The Murder of Theo van Gogh and the Islamic Jihad Division ('Divisie Islamitische Jihad') in the Netherlands
Bibliographic record
Abstract
ABSTRACT The attacks on the people of London in 2005 by persons representing Muslim extremism were unprecedented, unexpected and unique in the respect that they were ‘attacks from within’. The loss of life was the highest number of deaths (52) in a violent attack within Britain since the Second Word War. This raised the issue as to how nations protect themselves against such attacks where intelligence is nonexistent and perpetrators are apparently hitherto model citizens. All this must then be coupled with the complexity, in policing and security terms, of responding to the new threat of suicide bombers (as in London in 2005). We examine here the experiences of the police and security services in the Netherlands, and elsewhere, with regard to the activities of Islamic extremists whose actions led to the globally publicised assassination of Theo van Gogh and other threats of terror. In particular, we examine the reasons for the ‘conversion’ of young second or third generation immigrants who appear to be integrated but who turn to radicalism.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.005 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".