New Poll Links Anti-Muslim Sentiment And Opposition To “Ground Zero Mosque”

A new poll indicates that there are some disturbing motivations that seem to be associated with opposition to the so-called "Ground Zero Mosque."

Despite claims to the contrary, a new Washington Post poll seems to confirm that there’s a direct link between opposition to the construction of an Islamic Community Center two blocks from Ground Zero and anti-Muslim sentiment in general:

Most Americans say the planned Muslim community center and place of worship should not be built in Lower Manhattan, with the sensitive locale being their overwhelming objection, according to a new Washington Post-ABC News poll.

Two-thirds of those polled object to the prospective Cordoba House complex near the site of the former twin towers, including a slim majority who express strongly negative views. Eighty-two percent of those who oppose the construction say it’s because of the location, although 14 percent (9 percent of all Americans) say they would oppose such building anywhere in the country.

The new results come alongside increasingly critical public views of Islam: 49 percent of all Americans say they have generally unfavorable opinions of Islam, compared with 37 percent who say they have favorable ones. That’s the most negative split on the question in Post-ABC polls dating to October 2001.

Nearly a third of all Americans see mainstream Islam as encouraging violence, little changed from recent years. More, a slim majority, say it’s a peaceful religion.

“Whatever faith or God they believe in, I think most people are decent,” Susan Deal, 45, of Walbridge, Ohio said in a follow-up interview.

Views of the Cordoba House project are closely related to these general perceptions of Islam, even if those haven’t directly caused a broad-based reevaluation. Those who hold favorable views of Islam and see it as generally peaceful religion are far more apt than others to say the building should move forward. For example, 55 percent who have favorable impressions of Islam support the construction, while 87 percent of those with unfavorable views oppose it.

Greg Sargent looks at the numbers more deeply:

It gets even clearer when you look at the numbers in another way. If you take the 66 percent overall who oppose the project, it turns out that two thirds of those people have generally unfavorable views of Islam, versus only one-third who view Islam favorably.

Clearly, not all opponents of the project feel unfavorably towards Islam. But two-thirds of them do. Does it mean that anti-Islam attitudes are the direct cause of opposition to the project? Impossible to say. But it’s overwhelmingly clear that there’s a link between the two sentiments, no matter how often opponents tell you the contrary.

Indeed.

However, as I’ve been saying for more than a month now, when you see that these anti-mosque protests have spread beyond the former Burlington Coat Factory to Staten Island, Florida, California, Wisconsin, and to Tennessee, where the site of a future mosque was recently the target of an arson attack. Clearly this is about more than property development in Lower Manhattan and, as the latest controversy over a so-called Pastor who plans to burn the Koran on September 11th demonstrates, is indicative of some rather disturbing beliefs that seem to be becoming more acceptable in American society.

FILED UNDER: Islam, Public Opinion Polls, Religion, US Politics
Doug Mataconis
About Doug Mataconis
Doug holds a B.A. in Political Science from Rutgers University and J.D. from George Mason University School of Law. He joined the staff of OTB in May 2010. Before joining OTB, he wrote at Below The BeltwayThe Liberty Papers, and United Liberty Follow Doug on Twitter | Facebook

Comments

  1. anjin-san says:

    > some rather disturbing beliefs that seem to be becoming more acceptable in American society.
    As I have said on many occasions, welcome to Sarah Palin’s America…

  2. Steve Plunk says:

    So their “outreach” is not working.  I guess they should learn to do it right.
     
    Anjin, Sarah Palin did not create these attitudes.  Islam’s theology, it’s history. and it’s current manifestations have created this problem.  This “religion of peace” is about to explode over a no name preacher burning some Korans.
     
     

  3. PD Shaw says:

    The poll says it’s location/location/location.  Of those who believe it should not be built there, 82% say it is due to location, 14% say it is due to opposition to Muslim community centers in general.

    Citizens from NYCity say it should be more than 10 blocks away.  http://www.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/poll_results.pdf

    I would also be shocked if Christians ever had favorable views of Islam, before, after or during 9/11.  It’s the province of religion to support one’s own beliefs and not support others.

    Question to angin-san, do you have a favorable or unfavorable view of the Republican Party?

  4. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Another well reasoned remark from the mind of Anjin-san.  Pilot, your response demonstrates your 88 IQ.  Accept it or not, America is populated by a vast majority of people who hold to Christian beliefs.  It has not been Christians who invaded Muslim lands to expand thier influence.  America is tolerant of all religions however we do have some enemies.  While not all of Muslims are our enemies, most of our enemies are Muslims.  In fact, most of the worlds strife today is Muslim related.  So now when most of America expresses the opinion the CORDOBA HOUSE should not be built at the proposed location, the founding Iman is issuing threats if we do not allow it, radicals will be strengthened.  This is precisely want some predicted would happen.  There comes a time to put our foot down.  Muslims must learn to respect the senitivities of this nation for if they do not they stand the chance of learning what the Japanese learned in WWII.  That is thay fighting to the death is no problem as long as they do most of the dying, and that America, though peaceful when angry is exremely violent.  Christians did not riot when churches were burned in Malasia, but Muslims will riot if some kook preacher burn Korans in Fla and they are the religion of peace?

  5. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Anjin, looks like I am not the only one on to you.

  6. legion says:

    Ah, Steve. Always ready to blame the victim. Imagine for a moment that an Imam somewhere – maybe in the US, maybe some other country – declared 11 Sep to be “Burn the Bible Day”. Christian conservatives in the country would “explode” like you’ve never seen. They would be demanding boycotts, legal action, police or even military intervention – you name it. The publicity this jackhole is getting would pale in comparison to the round-the-clock coverage a bible-burning would get.
    The simple fact is that burning a religion’s holy book is an incredibly inflammatory (no pun intended) act – it’s a direct insult to everything they hold dear. How exactly would you expect them to react?

  7. legion says:

    And here’s another thing to think about: A lot of people are making noise about demanding the city/state/federal gov’t step in and stop the Mosque-building in NYC, because it’s “insensitive”. Gen Petreus has pointed out that this Koran-burning has the potential to be actively dangerous to our troops in the field and, through increased terrorist recruiting, to regular US citizens in general. And yet, if the gov’t proposed halting the Koran burning, those EXACT SAME people would be marching on capitol buildings, guns in hand, demanding the pastor be left alone. That’s how you spot bigots & hypocrites.

  8. anjin-san says:

    > Question to angin-san, do you have a favorable or unfavorable view of the Republican Party?
    When Reagan was President, I was a member of the GOP. My view of the current iteration of the Republican Party is generally unfavorable.

  9. john personna says:

    Steve Plunk wrote:

    Anjin, Sarah Palin did not create these attitudes.  Islam’s theology, it’s history. and it’s current manifestations have created this problem.  This “religion of peace” is about to explode over a no name preacher burning some Korans.

    And you wouldn’t see yourself egging that on?

  10. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Legion, in the Muslim world, they build mosques on the sites of Churches in lands they conquer.  I am tired to death of PC people telling me I must tolerate people who intend, ultimately, to covert me or kill me.  Islam is not truely a religion as it seeks political domination.  I have coated all my bullets in lard and coated my edged weapons in bacon grease.  No virgins for those I dispatch.  By the way, martyrs thinking, in their perverted thinking, they will get 72 virgins in heaven.  They are all fat and ugly virgins and you are really in hell.

  11. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Anjin, you were a conservative during the Reagan era and converted to Marxism when?

  12. PD Shaw says:

    anjin-san, thank you.  And I don’t take from your response that you spend your time burning copies of the Republican platform, or stalking outside a meeting of the Young Republicans with a shiv.

    I think whether somebody has a favorable or unfavorable view of an ideology or theology is not a good measure of intolerance.

  13. john personna says:

    Zelsdorf, has there really been just one Muslim strategy for government and religious diversity over the ages?
     
    Is for instance, Egypt the same as Iran?  I know some Egyptian Christians …
     
    http://www.coptic.net/EncyclopediaCoptica/

  14. Juneau: says:

    @ legion
     
    Christian conservatives in the country would “explode” like you’ve never seen. They would be demanding boycotts, legal action, police or even military intervention – you name it.


    Since what you described has happened already in the past – and much worse than that – please show me the “violent” mobs and the damage they caused when these events occurred.   Where did the violent protests, the dire warnings of retribution, and the threatening mobs, take place when the Christian religion was  displayed with urine and excrement as “art?”

    You strain to draw a comparison that doesn’t exist between the way that Christians react to calculated insults to their religion, as compared to Muslims.  Again, the folks who engage in this false comparison are intellectually dishonest.  The proof of Christian tolerance exists before your eyes, both historically and in the present.  The proof of Muslim intolerance also exists before your eyes.  There is an infinite gap between writing letters, holding signs, and contacting your Congressman about religious insults(which Christians do), and threatening violence and death over a religious insult (which Muslims do).

    You can say “it’s only some Muslims” and that is absolutely true.  But even the moderates use the hovering threat of violence to accomplish what they want.  Now the park51 Imam is saying that if we don’t let the mosques be built on that location, then it may cause Muslims to attack.   So apparently, with Muslims, it’s pretty much “give us exactly what we want, or there’s going to be trouble.”

    They are going to push people who are ambivalent about Islam into standing against them, just based upon the concept that they refuse to be verbally threatened into compliance with the wishes of the “peaceful” religion..

  15. sam says:

    @Plunk

    Islam’s theology, it’s history. and it’s current manifestations have created this problem.
     

    Sigh. Islam embraces many theologies, as does Christianity and Judaism. I’d have thought by this time with all that’s been said, we’d at least understand that. Similiar to the rest of the monotheistic religions, Islam does have a unified theology. But I guess that is too difficult for some to grasp.

  16. legion says:

    It has not been Christians who invaded Muslim lands to expand thier influence.
    in the Muslim world, they build mosques on the sites of Churches in lands they conquer.
    Wow, Zel. Every post you make proves how completely bereft of education and sanity you are. Christians and Moslems have been treating each other like crap for the last ~1400 years. You don’t think Crusaders defiled Mosques? That Spanish Moors were treated as equals during the Reconquesta? That European colonial powers divided up the Middle East by what was best for the locals? That Christians and Moslems talked their differences out over tea when Yugoslavia broke up? How about the growing numbers of conservative Christians in the US seeking political domination here?
    Horrific violence is what organized religions have committed upon each other since the development of organized religion. The problem is not Islam, nor even religion in general – it is intolerant bigotry. And YOU are the problem.

  17. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Why is it the left always has to demonize those who disagree with them?  Why is it people cannot oppose something and have their reasons questioned?  Why is it those on the left think they know what is best for America and its citizens and to disagree with that is to be stupid or afraid?  I am beginning to believe those on the left have some sort of mental illness which causes them not to be able to understand what NO means.  A vast majority of Americans believe Muslims have the constitutional right to build a Mosque at Park21 however that same majority think it is wrong to build it there.  Funny thing is, Islam opposes almost all that the left holds dear.  They kill gays, treat women poorly.  Oppose abortion, yet the left protects Islam.  I think it comes down to both being anti American and anti freedom.

  18. matt says:

    John : This is what gets me.. Iran not only has +300,000 Christians but +20,000 something Jews. The Iranian parliament even has seats reserved for Jews and Christians since they are the minority (It’d be like congress having seats for Atheists and such here in the states).

  19. matt says:

    Funny thing is, Christianity opposes almost all that the left holds dear.  They kill gays, treat women poorly.  Oppose abortion, yet the left protects Christianity.  I think it comes down to both being anti American and anti freedom.
     
     

  20. sam says:

    @Juneau
    “Now the park51 Imam is saying that if we don’t let the mosque be built on that location, then it may cause Muslims to attack. So apparently, with Muslims, it’s pretty much “give us exactly what we want, or there’s going to be trouble.””
     
    Here’s what he said:
     

    “If we move from that location, the story will be that the radicals have taken over the discourse,” he said. “The headlines in the Muslim world will be that Islam is under attack. And I’m less concerned about the radicals in America than I am about the radicals in the Muslim world.” http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/nyregion/09mosque.html
     

    That last part of what I quoted from you is misleading. You make it appear as if Rauf is saying, “Give me what I want or else.”  I.e., you’re asserting that he himself would be amenable to seeing radical Muslim violence, if not complicit in provoking it,  if the proposed center is moved. That he’s extorting us. I’m not sure how you arrive at that on the basis of what he said.

  21. Trumwill says:

    Is having a negative opinion on Islam not allowed? I mean, there are religions that I have negative opinions of. So then should my opposition to dumping young men in the desert so that the elder men can collect fourteen year old wives be dismissed since I don’t like the Fundamentalist Latter Day Saints in general? Should I pretend to like the FLDS so that my opinion on things they or their members do that I don’t like is not mere bigotry?
     
    I say this as someone that does not oppose the Ground Zero Mosque, hope it’s built, and believe that those rallying the opposition are being overly-sensitive and in some cases optimistic. To me, this poll does not tell me anything useful unless having a negative opinion of a religious group is to be considered unacceptable.

  22. SPQR says:

    Personally, I’m becoming tired of reading all of the hatred of Muslims on websites. I suspect that it’s coming mostly from Jews and from other losers who feel so insecure, so inferior, so inadequate and so stupid that they trash Muslims to feel better about themselves. The Jews spew their hate, because they want to draw us into their senseless Hatfields and McCoys blood feud between themseves and Muslims that has been going on for 3,000 years. They’re as evil as the worst terrorists are. They foment divisiveness and trouble wherever they go.

    I served with good, consciencious and patriotic Muslim-Americans in Iraq, in Afganistan and in the Phillipines. They were fine people. Some of them gave their lives for this country. Lumping moderates in with radicals is just plain wrong.

    The ignorance of most of the people posting on conservative websites is stunning. They don’t know squat about Islamic cultures. All that they know are the hate and ignorance being spewed by sleazy elements for self-serving reasons.

  23. legion says:

    Juneau,
    There haven’t really been enough Moslems in the US until the last few decades to really track much in the way of hate crimes against them. But extreme violence committed by self-proclaimed Christians against blacks, Jews, homosexuals, etc. is quite well documented. Additionally, the arson at the Mosque building site, the demonstrations against such facilities spreading across the nation, and the general level of intolerance does not bode well for anyone.

  24. Juneau: says:

    @ sam
     
    Sigh. Islam embraces many theologies, as does Christianity and Judaism. I’d have thought by this time with all that’s been said, we’d at least understand that.


    Sam, you either have an extremely fluid, and arbitrary,  definition of “theology” or you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and are generalizing out of a lack of knowledge.

  25. mantis says:

     
    Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:
    Why is it the left always has to demonize those who disagree with them?
    Hahahahahaha.  Thanks Dorf.  That was a good one.

  26. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Legion, your lack of education shows here.  Islam began around 640 A.D.  Know what the A.D. stand for?  Which means Judism and Christianty were extablished religions way before Islam.  Do you know or will you have to google what was on the Temple Mount when Muslims conquered Jerusalem.  It certainly is not what is there now.  I was taught the Crusades were the European response to the Muslim invasion of the Holy Land and beyond in the eighth grade.  Prof. Norman Thornburg taught me more history from 1965 and again in 1970-73 than your marxist instructers were able to instill in your washed brain.  You are a perfect, or as flawed example of my previous post as exists.  FOAD Legion.  Know what that means.  Dweeb.

  27. sam says:

    @SPQR

    The Jews spew their hate, because they want to draw us into their senseless Hatfields and McCoys blood feud between themseves and Muslims that has been going on for 3,000 years.

     
    That’s a way over the  top. Just as not all Muslims are radical, so all Jews are not, either. Can we introduce some nuance into these discussions, please?

  28. john personna says:

    Trumwill:
     

    Is having a negative opinion on Islam not allowed? I mean, there are religions that I have negative opinions of.

    The obvious thing is that we have a nuanced view of Christian religions.  We don’t think Catholics and Mormons are the same.  And yet, many in this thread are pushing the view that there is one Islam.  Are the Saudis and Malays the same?

  29. john personna says:

    SPQR, are you early Rome or late Rome?

  30. john personna says:

    (Matt, I also know (Armenian) Christians from Iran.  They didn’t have fond memories.)

  31. mantis says:

    Is having a negative opinion on Islam not allowed?
    What a stupid question.  Not allowed by whom?
    To me, this poll does not tell me anything useful unless having a negative opinion of a religious group is to be considered unacceptable.
    What it tells us, as the post makes quite clear, is there is a direct correlation between dislike of Islam and opposition to the Park51 building.  Nowhere does the poll, or the post, claim that an unfavorable view of Islam is “unacceptable,” whatever that’s supposed to mean.

  32. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Mantis, they tried reasoning with you over at Wizbang.  That did not work so you were banned.  I will fight fire with fire.

    Matt, you have never been to a Catholic church have you.  Christians treat women badly.  In which Christian nation does that exist?  Where is it, in the Christian world, gays are stoned?  Dude, we have states where they can get married.  A vast majority of Americans identify themselves as Christians.  Matt, you made a statement where is your examples?

  33. sam says:

    @Juneau

    Sam, you either have an extremely fluid, and arbitrary, definition of “theology” or you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about and are generalizing out of a lack of knowledge.
     

    That’s not a serious observation, is it?  Cp, Sunni, Shia, Sufi.  See, Lawless, by Lee Smith for a discussion of the different schools of Islam, http://www.tabletmag.com/news-and-politics/42898/lawless/.
    Just consider the different approaches to sharia:
     

    Even though Islam is very simple in its basics, including conversion—you are a Muslim if you testify there is no God but God and Muhummad is the messenger of God—the faith comes with a fabulously esoteric scholarly tradition.

    The access that Muslims have to sharia is through jurisprudence, or fiqh al-sharia, the comprehension of sharia. In Muslim history there were at least six major Sunni schools of law, with only four remaining (Hanbali, Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i); in Shia Islam there are two major approaches, usuli, based on deriving principles, and akhbari, a scripturalist posture that believes all answers are already written down in the Quran and the sayings of the Shiite saints.

    Of course, there is also difference of opinion as to the relevant texts. Except for the Quran, Sunnis and Shiites typically disagree about everything. As for the hadith, or sayings of the prophet, the Sunnis believe the relevant hadith are those of the prophet and his companions, the sahaba; for the Shia, the meaningful hadith are those of the prophet as well as the imams who followed him. To produce fiqh, the Shia also have aql, or intellect, whereas the Sunnis go by the principle of qiyas, or reasoning by analogy, and also ijma, or consensus.
     

     
     
     
     

  34. mantis says:

    Mantis, they tried reasoning with you over at Wizbang.  That did not work so you were banned
    False.  I’ve never been banned at Wizbang.  I’ve told you this several times, but you’re an insane moron, so it doesn’t quite sink in, does it?
    I will fight fire with fire.
    Quick, your hair is on fire!  Fight it!

  35. matt says:

    john personna : That’s not surprising as Armenians in general have had it rough the last century (especially if they left during or shortly after the Islamic revolution). They probably feel a lot like Sikh do down here in Texas. My fiancee is half Iranian so I know quite well the plight of Christians there.

    Zel : Half of my Fiancee’s family is also very Catholic her grandfather is even a Deacon of the church with a great deal of theological education. I’ve been to Catholic churches around the world including the Cathedral of Notre Dame (beautiful architecture and acoustics). Still doesn’t change the fact that Christians are trying to execute gays in Uganda as a NATIONAL LAW or the variety of gays killed by so called Christians around the world. You need to pull the beam out of your eye buddy. Female Genital Mutilation occurs the world wide and is supported by Christian sects in Egypt, Africa, and even south America. What you need to realize is that it’s not the religion that is the problem but the actual local culture. Local culture trumps religion and since religion in general is very ambiguous the people will find passages that support whatever the local culture demands.

    I find a lot of people self identify as Christian if for no other reason then to avoid awkward family/social situations. I self identify as a Christian or Agnostic depending on the situation as I find a lot of employers down here are all about thumping their bible so I cannot blame people for not telling the truth in order to ensure future employment. I personally follow two rules while working down here. Don’t talk religion. Don’t talk politics.

  36. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Most people do not have much of a problem with Islam as it is practiced here.  However the problem comes when their adherents propose building a Mosque on a site where human body parts adn pieces of airplane landed after some men who came to this country will malice in their hearts.  They went to our schools to learn how to pilot our planes under a peaceful guise.  They lived among us all the time planning to kill as many as possible.  All this was done in the name of Allah.  I know of no way to distinguish between a moderate or radical Muslim.  I do not hear a great outcry from moderate Muslims over the behavior of the radicals because the radicals are in charge.  Islam has a history of building Mosques on or near the sites of their conquests.  The Cordoba Mosque in Spain was built on the site of a Church they destroyed.  Imam Faud referred to the proposed building as Cordoba House in his latest attempt to push this monument on people who do not want it.  He even issued threats if the site is rejected.  I think the American people recognize what is going on and only those who want Rauf to build this building are deluding themselves.  But then you in the echo chamber know what is best better than the vast majority of Americans.  I am suprised you are not all world leaders.

  37. wr says:

    Zels — Are you aware that America is not the same as Christianity? Because you seem to think they are one and the same. Some states here allow gays to marry, and some states in Africa — at the urging of American Christians — attempt to pass laws to make homosexuality a capital crime.

  38. PD Shaw says:

    john pesonna, I think the important thing is to distinguish idealogy/religion from the person.  The poll attempted to do this by asking questions about views of Islam and views of Muslims.

    General Opinion of Islam:  34% fav. / 49% unfav.

    Do you have at least some prejudice against Muslims:

    Sept. 2010:  26% Yes / 71% No
    March 2006:  27% Yes / 72% No 

  39. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    Female mutilation is a Muslim habit not Christian.  They eat people in Uganda.  Where in the New Testament is it stated death to infidels.  When did Christ murder Jews?  Mohammad did.  Matt your examples are not valid or just out right wrong.  Shall we use Darfur and an example of Islamic brotherhood?  How about Somalia?  Islam still recognizes slavery.  Encourages it also.

  40. matt says:

    I do not hear a great outcry from moderate Muslims over the behavior of the radicals because the radicals are in charge.

    You do not hear it because your ears are closed..

    http://www.muhajabah.com/otherscondemn.php

    So according to you we can ban White Christians from federal buildings and surrounding areas as they have traveled to those buildings with malice in their hearts (see Oklahoma Austin Holocaust museum etc).

    Your post completely goes off into fantasy land once you get talking about Cordoba and the Imam. Your ignorance of history is appalling and your insistence on making up “quotes” is just completely unchristian (bear false witness).

  41. Rose says:

    So, when the Muslims threaten we should just roll over and play dead? Or bow to Mecca five times a day? Or what?
    And it seems strange to me that this so-called religion of peace has no problems to gin up energy to demonstrate over a stupid cartoon when some loony pastor in a Florida swamp threatens to burn a Koran (note, he hasn’t even done it yet), but they can’t gin up energy to demonstrate against the barbaric stoning of a woman…. and that goes for the so-called “peaceful” American Muslims too. Where are they while their “peaceful” religion is being hijacked?

    As for that little silly pastor in Florida, he may be a media whore, but the media certainly has played his game by reporting on him. That pastor would still be a nonentity in a swamp somewhere if the media hadn’t given him the coverage. What do you think their motive might be? Could it be that they want to stir the pot and then claim how narrow minded we all are when we say “Enough!!!”
    Nah, let’s just roll over and play dead. You liberals are insane, and when sharia law is finally implemented due to Muslim continual aggression you will be the first to be caught in the tide, except you are too stupid to realize that.
     

  42. sam says:

    @Zels:
     
    “The Cordoba Mosque in Spain was built on the site of a Church they destroyed.”
     
    Uh, no:

    The building [of the church that was to become the Great Mosque of Cordoba] was begun in approximately AD 600 as the Christian Visigothic church of St. Vincent. After the Islamic conquest of the Visigothic kingdom the Emir Abd ar-Rahman I bought the church. Abd ar-Rahman I and his descendants reworked it over two centuries to refashion it as a mosque, starting in 784. Additionally, Abd ar-Rahman I used the mosque (originally called Aljama Mosque) as an adjunct to his palace and named it to honor his wife.  … http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Mosque_of_Córdoba

     
    After the Moors were kicked out of Spain (followed closely by the Jews, if you’re interested), the Great Mosque became a Christian sanctuary.  In the 1500s, a cathedral was built in the middle of the mosque. http://witcombe.sbc.edu/sacredplaces/cordoba.html

  43. matt says:

    Female mutilation is a Muslim habit not Christian.

    WRONG It’s just as much a CHristian habit as a Muslim habit

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

    So wait Zel you’re going to suddenly rule the old testament as not being part of the bible? That’s lul to the extreme and only goes to show that you know your own religion condoned similiar practices. IT’s painfully obvious that you have no intent on learning anything so any effort on my part to educate you would be a waste..

  44. mantis says:

    Revised Dorfgasm:
     
    All Muslims are personally responsible for the attacks on 9/11.  I know of no way to distinguish between a moderate or radical Muslim, therefore there is no way to do so.  I do not hear a great outcry from moderate Muslims over the behavior of the radicals, because I refuse to listen. Islam has a history of building Mosques on or near the sites of their conquests, as does Christianity, but I will ignore that. The Cordoba Mosque in Spain was built on the site of a Church they destroyed, and I’ll leave out the part where the Moorish conquest of Spain saved countless Jews and other non-Christians from the horrendous, murderous treatment of the Catholics who ruled them prior.  Now I will lie about Imam Faud issuing threats.  You’re all stupid and unAmerican for not insisting all Muslims are evil, as is apparent.
     
     

  45. Zelsdorf Ragshaft III says:

    No I do not equate America with Christianity, however without Christianty America would not exist.  The founders, though mostly Christian were sucessful in their efforts to prevent the establishment of a national religion.  Congress shall make no laws regarding the establishment of a religion.  That is a lot different than separation of church and state but does show intent.  What I have said is Ameican in the majority, identify themselves as Christian.  If you cannot tell the difference between what you stated and what I said, oh well.  How many American Christians are encouraging African nations to criminalize homosexuality?  Name them.  Which churches?  Don’t point to Phelps church and make that claim.  Funny, you do not point out Muslim nations do it now, even the more civilized ones.  Remember the Churches burnt in Malaysia?  How about the murder of the Dutch artist or the death threats to a Danish Cartoonist?  Try not to compare what Christians did in the 10th century to what Muslims are doing today.

  46. G.A.Phillips says:

    They kill gays, treat women poorly.  Oppose abortion, yet the left protects Christianity.

     LOL…. I had to pick out the best delusion, but I just want you to read it again, no response.

  47. matt says:
  48. Juneau: says:

    @ sam
     
    That’s not a serious observation, is it?


    Yes, it is – and you are confusing theology with doctrine.  Theology concerns itself with the nature and character of God.  Christianity and Judaism have no essential difference in theology – the God they worship is the same in nature and character. Doctrine is the specific  “rule set” agreed upon by a group in how best to walk out a devoted life.  It is the doctrinal differences that separate out Assembly of God churches from Baptists, for example, or Catholics.

    To say that Christianity or Islam has many different theologies is not correct.  They have distinctly different views on the nature and character of God, but are both monotheistic.

  49. mantis says:

    How many American Christians are encouraging African nations to criminalize homosexuality?  Name them.  Which churches?  Don’t point to Phelps church and make that claim.
    How about the Institute on Religion and Democracy, Abiding Truth Ministries, and Canyon Ridge Christian Church, among others?  Rick Warren, after helping out behind the scenes for years, remained silent for months before finally calling the bill “un-Christian,” two-faced little shitstain that he is.
    Remember the Churches burnt in Malaysia?  How about the murder of the Dutch artist or the death threats to a Danish Cartoonist?  Try not to compare what Christians did in the 10th century to what Muslims are doing today.
    Remember Eric Rudolph bombing Centennial Olympic Park?  How about Scott Roeder’s murder of George Tiller in his church?  How about Army of God, Lambs of Christ, Hutaree, and other American Christian terrorist organizations?  Hmm?

  50. Juneau: says:

    @ matt

    Female mutilation is a Muslim habit not Christian.
    WRONG It’s just as much a CHristian habit as a Muslim habit


    Dude, you may want to get your own citations right before you claim them as proof.  The Wikipedia entry you cite actually says just the opposite of what you claim.

    FGC has never been part of Christianity as a faith system. There are no scriptural or doctrinal documents existing within the larger Christian tradition that even address the issue. The only contemporary examples of Christians practicing FGC are in Africa. As FGC rituals predated the missionaries work in North Africa, many African tribes continue the practice as a matter of cultural tradition, unrelated to religious belief.
    In Islamic texts, FGC is referred to as khafḍ (Arabic: خفض‎)[18] or khifaḍ[19] (Arabic: خِفَض‎)
    Sheikh Musa Mohammed Omer, a member of the Executive Committee of the Supreme Council for Islamic Affairs in Ethiopia has said: “there is no evidence from Islamic sources prohibiting female circumcision,” unless it is infibulation.[22] Pharaonic circumcision refers to infibulation, or WHO Type III FGC.


    Who’s spouting nonsense now?

  51. Trumwill says:

    John Personna,
     
    Leaving aside that not everyone (on either side of the divide) takes a nuanced view of Christianity, When the poll question asks what you think of Muslims, the poll is forcing you that make an assumption about about Islam as a singular entity. If a poll question asks what you think about Christians, you have to consider both Catholics and Southern Baptists.

  52. John425 says:

    “…some rather disturbing beliefs that seem to be becoming more acceptable in American society.”

    Yeah, we tend to form negative opinions of people who wants to see another Holocaust and obliterate the state of Israel, someone who wants social policies fit for the 6th century, complete with beheadings, stonings, slavery and death for unbelievers, someone who crashed airplanes into buildings and killing thousands of innocents and we also think negatively of nation-states that burn Bibles and kill off as many Christians as possible. Think Saudi Arabia, Darfur and Iran. For good but unrelated measure we can add the terrorist state of North Korea into the last mix. 

  53. sam says:

    @Juneau

    Yes, it is – and you are confusing theology with doctrine.

     
    Oh, OK. Given that terminological change, is my plea for nuance misplaced?
     
    And
     

    Christianity and Judaism have no essential difference in theology – the God they worship is the same in nature and character.

     
    Well, unless you want to say that Catholics are not Christians, I’m pretty sure Jews would reject the Trinity, right? But that’s merely an aside.

  54. An Interested Party says:

    For those who are disturbed by female genital multilation, are you as equally disturbed by male genital mutilation?  And if so, do you harbor ill will towards Judiasm because of that?

  55. mantis says:

    For those who are disturbed by female genital multilation, are you as equally disturbed by male genital mutilation?  And if so, do you harbor ill will towards Judiasm because of that?
    There is a real big difference between the two.  It’s basically the same as the difference between piercing an ear and removing the eardrum.

  56. john personna says:

    Trumwil:
     

    Leaving aside that not everyone (on either side of the divide) takes a nuanced view of Christianity, When the poll question asks what you think of Muslims, the poll is forcing you that make an assumption about about Islam as a singular entity. If a poll question asks what you think about Christians, you have to consider both Catholics and Southern Baptists.

    Or, in either case, people who are willing to group Muslims and Christians together will be more willing to take a position for or against them.

  57. anjin-san says:

    > converted to Marxism when?
    I am an executive with a Fortune 500 company. You, unless I am misinformed, are unemployed and cashing government checks. I think you have things somewhat turned around.

  58. Trumwill says:

    Or, in either case, people who are willing to group Muslims and Christians together will be more willing to take a position for or against them.
    The poll *requires* that you lump them together (respectively) be to able to answer. You can’t answer the question otherwise. Insofar as your main point is a discomfort with people viewing all Muslims or strands of Islam as the same, I agree. But when asked to do so, having a negative view of the collective does not strike me as a particularly damning reveal so much as it is of having an opinion that a lot of people disagree with.

  59. An Interested Party says:

    “There is a real big difference between the two.”

    Really?  Male genital mutilation is just like piercing an ear lobe?  Well, that’s certainly one opinion…

  60. SPQR says:

    Rose @ 3:51PM – I suspect that Muslims have more to fear from you and your ilk than you and your ilk have to fear from them. Unreal.

  61. […] New Poll Links Anti-Muslim Sentiment And Opposition To “Ground Zero Mosque” (outsidethebeltway.com) […]

  62. matt says:

    Juneau : Yeah and if you actually continued to read the article you’d of seen that it says the same thing about Muslims.. AKA neither the bible or Koran specifically states it. There are plenty of priests in Africa/middle east/etc that say the bible supports it just like that sheikh dude that no one cares about. So in the end it is just as much a Christian activity as a Muslim..

    Really?  Male genital mutilation is just like piercing an ear lobe?  Well, that’s certainly one opinion…

    It is when compared to losing ALL sexual sensation. You do victims of  FGM a disservice by trying to equate them to the male version. I’m “mutilated” but I still have plenty of feeling and ability..

  63. matt says:

    As FGC rituals predated the missionaries work in North Africa, many African tribes continue the practice as a matter of cultural tradition, unrelated to religious belief.

  64. mannning says:

    If I could tell with certainty which Muslims in America were radical and ready to perform Jihad: terrorist or suicide attacks, I would deport them as “undesirables” and ban them from returning for life.  If we knew just how many were of this type, we might be able to better deploy our FBI, HLS, and other law enforcement resources across the land in order to intercept these terrorists early on, thus preventing further loss of life and property.

    The truth is, while we may have a handle on a few of these terrorists, it is not possible to track all Muslims in the nation, and it is not possible to tell which Muslims out of from 2 to 6 million are the good guys and gals and which are not. Thus, we have a significant threat of terrorist attacks, whether there are ten or ten thousand or a hundred thousand or more Muslim terrorists in country waiting orders to attack.  

    The reactions to this situation seem to hover between a law enforcement approach which means in essence awaiting a broken law before acting; a more active tracking of the few we do know as being subversive, hoping that we have the most likely offenders in view all the time; and the most radical reaction of all being to organize a mass deportation program of all Muslims (since we cannot identify the Jihadists in their midst, and they have been of little help themselves in turning in the Jihadists they know).

    My own take is that we will opt for the Law enforcement approach just now, with a little energy spent by the FBI to try to track the Jihadists. The question is, what would force us to go to the extreme of deporting millions of people?

    That we could do so is not a question, since we have actually done something even more difficult in mobilizing and supporting our 10 to 12 million servicemen in WWII for 4 or 5 years. It would be costly, and it would take years, but there is no doubt that it could be done from a logistics point of view.  

    I believe that a major Jihadist attack that resulted in thousands and thousands of casualties, even tens of thousands of dead and mutilated US citizens, would cause us to act very harshly towards all Muslims in the US, regardless of their possible innocence, and perhaps elsewhere in the world as well.  

    There are two cases of importance here: 1) we do not know the origin of the attack for sure; and, 2) we find out one way or another which nation or sect did order the act. We would strike out at the most likely nation or nations, or sect that we have some knowledge of as being Jihadist-oriented in case 1, and for a certainty we would strike at the nation or sect that we know is behind the attack as in case 2.  In either case, most resident Muslims would be rounded up and placed in concentration camps prior to their being deported.  
     

  65. sam says:

    Ah, Manning, try as you will, it’s impossible for you to hide the air of wistful longing in that comment re the final solution to the Muslim Menace. C’mon, fess up, part of you is really, really hoping for a religious war, right? Part of you gets off on the mass deportation scenario, right?  All in the service of your Crusade jones.  All in the service of Fighting the Good Fight Against the Forces of Evil. The nihilism at the core of your comment is pronounced, though I’m absolutely sure it goes thoroughly unnoticed by you, gimcracked up as it is in your mind in the garb of hard-headed realism.

  66. matt says:

    If I could tell with certainty which Christians in America were radical and ready to perform terrorist or suicide attacks, I would deport them as “undesirables” and ban them from returning for life. If we knew just how many were of this type, we might be able to better deploy our FBI, HLS, and other law enforcement resources across the land in order to intercept these terrorists early on, thus preventing further loss of life and property.

    The truth is, while we may have a handle on a few of these terrorists, it is not possible to track all Christians in the nation, and it is not possible to tell which Christians out of from 40-100 million are the good guys and gals and which are not. Thus, we have a significant threat of terrorist attacks, whether there are ten or ten thousand or a hundred thousand or more Christian terrorists in country waiting orders to attack.

    The reactions to this situation seem to hover between a law enforcement approach which means in essence awaiting a broken law before acting; a more active tracking of the few we do know as being subversive, hoping that we have the most likely offenders in view all the time; and the most radical reaction of all being to organize a mass deportation program of all Christians (since we cannot identify the extremists in their midst, and they have been of little help themselves in turning in the extremists they know).

    My own take is that we will opt for the Law enforcement approach just now, with a little energy spent by the FBI to try to track the extremists. The question is, what would force us to go to the extreme of deporting millions of people?

    That we could do so is not a question, since we have actually done something even more difficult in mobilizing and supporting our 10 to 12 million servicemen in WWII for 4 or 5 years. It would be costly, and it would take years, but there is no doubt that it could be done from a logistics point of view. 

    I believe that a major extremist attack that resulted in thousands and thousands of casualties, even tens of thousands of dead and mutilated US citizens, would cause us to act very harshly towards all Christians in the US, regardless of their possible innocence, and perhaps elsewhere in the world as well. 

    There are two cases of importance here: 1) we do not know the origin of the attack for sure; and, 2) we find out one way or another which nation or sect did order the act. We would strike out at the most likely nation or nations, or sect that we have some knowledge of as being extremist-oriented in case 1, and for a certainty we would strike at the nation or sect that we know is behind the attack as in case 2.  In either case, most resident Christians would be rounded up and placed in concentration camps prior to their being deported.

    Based on various sources there’s more likely at least 4 million Muslims here but the inability to know for sure is due to their integration into American society (which is a proven method of stamping out extremists).

  67. matt says:

    BTW saying it’s a law enforcement problem doesn’t = wait for something to happen.. The FBI and such have been quite pro-active in breaking up plots before they occur. Sure some things get through like the shooting of Roeder or the suicide bomber that flew his plane into a building in Austin but I believe law enforcement is trying…

  68. mannning says:

    Yawn! What a wonderful imagination Sam and Matt have! If you have ever been in a war, you would know for a fact that it is not something to wish for.

    If you have ever watched the inevitable progression towards war, such as in 1938, and knew it was coming and couldn’t do a thing about it but get ready to serve, or in 1950, or in 1962, or in Gulf I and II, all creating major problems and casualties for us, you would have your antennae up too.

    One gets rather good at detecting the trends, or else rather paranoid at the possibilities, or both. I, for one, have not forgotten 9/11, and who the culprits were, or the USS Cole, or Ft. Hood…….the list gets longer and longer. It is precisely those who refuse to look at the situation clearly that cause us to come late to the wars, which costs us dearly in lives to catch up, often quite unnecessarily had we taken appropriate measures in time, instead of appeasing the bad guys and going to great lengths to minimize the threats with imtellectual claptrap, pacifism and false expectations.

     

  69. matt says:

    Manning : Your condescension is unnecessary and merely distracts from your points in general. I highly doubt you were old enough to watch the “inevitable progression towards war” which began well before 1938 but I wouldn’t doubt your other statements. I have on the other hand read a great deal about the “inevitable progression towards war” and the policies of the Treaty of Versailles had more to do with the inevitable march then anything else. I also have family who have served or were imprisoned in concentration camps of the era (numbers tattooed on them and all) so I’ve had plenty of first hand accounts. I also have several family members and friends who are in the service or honorably discharged (including my brother killed in Iraq). The problem is every single one of your examples involves at least one COUNTRY trying to invade or attack another country. For some reason you’re incapable of realizing the substantial differences between a few people in caves and the might of Nazi Germany or even Saddam’s Iraq (Saddam being our boy for years was our fault just like Osama and crew). Hell I consider North Korea to be a bigger threat then radical Islam at this point (obviously radicals in general are a threat). Unstable dying dictator of a barely stable nuclear country trying to groom his relatively unpopular son to take over is worthy of great concern. The potential for nuclear materials/secrets to be sold/leaked to radical elements are of a great concern to me. For those reasons I find Iran to be worthy of concern too but certainly not enough to start bombing.

    I for one have not forgotten the Oklahoma city bombing and who the culprits were, or the Centennial Olympic park bombing or Austin. My mom treated several of the people who were shot at the fort hood incident and I helped with crowd control. What did you do for them?

    I obviously believe it is you who is not looking at the situation clearly. I’m glad you admitted that you’re paranoid because it’s very very obvious in your posts. When you mix unhealthy skepticism with fear you get paranoia and I refuse to be scared or paranoid but I will be skeptical of EVERYONE including “Us” and “them” as neither have my best interests in heart. If you believe appeasement lead to WW2 then you truly are ignorant of history..

    I will tell you that your insistence on labeling Islam as the next great evil and next great villain to fight against just appeases the terrorists because they’d love nothing more then to have that war..

  70. mannning says:

    @ Matt.  My late response to this comment was due to a crash requiring minor surgery of this old machine.

    1. paranoia–well, that is a bit strong.  I would accept concerned and somewhat anxious as I see the situation evolving overseas in Europe as it will here over time.

    2. age–I was at my father’s knee when he did homework for Hap Arnold’s plan for expansion of the Army Air Corps.  He was an officer on Arnold’s staff in the old War Department on Constitution Avenue. In fact, it was my father that hired in Robert MacNamarra and the other “whiz kids” to provide some needed brain power for the effort. For a pre-teen, I was rather well-informed on matters military, since I was brought up around fliers and Army bases. We lived in Georgetown when Dad was stationed in the Pentagon, and had a lot of military visitors. All during WWII and through my own stints in the Navy and the USAF I was around many senior officers and civilians. During my 43 year career in defense work after that I worked in many domains, including command, control, communications, intelligence and computerization at the Pentagon and at NATO HQ. I even worked for the German MOD for a spell, as well as the Swiss upon their request. I retired in 2000.
     
    3. history–try not to take a one-liner or a paragraph as representative of my knowledge of history. I do believe, however, that strong positions, including significant defense buildups and proper diplomacy, very early on by the Western Powers could have derailed Hitler’s plans of military buildup and conquest. Both the US, the UK and France were in pitifully deep pacifist mode for far too long, and yet they knew what Hitler was doing, and they knew that his armaments were equal or superior to what we had. My father was very impressed by the Luftwaffe buildup, which he had seen first hand.  

    4. war–I thought you knew that we were at war with radical and not so radical elements of Islam already! Have you forgotten that we have lost over 5,000 killed so far, and suffered many brutal casualties in Iraq and Afghanistan? While some believe that we are through in Iraq, I would not be surprised to see significant combat there for years. As for Afghanistan, we will still be there next year, and probably for many more, one way or another. As an aside, I believe that we haven’t conducted either of these engagements properly or in a timely manner, but it would take a book to describe it all. They were a large waste of people and money, for little gain, and little winning of hearts and minds.

    5. Jihad–it is the stealth Jihad in the US  that comcerns me.  If we react properly, it can be defeated, but if we wait too long to recognize the problem and take steps to counter it, it will be a disaster, although I believe we will win in the end. Every indication is that we will indeed wait around trying to “assimilate” the unassimilable, and using dope-filled peace pipes that only we smoke, while allowing Muslims to take key positions in the military, the government, and even law enforcement.  Of course, terrorists would glory in the publicity on one hand, but on the other hand, they would see their dream fading quietly into the sunset, which I would count as much the greater blessing. But, you are right, Muslims just might not be next. by a hair! Pakistan is troubling too, and must be watched.

    6. What did I do for the Hood situation? Virtually nothing but complain where I could, which is increasingly futile–the old order ain’t there no mo.  I am in my “rocking chair” now, and I plan to stay there, since I am in my 80’s and unfit for combat duty.  I did my service in the Korean Conflict, and in my career, devoted my skills, such as they were, to help improve the defenses of the US and NATO.

     

  71. mannning says:

    @ Matt
    I forgot your caveat on appeasement. It is obvious that the cause of the war was not appeasement, but appeasement was the bellweather for Hitler to proceed with his plans. He saw the UK and France as weak and the US as isolationist. Had he seen three strong nations standing together and armed as well as the Germans were, and willing to defend the status quo on principal….well, he might have backed off, and tens of millions of people would not have perished. That, with a few diplomatic modifications to the Treaty, might have staunched the war fever.