Posted on 12/19/2004 10:01:23 AM PST by chiller
What Do 44% of Americans Believe?:Newspapers and websites around the world are reporting what purport to be the results of a Cornell University poll on attitudes of Americans towards Muslims in the United States. The newspapers and websites are reporting that 44% of Americans say that they want to curtail the civil liberties of Muslim Americans.
Here is the summary from the Associated Press:
Nearly half of all Americans surveyed said they think the US government should restrict the civil liberties of Muslim Americans, according to a nationwide poll. . . .
The survey indicated that 44 percent of those surveyed said they favored at least some restrictions on the civil liberties of Muslim Americans. Forty-eight percent said liberties should not be restricted. These are extremely disturbing figures that will be accepted by hundreds of millions or even billions of people around the world.
But there is something important that the press reports overlook: the 44% of people polled did not actually say that they wanted to curtail the civil liberties of Muslim Americans. Rather, 44% of people reported views that the Cornell University pollsters themselves categorize as being support for the curtailment of the civil liberties of Muslim Americans.
I found the report on the poll here. It turns out that the pollsters asked people to agree or disagree with four statements:
1) Muslim civic and volunteer organizations should be infiltrated by undercover law enforcement agents to keep watch on their activities and fundraising.
2) U.S. government agencies should profile citizens as potential threats based on being Muslim or having Middle Eastern heritage.
3) Mosques should be closely monitored and surveilled by U.S. law enforcement agencies.
4) All Muslim Americans should be required to register their whereabouts with the federal government. For each of these statements, between 20 and 30 percent of the subjects agreed; most disagreed. Overall, the study reports, 29% of the subjects agreed with 2 or more of these statements, and 15% agreed with one of them. (Some of these numbers don't quite add up, I think, but see page 6 of the report for the figures.)
I don't want to be nitpicky, but am I right in thinking that a certain amount of spin is involved in how this poll is being reported? The pollsters made a judgment call that if you agree with any one of these statements, you are in favor of curtailing the civil liberties of Muslim Americans. Thus, the pollsters are claiming, and advocacy groups such as CAIR are trumpeting, that 44% of Americans are in favor of curtailing the civil liberties of Muslims.
But is that really what the poll shows? Most of the questions are quite vague, and use lots of buzzwords. Take the statement: "Muslim civic and volunteer organizations should be infiltrated by undercover law enforcement agents to keep watch on their activities and fundraising." There have been many press reports of Muslim civil and volunteer organizations being used as fronts for terrorist financing schemes. If you believe these reports are probably true, or just may be true, you might reasonably want the FBI to investigate the organizations. You would then answer that you agree with the statement. Does that really mean you want to curtail the civil liberties of Muslims?
Of course, this is not to say that the poll results are heartening. In particular, it is very disturbing that 29% of Americans would agree that "All Muslim Americans should be required to register their whereabouts with the federal government." I can imagine less damning explanations for this figure, but it is on the whole quite troubling. Nonetheless, the press reports around the world suggesting that 44% of Americans want to curtail civil liberties of Muslim Americans would appear to be at least misleading.
I don't think it is right either. But, if they asked me if I think ME travelers should face tighter scrutiny, I would have responded yes. Does that mean I think they should have their civil liberties curtailed, no. But, it would have been reported that way.
But, Christians, on the other hand, have lost civil liberties. It is already going on. Where is the outrage at that?
Very good addition.
No I don't. You seem to have fallen for SM*-lover propaganda.
You really have to dig to discover Nichol's and McVeigh's religion.
The SMs* have it in our face at every murdering videotaped outrage: Allah is Great!" on the banner behind them as they behead a helpless civilian. You really think there is an equivalence here?
*SM© = Sweet Muslims
Clearly, there is not enough outrage. It seems that more and more folks are complaining though, and that's good.
It ALSO seems to me that more so-called moderate Muslims need to speak up in defense of the Islam THEY practice, rather than let extremists hijack or define their faith.
That's what I think, anyway.
We treat islam as a religion at our peril.
Which is likely to kill the most people?
Sorry, "hurt feelings" don't count.
I say curtail the 'civil liberties' of ANYONE who dares to hyphenate their nation to second place.
African-American
Hispanic-American
Asian-American
Euro-American
et cetera-American
= UN-American
If you are truly an American, jump into the melting pot and MELT--show your allegiance to OUR Constitution and Flag--THEN your ethnic background differences will then greatly enrich and not divide this country. However, if you for political/financial gain insist on being a mugwump-American, I say NO civil rights for you....Jesse Jackson and your ilk--you have allegiance to some other country or entity first as demonstrated by what you call yourself....you can't take the Fifth Amendment on what you say every day....you're an Outlaw, not under the protection of our civilian laws....
That's a good point that you had to dig to find out their faith, whereas Atta and the others had theirs right out front.
But the fact remains that people have had their civil liberties curtailed in the past due to religion or ethnicity, and nothing good came of it. Remember the Holocaust? I'm not saying that you advocate that kind of thing, but I'm sure there were plenty of Germans who thought it was okey dokey to send the Jews to concentration camps and never spared a thought as to what might happen next.
We established a freedom of religon here (1st Amendment ring a bell?) for a reason. I don't think tinkering with the Constitution on this one is a good idea...too many people can hijack the process and pervert it to their own ends. I don't think anything like the Holocaust could happen again, or the Japanese internment camps, for that matter. And I am GLAD. That type of behavior offends me as an American.
I, frankly, don't care to have anyone telling them that they cannot practice their religon or curtail civil rights on the basis of religon alone. Not a good precendent. I am all for defense, so let's use the laws and technology we have, rather than treating some citizens as second-class out of a misguided sense of caution.
Rapist-American?
Bank-robber-American?Gay-American? Wait. They already tried that one.
Killer-American?
Cannibal-American?
Sorry folks. I will not trivialize my nationality by associating it with any sick, murdering, criminal, sicko criminal enterprise. Not even one masquerading as a religion!
How about we start by deporting all Muslims that are not US citizens and see how things improve from there ? No student visas either.
The following list does not include those getting refugee or asylee status, or of course, illegal aliens, allowed to stay through non-enforcement of immigration laws.
Birth Country |
Legal USA Immigrants 2002 |
Muslim population percentage | Estimated 2002 Muslim Legal Immigrants |
Pakistan | 9,415 | 97 | 9,133 |
Iran | 7,230 | 99 | 7,158 |
India | 50,228 | 14 | 7,032 |
Philippines | 45,250 | 14 | 6,335 |
Nigeria | 7,872 | 75 | 5,904 |
Ethiopia | 6,635 | 65 | 4,313 |
Bangladesh | 4,616 | 85 | 3,924 |
Egypt | 3,348 | 94 | 3,147 |
Morocco | 3,137 | 99 | 3,096 |
Turkey | 3,029 | 100 | 3,023 |
Jordan | 2,927 | 95 | 2,781 |
Albania | 3,362 | 75 | 2,522 |
Russia | 13,935 | 18 | 2,508 |
Somalia | 2,444 | 100 | 2,444 |
Iraq | 2,450 | 97 | 2,377 |
Lebanon | 2,956 | 70 | 2,069 |
Syria | 1,938 | 90 | 1,744 |
Indonesia | 1,805 | 95 | 1,715 |
Sudan | 1,883 | 85 | 1,601 |
Yemen | 1,382 | 99 | 1,368 |
Ghana | 4,410 | 30 | 1,323 |
Uzbekistan | 1,445 | 88 | 1,272 |
Afghanistan | 1,252 | 100 | 1,252 |
Guyana | 6,809 | 15 | 1,021 |
Sierra Leone | 1,492 | 65 | 970 |
Kenya | 3,209 | 30 | 947 |
Algeria | 759 | 99 | 751 |
Niger | 808 | 91 | 735 |
Saudi Arabia | 735 | 100 | 735 |
Romania | 3,655 | 20 | 731 |
Azerbaijan | 746 | 93 | 697 |
Togo | 1,187 | 55 | 653 |
Kuwait | 707 | 89 | 629 |
Malaysia | 1,200 | 52 | 624 |
Serbia and Mont. | 2,994 | 19 | 569 |
Bulgaria | 3,825 | 14 | 536 |
Liberia | 1,766 | 30 | 530 |
Cameroon | 927 | 55 | 510 |
Senegal | 522 | 95 | 496 |
Eritrea | 556 | 80 | 445 |
Thailand | 3,126 | 14 | 438 |
Israel | 2,741 | 14 | 384 |
UAE | 380 | 96 | 365 |
Tanzania | 554 | 65 | 360 |
Tunisia | 353 | 98 | 346 |
Cote d'Ivoire | 483 | 60 | 290 |
Kyrgyzstan | 356 | 76 | 271 |
United Kingdom | 9,527 | 3 | 257 |
Macedonia | 653 | 30 | 196 |
Germany | 5,064 | 3 | 172 |
Canada | 11,350 | 1 | 168 |
France | 2,375 | 7 | 166 |
Uganda | 455 | 36 | 164 |
Libya | 140 | 100 | 140 |
Mauritania | 131 | 100 | 131 |
Guinea-Bissau | 176 | 70 | 123 |
Fiji | 1,095 | 11 | 120 |
Burma | 1,193 | 10 | 119 |
Tajikistan | 137 | 85 | 116 |
Sri Lanka | 1,246 | 9 | 112 |
Mali | 124 | 90 | 112 |
Singapore | 582 | 17 | 99 |
Nepal | 2,095 | 4 | 84 |
Georgia | 735 | 11 | 81 |
Oman | 76 | 100 | 76 |
Turkmenistan | 84 | 87 | 73 |
Qatar | 72 | 100 | 72 |
Argentina | 3,129 | 2 | 63 |
Japan | 5,971 | 1 | 60 |
Bahrain | 59 | 100 | 59 |
Zimbabwe | 358 | 15 | 54 |
Panama | 1,164 | 4 | 47 |
Suriname | 180 | 25 | 45 |
South Africa | 2,210 | 2 | 44 |
Zambia | 280 | 15 | 42 |
Cyprus | 123 | 33 | 41 |
Australia | 1,836 | 2 | 38 |
Brazil | 6,331 | 1 | 38 |
Hong Kong | 3,574 | 1 | 36 |
Sweden | 963 | 4 | 35 |
Burkina Faso | 60 | 50 | 30 |
Netherlands | 981 | 3 | 29 |
Guinea | 29 | 95 | 28 |
Cambodia | 2,263 | 1 | 23 |
Malawi | 62 | 35 | 22 |
Italy | 1,644 | 1 | 16 |
Djibouti | 16 | 94 | 15 |
Maldives | 15 | 100 | 15 |
Burundi | 74 | 20 | 15 |
Angola | 59 | 25 | 15 |
Croatia | 1,153 | 1 | 14 |
Brunei | 20 | 63 | 13 |
Benin | 76 | 15 | 11 |
Mauritius | 57 | 20 | 11 |
Mozambique | 36 | 29 | 10 |
Greece | 651 | 2 | 10 |
Madagascar | 40 | 20 | 8 |
Chad | 8 | 85 | 7 |
Mongolia | 153 | 4 | 6 |
Malta | 37 | 14 | 5 |
Norway | 320 | 2 | 5 |
Cen. African Rep. | 6 | 55 | 3 |
Comoros | 3 | 86 | 3 |
Swaziland | 23 | 10 | 2 |
Namibia | 40 | 5 | 2 |
Aruba | 27 | 5 | 1 |
Botswana | 27 | 5 | 1 |
United States | 32 | 4 | 1 |
Rwanda | 109 | 1 | 1 |
Bhutan | 15 | 5 | 1 |
Slovenia | 64 | 1 | 1 |
Reunion | 3 | 20 | 1 |
Lesotho | 5 | 10 | 1 |
TOTAL | 95,577 | ||
WESTERN DEFENSE COMMAND AND FOURTH
ARMY WARTIME CIVIL CONTROL
ADMINISTRATION
Presidio of San Francisco, California
April 1, 1942
INSTRUCTIONS
TO ALL PERSONS OF
JAPANESE
ANCESTRY
Living in the Following Area:
All that portion of the City and County of San Francisco, lying generally west of the of the north-south line established by Junipero Serra Boulevard, Worchester Avenue, and Nineteenth Avenue, and lying generally north of the east-west line established by California Street, to the intersection of Market Street, and thence on Market Street to San Francisco Bay.
All Japanese persons, both alien and non-alien, will be evacuated from the above designated area by 12:00 oclock noon Tuesday, April 7, 1942.
No Japanese person will be permitted to enter or leave the above described area after 8:00 a.m., Thursday, April 2, 1942, without obtaining special permission from the Provost Marshal at the Civil Control Station located at:
1701 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, California
The Civil Control Station is equipped to assist the Japanese population affected by this evacuation in the following ways:
1. Give advise and instructions on the evacuation.
2. Provide services with respect to the management, leasing, sale, storage or other disposition of most kinds of property including real estate, business and professional equipment, household goods, boats, automobiles, livestock, etc. 3. Provide temporary residence elsewhere for all Japanese in family groups.
4. Transport persons and a limited amount of clothing and equipment to their new residence as specified below.
The Following Instructions Must Be Observed:
1. A responsible member of each family, preferably the head of the family, or the person in whose name most of the property is held, and each individual living alone must report to the Civil Control Station to receive further instructions. This must be done between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Thursday, April 2, 1942, or between 8:00 a.m. and 5 p.m., Friday, April 3, 1942.
2. Evacuees must carry with them on departure for the Reception Center, the following property:
a. Bedding and linens (no mattress) for each member of the family.
b. Toilet articles for each member of the family.
c. Extra clothing for each member of the family.
d. Sufficient knives, forks, spoons, plates, bowls and cups for each member of the family.
e. Essential personal effects for each member of the family.
All items carried will be securely packaged, tied and plainly marked with the name of the owner and numbered in accordance with instructions received at the Civil Control Station.
The size and number of packages is limited to that which can be carried by the individual or family group.
No contraband items as described in paragraph 6, Public Proclamation No. 3, Headquarters Western Defense Command and Fourth Army, dated March 24, 1942, will be carried.
3. The United States Government through its agencies will provide for the storage at the sole risk of the owner of the more substantial household items, such as iceboxes, washing machines, pianos and other heavy furniture. Cooking utensils and other small items will be accepted if crated, packed and plainly marked with the name and address of the owner. Only one name and address will be used by a given family.
4. Each family, and individual living alone, will be furnished transportation to the Reception Center. Private means of transportation will not be utilized. All instructions pertaining to the movement will be obtained at the Civil Control Station.
Go to the Civil Control Station at 1701 Van Ness Avenue, San Francisco, California, between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Thursday, April 2, 1942, or between 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m., Friday, April 3, 1942, to receive further instructions.
J. L. DeWITT
Lieutenant General, U. S. Army
Commanding
Yes, and Ronald Reagan apologized for the internment. Reparations were paid. We were wrong to do that for citizens of Japanese ancestry.
My familiarity with the Bill of Rights is very healthy, thankyouverymuch.
I am tempted to say that the Founding Fathers were naive in not defining "religion". That they should have known what islam is. It is bastardization of the concept of a nation. Clearly it is not a religion in the commonly understood way.
The only explanation I can imagine is that in the Founding Fathers day, Islam was clearly and obviously a joke; not to be taken seriously, and only a fool would cite it as anything serious, religion or otherwise.
Read everything you can get your hands on about dar al Islam and dar al Harb. That defines your religion for you.
The first edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica was published in 1771. It has a beautifully un-PC entry on islam, or as it was referred to then, mahometans. Here is a brief excerpt. Wish I had time to transcribe the whole thing:
...he also repeated to her( Khadijah, his wife ) a passage which he pretended had been revealed to him of the ministry of the angel...
A choice of words and phrasing sure to enrage the current incarnation of the so-called religion.
Well, I can see that you have your mind made up on this, and no amount of talking on my part will change it. We will just have to leave it here, then, because I don't agree with you.
BTW, I am sorry if I offended you with my reference to the First Amendment, but it seemed to me that you were ignoring it...it appears that you are, since you think the Founding Fathers were naive. I cannot agree with you on that, either.
Have a good day, and Merry Christmas. Perhaps we can talk again on a different topic.
Merry Christmas to you too.
"The first edition of the Encyclopedia Brittanica was published in 1771. It has a beautifully un-PC entry on islam, or as it was referred to then, mahometans. Here is a brief excerpt. Wish I had time to transcribe the whole thing..."
Do you have this edition on CD-ROM or on the original stone tablets? (reverent, non-blasphemous grin)....Would LOVE a CD, let me know if they're for sale.
The OBL won't get it until an American city is smoking, or a pandemic is released.
Then the OBL won't matter, they will be swept aside like the "German American Bund" in 1942.
I have no idea what faith Nichols has, if any.
No offense meant, but...do you have a source for that? If I am wrong about him, well, no problem. LOL After all, I can hardly be glad if he was a Christian, kwim?
From what I have found in just the past few minutes, he seems to have been affiliated with something called Christian Identity movement...apparently a bunch of racist militia types who quoted Scripture to justify violence against both the government and minorities such as the Jews. I have only seen one article, by contrast, that states he wasn't a Christian. The rest seem to imply it. The result, to me, is that I am now uncertain that he was a Christian, but I cannot be convinced as yet that he wasn't one, at least marginally.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.