If you don’t like it, why live here? What is it then, that you want from the USA? This is not going to become an islamic country, so what are you frustrated about?

There are two things that concern me about this. One is the obvious, thousands upon thousands of jihadists in the gates if you will. The other is the fact that the American public is so ho hum about this. Our complacency is astounding. Has their ever been another point in history that either our or another country or culture has been completely aware of the fact that enemy killers were amongst them and their only response was ehhhhh whats for dinner tonight? I wonder who is going to win American Idol? What would the response have been if this study was released on Sept 12th 2001?

Zetterson on May 23, 2007 at 5:21 PM

Zetterson, I think the problem is that Americans understand very well that they’re not permitted to do anything about the matter except talk and occasionally cast a vote–one vote out of 100 million. If they were permitted to do more than talk about the matter, I think they would. If they found practical ways to exceed the bounds of permission, I think they would take them.

You can make the numbers say that 3/4 of American born Muslims under 30 support the U.S. and reject extremism. Or you can make them say almost 200,000 American Muslims support attacking the U.S. They’re both true, but they both tell different stories. …

…[M]y original comment was about numbers, not Islam…. I learned that you can make numbers say anything by taking stats and research methods in college.
JaHerer22 on May 23, 2007 at 12:20 PM

Your broad point about what people can do with statistics is well-known, and your discussion of it is tedious and boring. It’s a mere distraction from the matter under discussion, which is that 26% of young muslim men in the U.S. admit being okay with muslims’ terrorist attacks. You’ve taken attention away from discussing that circumstance, but you haven’t changed the circumstance or its importance to the readers. The readers aren’t angry with you for saying that one can trifle with numbers; Allahpundit made that point himself. The readers are angry with you because you yourself are trifling. You can reply either by trifling again or by attempting to address the matter under discussion.

I didn’t realize this concept that you can make numbers say whatever you want was so controversial. I thought pretty much everyone knew this. I’d suggest going down to your local community college and signing up for a Stats 101 class–might change your whole perspective on things.

JaHerer22 on May 23, 2007 at 1:00 PM

It’s not the least bit controversial. But your snarky obnoxious “community college” suggestion is a bit. Leave it to you to end a debate point with a condescending swat.
Thanks, but I have a university degree, and don’t need yours or a community college’s instruction in simple stats.

The problem here is people like Greenwald, he either ignores or is too ignorant to understand that it only takes one suicide bomber to take out a stadium, or a hospital or a school and kill thousands of people if they should pick just the right targe…..

Kudos to the Free Muslims Coalition.

Valiant on May 23, 2007 at 1:20 PM

Free Muslims Against Terrorism, Or More Deception?

what part of “There are AT LEAST 180,000 people in this country that want to blow us up” don’t you understand?

I don’t care if you say “At least 26% of Muslims approve of suicide bombings” or if you say “Almost 75% of Muslims disapprove of suicide bombings.” There are hundreds of thousands of people in this country that would like nothing better than to kill a bunch of innocent people. And many of these lunatics are here ILLEGALLY!! Does that not concern you in the least?

http://iowahawk.typepad.com/iowahawk/

My syndicated column today follows up on my blog post yesterday about the Pew poll of US Muslims. Allah explores the “nuance.” Ace strips the whitewash off the MSM coverage (and gets a shout-out from Rush Limbaugh!)…….

It’s like the twist at the end of a Twlight Zone episode that just nails the whole thing down. “It’s … it’s a cookbook!” Same deal here.

An apt choice, AP. We should be just as afraid of Soc*alists who claim their only desire is”To Serve Man“

JaHerer22 on May 23, 2007 at 1:00 PM

Sorry, I wrote my comment prior to seeing yours.

Even at 99.9% success rate we would still have:

- 2 unsafe landings at the O’Hare airport per day
- 16,000 lost pieces of mail every hour
- 32,000 bank checks deducted from the wrong bank accounts every hour

Terrorism could potentially be as deadly or more so than the first example and s/b taken just as, or more, seriously. Heh, Edwards now says we have no WoT. It’s just imagination. Mrs. Obama dismissed it in 2 seconds flat yesterday too.

Ace did a heck of a job, again.

Not really, I mean I guess it could but I was mostly referring to poll data where there are so many different numbers and variables it’s easy to pick and choose and manipulate. The number of U.S. deaths in Iraq is pretty cut and dry, not much room for interpretation.
JaHerer22 on May 23, 2007 at 12:20 PM

It’s called cherry picking, and it’s done (as pointed out by tickleddragon) to reflect the viewpoint you represent.

tickleddragon on May 23, 2007 at 12:28 PM

Well of course the numbers don’t change and I never suggested they do. But there are so many numbers it’s easy to pick and choose the ones you want to make them say what you want them to. Here is the 108 page PDF of the poll results–plenty of numbers to go around in there.

You make numbers say what you want them too by cherry-picking the numbers that suit you and then using them in the way the best expresses what you’re trying to prove. Rounding up or down, using fractions or percentages, using the amount for X vs using the amount against X–these are all tricks of the trade. This poll is the perfect example–the exact same numbers have created headlines from “Time Bombs in Our Midst” to “Majority of Muslims support America.”

I didn’t realize this concept that you can make numbers say whatever you want was so controversial. I thought pretty much everyone knew this. I’d suggest going down to your local community college and signing up for a Stats 101 class–might change your whole perspective on things.

You can make the numbers say that 3/4 of American born Muslims under 30 support the U.S. and reject extremism. Or you can make them say almost 200,000 American Muslims support attacking the U.S. They’re both true, but they both tell different stories. That’s my point, what’s yours?

JaHerer22, I’m not buying it. First of all it is possible for them to reject extremism but not support the U.S. Those two should not be linked together. They may hope for a U.S. governed by Islamic Sharia law but feel that suicide attacks are the wrong way/least effective way to go about it. I, therefore, wish they included the question about whether or not each of these subjects polled desire sharia law in this study. That would have been a revealing Q&A. Second of all if I was told that 3/4 of American born Muslims under the age of 30 rejected the tactic of sucide bombings my initial reaction would be to be alarmed about the fact that its not 100%. The numbers mean the same either way. And they don’t lie. People can spin them an use them any way they want but they will always mean the same thing in the end.

Ace has a great round-up of headlines trying to spin into a positive a poll that showed 26% of young……

Does that include Democrats using US soldiers deaths in Iraq for poltical purposes ?

William Amos on May 23, 2007 at 11:56 AM
Not really, I mean I guess it could but I was mostly referring to poll data where there are so many different numbers and variables it’s easy to pick and choose and manipulate. The number of U.S. deaths in Iraq is pretty cut and dry, not much room for interpretation.
JaHerer22 on May 23, 2007 at 12:20 PM

That statement is completely false. There are not “so many numbers and variables”. The numbers (findings) do not change at all. It is only the viewpoint from which you report that changes.

I often find myself at odds with people on both sides of the political spectrum. I am a Born Again Christian, but I am an American first and I am so because it is the freedoms of America that make it possible for me to be a Born Again Christian without having to subjugate my faith to another religion or political ideology or suffer life threatening persecution.

So I take a pragmatic view of politics. That pragmatic view being predicated upon my freedom to exercise whichever faith or no faith at all as my conscience dictates.

Thus pragmatism dictates that I defend those freedoms in any ethical and moral fashion possible. It also dictates that there are times when ethical and moral consideration be temporarily set aside.

It is pragmatic I dare even say prudent to do whatever is necessary to ensure that the democratic foundation of this great republic stand against, and here I quote our founding fathers, “all enemies foreign and domestic”.

If we cannot or do not defend our republic against all enemies foreign we will not have a republic to defend against all enemies domestic. If we do not defend this republic against all enemies domestic then we shall surly fall to all enemies foreign.

To foolishly believe that there is no conflict that cannot be peacefully negotiated is to deny reality. 20% of the world’s 1.6 billion adherents to Islam believe that violent Jihad is the correct path required to fulfill the requirements of Islam that Islam bring the entire world into submission under Islam and establish a world wide Islamic caliphate.

The fact that 26% of American born Muslims under 30 also believes this proves incontrovertibly that this is not an issue that can be negotiated peacefully and should not even remotely be approached as such.

To suggest otherwise would be to abdicate reason and logic and abandon any pragmatic approach to reality.

Needless to say, I dislike “journalists”.