I bet if you asked the Pakistanis in the UK it would be higher than 62% !

Posted by: Celsius at April 6, 2008 8:32 AM

And Pakistan is Bush's ally in 'war-on-terror'. Go figure. I know, I know, so is Saudi Arabia. But, that is my point.

Posted by: Alert at April 6, 2008 8:50 AM

The 62% exemplify the true Islam.

Posted by: darcy at April 6, 2008 9:07 AM

This is interesting information on Pakistan :

http://nl.youtube.com/watch?v=i9xf62PKC5M&feature=related

Posted by: alien84 at April 6, 2008 9:11 AM

"The 62% exemplify the true Islam.

Posted by: darcy at April 6, 2008 9:07 AM "

You win!
That is the most understated FACT about Islam.
If the so called "moderate" Muslims have NO will to stand against the killing and violence done in the name of Islam, it proves that they will stand by (and may even join in) when Sharia tries to take over the world.

Posted by: abinitioadinfinitum at April 6, 2008 9:27 AM

62%....a "tiny minority of extremists"

Posted by: Cornelius at April 6, 2008 9:38 AM

(intro to surahs in the Quran) "In the name of Allah, Most Merciful, Most Compassionate"

Kill the cartoonist.
Kill, Death, Behead... (I have the photos)

Islam is a religion of 'peace and harmony', I know because Muslims (and friends) keep on telling me.

Why do they keep on telling me?

Posted by: James at April 6, 2008 9:41 AM

This morning on BBC radio 4,

"The papers were reviewed by the award winning journalist, Robert Fisk, the award winning author, Louis de Bernieres, and the award winning stand up comedian and Olympic torch refusenik, Francesca Martinez."

One of these people said muslims had every right to be offended by the cartoon showing Mohammed with a bomb as a turban.

Another (or the same one) asked why people picked on muslims for being violent because when the film "The Last Temptation of Christ" was shown in France a man died when the cinema was burned down. Why, nobody made a fuss about that or accused Christians of being violent.

As I was going out at the time I did not catch his name so can anyone tell me who he/they were because I like to remember the names of great dimmis not to say dangerous idiots.

Posted by: Fred at April 6, 2008 9:41 AM

This is interesting, that 62% of a group called 'Jamat-ud-Dawah' would lust for the blood of some inoffensive cartoonists and publishers.

Surely this must be some weird twisted sect of extreme Muslims. So not having heard of them, I looked on their site for more clues and found this in their introduction:-

'Jama’at-ud-Da’wah is a movement that aims to spread the true teachings of Islam, and to establish a pure and peaceful society by building the character of individuals according to those teachings. It is necessary to improve not only the belief of an individual but also his or her deeds and actions, only then an individual can become a truly good citizen. The word “Islam” is derived from the word peace, therefore when an individual, society, government or state conforms itself to the teachings of Islam, they are automatically enriched with the blessing of peace and security.'

Once again, the peace envisaged is that of the grave. Beware Islam in whatever guise it appears.

Posted by: StephenA55 at April 6, 2008 10:03 AM

And this is a surprise........to who?

Posted by: n.a. palm at April 6, 2008 10:22 AM

>>The word “Islam” is derived from the word peace, -- from post above

A total lie. Islam literally means "Surrender," with a secondary definition of "Submission."

Mohammedans are the biggest liars I have ever seen! But, Mo condoned lying, so no problemo to them.

Newsflash, Mohammedans: We are totally tuned-in to "taqiyya!" (Alliteration not intentional!)

Posted by: darcy at April 6, 2008 10:36 AM

Islam is a religion of 'peace and harmony', I know because Muslims (and friends) keep on telling me.

Why do they keep on telling me?

Posted by: James at April 6, 2008 9:41 AM

A few possible reasons, James:

1. Complete ignorance about Islam/Mo/Qur'an.

2. Can't face reality; in denial.

3. The truth conflicts with their Moonbat ideology so damn the truth.

4. Combination of all 3 cited above.

Next time, why not ask one of your non-Moslem friends to tell you one thing they know about the Qur'an. One. Just one. Then get back to JW and tell us what they said!

Posted by: darcy at April 6, 2008 10:43 AM

Hey Islam-Free Zone, check out Toronto SUN columnist Salim Mansur, a moderate Muslim, who has "come out" and blasted Jihadists for their duplicitous behavior

Posted by: spartanoak at April 6, 2008 10:55 AM

"...the award winning journalist, Robert Fisk.."
-- from a posting above

Robert Fisk has been, for many decades, a stalwart, and a fan, of the PLO, and has been, for at least as long, someone who repeats every conceivable canard and bit of viciousness that can be found in Arab or other propaganda, against Israel. He is also, according to many journalists who know him, someone who sometimes claims eyewitness knowledge of things he could not possibly have seen because he was nowhere around at the time. As for being "award winning" -- so what? There are so many awards being handed out like confetti, that some of them, many of them, most of them, surely go to entirely unworthy recipients. These awards mean nothing. Sometimes, in some fields -- what are called hard sciences --and at the highest level, they may mean something. But there are so many equally, or even more deserving, than some of the recipients, that even there one must not be surprised to find a Nobel Prize winner who is not up to expectations, or in some cases, where one may reasonably conclude that others, of equal or of greater merit, in the same field, were somehow overlooked.

Fisk's meretriciousness, in dispatch after dispatch, is hardly to be believed. But it is, by some, believed. Of course, you won't find a thing about Islam in the work of Robert Fisk. Islam, and its effect on the minds of men, and on what they do, how they see the world -- that is not part of Fisk's reporting. So he has been putting on Hamlet without the Prince for his entire life. You learn nothing from Fisk, except about Robert Fisk. About Muslim men, in mental and emotional thrall to Islam, and history-haunted, he tells you nothing, that is gives you no understanding of the kind without which it is not possible to make sense either of Arabs or the history of the Middle East, or of the present Middle East, and that goes far beyond the war against Israel, but includes events in the Sudan, and what happens to the Berbers and the Kurds, and to the Christians in Lebanon, and helps to explain the peculiar role of the Alawite dictatorship in Syria. For all of this, his supposed area of expertise, the indolent Fisk, who has never paid attention to the texts, tenets, attitudes, and atmospherics of Islam, has nothing to offer. Worthless.

Posted by: Hugh at April 6, 2008 11:42 AM

Speaking of awards that are manifestly undeserved by their recipients, and sweet posthumous justice, See Looters raid Arafat's home, steal his Nobel Peace Prize

Posted by: Lex at April 6, 2008 11:55 AM

in looking at the jamat da wah and a lot of what is posted on their website I would have to say it is in reality the Muslim equivalent of softcore porn it would seem is more of a jihadstwebsite than anything else and is very anti-West the current cartoon fusf if nothing else shows just how childish and backwards Islam is and I would think the only reason anyone really pays any attention to it is because the oil in the Middle East is needed by the West it's about time we had a modern Manhattan Project to find a resource that our cars can use that does not depend on middle eastern oil and the poll tax we are paying to would be Muslim overlords in my opinion what is going on over there with the Western governments dancing to the tune of King Abdul because of oil gives them a far too inflated idea of their importance

Posted by: crusader at April 6, 2008 12:35 PM

Award Winning?

The only groups that hand out more awards (trophies) than journalism societies are bowling leagues.

Posted by: Pelayo at April 6, 2008 12:48 PM

Really, this is not a fair poll, and shows bias with leading in the questions. I think they should have asked:

1 Boycott Danish products and Services
2 Expel Danish ambassadors from Muslim countries
3 Sue the Cartoonist and the Editors who published it.
4 Kill the Cartoonist and the Editors who published it.
5 Torture the Cartoonist and the Editors who published it until they accept Islam.
6 Torture the Cartoonist and the Editors who published it until they accept Islam, then kill them.
7 File a religious defamation grievance with the United Nations Human Rights commission, then kill the Cartoonist and the Editors who published it.
8 Cut of the hands and feet from opposite sides of the Cartoonist and the Editors who published it.
9 Crucify the Cartoonist and the Editors who published it until they accept Islam.
10 Reproduce faster by marrying more wives; double zakhat check to favorite Hamas "charity".
11 Keep preaching violent Islam and alternating with rubbing your zebibah on the carpet.
12 Nurse a grudge and look for an opportunity to kill a random infidel.
13 Kill multiple random infidels.
14 Burn a church.
15 Uulate in the streets with RageBoy(TM).
16 Set something in fire in front of cameras.
17 Ignore this nonsense and continue working on your suicide bomber belt.
18 Ignore this nonsense and continue filling out your application for the airport security screener job.
19 Ignore this nonsense and keep preaching Islam with peace in English, but preach violent Islam in your local tounge.
20 Ignore this nonsense and keep preaching Islam with peace.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at April 6, 2008 12:51 PM

Although it won't change the overall trend of the voting, it should be pointed out that the small sample size (197) of the poll translates into a fairly large (plus or minus about 7%) margin of error in the results. Reporting the results to two decimal places in the percentages is a little overkill.

An approximate rule of thumb for statistical sampling is the uncertainty is 1/sqrt(N), where N is the sample size. In this case, sqrt(197) = 14.04, so 1/sqrt(197) = 0.0712, about 7%.

You can check this the next time you see a CNN or CBS poll, or whatever. Usually somewhere down at the bottom of the screen there is a statement that the number of respondents was, say, 900, and the margin of error is, say, 3%. Does this correspond to the rule above? Yes, it does. Check it out. This is a problem with all polls involving a small number of respondents.

In the above report, Items 1 and 2 are statistically indistinguishable. But Item 3 stands out and the conclusions about the Muslims' desire to see the cartoonists killed is statistically valid.

Posted by: Eastview at April 6, 2008 1:44 PM

Hugh;

You're right about Fisk. I've read some of his work and was... underwhelmed.

Posted by: undaunted at April 6, 2008 2:22 PM

Here's a good letter to jpost.com on Fitna:
Valuable movie

Sir, - Manfred Gerstenfeld was far too heavy-handed in criticizing Fitna and its producer, Geert Wilders ("Not the bash it could have been," April 2). Wilders has made an accurate documentary of enormous benefit to Israel.

Gerstenfeld may be technically correct in claiming that the violent passages in the Koran do not necessarily lead to violent acts, but the increasing numbers of people who see the origin of Muslim violence in the Koran base their conclusions on firm doctrinal footing.

Making this sort of connection allows people to start understanding Israel's predicament with Islam as having a basis in Islamic doctrine at least as much as in objective reality. Denying that connection opens the door to explaining Islamic rage at Israel as being caused by Israeli misdeeds. Affirming it shows Israel as the victim of religious bigotry.

No system of ideas should be exempt from critical examination, however politically incorrect.

Posted by: jewdog at April 6, 2008 2:35 PM

"The papers were reviewed by the award winning journalist, Robert Fisk, the award winning author, Louis de Bernieres, and the award winning stand up comedian and Olympic torch refusenik, Francesca Martinez."

The same Robert Fisk who got the crap kicked out of him by Afghans in a street in Afghanistan and blamed it all on Bush.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at April 6, 2008 3:11 PM

One of the most ancient traits of a human is mirroring behavior. Love begets love - hatred begets hatred.

I wonder if Muslims have the psychological and mental sophistication, or possess sufficient maturity to imagine what will happen to them if the world ever mirrors their hatred and aggression? There is little sign that they understand or comprehend the eventual and inevitable consequnces of their frenzy of hatred towards us. Aside from their sporadic successful cowardly attacks against us, whereas they prove themselves largely impotent to achieve their seething lust for our blood, we posess unlimited means to visit violence upon them. God help them if we ever mirror their contempt, or unleash the ancient law of talion on them. Among Muslims, 60-70% may wish to see us murdered - and we see the results; endless terror attacks, endless subversion, endless betrayal. Let's see what happens if 60-70% of Westerners ever yearn for their destruction. Muslims should think long and hard about that if they have any sanity left.

Posted by: jsla at April 6, 2008 3:32 PM

Column from congresswoman Ginny Brown-Waite:

Taxpayer Funds Should be Spent Here in America , Not Sent Overseas

The federal deficit of the United States stands at $9.1 trillion today. In February alone there were over 200,000 foreclosed homes in America , the unemployment rate stood at 4.8%, and over 46.6 million Americans lacked health insurance. Despite these crises, Members of the Majority Party advocated to send precious taxpayer dollars in assistance to countries oversees. I am disappointed with their actions, as I imagine most of my constituents are.

First, the House of Representatives considered H.R. 5501, the Tom Lantos and Henry J. Hyde United States Global Leadership Against HIV/AIDS, Tuberculosis, and Malaria Reauthorization Act of 2008 on Wednesday. This bill authorizes $50 billion from fiscal 2009 to fiscal 2013 to fight AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria overseas.

Not a day later the Committee on Financial Services, of which I am a member, considered a measure that would provide up to $6.1 billion in debt relief to 24 nations. One such nation was Kenya , a country ruled by corrupt leaders that squander their resources. Another country was Georgia of the former U.S.S.R. that the World Bank considered 'the number one economic reformer in the world',� which hardly sounds like a country struggling under the weight of foreign debt.

I find these massive giveaways to corrupt governments insulting to every American who pays taxes. Every year Congress scrambles at the last minute to block the Alternative Minimum Tax, the Department of Veterans Affairs turns away Category 8 Veterans from services, and the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services are proposing cuts to Medicaid services that states cover, all citing budget constraints. Yet Democratic leaders clearly see nothing wrong with giving away hardworking American taxpayer dollars to countries they see as worse off than their own constituents.

With this type of action, it is no wonder Americans continue to question the mental stability of their elected leaders in Washington ; I do as well. As you can imagine, I vehemently opposed both of these ludicrous proposals. Call me crazy, but I believe taxpayer dollars should benefit American taxpayers, and you can be sure I will continue to fight to see that happen.

Thank You,

Ginny Brown-Waite

How much of the 6.1 billion in debt relief to 24 nations' ends up funding the 'inner spiritual struggle, is anybody's guess.

Posted by: Alert at April 6, 2008 3:42 PM

jsla,

Excellent post. If history is any guide, however, Islamic thinkers seem congenitally incapable of analyses that would lead them to understand the situation as you have so well presented it. In fact, the jihad/martyr syndrome that infects their world view would seem to prevent them from undertaking rational thinking along these lines.

It may well turn out that Islam is like malaria or herpes - with constant effort you can control the worst symptoms, but you can never quite eradicate it.

Posted by: Eastview at April 6, 2008 4:38 PM

"Looters raid Arafat's home, steal his Nobel Peace Prize" from Lex, above.

Heh, heh, heh. Sweet posthumous justice, indeed. That story is just too hard to beat. I bet the Zionists did it!

Posted by: Eastview at April 6, 2008 4:43 PM

More on

"Looters raid Arafat's home, steal his Nobel Peace Prize" from Lex, above.

Since it was Hamas that did the deed (and they did a very thorough job trashing the place and otherwise disrespecting the memory of Jimmy Carter's hero), I wonder how long it will be before payback from Fatah will occur, and what form it will take?

This should be fun to watch!

Posted by: Eastview at April 6, 2008 5:02 PM

Choice #4 is asking the impossible, given the fact that peace runs completely contrary to preaching Islam; plus Muslims are too committed to defending their prophet of doom to even think about ignoring this nonsense. I'm actually quite surprised that 41 out of 197 voted to ignore this nonsense.

Posted by: champ at April 6, 2008 5:15 PM

Hmmm, so roughly five times more Muslims are willing to kill than are willing to go without Ben and Jerry's ice cream and Suave shampoo? Gee, I'm shocked. Well actually not.

Posted by: Rick at April 6, 2008 9:50 PM

Hugh,

Do you remember Fisk's bizarre account of the day he was almost murdered by Afghan refugees fleeing coalition bombing in October 2001? He was going north on the road from Quetta to Kandahar to cover the war....at the same time that thousands of Afghans were fleeing south. Someone noticed the bespectacled Westerner after his car had a flat and they set upon him viciously, almost beating him to death.

The apologia in the account he later wrote was absolutely surreal..."as the blows rained down upon me, all I could think was that if I were in their shoes, I'd be doing the same thing."

What a guy.

Posted by: Cornelius at April 7, 2008 2:58 AM

Just checked the poll a few minutes ago and it was at 46% for "kill the cartoonist..." and at 44% for "Ignore this nonsense and keep preaching Islam with peace" (sample size was 351).

In other words, on that "dawa" site, as much if not more of the readership would rather kill the cartoonist than do dawa.

It's interesting that the most "peaceful" option is the one which involves Muslims continuing the dawa or propaganda campaign, ignoring, instead of refuting, the substance of the cartoons in question.

There was no option such as "Show proof from the Islamic texts that the cartoonists, Islam critics, et al., are wrong."

Posted by: Kinana of Khaybar at April 7, 2008 4:25 AM

Cornelius,

Regarding Fisk's account of almost being murdered by irate refugees fleeing the bombing in 2001 - Given the circumstances the fact that the refugees were Muslims is pretty much irrelevant. Put yourselves in their shoes. All they knew was that one day they were living in their fabulous Taliban paradise and the next there were massive numbers of bombs raining down from B52s. Miserable as life under the Taliban might have been, from their point of view it was almost certainly preferable to being bombed. They knew who was dropping the bombs, they knew they were completely helpless to stop them, and they knew they had to get away. On their way out they encountered a hapless American reporter who just happened to be at the wrong place at the wrong time. Fisk recognized the surreal situation he had stumbled into and is only guilty of acknowledging that the fleeing refugees were a pretty miserable lot who saw a chance to vent their rage and frustration on a target of opportunity and took it. If an al-Jazeera reporter had driven onto the scene of 9/11 and been recognized as such I could easily imagine he might have similarly been beaten to a pulp by angry New Yorkers if they knew who he was. Anger at this basic level transcends culture or religion or anything else.

Posted by: Eastview at April 7, 2008 5:03 AM

Just checked the poll a few minutes ago and it was at 46% for "kill the cartoonist..." and at 44% for "Ignore this nonsense and keep preaching Islam with peace" (sample size was 351).
Posted by: Kinana of Khaybar

Hmmm....That's actually an improvement, in absolute statistical terms, from the 62% previously reported as favoring killing the cartoonist and 20% favoring ignoring the nonsense. To bring the number down from 62% to 46% means that the percentage of the extra respondents favoring killing the cartoonist would have to have been something like "only" 25%. Still pretty outrageous, though, that such a large percentage of Muslims favor this action. Any number greater than zero is too many.

I wonder why the numbers have changed so much.

Posted by: Eastview at April 7, 2008 5:22 AM

"4 Ignore this nonsense and keep preaching Islam with peace 41 20.81%"

There's your tiny minority of...er...extremists.

Posted by: kevin at April 7, 2008 10:07 AM

At last! The "silent" majority of "moderate" Muslims!

Posted by: tanstaafl at April 7, 2008 10:27 AM

Eastview,

First of all, Robert Fisk is not American, he's Australian (or perhaps British).

Secondly, I don't think there is a chance in hell that a reporter from Al Jazeera would have been beaten by bystanders in New York after 9-11.

Posted by: Cornelius at April 7, 2008 2:25 PM

62%....a "tiny minority of extremists"

And another 20-30% would say they're against killing the cartoonists, but we'd know they were lying through their teeth.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at April 7, 2008 2:34 PM

And Robert Fisk once got beaten up by a gang of Afghan men and blamed it all on Bush. What a fruitcake.

Posted by: Spirit Of 1683 at April 7, 2008 2:43 PM

Cornelius,

My mistake about Fisk's nationality. My point was really about the dangers of being in the wrong place at the wrong time, and acknowledging it. You may be right, too, about an al-Jazeera reporter not being beaten to a pulp by New Yorkers on 9/11, since we had not yet gained the perspective we now have. Let it happen again, though, and I'm not so sure.

Posted by: Eastview at April 7, 2008 3:09 PM

Eastview

I tend to agree with you but as the one who posted Fisk’s name in the first place I probably did not make my point clearly.

That was that in his mind (assuming it was him) a few cartoons about Mohammed equate to all the material offensive to Christians, i.e. Jerry Springer, Life of Brian, The Last Temptation of Christ to name but a few. Christians just have to put up with these things or face further ridicule. Also riots around the world, beheadings, fatwas and general mayhem in every country with a muslim population are just the same as one Christian fruitcake in France burning down a cinema.

To compare these cases in any circumstances means he has no sense of proportion. Whatever happens he is determined to believe muslims are misunderstood and just like any other religion.

Posted by: Fred at April 7, 2008 3:41 PM

Fred,

OK, we're in sync then.

Posted by: Eastview at April 8, 2008 12:10 AM

Checked the poll numbers a few minutes ago...

"kill the cartoonist..." 47%
"ignore...preach Islam" 40%

sample size 615

Posted by: Kinana of Khaybar at April 9, 2008 2:44 AM

Looks like the percentages are stabilizing at slightly under half of the respondents favoring killing Wilders, with good statistical confidence. Savages.

Posted by: Eastview at April 9, 2008 8:13 AM

...latest check (a few minutes ago):

"kill..." 50.07%
"ignore..." 37.48%

sample size 675

Posted by: Kinana of Khaybar at April 10, 2008 3:08 AM

....although I think the fuse should be shorter; reflecting a Muslims short temper.

Posted by: champ at April 10, 2008 12:56 PM