Poll shows more Americans think Obama is a Muslim

[jjdrury81]

Yes I did and I has to again-If there is nothing wrong with being a Muslim why would you care in the least if anybody believe that Obama was one?

You know very well why I care. Many Americans do not have a favorable opinion of Muslims. Conservative leaders know this and are **exploiting **it to their advantage. They are spreading lies about the President that play on deep seated fears and prejudices.

That is clear.

 

[pnewton]

OBAMA IS NOT A MUSLIM!!!

Making it all caps and adding enough exclaimation points makes it true.

 

[SwizzleStick]

Well, if the White House says this, it must be so. This clears everything right up.

By the way, don’t people of most religions (Christian and otherwise) pray daily, many several times a day? Perhaps Obama prays every morning before hearing about the latest polling numbers regarding his job performance. This doesn’t really say much, other than the White House is in damage contol mode after Obama’s gaffe over the mosque.

"White House says Obama is Christian, prays daily
The Associated Press

Thursday, Aug. 19, 2010 | 11:06 a.m.

The White House insisted on Thursday that President Barack Obama is a Christian who prays daily as it looked to tamp down growing doubts among Americans about the president’s religion."…

Entire article: lasvegassun.com/news/2010/aug/19/white-house-says-obama-is-christian-prays-daily/

 

[scipio337]

You know very well why I care. Many Americans do not have a favorable opinion of Muslims. Conservative leaders know this and are **exploiting **it to their advantage. They are spreading lies about the President that play on deep seated fears and prejudices.

That is clear.

Well, perhaps if you could point out who these “Conservative leaders” are, they can be held accountable.

 

[pnewton]

You know very well why I care. Many Americans do not have a favorable opinion of Muslims. Conservative leaders know this and are **exploiting **it to their advantage. They are spreading lies about the President that play on deep seated fears and prejudices.

That is clear.

Conservative leaders have little to do with why Americans have a fear of Muslims. That has more to do with Muslims killing Americans and promising to kill more. The connection with the current increase has nothing to do with what Conservatives are saying as much as it does with what Barak Hussein Obama is saying. His weighing in favor of the mosque building was his choice, not that of any opponent. Many of us are angry about it. Our president does not represent most of us on this issue, but sides with Muslims. He has courted and bowed to Muslim heads of states. No, in this matter of public opinion, he is his own worst enemy.

 

[SwizzleStick]

Here’s an excerpt from old article from the NYT. It conveys that Muslims do not see Obama as a Christian no matter what he says or does, but they see him as a Muslim, and one guilty of a crime, apparently.

"President Apostate?

…But it is a mistake to conflate his African identity with his Muslim heritage. Senator Obama is half African by birth and Africans can understandably identify with him. In Islam, however, there is no such thing as a half-Muslim. Like all monotheistic religions, Islam is an exclusive faith.

As the son of the Muslim father, Senator Obama was born a Muslim under Muslim law as it is universally understood. It makes no difference that, as Senator Obama has written, his father said he renounced his religion. Likewise, under Muslim law based on the Koran his mother’s Christian background is irrelevant.

Of course, as most Americans understand it, Senator Obama is not a Muslim. He chose to become a Christian, and indeed has written convincingly to explain how he arrived at his choice and how important his Christian faith is to him.

His conversion, however, was a crime in Muslim eyes; it is “irtidad” or “ridda,” usually translated from the Arabic as “apostasy,” but with connotations of rebellion and treason. Indeed, it is the worst of all crimes that a Muslim can commit, worse than murder (which the victim’s family may choose to forgive).

With few exceptions, the jurists of all Sunni and Shiite schools prescribe execution for all adults who leave the faith not under duress; the recommended punishment is beheading at the hands of a cleric, although in recent years there have been both stonings and hangings. (Some may point to cases in which lesser punishments were ordered — as with some Egyptian intellectuals who have been punished for writings that were construed as apostasy — but those were really instances of supposed heresy, not explicitly declared apostasy as in Senator Obama’s case.)

It is true that the criminal codes in most Muslim countries do not mandate execution for apostasy (although a law doing exactly that is pending before Iran’s Parliament and in two Malaysian states). But as a practical matter, in very few Islamic countries do the governments have sufficient authority to resist demands for the punishment of apostates at the hands of religious authorities. "…

Entire article: nytimes.com/2008/05/12/opinion/12luttwak.html?_r=3&pagewanted=print

 

[estesbob]

You know very well why I care. Many Americans do not have a favorable opinion of Muslims. Conservative leaders know this and are **exploiting **it to their advantage. They are spreading lies about the President that play on deep seated fears and prejudices.

That is clear.

Why does it matter if some people have an unfavorable opinion of Muslims? If you don’t think there is anything wrong with that it should not bother you the least people think he is, I have very unfavorable opinion of Democrats-would you be offended if I referred to Obama as a Democrat even if he wasn’t one?

 

[Roy5]

Any thinking, well-read person knows that Obama is not a Muslim. They accused him of being a follower of Rev. Wright, who was somewhat wild but surely no Muslim. Sending 50,000 more troops to Afghanistan is pretty good evidence, too. And Muslims actually have much more in common with traditional Christians than most people think, which again proves that Obama is not a Muslim. They are anti-abortion, strongly opposed to pre-marital sex, very modest in dress, and much more that conflicts with Obama’s positions.

 What Obama would like to do - and we get in his way - is help undermine and defeat terrorism by diminishing its influence within the vast Muslim world. Instead, people like Gingrich and Reid continuously make statements that are quoted in the Muslim world to prove that the USA is waging a war against Islam. We, of course, quote the most radical Muslims to prove how evil they and their faith are. We are engaged in a big propaganda battle and badly need to win it if we don't want many more years of violence against us. 

 So, those of you who jump all over Obama because he is trying to win the hearts and minds of Muslims are, in reality, allies of bin Laden and his crazies. I suspect that you aren't deliberately helping the terrorists, but that's what you're doing!

 

[mary_bobo]

Conservative leaders have little to do with why Americans have a fear of Muslims. That has more to do with Muslims killing Americans and promising to kill more. The connection with the current increase has nothing to do with what Conservatives are saying as much as it does with what Barak Hussein Obama is saying. His weighing in favor of the mosque building was his choice, not that of any opponent. Many of us are angry about it. Our president does not represent most of us on this issue, but sides with Muslims. He has courted and bowed to Muslim heads of states. No, in this matter of public opinion, he is his own worst enemy.

I agree with your observations. I know that President Obama has said he is not a Muslim. I take that at face value. But those who think bowing and scraping to Muslim countries is going to get us anywhere must have no knowledge of the tenets of the Muslim religion. They seek to kill all “infidels” and that, in their minds, would be US. Perhaps if our president were not so solicitous to Muslim happenings, people would not assume that he is one of them.

 

[scipio337]

Any thinking, well-read person knows that Obama is not a Muslim. They accused him of being a follower of Rev. Wright, who was somewhat wild but surely no Muslim. Sending 50,000 more troops to Afghanistan is pretty good evidence, too. And Muslims actually have much more in common with traditional Christians than most people think, which again proves that Obama is not a Muslim. They are anti-abortion, strongly opposed to pre-marital sex, very modest in dress, and much more that conflicts with Obama’s positions.

 What Obama would like to do - and we get in his way - is help undermine and defeat terrorism by diminishing its influence within the vast Muslim world. Instead, people like Gingrich and Reid continuously make statements that are quoted in the Muslim world to prove that the USA is waging a war against Islam. We, of course, quote the most radical Muslims to prove how evil they and their faith are. We are engaged in a big propaganda battle and badly need to win it if we don't want many more years of violence against us. 

 So, those of you who jump all over Obama because he is trying to win the hearts and minds of Muslims are, in reality, allies of bin Laden and his crazies. I suspect that you aren't deliberately helping the terrorists, but that's what you're doing!

Too much…logical fallacies…to address…

 

[jjdrury81]

I agree with your observations. I know that President Obama has said he is not a Muslim. I take that at face value. But those who think bowing and scraping to Muslim countries is going to get us anywhere must have no knowledge of the tenets of the Muslim religion. They seek to kill all “infidels” and that, in their minds, would be US. Perhaps if our president were not so solicitous to Muslim happenings, people would not assume that he is one of them.

So your assertion is that the the tenets of the Muslim religion dictate that all Muslims desire to kill US citizens.

 

[dmelosi]

Any thinking, well-read person knows that Obama is not a Muslim. They accused him of being a follower of Rev. Wright, who was somewhat wild but surely no Muslim. Sending 50,000 more troops to Afghanistan is pretty good evidence, too. And Muslims actually have much more in common with traditional Christians than most people think, which again proves that Obama is not a Muslim. They are anti-abortion, strongly opposed to pre-marital sex, very modest in dress, and much more that conflicts with Obama’s positions.

 What Obama would like to do - and we get in his way - is help undermine and defeat terrorism by diminishing its influence within the vast Muslim world. Instead, people like Gingrich and Reid continuously make statements that are quoted in the Muslim world to prove that the USA is waging a war against Islam. We, of course, quote the most radical Muslims to prove how evil they and their faith are. We are engaged in a big propaganda battle and badly need to win it if we don't want many more years of violence against us. 

 So, those of you who jump all over Obama because he is trying to win the hearts and minds of Muslims are, in reality, allies of bin Laden and his crazies. I suspect that you aren't deliberately helping the terrorists, but that's what you're doing!

So would you agree that those who support Obama in his abortion stance are also staunchly pro choice?

 

[Kadaveri]

Another liberal myth. Bush said clearly and specifically many times that Saddam was not involved in 9/11. This whole alleged conspiracy rests on one out of context comment by Dick Cheney on a Sunday morning talk show that was immediately clarified the next morning.

If you read my post carefully you’d see I explicitly said no one in the Bush Administration directed accused Saddam Hussein of being involved with 9/11 (except maybe Richard Pearle who came close to doing so in 17:15 of THIS documentary). What I said was in the run up to the attack on Iraq they kept mentioning Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks together in such a way (and the article I linked to gives a few examples of this) which put the idea into people’s heads (even Congressmen got confused) that Saddam Hussein was involved without directly saying it.

How else do you think we ended up from only 3% of Americans thinking Iraq was involved soon after the attacks, to 45% in March 2003 and then 70% in September 2003? It’s a very effective propaganda machine that within two years could get a large majority of the population to believe a total lie which almost nobody had previously believed, without directly saying the lie itself.

He’s been disproven. It wasn’t about the US/British media.

There are more passages in Mein Kempf than that one, read THIS chapter. Excerpts:

Thus we see that propaganda must follow a simple line and correspondingly the basic tactics must be psychologically sound. For instance, it was absolutely wrong to make the enemy ridiculous, as the Austrian and German comic papers did…

By contrast, the war propaganda of the English and Americans was psychologically sound…

the German war propaganda offered an unparalleled example of an ‘enlightenment’ service working in reverse, since any correct psychology was totally lacking…

What our authorities least of all understood was the very first axiom of all propagandist activity: to wit, the basically subjective and one-sided attitude it must take toward every question it deals with. In this connection, from the very beginning of the War and from top to bottom, such sins were committed that we were entitled to doubt whether so much absurdity could really be attributed to pure stupidity alone…

It need not surprise us that our propaganda did not enjoy this success. In its inner ambiguity alone, it bore the germ of ineffectualness…

And in England they understood one more thing: that this spiritual weapon can succeed only if it is applied on a tremendous scale, but that success amply covers all costs. There, propaganda was regarded as a weapon of the first order, while in our country it was the last resort of unemployed politicians and a comfortable haven for slackers. And, as was to be expected, its results all in all were zero.

So yes Hitler was very much impressed by British/American propaganda, which he thought won them the war and vowed to match them.

 

[estesbob]

If you read my post carefully you’d see I explicitly said no one in the Bush Administration directed accused Saddam Hussein of being involved with 9/11 (except maybe Richard Pearle who came close to doing so in 17:15 of THIS documentary). What I said was in the run up to the attack on Iraq they kept mentioning Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks together in such a way (and the article I linked to gives a few examples of this) which put the idea into people’s heads (even Congressmen got confused) that Saddam Hussein was involved without directly saying it.

How else do you think we ended up from only 3% of Americans thinking Iraq was involved soon after the attacks, to 45% in March 2003 and then 70% in September 2003? This is a very effective propaganda machine that within two years could get a large majority of the population to believe a total lie which almost nobody had previously believed without directing saying the lie themselves.

Again there is absolutely no evidence that anybody in the Bush administration or in the mainstream media promoted the idea that Saddam was involved in 9/11. In fact the exact opposite is true.

 

[scipio337]

If you read my post carefully you’d see I explicitly said no one in the Bush Administration directed accused Saddam Hussein of being involved with 9/11 (except maybe Richard Pearle who came close to doing so in 17:15 of THIS documentary). What I said was in the run up to the attack on Iraq they kept mentioning Saddam Hussein and the 9/11 attacks together in such a way (and the article I linked to gives a few examples of this) which put the idea into people’s heads (even Congressmen got confused) that Saddam Hussein was involved without directly saying it.

That’s some spin. What the AUMF actually linked was that a) Saddam aided and harbored terrorists (Abu Nidal, Carlos the Jackal, Hamas, etc) b) terrorists attacked the US on 9/11 (contrary to polls from Egypt and Jordan) c) Saddam posed a threat as a continuing supporter of terrorists.

c-span.org/resources/pdf/hjres114.pdf

The article you link has ONE Congressman claiming he had “inside” information, and how many denials that there was a link?

 

[Kadaveri]

I’ve just given you plenty of evidence, just repeating that ‘there is no evidence’ doesn’t refute anything. It only gives the impression that you’re not even reading what I’ve written. Any denials of a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 obviously weren’t very effectively seeing how:

Kadaveri:

we ended up from only 3% of Americans thinking Iraq was involved soon after the attacks, to 45% in March 2003 and then 70% in September 2003

 

[estesbob]

I’ve just given you plenty of evidence, just repeating that ‘there is no evidence’ doesn’t refute anything.

You didsn provide any evidence. You didtnt even provide evidence that 70% of the people believed that Saddam was involved in 9-11 and that even if it was true this was because the Bush administration or anybody else said he was.

 

[scipio337]

There are more passages in Mein Kempf than that one, read THIS chapter. Excerpts:

So yes Hitler was very much impressed by British/American propaganda, which he thought won them the war and vowed to match them.

Great. I’m sure he was impressed with US and UK media.

But he attributed the “Big Lie” to the Jews, not the US or UK.

From time immemorial. however, the Jews have known better than any
others how falsehood and calumny can be exploited. Is not their very
existence founded on one great lie, namely, that they are a religious
community, whereas in reality they are a race? And what a race! One of
the greatest thinkers that mankind has produced has branded the Jews for
all time with a statement which is profoundly and exactly true. He
(Schopenhauer) called the Jew “The Great Master of Lies”. Those who do
not realize the truth of that statement, or do not wish to believe it,
will never be able to lend a hand in helping Truth to prevail.

…and I’m still missing where it was the “British/US propoganda” that “won them the war.”

Fail, again.

 

[scipio337]

I’ve just given you plenty of evidence, just repeating that ‘there is no evidence’ doesn’t refute anything. It only gives the impression that you’re not even reading what I’ve written. Any denials of a link between Saddam Hussein and 9/11 obviously weren’t very effectively seeing how:

I wouldn’t call one Congressman’s claims (and several others’ to the contrary) and a poll as proof of some subversive conspiracy to link the two, especially when this lone Congressman is held up in the article for being unique in his claim.

 

[Kadaveri]

You didsn provide any evidence. You didtnt even provide evidence that 70% of the people believed that Saddam was involved in 9-11 and that even if it was true this was because the Bush administration or anybody else said he was.

Yes I did give evidence of that. Read:

CBS:

a new poll found that nearly 70 percent of respondents believed the Iraqi leader probably was personally involved.

Critics have said the administration has tried to create the impression of Saddam’s involvement in the attacks, without directly making such a claim…

Which explains how:

Kadaveri:

we ended up from only 3% of Americans thinking Iraq was involved soon after the attacks, to 45% in March 2003 and then 70% in September 2003