| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
It's hard to discern much from this without seeing the actual questions that were asked, since the answers are somewhat confused and contradictory: two-thirds want a caliphate, but two-thirds also want a "democratic political system."
"Less than 25% of Muslims blame al-Qaeda for 9/11 attacks," from the Malaysia Sun, with thanks to Wally:
An in-depth poll of four major Muslim countries has found that in all of them large majorities believe that undermining Islam is a key goal of US foreign policy.Most want US military forces out of the Middle East and many approve of attacks on US troops there.
Most respondents have mixed feelings about al Qaeda. Large majorities agree with many of its goals, but believe that terrorist attacks on civilians are contrary to Islam.
There is strong support for enhancing the role of Islam in all of the countries polled, through such measures as the imposition of sharia (Islamic law). This does not mean that they want to isolate their societies from outside influences: Most view globalization positively and favor democracy and freedom of religion.
Democracy for religious minorities? Unclear. Freedom of religion including freedom of conscience, i.e., the freedom to leave Islam if someone so desires? Unclear.
These findings are from surveys in Egypt, Morocco, Pakistan, and Indonesia conducted from December 2006 to February, 2007 by WorldPublicOpinion.org with support from the START Consortium at the University of Maryland.Large majorities across all four countries believe the United States seeks to, “weaken and divide the Islamic world.” On average 79 percent say they perceive this as a US goal, ranging from 73 percent in Indonesia and Pakistan to 92 percent in Egypt. Equally large numbers perceive that the United States is trying to maintain “control over the oil resources of the Middle East” (average 79%). Strong majorities (average 64%) even believe it is a US goal to “spread Christianity in the region.”
“While US leaders may frame the conflict as a war on terrorism, people in the Islamic world clearly perceive the US as being at war with Islam,” said Steven Kull, editor of WorldPublicOpinion.org.
This is nothing new, of course, and it is partly why U.S. and European officials are so reluctant to speak about the role of Islam in inciting to jihad violence, despite the fact that their avoidance of the topic only allows the problem to metastasize. They are afraid that if they do discuss even measures to restrict the spread of the jihad ideology in mosques and madrasas, they will only reinforce the impression that they're at war with Islam. Yet clearly their efforts to efface this impression from the Islamic world aren't working -- so it might be more prudent in the long run to forget about trying to make headway against this, and instead take the measures that are necessary to protect their societies.
Consistent with this concern, large majorities in all countries (average 74%) support the goal of getting the United States to “remove its bases and military forces from all Islamic countries,” ranging from 64 percent in Indonesia to 92 percent in Egypt.Substantial numbers also favor attacks on US troops in Iraq, Afghanistan, and in the Persian Gulf. Across the four countries polled approximately half support such attacks in each location, while three in ten are opposed. But there is substantial variation between countries: Support is strongest in Egypt, where at least eight in ten approve of attacking US troops in the region. A majority of Moroccans also support targeting US forces, whether stationed in the Persian Gulf (52%) or fighting in Iraq (68%). Pakistanis are divided about attacks on the American military, many do not answer or express mixed feelings, while Indonesians oppose them.
However, respondents roundly reject attacks on civilians. Asked about politically-motivated attacks on civilians, such as bombings or assassinations, majorities in all countries—usually overwhelming majorities—take the strongest position offered by saying such violence cannot be justified at all. More than three out of four Indonesians (84%), Pakistanis (81%), and Egyptians (77%) take this position, as well as 57 percent of Moroccans (an additional 19 percent of Moroccans say such attacks can only be “weakly justified”).
The problem here, as always, is in the definition of "civilians." While non-Muslim Westerners may assume that they know what is meant by “terrorism,” “innocent lives,” and “civilians,” these are in fact hotly-debated terms in the Islamic world. Anjem Choudhury of Omar Bakri’s jihadist group in Britain told an interviewer that the victims of the July 7, 2005 bombings in London were not innocent, because they were not Muslims: “When we say innocent people, we mean Muslims. As far as non-Muslims are concerned, they have not accepted Islam. As far we are concerned, that is a crime against God…As far as Muslims are concerned, you’re innocent if you are a Muslim. Then you are innocent in the eyes of God. If you are non-Muslim, then you are guilty of not believing in God.” One Palestinian Arab jihadist ruled out that category also, for at least some of the victims of Islamic jihad terrorism: “There are no civilians in Israel. All the Israelis are military, all of them,” he insisted. “They are all military and they all have weapons and guns, and the moment they are called up they are going to be using their weapons against me.” The Tunisian jihadist Rashid al-Ghannushi has issued a fatwa to the same effect, declaring: “There are no civilians in Israel. The population — males, females, and children — are the army reserve soldiers, and thus can be killed.”
Attitudes toward al-Qaeda are complex. On average, only three in ten view Osama bin Laden positively. Many respondents express mixed feelings about bin Laden and his followers and many others declined to answer.
They declined to answer. Hardly a ringing condemnation -- it's more likely that they figured that telling a pollster from Maryland that they supported Al-Qaeda might not be wise.
There is strong disapproval of attacks by “groups that use violence against civilians, such as al-Qaeda.” Large majorities in Egypt (88%), Indonesia (65%) and Morocco (66%) agree that such groups “are violating the principles of Islam.” Pakistanis are divided, however, with many not answering.But there is also uncertainty about whether al-Qaeda actually conducts such attacks. On average less than one in four believes al-Qaeda was responsible for September 11th attacks. Pakistanis are the most skeptical, only 3 percent think al-Qaeda did it. There is no consensus about who is responsible for the attacks on New York and Washington; the most common answer is “don’t know.”
Most significantly, large majorities approve of many of al-Qaeda’s principal goals. Large majorities in all countries (average 70 percent or higher) support such goals as: “stand up to Americans and affirm the dignity of the Islamic people,” “push the US to remove its bases and its military forces from all Islamic countries,” and “pressure the United States to not favor Israel.”
Equally large majorities agree with goals that involve expanding the role of Islam in their society. On average, about three out of four agree with seeking to “require Islamic countries to impose a strict application of sharia,” and to “keep Western values out of Islamic countries.” Two-thirds would even like to “unify all Islamic counties into a single Islamic state or caliphate.”
But this does not appear to mean that the publics in these Muslim countries want to isolate themselves from the larger world. Asked how they feel about “the world becoming more connected through greater economic trade and faster communication,” majorities in all countries say it is a good thing (average 75%). While wary of Western values, overall 67 percent agree that “a democratic political system” is a good way to govern their country and 82 percent agree that in their country “people of any religion should be free to worship according to their own beliefs.”
Posted by Robert at April 30, 2007 5:09 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
I'm amazed how someone can pronounce Sharia and democracy and freedom of religion in the same sentence with a straight face.
Posted by: Witch-king of Angmar![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 30, 2007 6:19 AM
"I'm amazed how someone can pronounce Sharia and democracy and freedom of religion in the same sentence with a straight face.
Posted by: Witch-king of Angmar"
Naseem can. Quite often.
" a mild sharia" no less, whatever that is...
at April 30, 2007 6:55 AM
Being opposed to “a strict application of sharia” makes you an apostate in the eyes of strict Muslims. Saying anything that could have you considered "apostate" in places like Pakistan is exceedingly risky.
Part of the power of the radicals is the climate of fear they create. With everybody afraid to voice an opinion that contradicts the radicals, it makes everybody think that everybody else supports the radical position.
"I thought you wanted Sharia? No, I thought YOU wanted Sharia!"
Posted by: PapaBear at April 30, 2007 7:32 AM
Anyone know what "Shar'ia" means in Arabic?
Posted by: darcy at April 30, 2007 8:29 AM
"Strong majorities (average 64%) even believe it is a US goal to “spread Christianity in the region.”
...Islam is terrified of other religions...
at April 30, 2007 8:39 AM
What empty speaches they say. Even if you convert to islam, they still kill you! Like all the people going to the mosque to pray they blow them up! You can find pictures of women burried to their neck in dirt and stoned while in their dress of religion! I just cannot listen to them without it all being a bunch of lies!! How the U.S. can sit down and listen to Admadajine's lies is beyound me! None of this matters anyways, if they don't do something about the border and the illegals here! These people too in our country and there is NO WAY you could ask them to protect the borders! I have never seen so much wrong with our country and all these pinheads who want to protect these law brakers! Running across seas to adopt a black baby when so many suffer here! If you ask me they will come and take our babies now! Thankyou Angelina!!! It seems we are such a minority that really get it. There is only one person I know that can talk to about this stuff. That is because she was so far on the left I handed her Robert's book. PIG to Islam! She called me early and was talking 100 miles an hour! She laughs at herself now looking back! Still other people, they say respect their religion! Religion, I say!? Do you know what they believe!!!??!
This all reminds me of that bad paper pal-chainletter! You know you have to send seven other people the letter too or you will be cursed too! These people hang on to bad beliefs as they make them up along the way! Believing in such ideology. I threw my chain letter away! These people must recognize evil when theys see it. The devil disguises in so many ways. Who is their devil? Allah too? Allah is everything!? Except that of love and redemption, faith, hope and knowledge! Allah certainly hates women and children!
at April 30, 2007 8:51 AM
"It's hard to discern much from this without seeing the actual questions that were asked, since the answers are somewhat confused and contradictory: two-thirds want a caliphate, but two-thirds also want a "democratic political system."
I don't think it's all that difficult too discern: the people are irrational. They think you can have an Islamic state and a democracy at the same time.
The poll only goes to show that Muslims live in an Islamic twilight zone where Logic is turned upside down.
If the majority can't believe that Al Qaeda had something to do with 9/11, that can only mean one thing: the Jews did it. If asked, they would have also told the pollester that the Jews all called in sick on the morning of 9/11.
Does anyone really believe that religious freedom means religious freedom to Muslims? You can't have religious freedom and Sharia law at the same time in the same society.
It's pointless to conduct a poll in an Islamic country and expect to understand the results unless you understand the strange twist of mind that only Muslims seem to be inflicted with.
Posted by: rational
at April 30, 2007 9:08 AM
I do not see any religious freedom in their beliefs. They all are forced to say they believe in something they cannot even tell you! Saudia Arabia does ok in their democracy and beliefs, it appears.
at April 30, 2007 9:23 AM
Assalamau Laikum all,
I must say that this news is quite encouraging. The strength of support for sharia that is.
They know instinctively that sharia is how it is supposed to be....how their tribal ancestors lived in the golden age of Islam....and in order to bring back that age....there must be sharia.
A lot of them though have become softies...and quite like showing off their hair and shave off their beards...this is to attract themselves to the opposite sex...and quite contrary to the teachings of their ancestors...in essence they have been "corrupted"...at least that is what the mullas would have you think.
They have not thought this through like I have ...being of the modern ilk and progressive ...I think there is room for both...but in the right mix....a concept that I call mild sharia.
We can all share this golden age philosophy, womens can return to the fold (of cloth)but upto the scarf...mensfolk can trim the beards etc.
You peoples have the advantage as you are more "corrupt"....in this sense you can help shape this mix.
Posted by: Naseem at April 30, 2007 9:30 AM
The full report and the questionnaire are available at this link.
More poll and survey results on Muslims' opinions are being compiled here.
Re "democracy" and Islam, in Muslim majority countries "democracy" is simply a means by which Muslims can elect hard-line Islamic governments, Afghanistan, Iraq, Iran, Turkey, Palestinian Authority, etc.
Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at April 30, 2007 9:44 AM
From the article: "But this does not appear to mean that the publics in these Muslim countries want to isolate themselves from the larger world."
Of course not. If they were isolated, they would not have any civlizations to loot and subjugate for Allah.
Posted by: Stendec
at April 30, 2007 9:55 AM
Part of the problem for the average westerner in interpreting these seemingly contradictory results arises because of the vagueness of the terms in the questions.
"Asked how they feel about “the world becoming more connected through greater economic trade and faster communication,” majorities in all countries say it is a good thing (average 75%)."
Of course. That is perfectly consistent with the ultimate goal of Islam. Speed up and expand the da'wa and media jihad, while increasing the wealth of Islamic nations (and the latter is just common sense: who does not want to be wealthier?).
"While wary of Western values, overall 67 percent agree that “a democratic political system” is a good way to govern their country and 82 percent agree that in their country “people of any religion should be free to worship according to their own beliefs.”"
The first statement highlights the fact that the majority of Muslims say they oppose western values, wanting to keep those out of Muslim societies.
The latter statements reflect the seemingly contradictory attitude most Muslims have regarding freedom of belief. On the one hand they say no compulsion in religion. On the other, most endorse policies which clearly do put compulsion in religion. E.g., most Malaysians will say that they support freedom of belief, but 98% of them think that Muslims should not be permitted to leave Islam (which is, in fact, the law in Malaysia). Possible reasons for these apparent contradictory statements include:
-on polls and surveys, people generally tend to affirm statements that are perceived to be socially-desirable to the questioners or researchers.
-there is also a certain percentage of Muslims who believe one of the propositions but not the other, but the researchers do not show this specific type of result (e.g., the percentage of Muslims who believe X and believe Y).
-the seemingly contradictory statements within Islam itself, which permits coerced conversion as policy (9:5, 9:29, 8:39), yet also provides Muslims with highly effective da'wa propaganda (2:256) that can be taken out of context to deny or finesse the talk about the substance of that policy.
-freedom of belief (like "freedom of expression") is a concept that simply has different boundaries within Islam. Thus, most Muslims will say they are in favour of freedom of belief and freedom of expression, but a better indication of what they believe can be gleaned from answers to specific questions about real situations (e.g., do you think the Muhammad cartoonists should be criminally prosecuted and punished?, to which 78% of British Muslims say yes).
Clearly researchers need to ask more specific questions about specific policies such as the specific sharia laws (re blasphemy, apostasy, aggressive and defensive jihad, etc.) and specific situations (Muhammad cartoons etc.); otherwise these data are rather dificult to interpret, and, needless to say, it is doubtful that most westerners would buy my interpretation above. They need to see the results for specific answers (and for that matter they need to read the Islamic texts and follow news websites such as this one) before they will begin to understand the nature and the scale of the problem we are facing.
Posted by: Khaybar Oasis at April 30, 2007 10:31 AM
You can most likely thank those great buddies of the west, the Saudis, for creating such widespread report for militance in Morocco and Indonesia. As for Egpyt and Pakiworld, those snake pits were doomed to become jihadi-phillic from the start. Moreover, I note the survey does not even say how many of the individual respondants were muslim; we are led to assume that since the survey comes from muslim-majority nations, *all* the respondants were muslim. I would love to know, out of how many voted against shariah, attacks on U.S. troops, a Bin Laden, etc, how many in indoensia were Hindu, Christian or animist (who are likely incorrectly labeled *muslim*), how many in Pakiworld were Hindu, Christian, Sindhi or Baloch, how many in Egypt were Copts and how many in Morocco were conscious Amazigh, often agonistic, liberal muslim, anti-Islamist and closet Christians.
Of course, all these countries need to be taken to taslk for even letting their peoples become that radical, and religous and ethni/cultural minorities, and their resentments, need to be encouraged further.
Posted by: maxwell46&2 at April 30, 2007 10:33 AM
"Consistent with this concern, large majorities in all countries (average 74%) support the goal of getting the United States to “remove its bases and military forces from all Islamic countries,” ranging from 64 percent in Indonesia to 92 percent in Egypt."
I never hear about natural disasters in Morocco or Egypt but Pakistan, Turkey, Indonesia and Malaysia have experienced many natural disasters, from tsunami to earthquakes to volcanic eruption.
It's another case of being careful what you wish for because upon withdrawal of all US forces from all Islamic countries (Bosnia, too?) I would call on the US military to cease and desist offering aid in such countries, lest we offend their sensibilities. If Indonesians or Malaysians experience another tsunami they can call on Allah. We will help all others in the area but we won't darken Islamic soil with our unclean Christian feet.
Posted by: PMK at April 30, 2007 11:31 AM
..a democracy is nothing more than mob rule...
Posted by: exsgtbrown at April 30, 2007 11:56 AM
Naseem can. Quite often.
" a mild sharia" no less, whatever that is...
Posted by: pr126
You mean like a "little bit pregnant"?
at April 30, 2007 12:29 PM
Muslim Bridges right here in the USA
http://www.muslimbridges.org/
Their article;
"Suicide Bombing"
Bunch of Blah blah blah..
Targeting civilians life and property through suicide bombings .. forbidden..blah blah..
Here is their so called "Mission"..
Mission is to build bridges- to promote peace and dialogue through proactive interactions
at individual and organizational levels and provide answers to questions so that
misconceptions of Islam and Ameican Muslims can be stopped. more blah blah blah..
So wonderfull! They, with many other "Peace Loving Muslims" got together and drew
up this "thing-a-ma-gigie"...
"The US Muslim Religious Council Issues Fatwa Against Terrorist"
Targeting civilians life and property through suicide bombings .. forbidden..more ..
Blah .. blah ..blah..
Sure.. but ask them who are "Civilians"...they will not answer!
For real ..e-mail them and ask..the big Question..."Just who are civilians"?
This is a organization in California... My quess is most, if not all who signed that so called
"Fatwa Against Terrorism", did so with the Islamic interpretation ...
"Civilian" = "Muslim".
"American" = "CHUMP"
I posted the e-mail exchange on my blog..
http://muslimbridgesfallingdown.blogspot.com/
They refused to answer .."Who are Civilians"
and said ;
"We regret, this discussion is going beyond the type of dialogue and healthy
exchange desired."
blah blah and
"We are encouraged not to exchange in arguments and simply say "Peace"
Therefore, as our final reply.
"Peace".
at April 30, 2007 1:20 PM
Gobbledy=gook.
This poll sounds like it was set up by a schizophrenic.
"Islam must dominate and not be dominated? True or False?"
That's the only question that matters.
The rest is windowdressing to dupe the infidel dogs.
Posted by: profitsbeard at April 30, 2007 1:57 PM
As for more detailed stats and the text of the questions, this wasn't hard to find:
story:
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/articles/home_page/346.php?nid=&id=&pnt=346&lb=hmpg2
Full Report (PDF):
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/apr07/START_Apr07_rpt.pdf
Questionnaire (PDF)
http://www.worldpublicopinion.org/pipa/pdf/apr07/START_Apr07_quaire.pdf
at April 30, 2007 4:04 PM
"They have not thought this through like I have ...being of the modern ilk and progressive ...I think there is room for both...but in the right mix....a concept that I call mild sharia".
Posted by: Naseem
Would it be too much to ask for you to nip over to the Red Mosque and run this 'Mild Sharia' concept past the head honcho? He's known as the Head Honcho for good reason, he lops heads off...
Posted by: Jihadtobejoking at April 30, 2007 4:21 PM
I see allot of positive in this in what Muslims are saying:
1. Muslims are saying they would rather be RULED BY GOD AND IMAMS than despots who are not sharing the wealth.
2. Muslims are saying they want to choose who rules them and no imams or dictators for life.
3. Muslims want to control their own oil. (They make the mistake though that America is controlling Mideast oil as most of it is run by Mulims, Europeans or Chinese.)
4. Muslims do not want homosexuality, aborticide, God out their schools, television, government and lives and they want to live in their cultural niche they have developed.
Yes there are major friction points in Judea, but if one would change Muslim to Christian or Jew one can see they want the same things in life in a morality and control.
The greatest positive is most Muslims do not seek and active outside their nation response which is terrorism.
If western people would stop telling Muslims what is wrong with them all the time and start pointing out that we want the same things, then a better step forward could be made.
The above findings show Ahmadinejad, bin Laden, Qods forces, Hezbollah and Hamas are not what Muslims want. That should be very disturbing to the ayatollahs in finding out that the followers are looking to make Islam democratic in having a say who is leading them.
Talk about a real firestorm the day elections of imams start taking place. That would really be olde Texas politics.
Posted by: Lame Cherry at April 30, 2007 4:31 PM
"the Islamic world clearly perceive the US as being at war with Islam"
If only our government would buy off on that concept and get off the WOT mantra. Then maybe we could make some progress in this conflict.
Posted by: walterc at April 30, 2007 6:46 PM
The Poll tells me they all want elections to vote in Sharia law. Dump the current leadership who have relations with the West. Take the Armies and have a War. Starting with Israel. While trashing Western interests in their presence.
This poll is another free will issue. If their dislike for us and what we represent is so prevalent. Then we should see our way clear of funding their well being.
They want all the benefits while being clueless as to what it takes to make it happen
These People need to get back to the fundamentalist of life. Like the kind of effort it takes just to put Bread on the table. With all the digging they show themselves capable of. you'd think they would plant something besides Bombs.
Tell these people to stay Home and sorry, the Kitchen is CLOSED.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at April 30, 2007 9:03 PM
To our ol' pal Naseem:
You get what you deserve, and in your case that would be shariat governance!
But you may want to read the fine print first: There is no such thing as "moderate" Islam. There is no such thing as "moderate" shariat. There is no "moderate" version of the Kuran! And there is no "moderate" Taliban. Islam is Islam! SO---
it's Taliban forever for YOU, kiddo!!!!!!!!!!!
You truly deserve them, we must say!!!! Allahu akbar to you (along with the amputations, beheadings, stonings, whippings, beatings, and dictatorial, psychopathic religious "clerics" and other good "Islamic" stuff you love so well).
Enjoy, enjoy!!!!
Posted by: pythagoras at May 1, 2007 3:26 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)