Regarding the NY City police report on radicalization of American Muslims, there were a couple of questions that, it seems to me, were left unanswered by the report.
For example, since these jihadist ideas originate in a foreign religion, Islam, why don't we just stop admitting foreign Muslims into the USA? It's true that not many Muslims are jihadis, but sympathy for jihadis, as poll after poll has shown, is widespread among ordinary Muslims. This is our country. We can choose whom to admit and whom to politely refuse admittance.
Here's another question: Why are Muslim clerics, many of whom are sympathetic to jihadism, and some of whom actually preach it, why are these clerics proselytizing in our jails? You have this ideology that preaches violence and hatred for western society and you allow it to be preached in jails? Preached to the most violent and anti-social people we've got? Hello?
Jihadism is an ideology not a religion. Why don't we just treat it the way we treated the last dangerous ideology that came down the pike, communism? Keep out foreigners who profess it, and keep a careful watch on Americans who profess it?
But I guess that would be "insensitive," "hurtful," 'hate-filled" and all the other slimey little epithets of multiculturalism.
How would you recommend authorities determine those who profess this "jihadism"? What method(s) would be acceptable and reliable for foreign visitors or Americans?
I realize that you have defined "jihadism" as a non-religious ideology, above. Presumably you are able, therefore, to separate "jihadism" from "islam", which I presume you see as a "religion". Perhaps you could share how you are able to make this a reliable separation? Presumably, you do not see all muslims as "jihadis", but are all "jihadis" muslim? If not, please (anyone) explain and give examples of non-muslim "jihadis". If yes, it would seem useful to ask or determine if a person is muslim or non-muslim, and then somehow determine if they are muslim "jihadis" or muslim non-"jihadis". But is this last distinction permanent and definitive? Really?
However, it is practically against the (current) rules for the US government to ask about religion. In confidential surveys, the US Census Bureau never asks for religious affiliation, although it does ask questions about ethnicity, race, and national-origin (the last is a semantic phrasing to differentiate between hispanic/latino and non-hispanic/latino, although many respondents consider hispanic/latino to be a "race", rather than some separate thing called "national-origin"). What does the INS currently ask those interviewed for visas? Somehow I doubt that they, as well, explicitly ask about religion, so, the obvious first approach to determine "jihadi status" is out-of-bounds, whether or not "jihadi" status is even definitively separable from "islam".
Would directly asking a person if they are a "jihadi" be reliable? How likely is a "jihadi" to answer yes to such a question if interviewed by a government agent?