition beyond education and soft measures.

  19. gedediah says:

    @ Brummie. Brilliant example of the victimisation mentality!

    You have to hand it to Islamist extremists, unlike their fundamentalist Christian counterparts, they’re much more likely to live by the rules they preach. That’s the problem in a nutshell! As Trevor says, the moderates are the ones distorting Islam. Just like the Christians who don’t follw the Old Testament by stoning adulterers and unruly childern, etc.

  20. RussellW says:

    It’s about time the ‘tiny percentage of extremists’ myth was busted, for every jihadi, there’s a network of hate preachers , sympathisers , fund raisers and apologists which probably makes up a sizeable percentage of the Muslim population.


    Agreed, members of ISIS are pious Muslims, they’re following the teachings of their prophet, religiously.
    Actually to Christians, the New Testament is more important than the Old Testament, remember Jesus’ lesson about ‘casting the first stone’ and ‘turning the other cheek’. Early Christians were prepared to die, rather than to kill for their faith.