26% of US Muslims say "Suicide bombing OK"

[MDS]

There is no justification for terrorism. PERIOD!

I don't like to paint all people with the same brush and that survey does seem to show that the majority of muslims are not radicalists that will kill anybody, anywhere for no reason so it really is the 'extremist' few and we shouldn't say all Muslims are evil (although it is hard not to given all the media coverage).

However, what does piss me off is 'In defense of Islam'. Why does Islam or any religion for that matter need to be 'defended' by killing innocent people that have nothing to do with it?

The religious extremists of ANY religion are all the same. It's no different than school rivalries or political affiliations except that they are deadly. Instead of just being opposed to the opposing team they think their 'god' instructs them to kill anyone that may not believe their beliefs. That of course is antithetical to any true religion as they all are similar in their teachings to 'love your fellow man'.

I have no problem with eliminating those kinds of people from the world but unfortunately many innocents will suffer too as they are seen as guilty by association.

 

[zhimbo]

I think he made a reporting error.

Yes, and I corrected it, because when discussing controversial topics, accuracy is very, very important. Apparently that makes me a terrorist-lover or something, as I really don't understand your reaction to me.

(and I'm gonna yell, because it was IN the linked article/study and you still don't seem to mind this news)...AT LEAST FIVE PERCENT OF AMERICAN MUSLIMS VIEW AL QUIDA FAVORABLY.

....

Maybe you won't answer my question??? I hope you do. Does this or does this not disturb you more than whether or not the title of the thread got the number correct?

I love puppies and kittens.

Pie is yummy.

Paris Hilton sure is in the news too much for my taste.

Sorry but those opinions are as far out on a limb as I'll go. You're asking me to answer whether I find sympathizing with a terrorist organization to be bothersome, or if I "mind" it! Gosh, I tremble at offering my controversial answer to this pressing question.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

I find it interesting that certain posters do not find the above article very disturbing.

Instead, they play the semantics game with my original post while completely avoiding the disturbing results of the survey.

 

[zhimbo]

I find it interesting that certain posters do not find the above article very disturbing.

Instead, they play the semantics game with my original post while completely avoiding the disturbing results of the survey.

I, for one, am not playing semantic games. I mean, I quote the ACTUAL figures to show that the title was inacurate.

I'm telling THE TRUTH.

Your title is A FALSEHOOD. Presumably unintentional, but still A FALSEHOOD.

I value truth. So sue me.

Apparently valuing the truth over gut reaction makes me suspiciously sympathetic to terrorist causes or something. I really don't get the reactions of "certain posters" on here, either.

 

[tbewick]

I find it interesting that certain posters do not find the above article very disturbing.

Instead, they play the semantics game with my original post while completely avoiding the disturbing results of the survey.

It is a fairly large difference - 26% (the title of this thread) versus 8% (the value stated in the Pew Center Report). The phrasing of the survey question is also important.

You're always going to have some people who have an extremist point of view or who sympathise with such views. For instance, if you were to have conducted a similar survey 20 years ago on the views of Irish Americians, you would probably have found that some were sympathetic to the Irish Republican Army, a terrorist organisation that killed many innocent people. On this basis, the results are in line with what I'd expect.

I think that there is reason to be concerned about xenophobic reactions to ethnic groups like Muslims, and this is something which the Pew report identifies. I live in the UK, and recently a member of the government opened a 'debate' about the veil worn by some Muslim women. In France a while back, there was some talk of banning the Muslim head garment (I can't remember the proper name) in schools. I think that that sort of discussion is less about real debate and more to do with politicians trying to appeal to intolerant voters.

 

[Tomorrow]

I find it interesting that certain posters do not find the above article very disturbing.

Instead, they play the semantics game with my original post while completely avoiding the disturbing results of the survey.

Well...apparently these fellas think your misuse of the thread title is MUCH more disturbing than the fact that there are a city-full number of people in this country who support Al Queda. (Perhaps they are amongst the sympathizers?)

I believe in accuracy of reporting, for certain. But we've all made mistakes...including the negative responders. What disturbs and aggravates me is that it seems much more important to them to spank you for your horrific thread title misrepresentation (or mistake) to the few of us readers here on AH. How very aggrieved they must be that you are such a threat to the world.

Oh wait. Didn't they say they were arguing the issues and substance of the point made? I sure wish I could find where they did that. Have you seen it?

Congratulations Buckeye_Nut, you now rank as a worse threat to world peace than 117,500 Al Queda sympathizers in the United States. Thank goodness for all these critical thinkers responding to you with their rational wisdom. We're safe, now.

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

Well...apparently these fellas think your misuse of the thread title is MUCH more disturbing than the fact that there are a city-full number of people in this country who support Al Queda. (Perhaps they are amongst the sympathizers?)

I believe in accuracy of reporting, for certain. But we've all made mistakes...including the negative responders. What disturbs and aggravates me is that it seems much more important to them to spank you for your horrific thread title misrepresentation (or mistake) to the few of us readers here on AH. How very aggrieved they must be that you are such a threat to the world.

Oh wait. Didn't they say they were arguing the issues and substance of the point made? I sure wish I could find where they did that. Have you seen it?

Congratulations Buckeye_Nut, you now rank as a worse threat to world peace than 117,500 Al Queda sympathizers in the United States. Thank goodness for all these critical thinkers responding to you with their rational wisdom. We're safe, now.

Hahahaha..... funny & entertaining post!! (scary too)

It's obvious they're still in denial because they have yet to respond to the terrifying survey.

Not to mention... PEW leans hard to the left, and many of their employees rotate back and forth between various lib political organizations.

The fact that this survey even came from a lib organization....... should even make it more scary!!

 

[zhimbo]

Didn't they say they were arguing the issues and substance of the point made?

What's to argue?

You seem to want to goad me into some shocking revelation that I rejoice in the anti-U.S. terrorist sentiment or something. I have no idea what you think I think.

There's a problem - but don't exagerrate it - it WEAKENS one's position to misrepresent the facts.

It's true that a very small minority of muslims in this country hold disturbing sympathies with Al Qaeda. I leave it as a problem for the reader to figure out if I think that's a good thing or a bad thing.

It isn't true that 1/4 of U.S. Muslims have no problems with suicide bombers, as the title implies.

 

[Tomorrow]

What's to argue?

You seem to want to goad me into some shocking revelation that I rejoice in the anti-U.S. terrorist sentiment or something. I have no idea what you think I think.

There's a problem - but don't exagerrate it - it WEAKENS one's position to misrepresent the facts.

It's true that a very small minority of muslims in this country hold disturbing sympathies with Al Qaeda. I leave it as a problem for the reader to figure out if I think that's a good thing or a bad thing.

It isn't true that 1/4 of U.S. Muslims have no problems with suicide bombers, as the title implies.

I completely agree that potentially inflammatory, but incorrect information is a no-no. I also think it was a mistake, nothing intentional, on the OP's part. But that perhaps doesn't forgive the oversight.

I don't want to goad you into anything, Z. And further it's irrelevant what I think you think. I just find it really interesting and reasonably disturbing that your reply (and others') basically takes a pass on the information in the report and you prefer to focus on B_N and the thread title. As you said, "I leave it as a problem for the reader to figure out if I think that's a good thing or a bad thing." Al Queda allegiance in the U.S. and the potential for domestic harm to civilians doesn't seem to bother you nearly as much as the thread title. That's what I have a problem with. I wonder what the 9/11 victims's families would say about your priorities.

 

[zhimbo]

As you said, "I leave it as a problem for the reader to figure out if I think that's a good thing or a bad thing." Al Queda allegiance in the U.S. and the potential for domestic harm to civilians doesn't seem to bother you nearly as much as the thread title. That's what I have a problem with. I wonder what the 9/11 victims's families would say about your priorities.

So, tell me - do you think raping nuns is good or bad? How about random shooting of schoolchildren? Hitler - bad man or swell guy?

Are these points worth discussing? No, not really. And please, don't bother answering them. I don't insist on obvious answers.

I also don't think the OP was intentionally misrepresenting the data, but it was sloppy and gives a far, far more alarming impression than warranted. I thought that was worth addressing.

Beyond that - well the data speak for themselves, don't they? A small, but not vanishingly small, minority of muslims seem to support an evil organization and some support a common terrorist tactic in *some* circumstances.

As for the suicide bombing stats, I don't actually find that so very worrisome, in that most of the respondents agree to only some or rare circumstances. That's vague enough that it's difficult to interpret, and I certainly don't see that as an endorsement of 9/11 or whatever. Hell, I'd probably respond "rare" circumstances; I can certainly invent scenarios, and I'm sure you could to, where we would consider a suicide bomber justified or even a hero.

The 5% Al Qaeda...well, I'm sure part of that group is simply brain-dead stoners giving joke answers or who are utterly clueless. It's hard to find ANY question that polls lower than 5%, presumably due to jokers and simple idiots.

(6% of Americans polled said Garth Brooks was the greatest male singer of the 20th century. 8% can't name a single TV network. Stuff from PollingReport.com, courtesy Bob Harris)

The more worrisome picture, actually, is that low-level "leaning" is common. This poses no immediate danger, but I'm sure it's more common than, say, 5 or 10 years ago. These are people who pose no danger, I'm sure, but may be a "canary in the coal mine" that such attitudes are brewing.

One way NOT to worsen this is to sloppily label 1/4 of muslims as unconditional supporters of suicide bombers. That's not going to help our muslim population feel like they have common cause with the nation. No, I don't think it was intentional, but that's how misinformation starts, isn't it?

 

[Buckeye_Nut]

I just find it really interesting and reasonably disturbing that your reply (and others') basically takes a pass on the information in the report and you prefer to focus on B_N and the thread title. As you said, "I leave it as a problem for the reader to figure out if I think that's a good thing or a bad thing." Al Queda allegiance in the U.S. and the potential for domestic harm to civilians doesn't seem to bother you nearly as much as the thread title. That's what I have a problem with. I wonder what the 9/11 victims's families would say about your priorities.

Hammer....

meet nail....

right on the head.........

 

[Diapason]

These are undeniably disturbing statistics, although admittedly I'd prefer to see the accurate numbers rather than shock-tactics made-up numbers. I'm not accusing the OP of this, I'm accusing mass media of this.

'Overall, 8% of Muslim Americans say suicide bombings against civilian targets tactics are often (1%) or sometimes (7%) justified in the defense of Islam.'

- Pew Center Report

It's not my intention to stir things here, but let's do a thought experiment. If you read the following, what would be your reaction?
'Overall, 8% of Americans say air bombings against civilian targets in Iraq are often (1%) or sometimes (7%) justified in the defense of Democracy.'

I'm not putting words in anyone's mouth, I totally made that up, but if I read it, I wouldn't necessarily be hugely surprised. For a start, some people are just idiots, irrespective of faith, creed or nationality. If 1% of any given group say anything outrageous I'm rarely surprised. I suspect that you could conduct a survey in some locations in the US where you *might* find 7% of people saying that sometimes civilian deaths are justified for a greater good. Results of these surveys always need to be taken in context.

(Of course, I quite categorically do not think that Al Qaida stand for any kind of greater good, hopefully that goes without saying. I'm correct in thinking it's possible here to have an abstract discussion without being labelled an America-hater or whatever. Fingers crossed.)

There is no justification for terrorism. PERIOD!

[snip]

Why does Islam or any religion for that matter need to be 'defended' by killing innocent people that have nothing to do with it?

[snip]

Instead of just being opposed to the opposing team they think their 'god' instructs them to kill anyone that may not believe their beliefs.

[snip]

I have no problem with eliminating those kinds of people from the world

Does that last comment mean what I think it does? It seems a little at odds with what went before.

the data speak for themselves

Data used as a plural? You don't see that every day...

Si

 

[Buckle-meister]

I suspect that you could conduct a survey in some locations in the US where you *might* find 7% of people saying that sometimes civilian deaths are justified for a greater good.

At least.

Data used as a plural? You don't see that every day...

My exact same thought when I read it. It's telling isn't it?

 

[markw]

Data vs. Datum. A common misunderstanding

Not to be a pedantic plick, but I had this drilled into me back in computer school in the days of hollerith cards.

http://wsu.edu/~brians/errors/data.html

 

[superstar]

Data used as a plural? You don't see that every day...

Si

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Data

I actually do, in the IS/IT field we refer to data as plural.

 

[Diapason]

Lest there be any confusion, I know data is plural, and I was drawing attention to the correct usage by the poster in question. In the interests of full disclosure, I should admit that I am often guilty of using it incorrectly myself.

Sorry to sidetrack this thread with semantics!

Si

 

[Non-Audiophile]

Ah, yes, the myth of the "liberal media" again. Those without sfb might ponder the fact that the media are all billion dollar enterprises and (curiously enough) they share the world view of those who own other billion dollar media. Some might think it more significant that about a quarter of the population of America still supports Bush, notwithstanding that he did what people were hanged for after WWII -- launching a war of aggression. (Oh, I forgot, when our own government initiates an unprovoked war, we are not allowed to use the "a" word for it, it is "preemptive" even though nothing happened to prevent in reality.) Yes, a quarter of the US population supports our government, apparently also supporting (i) deleting constitutional provisions like habeas corpus and (ii) engaging in torture. Finally (to end this rant), I find it much more disturbing on a continuing basis that a majority of Americans still think Iraq had something to do with 9/11 and that WMD were found in Iraq.

 

[highfihoney]

You said a mouthfull.

WOW

 

[zhimbo]

[...]myth of the "liberal media" [...]supports Bush, [...] war of aggression. [...] "preemptive" [...] habeas corpus [...] Iraq [...] 9/11 [...]WMD [...]

Well, OK then. Way to scramble every current political hot-button issue into one big omelet!

But hey, it's "the Steam Vent".

-Z

p.s. Sorry, you lose points for not fitting in the phrase "blood for oil". Better luck next time!