| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Both the figures of the new Pew Research Center poll of Muslims in America, and the poll itself, far understate the problem.
As to the figures. It should be obvious, both by study of Islamic doctrines and by observation that Islam is a belief-system in which deception has always played a major role. There is, for example, "taqiyya," a doctrine that originates in Shi'a Islam. It is religiously-sanctioned dissimulation, originally made necessary because of Sunni persecution and murder of Shi'a, who felt they needed justification for lying about both the nature of their faith, and their belief in it. Like the related "Kitman" (mental reservation), it is also widely practiced by Sunnis.
Indeed, Muhammad, the central figure in Islam, famously said that "war is deception." This matters, for Muhammad is the Model of Perfect Conduct, uswa hasana, the Perfect Man To Be Emulated and Followed in All Things, al-insan al-kamil. His every word, his every deed, is pored over, as conveyed in the stories known as the Hadith, or traditions. Every detail of his life as preserved in the canonical biography, the Sira, is pored over as a guide -- a guide both to the full meaning of the Qur'an (both Hadith and Sira offering a kind of gloss), and for the submissive Believer's own conduct.
Now if one lives in an Infidel land, and if one is keenly aware of the growing knowledge about and consequent alarm about Islam, then one is very likely, for obvious purposes, to simply not respond with the truth. The most obvious purpose will be to shore up the position of Muslims in this country. This is necessary because that alarm about Islam is growing, despite the practiced efforts of the government and of so much of the media, to downplay it and divert attention from it. Just look at how, online, the media presents the results of this disturbing study. Just look at the misleading headlines it offers all those who just read and run.
So some respondents will lie, while others are so contemptuous of the Infidels that they see no need to lie. That is the difference between the most forthright Muslims, indifferent to the Infidels, and the vast army of apologists who try to divert or distract attention, or play at Taqiyya-and-Tu-Quoque. And even straighter-talking than these forthright Muslims are the apostates from Islam, such as Ayaan Hirsi Ali and Ali Sina and Ibn Warraq and Wafa Sultan, who know perfectly well what Islam inculcates, and what, outside of the mosque and the madrasa, suffuses Islamic societies as part of the atmospherics of Islam.
Those who answered "Don't Know" or refused to answer should be taken not at face value, but as knowing perfectly well and not answering the question because they did not wish to be toted up in this exercise in a way that would harm the "image of Islam." And one would be a fool not to think that some, and perhaps a great many (I think very many) of those who claimed they did not support terrorism, were being completely forthright. Many no doubt used some weaselly bit of "mental reservation" to be able to claim they were against it if it was directed at "innocents" -- remember, the Muslim definition of "innocents" does not coincide with the definition that Infidels subscribe to -- non-combatants, especially women and children and the aged -- as the views, on record, of Al-Qaradawa and the Sheik Al-Azhar, among others, make clear.
Furthermore, the opinion poll was constructed so as to leave out certain key questions. Why was there no question on the desirability of working to impose the Shari'a? That would demonstrate the contradiction between Muslim desires and the continued existence of the legal and political institutions of this country, institutions built entirely by non-Muslims and reflecting entirely a view of the individual, and indeed of the world, that is flatly contradicted by the letter, and spirit, of Islam. Think of the Muslim view of freedom of conscience, of freedom of speech, of the very idea of respecting and upholding the rights of individuals. These are seen as opposed, in Islam, to the collective or umma, which is the only thing that matters. And it matters only so that it might support the spread of Islam and Islam's necessary dominance, everywhere.
Why was there no question about the desirability of resurrecting a worldwide caliphate to which all Muslims could adhere, whether or not they lived in the domains controlled, for now, by that caliphate?
It is obvious that the poll was unsatisfactory in one sense. It greatly understates the problem. Its methodology is naive.
But in another sense, it is satisfactory. It shows the existence of a serious problem, despite the ways in which the questions were posed. (Also, Muslims themselves in many cases were responsible for compiling the questions and then collecting answers.) It is a peculiar poll, asking questions of people who are keenly aware of the prescription, by the greatest faith-figure in their life, that "war is deception," and keenly aware that, again according to the tenets of Islam, there exists a permanent state of war, though not necessarily of active warfare, between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb, the Lands Controlled by Muslims and the Lands (for now) Controlled by the Infidels. It is peculiar to expect fully honest answers from those who consider that, for now, they have been allowed to settle deep within the Lands of the Infidels, and should do everything possible to assure the circumambient Infidels that everything is fine, that they have nothing to worry about, and that their Muslim neighbors and colleagues are absolutely true-blue believers in American institutions -- when, in fact, if they are Believers in Islam, they cannot conceivably offer loyalty either to Infidel nation-states, or to Infidels, no matter how charmingly and plausibly they behave, as necessity, "darura," dictates. For now.
Posted by Hugh at May 23, 2007 8:37 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Why would any clear-thinking Muslim tell an infidel pollster that he supports suicide bombings? These 26% are either getting arrogant, or are really dumb.
Posted by: pez![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at May 23, 2007 9:14 AM
When I first learned about "taqiyya," so much was explained!
Posted by: darcy at May 23, 2007 9:25 AM
"To compensate respondents for their time and to make participation in the survey more attractive, an incentive of $50 was offered for completing the interview. The study began with $25 incentive, but this was subsequently increased to $50 to further minimize mid-interview termination. Three-quarters of the respondents provided name and address information for receiving the incentive payment."
Page 72 of pdf.
The poll questions are in categories, Q.A, Q.B, etc. Q.D. (page 95 of pdf) is about discrimination against Muslims. Q.F is where they start to ask about extremism by Muslims . Q.F. is page 95 of the pdf. So when the poll switched from Muslims being discriminated against to Muslims engaged in terrorism, people stopped answering questions when they were paid 25 dollars.
So they had to increase the payment from 25 dollars to 50 dollars so that people would continue to answer questions after Muslims being discriminated against in Q.D. to Muslim terrorism in Q.F and afterwards. Q.H is when they ask the heavy questions on Muslim terrorism, almost the end of the poll.
So at 25 dollars, the RDD survey respondents would all stop answering as soon as the questions stopped being discrimination against Muslims to Muslim terrorism and extremism.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at May 23, 2007 9:59 AM
Translation of above. For 25 dollars, people will talk about discrimination after 9-11. But to say that terrorism is bad, i.e. to say other than what they believe, they require 50 dollars. They won't say al Qaeda is bad for 25 dollars but will for 50 dollars.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at May 23, 2007 10:03 AM
This ended up being experimental economics. As experimental economics we discover that to get Muslims to say al Qaeda is bad, we have to pay them 50 dollars, 25 is not enough. This is a different part of economics than survey research, but a valuable contribution nonetheless. Hats off to Pew, they proved that Muslims do support al Qaeda and that it takes 50 dollars to get them to say they don't.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at May 23, 2007 10:09 AM
Old Atlantic,
Let me see if I understand this correctly. For zero dollars, they wouldn't say squat...
oh, and by the way, send me a check for $25. I have a lot of complaining to do. Life as an infidel these days just ain't what it used to be...
Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at May 23, 2007 10:23 AM
Generally speaking, anytime you have a "non-response" to a poll question, this is bad news for the pollster. Every time there's an absence of data, it goes to the error side of the equation. So, the more "unknowns", the greater the error. After a certain point (e.g., you get too many "non-responses"), the error is too high, and bingo, your polling data is garbage.
Many times, questions which a researcher would like to learn more about are (oftentimes) bound up with that which is deemed "socially unacceptable." So, questions about pre-teen sex, pre-teen drug use, wife abuse, infidelity, etc., etc, are all problematic. The pollster will get either non-responses or worse, false responses (so, the poll results claim that every pre-teen is a virgin, only problem -- 13 percent are pregnant..)
I would rank asking Muslims about whether or not they support suicide bombers as being right up there with asking teens about sex. You can't really expect an honest answer. (Many pollsters, btw, to obtain honest answers will ensure that the data collected is anonymous -- so the info never gets around...and there are various ways to ensure this. With this poll of Muslims, note that (!!) "three-quarters of the respondents provided name and address information for receiving the incentive payment." (At one time, making so-called "incentive payments" was considered unethical in the polling business.)
Anyway, given these considerations, it makes the "25 percent of young American Muslims believ[ing] to some extent that suicide bombings can be justified" as very problematic, very worrisome.
Posted by: J.S. at May 23, 2007 10:38 AM
And at this very moment Bush and the quislings in the Senate are considering legislation that not only won't reduce Muslim immigration but will actually increase it.
Posted by: RBLA at May 23, 2007 10:41 AM
Ynkedoodl2 I think you are getting Pew experimental economics.
To summarize, the Pew Study was experimental economics. Their experimental design, by accident, was to determine by experiment how much money it takes to get Muslims to say they are against terrorism or al Qaeda.
Pew discovered by varying the amount of money offered that Muslims in the U.S. would not say terrorism is bad or denounce al Qaeda for 25 dollars but would for 50 dollars.
For 25 dollars, Muslims in the U.S. would complain about discrimination after 9-11, but would not answer questions about whether they supported al Qaeda or terrorism.
The conclusion of the Pew Experimental Design was that it takes 50 dollars to get a Muslim in the U.S. to say they are against terrorism or al Qaeda and 25 dollars is not enough. This is the proper statement of the conclusion of the Pew exercise.
Its reasonable to infer from this that Muslims in the U.S. support al Qaeda and terrorism and killing Americans.
It is reasonable to infer from this that Virgil Goode was right, stop Muslim immigration.
Virgil Goode Right: Stop Muslim Immigration
Paul Begala waylays Bay Buchanan, Virgil Goode, and 9-11 Truth
Posted by: Old Atlantic at May 23, 2007 10:42 AM
The table on page 11 of the pdf on criticism of US foreign policy may be the closer representation of actual feelings.
Criticism of U.S. Foreign Policy
US Muslims vs. General public*
War in Iraq % %
Right decision 12 vs. 45
Wrong decision 75 vs. 47
DK/Refused 13 vs. 8
100 vs. 100
War in Afghanistan
Right decision 35 vs. 61
Wrong decision 48 vs. 29
DK/Refused 17 vs. 10
100 vs. 100
U.S. War on Terrorism
Sincere effort 26 vs. 67
Not sincere effort 55 vs. 25
Mixed/DK/Refused 19 vs. 8
100 vs. 100
*General public comparisons were taken
from the following Pew nationwide
surveys, respectively: April 2007,
December 2006, March 2004.
From Jan to April 2007, when these questions were asked, they felt safe to be this critical. The criticism of the war on terror, 55 percent "not sincere" sounds sincere.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at May 23, 2007 11:27 AM
"Nearly 60,000 respondents were interviewed to find a representative sample
of Muslims."
We might restate the conclusion a little. It takes 50 dollars a person to troll through 60,000 Muslims
to find over 500 out of a 1000 willing to say that they are against al Qaeda and terrorism. Paying 25 dollars isn't enough to get them to answer questions on terrorism, that will only get them to complain about discrimination after 9-11.
In the end, paying them 50 dollars, they still came up with fewer than 1000 Muslims willing to say they were against al Qaeda and killing Americans.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at May 23, 2007 11:40 AM
If we take the under 1000 willing to say they were against terrorism and al Qaeda out of the 60,000, we have less than 2 percent of Muslims in the US out of the sample they started with were willing to denounce al Qaeda and killing Americans.
To get even that many they had to increase the payment for answering questions about terrorism to 50 dollars, because at 25 dollars they stopped answering questions after the discrimination questions.
They also had to recontact an old survey group whose characteristics they knew were much more friendly.
We can look at this as a search for at least 500 US Muslims willing to denounce al Qaeda and terrorism. To get that many they had to up the money for saying specifically that from answering questions on discrimination and reuse an old sample that they knew was more friendly.
Posted by: Old Atlantic at May 23, 2007 11:48 AM
The reason the questions were the way they were is the poll was designed to find exactly what it was intended according the wording the Pew used.
Pew was designed as a right wing, pro American, pro free business foundation and while the Pew family still runs the trust one can find PBS among the leftist platforms Pew funds.
Pew desired to find exactly like all polls what they intended. The poll means only a selling point for policy. The left will use it to bury the FBI and CAIR will use it to claim they are assimilated when they are not.
Posted by: Lame Cherry at May 23, 2007 12:17 PM
Hugh
I mentioned this in the next thread, but your suggestion to read the latter quarter of the study was spot on. If one goes through the raw data i.e. pg 81-108, one should read the responses to the questions, and then toss it around in one's mind. One can then come to appropriate conclusions. I agree that the analysis that PEW came out with was inane, but some of the responses, such as 50% believe that the Quran should be literally followed word for word, are revealing. As is the real howler (QG2, pg 96/108) which has 69% of Muslims think that Islam treats men and women equally well, and another 2% think that Islam treats women better than men.
Raw data, Sir - you need raw data. Nothing more, nothing less!
Posted by: Infidel Pride at May 23, 2007 12:57 PM
Hugh, you mention that taqqiya is a concept that originated among the Shia.
There is an interesting section in the Reliance of the Traveler, from Sunni jurisprudence, about lying. It states that lying is usually frowned upon in Islam and that since the evidence for that is well known it doesn't expound. Several pages then follow about when lying IS acceptable in Islam and even demanded. For example lying to a spouse to smooth over a problem is OK. Lying to an "oppressor" is mandatory. For example if a fellow Muslim is hiding from an oppressor and you know where he is, you MUST lie.
This wonderful Islamic manual of Sharia goes on to explain how a Muslim can avoid lying by misleading instead. (That's much better. Allah really approves of this). I'm sure you have read all this. I just point it out because this isn't labeled as "taqqiya." Merely necessity.
Posted by: former liberal WF at May 23, 2007 4:06 PM
A summary introduction of my posts and a reposting of them afterwards is at
Pew Research Poll Flaws: Muslim Americans: Middle Class
Posted by: Old Atlantic at May 23, 2007 4:10 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.)