|
Post by Jade on Dec 11, 2009 12:06:34 GMT
Nursery-age children should be monitored for signs of brainwashing by Islamist extremists, according to a leaked police memo obtained by The Times.
In an e-mail to community groups, an officer in the West Midlands counter-terrorism unit wrote: “I do hope that you will tell me about persons, of whatever age, you think may have been radicalised or be vulnerable to radicalisation ... Evidence suggests that radicalisation can take place from the age of 4.”
The police unit confirmed that counter-terrorist officers specially trained in identifying children and young people vulnerable to radicalisation had visited nursery schools.LINK
|
|
|
Post by iamspecial on Dec 11, 2009 12:30:48 GMT
I am sure it will make the marchesarosa happy -or is it State surveillance gone too far?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 11, 2009 14:03:49 GMT
I wonder what blue-eyed Farisa will think of herself photographed in her “I love Al-Quaida" bonnet alongside the poster with the Qur’an quote “Whoever insults God’s prophet kill him” when she grows up, Dayzzee? Even though she has been named “Jihad” I suspect she may develop a slightly different perspective to the average muslim baby, clearly having a genetic foot in the other camp, as it were. But remember, muslims are BORN into the faith. There is no choice, no way out. Apostacy is a no-no. That’s why there are so few willing to put their heads above the parapet as EX-Muslims. I am very dubious about muslim schools. They are already a huge self-segregated group. Muslim “education” by muslim teachers just makes things worse. Instead of investigating muslim kindergartens perhaps muslim education should simply not be funded from the public purse.
|
|
|
Post by Jade on Dec 11, 2009 15:30:28 GMT
But faith based schools are part of the fabric of our society Marchesa - how else could the church (es) survive?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 11, 2009 15:40:10 GMT
I wasn't talking about Church schools, Dayzzee. I was talking about Islamic "education". I'm not so daft I would throw out the baby with the bathwater.
|
|
|
Post by Jade on Dec 14, 2009 9:47:00 GMT
so what rule would need to be introduced that would ban one and not the other? And how policed?
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 15, 2009 23:40:59 GMT
A rule that banned state subsidy of muslim "education" on the grounds that it prevents the integration of an already seriously self-segregated quasi-colony, Dayzzee. This group persists in selecting most of its marriage partners from the subcontinent in order to maintain its segregation in the UK EVEN from more westernised muslims.
You must be living in cloud cuckoo land, Dayzzee, if you think the voluntary apartheit pursued by most muslims in the UK is advantageous to British society.
Let muslims educate their children at their own expense if they find state schools uncongenial.
Only people who are ideologically wedded to "multi-culturalism" even when its disadvantages are apparent to all, Dayzzee, could object to state education helping the integration of this group which persists in self-segregation.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Dec 16, 2009 9:14:23 GMT
You can't logically refuse to sudsidise Muslim schools without refusing to subsidise sectarian Christian and Jewish schools as well.
Of course, many people believe that all sectarian education is a very bad thing, and I'd be happy to see it all go. But it would be difficult to get such a ban past powerful lobbies.
It didn't do a lot for integration in Northern Ireland.
|
|
|
Post by luckyfredsdad on Dec 16, 2009 10:18:28 GMT
But faith based schools are part of the fabric of our society Marchesa - how else could the church (es) survive? As a Churchman and one who spent his early years at Church schools, and who believes that Church schools play a great part in the county's educational field. I do not think they are essential! Especially for the Church! As far as the Anglican's are concerned, my experience is that they do not play a great part in teaching the faith? They might save the state money, but I think they have the potential to cause great havoc,[see N.I. ] . Faith Schools ,of all kinds , should be banned and if people want their children to be taught their own religion, they should be able to draw out their children for a single lesson a week for tutoring by the clergy! If further teaching is necessary, after school hours should be used. There's no reason why they should not be allowed the use of class rooms after school for the clergy to teach!
|
|
|
Post by luckyfredsdad on Dec 16, 2009 10:25:11 GMT
You can't logically refuse to sudsidise Muslim schools without refusing to subsidise sectarian Christian and Jewish schools as well. How much does the state subsidise ,'sectarian,' religion? They pay the wages, I believe, but doesn't the Church put money in as well for building costs and repairs? They used to, mind you, I disagree with religion in schools, not to the wall, as it were, but strongly enough.
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 16, 2009 13:07:49 GMT
What has "logic" to do with the problem, jean? It is the politically correct multi-culturalists taking things to the "logical conclusion" that has brought us to the pass we are now with private but state subsidised muslim schools encouraging separatism from the mainstream UK society and values.
There is no problem with church schools. They are in the main stream of the very best of British cultural values. Parents of all faiths and none are fighting to get their children into them.
I concede there is a problem in Northern Ireland with a religiously divided educational system but that is another argument against muslims being permitted to pursue the same exclusivity AT THE STATE'S EXPENSE in the rest of the country.
|
|
|
Post by Jade on Dec 16, 2009 13:34:04 GMT
generally in established Church schools - those that are broadly Christian, the Church will own the land and provide pastoral support gratis, but the state pays for everything else, and more besides
In Muslim schools the State investment is far less as the faith picks up the tab for a lot of the wages, and so exempts themselves from a lot of interference and regulation.
With our liberal discrimination lawas, which I would not want to see undone in any part, you cannot ban the teachings of one religion, you have to ban all faith schools (as in France)
|
|
|
Post by jean on Dec 16, 2009 13:53:58 GMT
As Jade says, marchesa: ...you cannot ban the teachings of one religion, you have to ban all faith schools (as in France)
|
|
|
Post by marchesarosa on Dec 16, 2009 14:52:13 GMT
I have not called for a ban I called for an end to a state subsidy to muslim education because it is invidious and worsening an already bad situation.
You won't catch me insisting on a "logic" that is in fact an absurdity. I hope I have more sense.
|
|
|
Post by jean on Dec 17, 2009 16:50:50 GMT
...I called for an end to a state subsidy to muslim education... Well you can't logically and consistently do that without calling for an end to state subsidy to Christian and Jewish education too.
|
|