The Student Room Group

Only 1 in 3 UK Muslims would tip off police on islamic terrorists

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/survey-reveals-chasm-between-muslim-values-and-rest-of-uk-d30hl55lk


''Only one in three British Muslims would tip off the police if they believed that somebody close to them had become involved with terrorist sympathisers, a poll has revealed.''

''The Times revealed in December that fewer than a tenth of extremism tip-offs were coming directly from the Muslim community or faith leaders.''

Scroll to see replies

What did you expect?

Posted from TSR Mobile
Reply 2
Original post by DiddyDec
What did you expect?

Posted from TSR Mobile


Not much, if anything I'm surprised it's this high. This is for people who think most muslims are integrated and/or moderate. They're not.
- came here expecting source to be Mail and the usual "omg it's daily mail it must be false" posts

- source is Times

- what will they do now?

Will the distrust in The Daily Mail evolve into a distrust for The Times?
OK. So when you look at any other crime, or indeed non Muslim terrorists how likely are non Muslims to report it to the police as well? 33% seems quite high really, when it comes to any one reporting a crime
Original post by Erebor

''Only one in three British Muslims would tip off the police if they believed that somebody close to them had become involved with terrorist sympathisers, a poll has revealed.''



With respect, that is a poll rigged to produce a low positive response.

There are three distorting phrases in the question:-

"terrorist sympathisers" not "terrorists" so the people referred to need have no involvement with terrorists, but merely be sympathetic to their views.

"become involved with" not "are being groomed by" so a very low level of engagement is required.

conversely "somebody close to" without defining the relationship heightens the commitment to the individual at the expense of commitment to the state.

So would you tip off the police if your mother went to hear a speech by the Labour Party leader? Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser. She becomes involved with him if she goes to listen to one of his speeches and I assume you are close to your mother.

Ask the question "Would you tip off the police if you thought a relative or friend was becoming involved in terrorism?" and see what different response you get.
Original post by nulli tertius
With respect, that is a poll rigged to produce a low positive response.

There are three distorting phrases in the question:-

"terrorist sympathisers" not "terrorists" so the people referred to need have no involvement with terrorists, but merely be sympathetic to their views.

"become involved with" not "are being groomed by" so a very low level of engagement is required.

conversely "somebody close to" without defining the relationship heightens the commitment to the individual at the expense of commitment to the state.

So would you tip off the police if your mother went to hear a speech by the Labour Party leader? Corbyn is a terrorist sympathiser. She becomes involved with him if she goes to listen to one of his speeches and I assume you are close to your mother.

Ask the question "Would you tip off the police if you thought a relative or friend was becoming involved in terrorism?" and see what different response you get.


But that highlights exactly the point. Muslims always just say "not true Muslim" or "not one of us", but the entire time the people are going on about their business, no one ever says anything. And this poll shows this.
Original post by Erebor
http://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/survey-reveals-chasm-between-muslim-values-and-rest-of-uk-d30hl55lk


''Only one in three British Muslims would tip off the police if they believed that somebody close to them had become involved with terrorist sympathisers, a poll has revealed.''

''The Times revealed in December that fewer than a tenth of extremism tip-offs were coming directly from the Muslim community or faith leaders.''


The figure is meaningless unless contrasted against the figure for non-muslims if you were hoping to make some type of point.

People are often unwilling to report things for fear of repercussions and the fact that suspicions can be false.
(edited 7 years ago)
Original post by Kvothe the arcane
The figure is meaningless unless contrasted against the figure for non-muslims if you were hoping to make some type of point.
People are often unwilling to report things for fear of repercussions and the fact that suspicions can be false.


Why? Non-Muslims aren't as widespread in terrorist activities...

This has nothing to do with non-Muslims and everything to do with "not true Muslism", shutting their eyes to things and then crying they are being judged as a whole.
Original post by brainhuman
Why? Non-Muslims aren't as widespread in terrorist activities...

This has nothing to do with non-Muslims and everything to do with "not true Muslism", shutting their eyes to things and then crying they are being judged as a whole.


Nulli has made a post criticizing the methodology so there's little point repeating his? words but I assume the OP is trying to make the point that muslims are particularly unlikely to report terrorism.

For that claim to be true, there has to be comparison between muslims and a control group to show that the difference is significance. Without that, it is not reasonable to infer any conclusion.
Original post by Kvothe the arcane
Nulli has made a post criticizing the methodology so there's little point repeating his? words but I assume the OP is trying to make the point that muslims are particularly unlikely to report terrorism.

For that claim to be true, there has to be comparison between muslims and a control group to show that the difference is significance. Without that, it is not reasonable to infer any conclusion.


And I repeat myself, this isn't about comparison at all. This isn't a relative concept.

This is in absolute terms, and in absolute terms 66% of Muslims would ignore signs someone is getting involved with terrorism or terrorist sympathizer. It is completely irrelevant what other groups would do.
Original post by brainhuman
Why? Non-Muslims aren't as widespread in terrorist activities...

This has nothing to do with non-Muslims and everything to do with "not true Muslism", shutting their eyes to things and then crying they are being judged as a whole.


You haven't understood what I said at all.

Shutting your eyes to what?

So, Ali's brother Mohammed sits on a mosque committee with Akbar. Akbar sounds off all the time about how the west is evil and the PLO/PFLP/Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood/Al Qaeda/Isis should give the west a bloody good hiding and has been sounding off in this way for the last 30 years. Ali is not aware of any active step taken by Akbar. Mohammed regards Akbar as a bit of a wingnut.

Does Ali report Mohammed?
Original post by nulli tertius
You haven't understood what I said at all.

Shutting your eyes to what?

So, Ali's brother Mohammed sits on a mosque committee with Akbar. Akbar sounds off all the time about how the west is evil and the PLO/PFLP/Hamas/Muslim Brotherhood/Al Qaeda/Isis should give the west a bloody good hiding and has been sounding off in this way for the last 30 years. Ali is not aware of any active step taken by Akbar. Mohammed regards Akbar as a bit of a wingnut.

Does Ali report Mohammed?


I very well understood your point about how questions can be leading.
Reply 13
I would love to see the statistic with left wingers. They see Islamists as victims and western authority services as the enemy
Shocking.
Reply 15
Original post by Kvothe the arcane
The figure is meaningless unless contrasted against the figure for non-muslims if you were hoping to make some type of point.

People are often unwilling to report things for fear of repercussions and the fact that suspicions can be false.


33 percent of nearly 3 million people in the UK should be shocking enough.

Not to mention that it could save lives or prevent radicalisation. But i guess that doesn't matter to you either, like them?
I am surprised that is that high.
There is hope after all.
Original post by TelAviv
- came here expecting source to be Mail and the usual "omg it's daily mail it must be false" posts

- source is Times

- what will they do now?

Will the distrust in The Daily Mail evolve into a distrust for The Times?


Murdoch.

Also the state doesn't protect potential witnesses from repercussions nearly enough.
If your brother was dealing drugs, would you report him to the police? The article clearly states it people close to them. Of course the first thing to do is to try and talk to them about it without involving the police.

I think if it was anyone else, people wouldn't have a problem reporting them straightaway, apart from being scared of consequences.
Original post by donutellme
If your brother was dealing drugs, would you report him to the police? The article clearly states it people close to them. Of course the first thing to do is to try and talk to them about it without involving the police.

I think if it was anyone else, people wouldn't have a problem reporting them straightaway, apart from being scared of consequences.


This too. I can't see why people should be ostracised for looking out for their own either.

And before we go down the route of "terrorism more serious than drugs", the variables are just too wide to consider to conveniently come under a catch-all category.

Quick Reply