Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Opposition to 'mosque' directly linked to anti-Islam sentiment, poll shows

We now have clear evidence that there's a direct link between public anti-Islam sentiment and public opposition to the construction of Cordoba House, a.k.a. the "Ground Zero mosque."

The evidence can be found in the internals of the new Washington Post poll on Islam and the planned center, and it was provided to me by Post polling director Jon Cohen. The numbers directly contradict the claim by opponents that public opposition to the project is not linked to broader anti-Islam sentiment, and is only rooted in a desire to be sensitive to 9/11 families or to respect Ground Zero as hallowed ground.

The poll's toplines show that 66 percent of Americans oppose the Islamic center. Separately, a plurality, 49 percent, has generally unfavorable views of Islam.

But it's the intersection of these numbers revealed in the internals that proves the point.

Here's the rub: According to the internals sent my way, opposition to the "Ground Zero mosque" is overwhelmingly driven by those with an unfavorable view of Islam:

* Fifty-five percent of those who have favorable views of the religion say it should be built.

* Meanwhile, among those who have an unfavorable view of Islam, an overwhelming 87 percent say the project shouldn't be built, with 74 percent strongly opposed.

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.

By Greg Sargent  |  September 9, 2010; 11:01 AM ET
Categories:  Foreign policy and national security  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Morning Plum
Next: More House Dems balking at ending Bush tax cuts for rich

Comments

OT:

It's the ECONOMY, STUPID.

* U.S. Trade Gap Narrows *

The U.S. trade deficit contracted sharply in July, posting its biggest drop in 17 months as exports of airplanes surged and U.S. demand for imports fell across the board.

Meanwhile, in an optimistic sign for labor conditions, the number of U.S. workers filing new claims for jobless benefits fell last week by a lot more than economists expected.

The U.S. deficit in international trade of goods and services narrowed by 14% to $42.78 billion from a downwardly revised $49.76 billion the month before, the Commerce Department said Thursday. The June trade gap was originally reported as $49.90 billion.

U.S. exports expanded 1.8% to $153.33 billion, the highest level since August 2008, from $150.57 billion in June. Imports registered their biggest decline since February of last year, falling 2.1% to $196.11 billion from $200.33 billion in June.

The deficit reduction, which followed three straight months of gains, was much bigger than expected. Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had predicted a $47 billion trade gap.

[...]

Initial unemployment claims decreased by 27,000 to 451,000 in the week ended Sept. 4, the Labor Department said in its weekly report Thursday. New claims for the previous week, ended Aug. 28, were revised upward to 478,000 from 472,000.

Economists surveyed by Dow Jones Newswires had expected new claims would decline by a mere 2,000.

The four-week moving average, which aims to smooth volatility in the data, fell by 9,250 to 477,750. The prior week's average was revised to 487,000.

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704644404575481411027521610.html

Posted by: Ethan2010 | September 9, 2010 11:08 AM | Report abuse

So, Chris Plante, the local hate radio host on AM was getting into a twisted knot trying to attack Obama for suggesting burning Koran's is a bad idea that could endanger our troops but at the same time try and not disrespect General Peraeus.

It was quite the tight rope act.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Yet another reason to not vote for Reid...

Posted by: sbj3 | September 9, 2010 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Jobs are always a lagging indicator during any recovery period. We are just starting to turn the corner. The Obama efforts are starting to payoff. Most of them have been in effect for a year or less, so of course they were not going to fix everything overnight.

Bush/Cheney spent a whole eight years destroying our economy, so how the hell does anyone expect President Obama to undo the damage overnight.

We are headed in the right direction. Stay the course, and let Democrats finish rescuing the working class, like they have always had to do, after Republicans, from Hoover To Bush2, have frequently impoverished our working class.

Stay the course. Democrats will defend Social Security, and Equal Pay for equal work, regardless of gender, while Republicans will always try to undermine, and destroy Social Security, and treat Women as baby producing serfs.

Republicans brought about this economic catastrophe.

John Kevorkian Boehner, and Mitch Kevorkian McConnell have been in power for decades, so how come The Tea Party is not trying to oust them? Hmmmmm.

Republicans think all the voters are stupid. Why else would they be calling for you to vote out all "Washington insiders", while at the same time promising to put Boehner, and McConnell back in charge?

Wake up people. You are being played by the ultimate insiders and destroyers of our economy; John Kevorkian Boehner, and Mitch Kevorkian McConnell. You would have to have a death wish for America, to let those two guys back into the operating room.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 11:33 AM | Report abuse

I'll finish your sentence sbj3.

...and instead vote for the mentally unstable Angle who doesn't know what planet she's from.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 11:34 AM | Report abuse

I absolutely agree with sbj that this is a good reason to criticize Harry Reid -- in fact, I've done so myself!

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 9, 2010 11:42 AM | Report abuse

More mosque news! CalD is going to be so excited!

"But it's overwhelmingly clear that there's a link between the two sentiments, no matter how often opponents tell you the contrary."

Well, come on. Would we really be arguing about a community center being built where there is currently a derelict building if nobody in America harbored any kind of anti-Islamic sentiment?

That being said, Mark Steyn recently agreed with me that we wouldn't even be having this discussion if there were now 3 100 story tall WTC towers with ferris wheels on top (well, he didn't say that, exactly, but that's what I would have liked to have seen) on the site of ground zero. Then nobody would give two-figs about an actual Mosque topped with whirling minarets practically next door.

The lethargy in restoring the WTC is a huge factor here--bigger, in my opinion, than anti-Islam sentiment.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 9, 2010 11:45 AM | Report abuse

Greg, this was a non-story. You may as well have done a story that we now have proof that sunshine and warmth are directly related.

Posted by: 54465446 | September 9, 2010 11:46 AM | Report abuse

Anti-jihadists have consistently denounced the secular-Islam demonization campaign.

When will Greg (and his media toadies) publicly apologize to the secular Muslim NY Cabbie and his family for inciting the pro-jihad mosque vigilantee to moby violence?

It's past time to take a little ownership for Greg's orchestrated Islamo-supremacist advocacy campaign here.

What gets lost in all Greg's polling demogoguery is that the Muslim cabbie victim is himself a hateful hater, bigot, inauthentic, xenophobic, neanderthal-- at least, if you go by the criterion set out by Greg (and his toadies): Opposing the mosque is "Islamophobia"-- period. Right?

As an anti-jihadist, however, I’m inclined to observe that the Muslim cabbie’s pretty much consonant in his opinion of the Cordoba mosque with a super majority (70%) of his fellow Americans.

That Greg's proteges will be disappointed to discover the opinion of this Muslim cabbie apostate tells you all you need to know about the two "sides" of this debate.

Own it, Quislings for Islamo-supremacism.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 9, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

anti-mosque sentiment tied directly to anti-islam sentiment...
stop the presses!

Posted by: metropolitannyc | September 9, 2010 11:47 AM | Report abuse

@Greg: "I absolutely agree with sbj that this is a good reason to criticize Harry Reid."

yes, but do you further agree that Reid's anti-Islamic hatred is a good reason to vote for the mentally unstable Angle who doesn't know what planet she's from?

It's a tough call...

BTW, "Rauf said that if he knew how controversial the project would be, he “never would have done this – not have done something that would create more divisiveness."

http://news.blogs.cnn.com/2010/09/08/live-blog-imam-behind-nyc-islamic-center-speaks/?hpt

Posted by: sbj3 | September 9, 2010 11:48 AM | Report abuse

I’d also like to point out how bigotted, ignorant and intolerant it is of Greg to explain and justify the spiritual commitment of Cordoba House fanatics who endorse “Vilayet-i-faquih” (mullahocracy).
http://www.slate.com/id/2264770

By what authority does Bloomberg excommunicate (takfir) devout Secular Muslims when they oppose “Vilayet-i-faquih” and the multitude of oppressive sharia fatwas, endorsed by the Corboba House sharia law advocates?

Again, the prerogative to issue apostacy fatwas is granted only to Islam’s prophet, or authoritative representatives of the Ummah— which is Greg endorsing?

Does Greg know whether Cordoba House’s handlers in the Apartheid Kingdom of Saudi Arabia or the Muslim Brotherhood approved of any anti-sharia fatwas?

Don’t take my word for it: Here is Rauf's editorial endorsing "Vilayet-i-faquih" (the special term promulgated by Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini to describe mullahocracy).
http://www.slate.com/id/2264770

Please explain your nasty bigotry toward secular American Muslims who oppose the Cordoba House mosque, Greg.

Does Greg's bullying campaign (like Mayor Bloomberg's) have anything to do with sharia banking investments in Dubai?

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 9, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

Asking any politician their personal opinion on a controversial issue in an election year would get the same results as asking a kid if they ever drank a beer when they are underage. Sure, there's the exception but overall you'll get a bunch of hogwash.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 11:50 AM | Report abuse

@Liam-still: "Jobs are always a lagging indicator during any recovery period. We are just starting to turn the corner."

So what you're saying is that things should improve noticably just in time for recently elected Republicans to take credit for it, right?

"hn Kevorkian Boehner, and Mitch Kevorkian McConnell have been in power for decades, so how come The Tea Party is not trying to oust them?"

McConnell got a perfect score from the American Conservative Union, so that may be one reason. The other is that he's not up for re-election again until 2014, I don't think.

Boehner took on the House Bank, was one of the engineers of the Contract with America, and as house minority leader is the most powerful Republican in a Democrat-controlled house. As such, I imagine the Tea Party folks think their energy is best spent elsewhere.

Posted by: Kevin_Willis | September 9, 2010 11:52 AM | Report abuse

We wouldn;t be having this discussion if a small number of profewssional Islam haters and political opportunists hadn't ginned up the controversy and stirred up anti-Islamic sentiments. Perhaps some GOPers did because they realized anti-Mexican sentiment would have ballot box repercussions. Nevertheless, this is a manufactured controversy, and it is beginning to have very serious repercussions, like the notoriety lavished on that crank pastor in Florida.

Posted by: Mimikatz | September 9, 2010 11:53 AM | Report abuse

It's amazing that any Americans have a positive view of that blighted religion called Islam. What with the enormous amount of murder and mayhem caused by it's psychotic followers in America and around the world.

A mosque looks like an alien spacecraft and seems to be filled with grisly aliens bent on human extermination and earthly conquest. Like "War of the Worlds".

America would be much better without any Islamic influence. That is a sure thing. Most Americans realize that. It's our snobby, self-righteous, so-called liberal elite that seems clueless about the whole thing.

Vote them all out.........NOW!

Posted by: battleground51 | September 9, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse

There's a difference between not thinking a community center should be built were Mustlims are already worshiping to openly walking around with Muslim's are evil signs and associating all Muslims with 9/11.

Apparently, KaddafiDelendaEst can't distinguish between the two.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

Although the anti victory lefties in America continue to complain about the need for and execution of the wars in Iraq and A stan, they served many purposes.

Among these, a collateral to be sure, is the fact that Americans received a thorough exposure to the arab/muslim culture. The reliance on violence, the corruption, the rank poverty and the suffocating tyranny all played out across the TV screen. The culture that produced 9/11 was there for all to see.

so in the nine long years since the terror attack we've learned a lot about these people. We also witnessed an endless string of assaults on innocent Americans at the hands of jihadis.

This exposure, and the domestic track record, would cause any prudent person to have a distrust of Islam.

As an added factor, the muslim community continues to rely on known malefactors to be their public personna. CAIR is still in the news and it is still an unindicted co conspirator in the HLF case. If that's the best face they can put forward, then there is even less reason to trust the Muslims in America.

Mitigating against this distrust is the simple notion that not all muslims wish to turn America into the third world toilet they fled to begin with. Those that wish for something other than a sharia lead tyranny are at a cross roads. Thus far their actions have been less than impressive, but reform remains possible.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 11:58 AM | Report abuse

And certainly a lot of the credit for turning a local zoning dispute -- that we may recall had actually been resolved favorably before the bandwagon even got rolling -- into a minor international incident, properly belongs to the bellows of the left-wing blogosphere. Congratulations guys, the scraggly band of right-wing crazies opposing the center could never have heaped this kind of attention on it in a million years without you fanning the flames so energetically and incessantly. Give yourselves an Attaboy, why don't you.

Posted by: CalD | September 9, 2010 12:04 PM | Report abuse

Kevin,

John Kevorkian Boehner could have been challenged by the Tea Party, but they did not do so. Hmmmmm. Do they really all suffer from Amnesia, and really do not remember that he has been a Special Interests lapdog, for decades. Do none of them recall him passing out Tobacco Industry checks on the floor of Our House, just before a vote was cast?

As for Mitch Kevorkian McConnell. Stop trying to be too cute by half. He is the minority leader of Republicans in the US Senate, and would become Majority Leader, were they to take back the Senate, so my question is still valid: How come the Tea Party has not sought to take away that ultimate long term insider's leadership position?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

skipsailing28, are you saying the culture we were exposed to during the time of war is a good representation of Muslim's around the world?

Is that the simplistic view you've boiled it down to?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 12:05 PM | Report abuse

Ground Zero imam issues veiled threat: if mega-mosque isn't built, "anger will explode in the Muslim world"
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100909/ap_on_re_us/us_nyc_mosque_imam

If he really cared about the pain he is causing, he would move it now, and appeal to his violent coreligionists not to react by shedding blood. Instead, we got his veiled threat.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 9, 2010 12:07 PM | Report abuse

Kill a few thousand people with airplanes. Try to blow up a few more planes, try to blow up Times Square and then murder a bunch of people on an Army base while screaming 'Allah Akbar' and many Americans develop an anti-Islam sentiment.

WHAT is wrong with these people?

Must be just a bunch of ignorant racist.

Posted by: TECWRITE | September 9, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

anti victory lefties

You're right. Obama's should have announce mission accomplished and had a parade through D.C.

What I'd like to see him do though is dedicate a section of the Mall around the area where the war memorials are to the fight in Iraq and ultimately, the Afghanistan battle so visiting Vets can feel the pride of having their generations battle front and center for all to see.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 12:10 PM | Report abuse

I wasn't around at the time but for how long were German's and Japanese lashed out at after WWII?

Did it take a decade? Two?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

These polls are ridiculous

A person can be friendly toward muslims and still believe that the mosque should not be built down there.


The horrible about the liberals: they are trying to turn this issue into a SMEAR CAMPAIGN - if you are against the mosque, you are a bigot and there is something wrong with you.

That attitude is STUPID - and those liberals are the ones who are not respecting American debate, and difference of opinion.


Im getting sick of the personal attacks - when the liberals think they are wrong on an issue, they don't talk the issue, they issue personal attacks.


ALL this is Obama's fault. Race relations and partisan relations are dramatically worse since Obama came in.

Obama is not doing anything for this country, just dragging it down.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 12:15 PM | Report abuse

Umm SaveTheRainforest, nobody is smearing anyone.

Read the posts above yours. There are three people, KaddafiDelendaEst, skipsailing28 and battleground51 openly admitting its OK to be hateful towards Islam.

Explain this.

And there you go again, blaming Obama for the race issues.

Give it a rest.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 12:19 PM | Report abuse

I am really starting to agree with CalD on this one. The discussions could be instead:

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/09/us/09secrets.html?hp

A decision that should make Kaddafi very happy.

Posted by: Papagnello | September 9, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

"We wouldn;t be having this discussion if a small number of profewssional Islam haters and political opportunists hadn't ginned up the controversy and stirred up anti-Islamic sentiments. Perhaps some GOPers did because they realized anti-Mexican sentiment would have ballot box repercussions. Nevertheless, this is a manufactured controversy, and it is beginning to have very serious repercussions, like the notoriety lavished on that crank pastor in Florida.

Posted by: Mimikatz"

You are a mongoloid.

Posted by: garrafa10 | September 9, 2010 12:20 PM | Report abuse

TECWRITE


As opposed to those American Cluster Bombs that were distributing Candy all over the middle east, for decades?

Or,

Those Chemical Weapons that Reagan gave to Saddam to use against the Iranians,

and ended up using against the Kurds,

or when Bush One urged the Shiites to rebel, and then allowed Saddam to attack them with our chemical weapons, while our military was ordered to stand down, and let the helicopters wipe out those that Bush talked into fighting Saddam.

Or;

How about when Eisenhower used the CIA and Marines, to overthrow anelected government, and install The Shah?

Yes indeed. I am always puzzled, like you are, as to why those countries, could possible hold any resentment towards we: The Great Non Meddlers.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 12:21 PM | Report abuse

TECWRITE


As opposed to those American Cluster Bombs that were distributing Candy all over the middle east, for decades?

Or,

Those Chemical Weapons that Reagan gave to Saddam to use against the Iranians,

and ended up using against the Kurds,

or when Bush One urged the Shiites to rebel, and then allowed Saddam to attack them with our chemical weapons, while our military was ordered to stand down, and let the helicopters wipe out those that Bush talked into fighting Saddam.

Or;

How about when Eisenhower used the CIA and Marines, to overthrow and elected government, and install The Shah?

Yes indeed. I am always puzzled, like you are, as to why those countries, could possible hold any resentment towards we: The Great Non Meddlers.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 12:23 PM | Report abuse

There are lies, damned lies and statistics, those being presented in ways to make them appear to support any viewpoint.
What should be shocking in this piece is that ONLY 87 percent of generally anti-muslims Americans are anti-mosque (call it what it is). One would expect 100 percent. Either way, the cited numbers mean nothing as even the writer notes about a causal relationship; "Impossible to say."
The writer should remember the old researcher catch phrase: Correlation is not causation.

Posted by: observer57 | September 9, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

I have the solution, the US needs to sever all ties to all muslim majority countries -57 of them.
Cuba is a good example. No more problems.
Americans should leave muslim countries alone and vice versa.

Posted by: MumboJumboo | September 9, 2010 12:24 PM | Report abuse

Liam-still wrote:

"Those Chemical Weapons that Reagan gave to Saddam to use against the Iranians,

and ended up using against the Kurds,"

Sorry, the rest of your post has a lot of ugly truth in it. This charge however is a complete lie. Stick to the truth. It's usually damming enough to get the job done!

Posted by: 54465446 | September 9, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse

"Umm SaveTheRainforest, nobody is smearing anyone.

Read the posts above yours. There are three people, KaddafiDelendaEst, skipsailing28 and battleground51 openly admitting its OK to be hateful towards Islam.

Explain this.

And there you go again, blaming Obama for the race issues.

Give it a rest.

Posted by: mikefromArlington"

You are an idiot. There are hundreds of millions of people around the world who share these mild views about the religion of peace and its precious followers. Before you start sniveling "racism"; "bigotry"; or "diversity", perhaps you should ask yourself why the religion of peace is currently at war with the following peoples: Hindus; Jains; Buddhists; animists; Christians; Jews; communists; and even the disinterested?

Posted by: garrafa10 | September 9, 2010 12:27 PM | Report abuse


I wasn't around at the time but for how long were German's and Japanese lashed out at after WWII?

Did it take a decade? Two?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010

.................

We did round up Japanese American Families, and put them in concentration camps. We did no do the same thing to German Americans, because after all they had a non threating skin color.

It is the same reason why one Right Wing Nut Job posted that race relations problems have been caused by President Obama. If his skin were white, then of course he would not be the one to blame.

I love it when Right Wingers claim that Dick Cheney's cousin is not American, and he is also the one who is leading the modern day KKK.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 12:29 PM | Report abuse

Obama's speech yesterday - did that signal an official change from "Blame Bush" to "Blame Boehner" ???



The whole thing is ridiculous - the people want solutions - not blame.



No President gets to blame anyone - and Obama is a failure everytime he tries to blame anyone - IT IS A FAILURE OF LEADERSHIP.



Obama just proves over and over again why he should not be President.


Obama is not qualified, inexperienced, and sometimes it seems he just doesn't want to do the job.

The election is about which party is best suited to guide the nation forward - NOT about who is to blame. By changing the subject to blame, Obama loses immediately.

Obama is a complete failure as a leader - he is hurting the country as well as the democratic party.

There is no longer any sense talking to people who want to defend Obama- there is nothing there to defend - except a drag on the economy.
.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 12:31 PM | Report abuse

in response to this:
===============
skipsailing28, are you saying the culture we were exposed to during the time of war is a good representation of Muslim's around the world?

Is that the simplistic view you've boiled it down to?

============================

I am saying that Americans saw, first hand a culture that they did not have an adequate picture of prior to the wars. The exposure we got to the arab/muslim culture did damage to the trite nostrum that Islam is a religion of peace.

How many mass murders of arabs by other arabs does it take for most Americans to reach the conclusion that this is just who they are? That they would bomb their own holy shrines and use their places of worship as mustering sites for armed conflict said a great deal to us.

Then there is the undeniable fact that muslims among us have repeatedly gone on murder sprees, or have attempted to do so.

Is this simplistic? Or would you rather die with a nuanced view of your killers?

The muslim culture has had nine long years to repair its imagine with Americans and it has failed to do so. The poll numbers you see aren't the result of some bigotry, although the liberals seem to believe that. No, the reaction to the mosque is simple prudence.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 12:40 PM | Report abuse

54465446

You should do some research on that, before you call it a lie.

Rumsfeld went over to meet with Saddam, at Reagan's behest. Shortly after; The USA sent chemical weapons starter kits, to Saddam,. The Reagan Commerce Dept. was used as the facilitator of those shipments. Saddam had no WMD until Reagan gave him the starter kits. We also provided him with Satellite information on the locations of Iran forces, that he then used chemical weapons on. We kept on feeding him that information, over and over, even though we knew full well that he used it, to launch chemical attacks on the Iranians, at those locations.

We need to stop making excuses for how Republicans have always embraced and armed Right Wing butchers.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 12:41 PM | Report abuse

"The whole thing is ridiculous - the people want solutions - not blame. "

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 12:31 PM


"ALL this is Obama's fault."

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 12:15 PM

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 9, 2010 12:42 PM | Report abuse

"We are headed in the right direction. Stay the course, and let Democrats finish rescuing the working class, like they have always had to do, after Republicans, from Hoover To Bush2, have frequently impoverished our working class."

I don't know if the country can take much more "rescuing" from the Democrats. 

Posted by: TrollMcWingnut | September 9, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

I'm for the mosque for the simple fact it will make many people very angry that it exists, and hopefully their hostility will make it more difficult more muslims to immigrate here.

Posted by: kenk3 | September 9, 2010 12:44 PM | Report abuse

Greg - This was an excellent story. It demonstrates how this poll data should be analyzed (by looking at the "internals"), which can be taken apart through all kinds of statistical techniques, and which often tell a different story from the simpler, highest level findings.

Also, it demonstrates what a lousy job reporters usually do in reporting poll data (focusing only on the simplest most general but often misleading findings). I've had a lot of experience as an academic researcher dealing with questionnaire data and have been appalled at the way the media presents poll data. I thought the article by Balz & Cohen was particularly misleading.

Posted by: dougd1 | September 9, 2010 12:45 PM | Report abuse

"perhaps you should ask yourself why the religion of peace is currently at war with the following peoples"

See now therein lies your problem. Islam isn't at war with anyone.

It's a bunch of kookoo's who have decided to hijack the religion to try and justify their drive for global dominance. It's just a bunch of power hungry whacko's who were mostly rejected by their home countries that have decided to live in a bunch of caves and brainwash youth it's all for a higher cause when it's just to satisfy their leaders hunger for world power.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 12:47 PM | Report abuse

"Im getting sick of the personal attacks - when the liberals think they are wrong on an issue, they don't talk the issue, they issue personal attacks."

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 12:15 PM

"And in your case, looks could kill, right?"

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 2, 2010 3:08 PM |

Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 9, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

In Washington DC, Americans of diverse faiths will publicly stand for freedom of religion and worship at DC's Freedom Plaza at 2 PM on Saturday, September 11. See 911Freedom.com

Posted by: responsiblepublic | September 9, 2010 12:50 PM | Report abuse

It would be helpful if pollsters and the bloggers who cite them defined the terms/concepts they use.

Seriously, what does being "anti-Islam" even mean? This category could encompass a whole variety of people - from those who are still (rightfully) aggravated by 9/11 and mix us Muslims all together with a bunch of crazy people.

Then there are those (Muslims included) who only see how Islamic law is enforced in reactionary Muslim majority states such as Saudi Arabia, Sudan, or Iran.

There are those who have a solid knowledge of Islam and Muslims, but don't like the religion itself, for reasonable reasons.

There are also plenty of Muslims, such as myself, who don't appreciate militant Islam as exemplified by the Park51 project, or building of mosques generally in non Muslim majority countries. Many of us have immigrated here to run away from organized religion, like other fellow Americans.

Then there are crude, unambiguous haters - illustrated by the Koran burners and a few clowns on this board. I bet those form a tiny minority in this poll.


Posted by: Mag3 | September 9, 2010 12:51 PM | Report abuse

skipsailing28, do you think the German gunner at Omaha beach that mowed down hundreds of our troops is a good representation of Germans?

You're trying to equate war zone tactics to a societies every day lives.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

kenk3-

that's a joke, right?

Posted by: ChuckinDenton | September 9, 2010 12:52 PM | Report abuse

There is no Mosque being proposed. Something that Empty Talking Heads, and lots of Bloggersskites, prefer to ignore; because Mosque is their starter fuel word.

The proposed center will have a prayer room for muslims, a prayer room for Christians, and one for Jews. It will also have a performance theater.

I still think, that if they just add a gun store, on the first floor, they would immediately get the backing of the Nutty Rifle Association.

It would be a brilliant move, and it would drive Quitter Palin around the bend.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 12:53 PM | Report abuse

"See now therein lies your problem. Islam isn't at war with anyone.

It's a bunch of kookoo's who have decided to hijack the religion to try and justify their drive for global dominance. It's just a bunch of power hungry whacko's who were mostly rejected by their home countries that have decided to live in a bunch of caves and brainwash youth it's all for a higher cause when it's just to satisfy their leaders hunger for world power.

Posted by: mikefromArlington"

Your stupidity is breathtaking. Why don't you visit Mumbai; or Mogadishu; or Abidjan; or Southern Nigeria; or The Philippines; or Southern Thailand, to name but a few places where Islam is indeed at war and see what reaction you get from the local inhabitants when you tell them "It's a bunch of kookoo's who have decided to hijack the religion to try and justify their drive for global dominance"? There are not so many caves in Somalia, but plenty of foreign Salafists. Do you even know this term?

Posted by: garrafa10 | September 9, 2010 12:55 PM | Report abuse

One problem is that Americans don’t trust the government, media, or advocacy groups to effectively differentiate between “moderate” and “radical” Muslims. These concerns are not unjustified as past efforts to do have been abysmal failures.

In an October 19, 2001, article in The New York Times, supposed moderate Muslim Anwar al-Awlaki was praised, “…as a new generation of Muslim leader capable of merging East and West." He is now the leader of al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula.

Sami Al-Arian, a former tenured professor at the University of South Florida, was thought to be a moderate Muslim bridge-builder and won the friendship of prominent political leaders. It is now known that Al-Arian was the head of Islamic Jihad in America, who pled guilty to one count of conspiracy to provide material support to a specially designated terrorist organization.

NBC News once described Muzzamil Hassan as “a banker, who is disturbed that negative images of Muslims seem to dominate TV, especially since 9/11." The story documented Hassan’s venture to create “Bridges TV” to improve relations with the West by countering negative stereotypes of Islam. Turns out this “moderate” beheaded his wife and, after calling the police, proudly explained why: She insulted his Muslim honor by filing for divorce.

The Washington Post once touted Abdurahman Alamoudi as “a pillar of the local Muslim community.” His organization, the American Muslim Council, was described by a spokesman for FBI director Robert Mueller as "the most mainstream Muslim group in the United States." Today, Alamoudi is serving a 23 year federal prison sentence for terrorism-financing.

The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) is held up by many as moderate and “mainstream.” Yet in 1998, CAIR founder Omar Ahmad stated: “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Qur’an should be the highest authority in America.” Does Ahmad’s desire for a theocratic political state sound moderate ?

Nidal Malik Hassan was an active-duty U.S. Army major when he killed 13 and wounded 32 people at Fort Hood in 2009. Internal Army reports indicated officers within the Army were aware of Hasan's tendencies. Investigations discovered e-mail communications between Hasan and Anwar al-Awlaki, who quickly declared Hasan a hero, as "fighting against the U.S. army is an Islamic duty". However, the FBI determined that Hasan was not a threat prior to the shooting and that his questions to al-Awlaki were consistent with medical research.

It should be no surprise, then, when critics of the Ground Zero Mosque question the integrity of the “moderate” label placed on the central characters involved with its development. Questions range from the source of funding to troublesome comments made by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to questionable associations of other participants. People won’t be inclined to trust so-called “moderate” Muslims until these questions are answered.

Posted by: braunt | September 9, 2010 12:56 PM | Report abuse

"There is no Mosque being proposed. Something that Empty Talking Heads, and lots of Bloggersskites, prefer to ignore; because Mosque is their starter fuel word.

The proposed center will have a prayer room for muslims, a prayer room for Christians, and one for Jews. It will also have a performance theater.

I still think, that if they just add a gun store, on the first floor, they would immediately get the backing of the Nutty Rifle Association.

It would be a brilliant move, and it would drive Quitter Palin around the bend.

Posted by: Liam-still"

How about a Radovan Karadzic Multicultural Center directly in front of that pigsty of a mosque offering Danish cartoons and roasted pork every Friday, all day long? With special fans we can assure the "worshippers" get to inhale deeply the aroma of the finest pork barbecue in the US.

Posted by: garrafa10 | September 9, 2010 1:00 PM | Report abuse

There are some additional facts this survey revealed which this excellent column did not cover.

http://bit.ly/b4Bub6

Posted by: aymanfadel | September 9, 2010 1:01 PM | Report abuse

Wow!
Great journalism.
The writer has conclusively proven that most Americans don't think highly of Islam and don't want the Ground Zero Mosque built.
So what!
Our Constitution allows Americans to not think highly of Islam.
Were the views of most Americans about Islam a secret before this aricle? The writer must have been hiding in a cave if he didn't know this fact before this poll.

So, what's the point of the article?

The point is that the writer turned the poll's results about having an unfavorable view of Islam into a statement that people who hold unfavorable views of Islam are "anti-Islam" by usuing the words "unfavorable view" and anti-Islam interchangably.

"Anti-Islam" was not in the poll.

I personally have an unfavorable opinion of carrot flavored ice cream.
According to the writer's logic, that makes me "Anti-carrot ice cream."
The next step would be the inference that I hate peopple who like carrot flavored ice cream.
That's really what the article is trying to communicate by twisting words.

Shame on you Mr. Sargent.

The American People are tired of these types of liberal smears, even if you try to do it by twisting words.

Posted by: jfv123 | September 9, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

in response to this:
=============
There are three people, KaddafiDelendaEst, skipsailing28 and battleground51 openly admitting its OK to be hateful towards Islam.
==================

I won't speak for the other two folks, but it is simple hyperbole to claim that I am admitting that it is OK to hate. This is typical of the liberal smear mentality.

I state a case for distrust of muslims and simple prudence when dealing with them. Somehow this turns into "hate" from mike. Mike needs his political opponents to be haters for a few reasons among them are:
(1) Castigating those who don't embrace the liberal agenda is just what liberals do.
(2) Claims that others are motivated by hate give Mike a false sense of superiority. Mike if you have to lie to yourself you are in trouble.
(3) The rancor has grown of late, IMHO because the liberal agenda is being refudiated (great word, thanks Ms Palin!). Rather than face this fact, many on the left are engaging in denial. It easy to explain away the refudiation by assuming poor motives on the part of the refudiators. This is simple denial

Hey! "The Refudiators" would be a great name for a garage rock band.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 1:03 PM | Report abuse

And Christians colonized the Philippines by force, and spread Christianity there.

The history of the 20th century showed that it was Christian Nations that were occupying Muslim nations, and not the other way around.

And for the record: there has never been a Muslim army stationed in the Western Hemisphere, but there sure has been American Armies stationed in several Muslim nations.

The Islamic Terrorists, are dangerous psychopaths, that must be dealt with, but trying to lay the blame for their acts, on the shoulders of all Muslims, is also a form of intentional evil.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

All, check this out: More House Dems balking at ending the Bush tax cuts for the rich:

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/09/more_house_dems_balking_at_end.html

Posted by: Greg Sargent | September 9, 2010 1:04 PM | Report abuse

garrafa10, the know nothing, look to Iraq.

You've got extremist trying to disrupt the normalcy that is trying to prosper. Islam against its self.

That is just one example of Islam not being some monolithic movement that all supports the same ideas.

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 1:06 PM | Report abuse

Umm SaveTheRainforest, nobody is smearing anyone.


___________________________


The point is that the left is trying to link opposition to the mosque to anti-Islamic sentiment.


But I state clearly that a person could be friendly toward muslims and still be against the mosque at Ground Zero - and still be in favor of a strong National Security policy.


Well - I find all the talk about "islamaphobia" an attempt at SMEAR - all about the mosque issue.

Talk the mosque issue - don't attack the people personally.

This is the SAME as the democratic Congressmen calling people who are against the liberal version health care reform "racist."


I'm actually repeating myself - I think I stated it clearly the first time.


.


Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 1:07 PM | Report abuse

This guy does not merit the substance or quality that one should come to expect from either liberal or conservatives on the Post, feels like glorified undergrad blogging to his liberal buddies, the social club mentality.

"Guys like check this out, I have something new to say, I found the real problem, there are people in America that have an unfavorable view of Islam!!" Can you believe that, we have got to expose them!! And next week, it's the people that have an unfavorable view of Buddhism, etc. If people like him got elected into office, we'd have a return to the guillotine mob mentality.

Sorry buddy, but we have the right in America to have unfavorable views about whatever we choose, what the heck are you going to do about it.

Posted by: joshmw | September 9, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

[Liam lied: "There is no Mosque being proposed... The proposed center... will also have a performance theater."]

Nice Baghdad-Bob imitation. Those big Protestant mega-churches (that feature day care centers, gyms, and various other modern accoutrements)-- are they no longer churches because they feature all sorts of extras besides the "space for prayer"?

Liam's refried propaganda is just more willful denial.

Don't be a mouth-piece for the Hamas-terrorism sponsors of Cordoba House your whole life, Liam.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 9, 2010 1:09 PM | Report abuse

So, we've got a story about bigotry being one of the main driving forces behind the anti-community center hate fest going on and when you say:

T"his exposure, and the domestic track record, would cause any prudent person to have a distrust of Islam."

you aren't giving the green light for the hate fest a couple blocks from ground zero?

Posted by: mikefromArlington | September 9, 2010 1:11 PM | Report abuse

"garrafa10, the know nothing, look to Iraq.

You've got extremist trying to disrupt the normalcy that is trying to prosper. Islam against its self.

That is just one example of Islam not being some monolithic movement that all supports the same ideas.

Posted by: mikefromArlington"

You are a mongoloid. You want to debate Islamism and yet you are unfamiliar with the term Salafism.

Posted by: garrafa10 | September 9, 2010 1:13 PM | Report abuse

LET ME BE CLEAR


This entire discussion is a little silly - NO ONE in America brought Islam into this conflict.

Osama bin Laden and Al Queda BROUGHT ISLAM INTO THE CONFLICT.


ANY rational person would find it wrong to bring religion into a war - and use it as a justification to start a war.

THAT is exactly what has been done.


NO ONE in American started this war - Al Queda and the people in the Muslim world who supported them started the war.


I would also like to point out that there has been a lack of clarity in the REASONS why Al Queda is fighting the US.


Surely, the American press is partially to blame on this issue - because the American press is reluctant to dicuss the Israeli - Palestinian issue as a CAUSE FOR THE WAR ON TERROR.


That is a religious war too - one religion is fighting people of a different religion - WHO IS TALKING ABOUT THAT ???

All I can say is GROW UP - the democrats have become SUCH CHILDREN in the past few years - from their childish criticism of Bush to their False Charges of Racism.

The democrats could be MORE MATURE - and MORE HONEST. The democratic party has become such a joke - the American People don't even want to listen to them anymore.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 1:14 PM | Report abuse

Greg:

Two points. First, it can hardly be a revelation that a majority of people who view Islam "unfavorably" would be opposed to the building of the m/Ic/w. Did you really need a poll to tell you that?

Secondly, and more importantly, what exactly do you mean when you say "anti-Islam"? Is having an "unfavorable view" of Islam necessarily being "anti-Islam"? I have an unfavorable view of smoking. Does that make me "anti-smoking"? I certainly don't go around protesting against smoking, or objecting to people who do smoke, or trying to prevent them from smoking. So am I "anti-smoking"?

My sense is that, by "anti-Islam", you are implying at the very least people who are bigots, if not foaming-at-the-mouth "haters". But in fact one can quite easily hold "unfavorable" views of Islam without being a bigot at all.

BTW, do you have a "favorable" view of Islam? If so, what about Islam do you find favorable? Does this make you "pro-Islam"?

Posted by: ScottC3 | September 9, 2010 1:15 PM | Report abuse

The only thing less surprising than the results of the poll are the plethora of mouth breathers who show up in comments to reinforce the point.

Posted by: Gutavo | September 9, 2010 1:17 PM | Report abuse

[mike slandered: "KaddafiDelendaEst... openly admitting its OK to be hateful towards Islam."]

That is a vicious lie. Anti-jihadists have consistently denounced the secular-Islam demonization campaign.

When will Greg (and his media toadies) publicly apologize to the secular Muslim NY Cabbie and his family for inciting the pro-jihad mosque vigilantee to moby violence?

It's past time to take a little ownership for Greg's orchestrated Islamo-supremacist advocacy campaign here.

What gets lost in all Greg's polling demogoguery is that the Muslim cabbie victim is himself a hateful hater, bigot, inauthentic, xenophobic, neanderthal-- at least, if you go by the criterion set out by Greg (and his toadies): Opposing the mosque is "Islamophobia"-- period. Right?

As an anti-jihadist, however, I’m inclined to observe that the Muslim cabbie’s pretty much consonant in his opinion of the Cordoba mosque with a super majority (70%) of his fellow Americans.

That Greg's proteges will be disappointed to discover the opinion of this Muslim cabbie apostate tells you all you need to know about the two "sides" of this debate.

Own it, Quislings for Islamo-supremacism.

Posted by: KaddafiDelendaEst | September 9, 2010 1:21 PM | Report abuse

well this is silly:
============
skipsailing28, do you think the German gunner at Omaha beach that mowed down hundreds of our troops is a good representation of Germans?

You're trying to equate war zone tactics to a societies every day lives.

=============
Try reading what I wrote, instead of just making up stuff.

here's a hint son. these are my words:
"How many mass murders of arabs by other arabs does it take for most Americans to reach the conclusion that this is just who they are? That they would bomb their own holy shrines and use their places of worship as mustering sites for armed conflict said a great deal to us."

I am making a simple point, and your denial is preventing you from understanding it. Dogmatically liberals must believe that islam is just fine, just a few weirdos running around, just like oh say Christians. After all islam has legions of guys like Abu Musab Al Zarkhawi (you remember him doncha? bombing the golden mosque? The occassional beheading) and the liberals believe that the christians have Tim Mc Veigh. therefore Islam and Christianity are morally equivalent.

it is a deeply stupid argument. We watched and continue to watch arabs slaughter each other for political reasons. We see the tyranny and the third world mentality in muslim dominated countries. Concluding that Islam has a nasty streak and that treating muslims with circumspection is simple prudence.

so spare me the illogic. If you can mount a rational argument, then pray do so. If you can't move it on.

And then be sure to share your argument about how peaceful islam is to Thai christians and bhuddists. they're getting killed by the thousands at the hands of Islamic madmen. What did they do wrong to the muslims that they, in your opinion, are the moral equivalent of the fanatics that are killing them?

yours is a silly, silly approach to this. Try to overcome denial and face the simple fact that islam blew its chance to amend its imagine in america

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 1:25 PM | Report abuse

Americans are told they should not judge Islam based solely on the actions of a few extremists (i.e., Jihadist terrorists). On the other hand, many Muslims (and, for that matter, some Americans) are judging Americans based solely on the actions of a few extremists (i.e., Terry Jones). I guess it helps when you extrapolate anyone who opposes anything Islamic, such as the Ground Zero Mosque opponents, as “extremists,” on the same level as terrorists.

There are many apologists who argue that Muslims have an absolute Constitutional right to build a mosque near NYC's Ground Zero and that those who oppose it on moral grounds are intolerant bigots and should just all shut up about it. That is certainly the tenor of Mr. Sargent’s post. Now here comes this guy In Florida who wishes to exercise his Constitutional right to free speech and they are outraged! Of course, just because one has the right to do something, doesn’t mean he or she should do it, especially if it causes unnecessary harm to others. This church “pastor” shouldn’t burn Korans any more than the Cordoba Mosque should be built near Ground Zero in Lower Manhattan. Shouldn’t religious, social and cultural sensitivity work both ways?

Americans peacefully protest a mosque or some other Muslim practices being implemented in public accommodations and they are considered ignorant racists by some. However, a lone pastor of an obscure 50-person church says he is going to burn copies of the Koran and many thousands of Muslims around the world erupt in riotous protest, burn our flag, assault our military troops, and threaten extreme violence against American society. If Muslims are so sensitive to any offense, real or imagined, and that this is all it takes to set them off into a violent frenzy, then perhaps there is no hope of living in harmony with them. If the U.S. reacted as brashly against every infraction committed by Muslims against non-Muslims around the world, we would have nuked Mecca by now.

Posted by: braunt | September 9, 2010 1:26 PM | Report abuse

It's become obvious that a lot of Americans are uninformed about our objective in Afghanistan. We are not at war against Afghanistan!

Our American soldiers are trying to gain trust in Afghanistan and end Al Qaeda's hold in that country. This anti-Islam hostility that has swept across our country makes it even more difficult to achieve our objective there and bring our soldiers home safe.

Americans need to put our soldiers' safety first. No excuses, no explanations, no debate. Don't sit in the security of your home and put these brave men and women's lives in additional danger. They deserve that from us.

Posted by: Beeliever | September 9, 2010 1:28 PM | Report abuse

While there is definite Islamophobia in America, the blame is more on Muslims themselves and not on Americans.

Muslim countries with their corrupt leaders and intolerant Imams have set a very bad example.

Tolerance is a 2 way street and the western society, especially Americans are very tolerant. I am a Muslim and I disagree with Rauf that building a mosque here will help people get a better understanding of American Muslims.

Actually, by not buliding the mosque here and moving it will show America that American muslims do care about the general consensus. The radical Islamists and the radical Jews will find issues to promote hatred anyway.

The mosque location issue is an American problem and lets move it to build peace and make integration of American muslims easier in this society

Posted by: Voiceofreason110 | September 9, 2010 1:34 PM | Report abuse

I am sick of the threats of this imam who claims he services 500 muslims five times a day and gave his wife's address. Would you think her neighbors would notice 500 muslims coming up the elevator five times a day? How dare you threaten us to be quiet about your putting this insulting mega mosque on this site. And how dare the state dept. send this questionable so and so on any trip on our money.
So the muslim world will explode will it? Well who gives a rats patooty. Explode you sorry so and sos.
This imam is connected to Hamas and that slimy man who gave to the Holy Land Foundation indicted for funneling money to terrorist groups. And that cheesy greasy waiter who just happened to come up with 4.8 million has a rap sheet. Did he rob ever table he waited on? And did he pay the 300,000 back taxes on this property?
I am so sick of the threats. All of you out there need to get some tailbone and stand up to these questionable characters.

Posted by: greatgran1 | September 9, 2010 1:35 PM | Report abuse

I hope your read and understand this. In my humble Opinion it is wrong to call people who support the Greiving and Berated are ISLAM HATERS. Is that what you’re saying? That is ugly.

Posted by: jeffreyhauser | September 9, 2010 1:36 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Sargent, please repeat the following to yourself several times before you're tempted to write another obscenely incorrect article like this one:

Correlation is not causation.

Correlation is not causation.

Correlation is not causation.

and so forth.

Get it???

Posted by: PlumbBobBlog | September 9, 2010 1:41 PM | Report abuse

Sargent's article on the mosque and anti-islamic sentiments is sophomoric, at best.

Posted by: Claraty | September 9, 2010 1:48 PM | Report abuse

All

No one in this country is against Muslims - they are against our country being ATTACKED.


Sorry - but some liberals do not seem to respect that.


All this talk about islamaphobia - and the polls - linking this to that -


NONE of that would have happened without the attacks.

How about if we say the Japanese DID NOT attack Pearl Harbor -


It was REALLY Japanese radicals - using Japanese nationalism as their cause.

This entire discussion is so stupid.

The mosque should NOT be built - and everyone should just let adequate time to pass AFTER the war is over to wounds to heal.

I will point out again - THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE MOSQUE FLARED UP AFTER THE BOMB WAS PLACED TIME SQUARE IN APRIL OF THIS YEAR - WHICH COULD HAVE KILLED 3,000 MORE PEOPLE.

The liberals FORGET THAT -


It is time for the liberals to simmer down - and go quietly while THEY GET VOTED OUT.

.


Americans are AGAINST people who USE ISLAM to organize against us.


The liberals seem to think that if we , ignore the War, it will go away.


.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

by that logic, since democrats are overwhelming ashamed of our history whereas republicans view our history as flawed but better than most other countries, clearly there is a link between being a democrat and being ashamed of your country.

Hey, Greg Sargent's logic is FUN!

Posted by: dummypants | September 9, 2010 1:50 PM | Report abuse

The anti-Islam sentiment is DIRECTLY LINKED to 9/11.

Idiots.

.

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

It just doesn't matter what we say or do. Those who wish us dead will seek to kill us anyway.

Looking at Islam historically it can be argued that the entire faith instills a desire for the "big shake down" in its adherents. "The shores of Tripoli" is a perfect example.

Now this Imam Rauf seeks to shake us down as well. His approach is simply amazing.

His statement that America has more blood on its hands than al Q says it all. Basically America is to blame because Saddam Hussein built palaces instead of feeding his subjects. And somehow that's America's fault. Had we left Saddam in place to continue to rape the country and cause trouble with his neighbors I have no doubt that Rauf would have condemned us for that too.

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 1:58 PM | Report abuse

Obviously, if 9/11 never happened and the repugnant value system which gave rise to it did not dominant the muslim world americans certainly would have a better view of Islam and the 9/11 mosque would never have even been an idea.

Is that surprising?

Posted by: dummypants | September 9, 2010 1:59 PM | Report abuse

So What?

I have an unfavorable view of Catholism and Evangelism a few other religious isms.

Last night on Anderson 360 on CNN there was a discussion about the building of the mosque around Ground Zero.

The most important person among the four on the panel was the wife of the 9/11 Firefighter who died in the attacks while actually sacrificing his life for his fellow Americans. She would prefer that the Islamic Center be moved since it is possible that some remains of the victims were found as far as this building and possibly on this building. Her argument was the most sincere and note worthy as far as I am concerned, before hearing her speak I could have cared less about whether the Center was built there, but hearing her feeling I changed my mind and I thought her argument that the people who want to build the Center just change their minds as a gift to the victims of 9/11 and move it somewhere else.

The Firefighters, Police, EMT workers and Port Authority workers who sacrificed their lives are more important then an Islamic CEnter when it comes to the memory of 9/11. The wishes of their survivors should be first and foremost when considering what goes on around Ground Zero. The Americans who sacrificed their lives for their fellow Ameicans in the line of duty are much more important than an Islmic Center or any other religious Center.

Posted by: rannrann | September 9, 2010 2:01 PM | Report abuse

beeliever wrote:

"It's become obvious that a lot of Americans are uninformed about our objective in Afghanistan. We are not at war against Afghanistan!

Our American soldiers are trying to gain trust in Afghanistan and end Al Qaeda's hold in that country. This anti-Islam hostility that has swept across our country makes it even more difficult to achieve our objective there and bring our soldiers home safe.

Americans need to put our soldiers' safety first. No excuses, no explanations, no debate. Don't sit in the security of your home and put these brave men and women's lives in additional danger. They deserve that from us."

You make several errors in your thinking. One is that we are tyring to gain anyone's trust. We are in fact trying to stabilize a goverment that has little control outisde the city of Kabul, so that we can get out without seeming to lose. No serious thinking person believes we will be able to end Al Queda's hold in that country. They simply move across the border to Pakistan when seriously threatened.

The second error is that somehow otherwise moderate Muslims will now be driven into planning attacks on Americans that they would not otherwise have carried out. We have been "desecrating" Korans IN Iraq and Afghanistan for 8 years, and the people there are aware of it, as you seem not to be. This has nothing to do with the safety of our soldiers. The Obama administration made this request of Petraeus for political reasons. He however relcutantly has gone along with their request. I voted for the man and have been a supporter of his actions including on this board many times. However I am not blind. This is totally an attempt to recover some momentum going into November.

Posted by: 54465446 | September 9, 2010 2:07 PM | Report abuse

"Im getting sick of the personal attacks - when the liberals think they are wrong on an issue, they don't talk the issue, they issue personal attacks."

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 12:15 PM

"Idiots."

Posted by: SaveTheRainforest | September 9, 2010 1:58 PM |


Posted by: schrodingerscat | September 9, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

rannrann wrote:

"The most important person among the four on the panel was the wife of the 9/11 Firefighter who died in the attacks while actually sacrificing his life for his fellow Americans. She would prefer that the Islamic Center be moved since it is possible that some remains of the victims were found as far as this building and possibly on this building. Her argument was the most sincere and note worthy as far as I am concerned, before hearing her speak I could have cared less about whether the Center was built there, but hearing her feeling I changed my mind and I thought her argument that the people who want to build the Center just change their minds as a gift to the victims of 9/11 and move it somewhere else."

Sorry, the law cannot be personalized in that way, anymore than we allow victims to dictate the punishment of their attackers, no matter how good an idea that seems. Chances are that that this very unfortunate woman would never have even been aware that this mosques existed without the ridiculous efforts of Pam Geller.

Posted by: 54465446 | September 9, 2010 2:14 PM | Report abuse

Duh.

Posted by: serban1 | September 9, 2010 2:15 PM | Report abuse

"Anti-mosque, Anti-Islam Views Linked"
___

Yuh, think?

Posted by: tallyhohohoho | September 9, 2010 2:16 PM | Report abuse

Colin Powell was just on as a guest on ABC and reminded/informed people that there is a Muslim prayer room in Walter Reed Hospital and at the Pentagon. He offered one of the best and most thorough analyses of not only the right of the cultural center in NYC to be built, but also the value.

Posted by: bpotter110 | September 9, 2010 2:17 PM | Report abuse

A steady TV diet of Muslims burning US and Israeli flags, stoning our embassies and consulates, shaking their clenched fists and screaming death threats against our country, and issuing fatwas (calls for assassination) against Western authors and artists has led to this widespread American sentiment. Should anyone be surprised? If anyone remembers, as I do, shortly after 9/11 we learned from a captured Muslim terrorist manual that America's open society and legal protections were to be exploited in pursuing their bloody ends.

Posted by: Watersville | September 9, 2010 2:31 PM | Report abuse

Christian Americans are nothing but a bunch of rednecked, illiterate, bigoted haters and Greg Sargent has the polls to prove it! His good friend showed him a poll and Greg couldn't wait to share it with all his friends. So there! Take that, America! Ha ha! Greg Sargent joins Daisy Khan in chanting "hell No! We won't go!" Stick it to the 9/11 families, Greg! Float the idea of a mosqe over around Shanksville, why don't you?

Posted by: chatard | September 9, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Your certainty of no retaliation against our soldiers must be comforting. For those of us who have family members serving in Afghanistan, we aren't allowed the luxury of your certainty. Nobody seems at all concerned about the families of soldiers. We live in fear daily for the safety of our loved one, and the unheroic civilian rhetoric going on in this country toward Muslims only causes us more despair. It's easy to be a warrior on a computer, and pretend you know more than Patraeus about the safety of our children.

Posted by: Beeliever | September 9, 2010 2:39 PM | Report abuse

Guilty as charged. I am against female genital mutilation, arraged marriages of 1 year olds, honor killings, suicide bombers, the 8th century in general,not education girls, killing girls that go to school, anti semetism, legal rape, sharia law,iran and the list goes on and on......I guess I am a racist?

Posted by: j751 | September 9, 2010 2:41 PM | Report abuse

This is just stupid. Obviously there is a CORRELATION. Naatrually people who oppose the religion will also oppose the mosque.

What you need to face up to the fact which you yourself cite, "Fifty-five percent of those who have FAVORABLE views of the religion say it should be built." (my capitals).

So even among those who have FAVORABLE view of the religion ONLY 55% say the mosque should be built.

How do you explain the other 45%, those who have a favorable opinion of the religion and do not think it should be built?

Doesn't that blow a hole through your argument that only anti-Islam people oppose the mosque?

Posted by: rohit57 | September 9, 2010 2:43 PM | Report abuse

Of course people who are anti-Islam are going to be against the mosque as well - no surprise there.

But, the trouble with your account is a fact you yourself cite:

"Fifty-five percent of those who have favorable views of the religion say it should be built."

That means that even among those who have favorable views of the religion, 45% do NOT say that the mosque should be built.

Doesn't that blow a hole through your argument that only anti-Islamic people oppose the mosque?

Posted by: rohit57 | September 9, 2010 2:47 PM | Report abuse

this simply misses the point:
===============
Sorry, the law cannot be personalized in that way, anymore than we allow victims to dictate the punishment of their attackers, no matter how good an idea that seems. Chances are that that this very unfortunate woman would never have even been aware that this mosques existed without the ridiculous efforts of Pam Geller.

+++++++++++++++++++++

Come now, this is a tired, trite and irrelevant argument. Those who oppose the mosque have repeatedly acknowledged the legal rights of the Iman to build it.

It isn't a question of whether he can legally. It is a question of whether he should.

Even your guiding light, Barrack Hussein Obama mentioned the word "wisdom". Is it wise to build there, even if the law allows it?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 2:56 PM | Report abuse

It's become obvious that a lot of Americans are uninformed about our objective in Afghanistan. We are not at war against Afghanistan!

Our American soldiers are trying to gain trust in Afghanistan and end Al Qaeda's hold in that country. This anti-Islam hostility that has swept across our country makes it even more difficult to achieve our objective there and bring our soldiers home safe.

Americans need to put our soldiers' safety first. No excuses, no explanations, no debate. Don't sit in the security of your home and put these brave men and women's lives in additional danger. They deserve that from us.

Posted by: Beeliever
------------------------------

Some of the anti-Islamic hostility is caused by the foolish actions of Bloomberg and Imam Rauf in proposing this project in the first place.

To add to that, a lot of "right wing hating" liberals have jumped into the fray. Instead of very nicely saying to Imam Rauf, "Perhaps you should build it elsewhere" they are going into their usual hobby of right wing bashing.

When two thirds of the country thinks something, you listen to them, and you do not preach to them.

Move the mosque, ask Rev. Jones to cancel the Quran burning, and we can all go back to our lives.

Posted by: rohit57 | September 9, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

That is a lie. He said no such thing. He said that he would not comment on the wisdom of the decision.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 3:00 PM | Report abuse

and the silliness continues to rain down, unabated. Here's the latest:
=================
So, we've got a story about bigotry being one of the main driving forces behind the anti-community center hate fest going on and when you say:

T"his exposure, and the domestic track record, would cause any prudent person to have a distrust of Islam."

you aren't giving the green light for the hate fest a couple blocks from ground zero
=====================

I didn't trust the guy I bought my last car from. I didn't hate him either. I thought that liberals prided themselves on their much vaunted ability to understand nuance better than the average conservative.

It seems you've failed the nuance test.

Furhter, where in Mr Sargent's foolish "analysis" is the proof that bigotry is a driver?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Muslims around the world cheered the terrorists on 9-11.

Muslims around the world want to establish sharia and threaten with death anyone who asserts their right to be critical of islam.

Yes, that does result in anti islamic feelings. And the muslims who cheered 9-11, want to establish sharia law and threaten with death those critical of islam will consider a mosque at ground zero a great victory.

So yes anti islamic feelings are involved with the opposition to a mosque at ground zero. Surprise, surprise.

Only difference between myself and the liberals is I believe this a link that is justified.

Posted by: davemercer27 | September 9, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse

Well, he actually looked into moving the site, and it turns out that it would be very expensive, and almost impossible to do. Moving the site would require equipment that could dig up the entire site, all the way down to the molten core of the earth, and doing the same thing at a different site, where the site swap could be made. Of course the equipment for such a massive undertaking has not yet been developed, not to mention the possibility of magma flowing out of both locations, and entombing all of New York City.

Still; Sensitivities are more important, than any silly inconveniences, such as smothering New York City with escaped Magma, so let the site relocation begin.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 3:08 PM | Report abuse

What Mosque. What the hell sort of a fantasy poll are they taking. No Mosque has even been proposed for the site. The building is already being used by the same people who will use it, after they have refurbished it. The neighborhood looks derelict and run down now. A face lift on the building would only help to spruce up the neighborhood.

If the 9/11 site is such hallowed ground to all those raving lunatic right wingers, then why has the area being left to look like a earthquake disaster zone, for the past nine years?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

in response to this:
================
That is a lie. He said no such thing. He said that he would not comment on the wisdom of the decision.

==============

And what did I say Liam? Go back a read the comment. Just in case your ennui overcomes your desire for intellectual honesty, here is the quote:
"Even your guiding light, Barrack Hussein Obama mentioned the word "wisdom""

See? I did not characterize what BHO said. I simply pointed out his use of the word.

Did you, perhaps, reply in haste?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 3:14 PM | Report abuse

t isn't a question of whether he can legally. It is a question of whether he should.

Even your guiding light, Barrack Hussein Obama mentioned the word "wisdom". Is it wise to build there, even if the law allows it?

Posted by: skipsailing28 | September 9, 2010 2:56 PM
..................

Because you took the word out of context, to create the false impression that President Obama questioned the wisdom of having opted to refurbish that existing site; when in fact President Obama said the exact opposite; and said that he was not commenting on that decision; period.

That makes you a liar.

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 3:19 PM | Report abuse

"Guilty as charged. I am against female genital mutilation, arraged marriages of 1 year olds, honor killings, suicide bombers, the 8th century in general,not education girls, killing girls that go to school, anti semetism, legal rape, sharia law,iran and the list goes on and on......I guess I am a racist?

Posted by: j751 "
---

Well, I am against polygamy, the Oklahoma City bombing, antisemitism, slavery, racism as an official church position (Mormons, until at least 1978), pedophile priests, banning women from leadership positions, requiring women to wear ankle-length skirts, gender segregation, and other things associated with sects of Christianity at various times in history.

BUT fortunately I do not generalize as you do. Idiot.

Posted by: brian_away | September 9, 2010 3:27 PM | Report abuse

Build the Mosque but only if the FBI is allowed to open a satellite branch of its counter-terror operations on the second floor.

That should keep the Mohammedens on their toes.

Until they blow it up of course.

Posted by: luca_20009 | September 9, 2010 3:29 PM | Report abuse

Of course people who are anti-Islam are going to be against the mosque as well - no surprise there.

But, the trouble with your account is a fact you yourself cite:

"Fifty-five percent of those who have favorable views of the religion say it should be built."

That means that even among those who have favorable views of the religion, 45% do NOT say that the mosque should be built.

Doesn't that blow a hole through your argument that only anti-Islamic people oppose the mosque?

Posted by: rohit57
_________________________
well no, it doesn't. Since such a large majority of the public at large opposes the mosque, finding a 55-45 majority (when was the last presidential election with that big a majority to the winner, for comparison) FOR the mosque among those who don't hold unfavorable views of Islam in general is a very big deal.

Which, of course, is the point of the article. That the anti-mosque sentiment does not hold across other variables, and is overwhelmingly associated with those who are anti-Muslim.

Posted by: JoeT1 | September 9, 2010 3:55 PM | Report abuse

Why do you want to build a Mosque there, even installin the FBI there? The people who own the building, and seek to refurbish it, have no plans to build a Mosque there, so why do you want one there?

Or do you just love Strawmen, and can not get enough of them?

Posted by: Liam-still | September 9, 2010 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Greg you forgot to ask or explore why so many Americans have such an unfavorable view of Islam. Given the two World Trade Center Attacks, the Cole Attack, the Khober Tower Bombings, the Attack on the Indian Parliament, the bombings in the English and Spanish subway systems the daily suicide bombings in Afganistan, Iraq, Israel and Pakistan, the long waiting lines at airport security checks in every country is their any wonder that most non-muslims in the world have a negative view of Islam. The question is does such a veiw indicate wisdom and self preservation or intolerance? I believe the former.

Posted by: jkk1943 | September 9, 2010 4:41 PM | Report abuse

The problem with many of the comments on this page is this: There are over one billion Moslems in the world. There are close to 3 million Moslems in the United States. Most of these are U.S. citizens. Many of them were born here. If we are at war with Islam, then it is going to be a war that lasts for decades if not centuries, and it will be the end of ordered liberty in the United States. That's just a fact. So, G.W. Bush quite wisely framed the issue as a war on "terror." Not a war on Islamic terror, just a war on "terror." Who can be for "terror?" It was G.W. Bush, not a liberal, who called Islam a "religion of peace." That was exactly the right move. The question of whether it "is" a religion of peace or not is beside the point. We could argue from now till the cows come home about that point. We could argue just as long about whether Christianity or Judaism are religions of peace. What's the point?
If the point here is to curtail terrorist attacks against U.S. citizens and others, then we will need the vast majority of Moslems, both in the U.S. and elsewhere, on our side. Pointing to "moderates" who turned "radical" or quoting from the Koran to show what horrible folks they are is not going to help us in that effort. In fact, just the reverse. It's the bizarre struggle against the lower Manhattan community center that has fueled the wacko minister in Pensacola and encouraged him to get his 15 minutes of fame. I do not understand why people cannot understand this.

Posted by: lane2125 | September 9, 2010 4:49 PM | Report abuse

KaddafiDelendaEst,

U need to do some serious reading about Islam:"Welayat El Faqeeh" which means the rule of an Islmaic schoalr of juriprudance (Sharia Law)belongs to Shia Islam only and is practiced in Iran only; Imam Rauf is a Sunni Muslim.

Still an elected Faqeeh has more political legitimacy than the many Muslim despots and didctators that plague the Arab and Muslim wolrd.

Thoy a tribal and fuedal dictatorship, "saudi" Arabia is certainly not an Apartheid state.

The only remianing racist, apartheid colonial settler occupying state is isrl-the so called "the only democracy in the ME!!!"

In fact Turkey is the only true democracy in the reigon.

Posted by: asizk | September 9, 2010 5:00 PM | Report abuse

Did you consider that the 9/11 families might not be too enthralled with Islam ?

Posted by: warnerme | September 9, 2010 5:27 PM | Report abuse

all religious BS aside these people are enemies of western civilization.

Posted by: pofinpa | September 9, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Skipsailing:

A question for you. You make a lot of statements about islam, muslims, arabs, and "arab/muslim culture."

I'm trying to figure out if you think that the traits you ascribe to islam, muslims, arabs, and "arab/muslim culture" arise out of:
(a) the religion of islam itself?
(b) the common racial background of people on the arabian peninsula?


In other words, do you think that your statements (below) should apply to my former Congressman, Keith Ellison (a muslim) -- just by virtue of his faith? Or would they apply to all Arabs regardless of religion -- just by virtue of their race?

You say:
------------
"arab/muslim culture. The reliance on violence, the corruption, the rank poverty and the suffocating tyranny"
-----------
"The culture that produced 9/11"
----------
"mass murders of arabs by other arabs ...this is just who they are"
------------
"the tyranny and the third world mentality in muslim dominated countries. Concluding that Islam has a nasty streak and that treating muslims with circumspection is simple prudence."
--------------
"Looking at Islam historically it can be argued that the entire faith instills a desire for the "big shake down" in its adherents."
--------------

Oh, and to help inform your answer, here is a definition from http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/racism:

rac·ism   [rey-siz-uhm]
–noun
1.
a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.

----------------
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/bigot
bigot [ˈbɪgət]
n
a person who is intolerant of any ideas other than his or her own, esp on religion, politics, or race

----------

So which is it: when you say "THIS IS JUST WHO THEY ARE", WHO IS "THEY"?
Are you talking about all people of one religion (including Congressman Ellison)? or are you talking about all people of the Arabian peninsula? Or what?

Posted by: d1236 | September 9, 2010 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Did you consider that the 9/11 families might not be too enthralled with Islam ?

Posted by: warnerme | September 9, 2010 5:27

-----------------
Warnerme: are you including the families of muslim victims of 9/11?

Because yeah, I think that those muslim families who lost loved ones in the Twin Towers probably do not blame their own religion for the acts of 9/11. And neither should we.

Posted by: d1236 | September 9, 2010 5:38 PM | Report abuse

I knew objection to the New York mosque wasn't solely based on sensitivity to the 9-11 victims when I read the following day about objections to mosques in other parts of the country.

Posted by: MidwaySailor76 | September 9, 2010 5:41 PM | Report abuse

"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."

The author realizes that correlation is not causation and yet can't refrain from drawing conclusions. In the same way he deduces a "link", the Islamophobes are deducing a "link" between terrorism and Islam, by surveying news they hear about terrorism and home many of the terrorists are Muslims.

It's worth repeating, "correlation is not causation".

Posted by: dyutimandas | September 9, 2010 5:43 PM | Report abuse

The author realizes that correlation is not causation and yet can't refrain from drawing conclusions. In the same way he deduces a "link", the Islamophobes are deducing a "link" between terrorism and Islam, by surveying news they hear about terrorism and home many of the terrorists are Muslims.

It's worth repeating, "correlation is not causation".

Posted by: dyutimandas
=================================
And smoking hasn't been proved to cause cancer, but you'd be a fool to ignore the high correlation.

Posted by: MidwaySailor76 | September 9, 2010 5:45 PM | Report abuse

It looks like the mosque will be relocated and no Korans will be burned, after negotiations between the Imam and the pastor in Florida produced an agreement.

Now the question is "How can this be reported so that it makes the mosque builders appear to be the magnanimous victims of evil, intolerant Christian hate"?

I'm sure you WAPO libs will figure out a way

Posted by: MrMeaner | September 9, 2010 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Scott C3:"My sense is that, by "anti-Islam", you are implying at the very least people who are bigots, if not foaming-at-the-mouth "haters". But in fact one can quite easily hold "unfavorable" views of Islam without being a bigot at all.

It was "easy" for only 13%. What's significant is that Greg reported to suggest that anti-Muslim feelings drove the opposition to the NYC community center/mosque, and not the other way around; in other words, the NYC project galvanized latent anti-Islamism.

Posted by: bitterblogger | September 9, 2010 5:49 PM | Report abuse

"Opposition to 'mosque' directly linked to anti-Islam sentiment, poll shows"

The data you present in this article show no such thing. One of the most common errors we find in the press is the confusion between correlation and causation.

Moreover, if your poll numbers are to be believed, millions of Americans who have a favorable view of Islam are opposed to the Park51/GroundZero edifice nonetheless.

Posted by: rightklik | September 9, 2010 5:53 PM | Report abuse

Wow, this comment thread has tons of evidence of people ignorantly assuming that every one of the billion and a half muslims in the world are some kind of evil "other". Here are some of the representative comments - they remind me of things people said about gays 10 years ago. When these people wake up and realize that their neighbors and even their congressmen are muslim, maybe they'll start to realize how idiotic and bigoted these generalizations are:

----------
all religious BS aside these people are enemies of western civilization.

Posted by: pofinpa | September 9, 2010 5:31 PM | Report abuse
-------
it's amazing that any Americans have a positive view of that blighted religion called Islam. What with the enormous amount of murder and mayhem caused by it's psychotic followers in America and around the world.

A mosque looks like an alien spacecraft and seems to be filled with grisly aliens bent on human extermination and earthly conquest. Like "War of the Worlds".

America would be much better without any Islamic influence. That is a sure thing.

Posted by: battleground51 | September 9, 2010 11:54 AM | Report abuse
--------------

Muslims around the world want to establish sharia and threaten with death anyone who asserts their right to be critical of islam.

Posted by: davemercer27 | September 9, 2010 3:06 PM | Report abuse
-------------
-------------

To all the above and to Davemercer in particular I ask: does your statement apply to the thousands of muslims serving with honor in our armed forces?

Posted by: d1236 | September 9, 2010 5:55 PM | Report abuse

Who claimed that? I've always been anti-anything where people blow up others or kill people due to religion. You have to exceptionally ideological to the point of delusion to partake in Sargent's views. Most people don't buy it, bud.

Posted by: shred11 | September 9, 2010 7:43 PM | Report abuse

What a major surprise! My .02, and it's worth every cent you're paying for it, building a mosque anywhere near ground zero is a bad idea. It may be legal and Constitutional but it's going to make a lot of people in the US angry. Some of them have no problem with Islam, others are virulently opposed to everything Islamic. Duh!
Burning Korans is a bad idea and will make a lot of people all over the world angry. Another duh!
Now our current celebrity horses behind, Rev. Jones, says he's called off the Koran burning festival because they decided not to build the mosque so close to ground zero...but wait, the Imam says no one asked him and he plans to build the mosque right where it was already planned! Now I hear a Catholic Church was refused a permit to build near ground zero. I wonder if that's even true? What a CF!

Let's just get together and burn a bunch of Bibles, Korans, Talmuds, Torahs, the Vedas, Siddhartha...oh, Satanic Bibles, too. I'm sure I missed a few but you get the idea.

Posted by: meand2 | September 9, 2010 8:23 PM | Report abuse

"Let's just get together and burn a bunch of Bibles, Korans, Talmuds, Torahs, the Vedas, Siddhartha...oh, Satanic Bibles, too. I'm sure I missed a few but you get the idea."

Lenin and Lennon would be proud

Posted by: MrMeaner | September 9, 2010 9:19 PM | Report abuse

Good work, Sherlock!

Posted by: liam358 | September 9, 2010 9:56 PM | Report abuse

And let me guess, there's a "link" between opposition to illegal immigration and racism. Racists are significantly more likely to oppose illegal immigration than non-racists. Duh.

This proves nothing, but that barely over half with a favorable view of Islam support the project says a lot. Close to half with a favorable view don't support it.

If you're trying to make the opposition look bad you write Sargent's column.

Posted by: buckdharma | September 9, 2010 9:59 PM | Report abuse

Thank you all for reinforcing my atheism.

Religious tribalism (including that of so many loud-mouthed, intolerant "Christians") is an obvious danger to the people of any society. Madison and Jefferson saw this clearly; the first sentence of the first amendment to our nation's bill of rights begins, "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof." So simple.

Posted by: Estrogena | September 9, 2010 10:42 PM | Report abuse

For the last four years, Senate Majority Leader Harry Ried, and his friend Nancy Pelosi have been on the nightly news... shoving two stimulus bills (that they didn't read before voting for), a socialistic Health Care Plan, a CAP-N-TRADE tax on ALL ENERGY produced and consumed in America.

But now, where are they?

They are not in the news... they are not commenting on the new Union Stimulus Bill proposed by their buddy BObama.

Are they Hiding?

Are they Afraid?

Do they understand the DAMAGE they have done to our country?

All PATRIOTS must come to the aid of our country... we must throw all corrupt incumbent politicians out of Washington DC. We must keep our eye on the ball and not be distracted by the disinformation presented by the Global Media.

Posted by: btrask3 | September 9, 2010 10:48 PM | Report abuse

I had to stop reading comments after maybe 15. Has America turned into a cesspool of stupid?

We lost very precious lives 9 years ago. Afterward, some of you blindly followed an idiot and marched into a nation that had never done anything to us and now you have the blood of close to a MILLION on your hands. This after that same idiot wouldn't give the order to kill the man that was supposedly responsible for giving the order for the 9/11 attacks.

And you still followed that same idiot as he gave OBL what he wanted. US troops out of Saudi Arabia. Some of you conveniently forget that part. And some of you continued to follow this same idiot while he gave the biggest tax relief to folk that didn't need it, and made you pay for it. Some of you followed this same idiot as he helped pull off the biggest bank heist in the nation's history. Now some of you forget this and have the nerve to blame President Obama for everything that same idiot started.

Some of you, to this day, act against your own self interest. Supporting policies advocated by deceptiCons that favor corporations, while those same corporations are slowly strangling the life of of all of us. And if you are crazy enough, some of you actually believe the corporate owned media when it tells you that YOU are about to give power back to the same people that almost sank an entire world's economy. Rewarding them for doing and offering nothing in the last 20 months to help get us back on a more prosperous footing.

To hear some of you talk, you would think Liberals had done all of this. While you drive on public roads to take your children to public parks. You blame Liberals while you go to the mailbox to get your Social Security check, and support the same idiots that wanted to tie that same SS money to the market. That same market that crashed and destroyed lives and entire life savings. The same idiots that want to balance the budget by providing less to people. And more to the same corporations that to this day are still hoarding all the cash we gave them.

Some of you need to answer this challenge. I call it "The conservative challenge".

Name one policy or piece of law brought by conservatives, since Carter, that has benefited the masses of Americans.

I am The original, SickupandFed. And I approve this post

Posted by: SickupandFed | September 10, 2010 9:47 AM | Report abuse


I am from a Muslim background and I say NO to the Mosque/Islamic Center 2 blocks from Ground Zero. Muslims need to show sensitivity and in case they have forgotten, they do need to be reminded that indeed the people who committed murder on a horrific scale on 9/11 called themselves Muslims and derived their inspiration from the same ideology. Muslims need to take responsibility for that at least. Second, the Islamic Center is designed to make a political statement. Until Muslims clean up their house, they should refrain from make statements that will definitely be exploited to further the Islamist Agenda (even if Imam’s intentions are decent).


In addition, America should do much more than protest the mosque.

Posted by: zara1 | September 15, 2010 5:30 AM | Report abuse

Post a Comment

We encourage users to analyze, comment on and even challenge washingtonpost.com's articles, blogs, reviews and multimedia features.

User reviews and comments that include profanity or personal attacks or other inappropriate comments or material will be removed from the site. Additionally, entries that are unsigned or contain "signatures" by someone other than the actual author will be removed. Finally, we will take steps to block users who violate any of our posting standards, terms of use or privacy policies or any other policies governing this site. Please review the full rules governing commentaries and discussions.




characters remaining

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company