Well, this is just the thing that will make all of Trump's supporters rethink their beliefs.

The Polling Company CSP Poll (2015): 19% of Muslim-Americans say that violence is justified in order to make Sharia the law in the United States

Pew Research (2014): 47% of Bangladeshi Muslims says suicide bombings and violence are justified to "defend Islam". 1 in 4 believed the same in Tanzania and Egypt. 1 in 5 Muslims in the 'moderate' countries of Turkey and Malaysia.

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/Pages/…

Yes, I left out that the majority in the United States are against these things. When has that stopped slog from arguing against certain constitutional rights when a small minority commits crimes?

Kinda funny on that Pew Research poll which @2 references, it's only 3% in Pakistan, which is the home of the recent terrorist in the SanBernardino attack, and arguably *much* more volatile than it's former "other half". The situation in Bangladesh is complicated on its own, but violence there has been entirely domestic. There isn't much evidence for external Bangladeshi terrorism, so I'd like to congratulate you an an exceptional cherry-pick, @2! (clap clap clap)

@2 So what you're saying is that you're a huge fucking racist hypocrite and don't really give a shit about constitutional rights.

Kurt Schlichter: http://journal.ijreview.com/2015/11/2502…

Evidently possesses many serious and important opinions.

See what I mean?

Christians are pretty enthusiastic about targeting civilians -- much more then Muslims. Two thirds of Christians think it's sometimes OK for the military to slaughter civilians for "the greater good" as they call it. More than one fourth of Christians think it's OK for "individuals or small groups" (that's yer terrists and 'freedom fighters') to target civilians. "Sometimes."

You know. Depends on the situation. Never say never, am I right?

Is not the better way to fight ISIL ideology to is make America feel safe for Muslims? Even Bill O'Reilly tried to make that point to Donald Trump last night.

Anger-statistics don't help.

Gee anger statistics were sure popular with you fuckers when you thought it proved you were better human beings. But when they prove Christians give zero fucks about 'collateral damage' then all of a sudden you want to change the subject.

@7 to be fair in modern war with high explosives there is no way to NOT kill civilians. Not really. I mean, despite vast technological improvements in targeting and the fact most members of US military generally and honestly don't enjoy killing civilians, if we drop bombs and missiles and drones in asymmetrical combat we're going to kill innocent civilians. it's about time we're honest about that reality.

In 2003 when Americans said they supported the invasion of Iraq (and those included the editors of this very paper) what they were REALLY saying is "I'm okay with killing innocent children."

So the only relevant poll question is "are you okay with war or not?"

"What, you want me to Google it right now? You expect me to bring supporting evidence with me for the claims I'm going to make on live TV?"
If you don't have the capacity to defend it, don't say it in the first place.

@10

Suicide bombers say exactly the same thing. No way to avoid it. Has do be done.

Because it's asymmetrical! Tokyo and Dresden were asymmetrical? What? We have to kill civilians because it's asymmetrical. We have to kill civilians because because it's not asymmetrical. We have to kill civilians because our bombs are so big. We have to kill civilians because our bombs are not big enough. We have to kill civilians because our bombs are not accurate enough. (Am I the only one who has noticed that whenever they're trying to sell the next war they romance you with how accurate our new bombs are?)

Other option is to not bomb at all. But for some reason if you suggest not bombing at all then you're the crazy one.

@2 Sharia law? Ok. How about Christians who want to enshrine the 10 Commandments as the law of the land here in the good old United States?

Same thing different religion.

Oh and before you cry 'that's not the same, that's not true' allow me to point to Oklahoma in order to provide you with a clue.

@12: Yeah, peace is better than war. Let's all make a note of it.

@2:

Really? You're citing The Center For Security Policy as a credible source? Geez Louise you must think the rest of us are credulous to the point of idiocy. Holding up a CFSP "poll" as "evidence" of anything relating to Islam is like claiming The Spanish Inquisition was an effective means of ferreting out heretics because it extracted so many confessions.

Frank Gaffney is a notorious far-right hack, a couple of rungs below Grover Norquist on the Skeeve-O-Meter (even Norquist, the most bottom-dwelling of political sewer rats, finds him repugnant), and has been since he was kicked out of the Reagan Administration - yes, KICKED OUT. Currently, he's Trump's personal Islamophobia peddler, and nobody except The Donald (and perhaps Bill O'Reilly) takes anything he says, does, or promulgates with any degree of seriousness. To say his methodology is shoddy, his questions leading, his interpretation of the responses reeking of mendacity would be a gross understatement; his data skews more than Brent Spiner drifting a shuttlecraft at Warp 5. He's so universally discredited even right-wing organizations such as The American Conservative Union, and Reason Magazine have denounced him, his methods, and his paranoid conspiracy theories.

But yeah, you just go right on ahead and appeal to HIM as an authority, you betcha...

Massive Nerdlove for: "his data skews more than Brent Spiner drifting a shuttlecraft at Warp 5."

@16:

I have to admit, I was rather please with that one myself.

We do have to give @2 credit for linking to a great looking site there. Was it formatted on a typewriter?

@18:

Is WordStar still a thing?

@10's right. Unless you're trying to bomb an empty military base in the middle of Wyoming, you're going to hit and probably kill civilians. Thus, speaking honestly, you either bomb or don't bomb.

"Quarter of British Muslims sympathise with Charlie Hebdo terrorists
Some 27 per cent of British Muslims sympathise with Paris gunmen, while more than one in ten say satirical cartoons "deserve" to be attacked"
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion…

1 in 7 American Muslims believe suicide bombings against civilians could be justified. (8% say "often" or "sometimes" justified, 5% say "rarely"). In Britain it's 1 in 4, France 1 in 3. That's according to a Pew Research study conducted in 2007. http://dailycaller.com/2015/11/18/flashb…

But yeah, it sure is funny this guy went on TV unprepared. The fact that one guy on one day could not cite statistics proves we have nothing to worry about!

@21 "could be" or "sometimes" are the key words here. As 7 pointed out people of all stripes are open to the idea that "sometimes" it "could be" necessary to do horrible things. If, for example, I could have suicide bombed the planes that hit the WTC on 9/11, knowing what I know now I would have done it for sure. It would have been a suicide bombing, it would have killed a shitload of civilians but it would have saved thousands of lives, not to mention all the wars following. Yes, "sometimes" a suicide bombing that kills civilians "could be" the right and moral thing to do.

@5 or perhaps I am pointing out that beliefs and actions of some should not affect the constitutional rights of the rest. For some this is freedom of association, for some this is the right to self-defence.

@15 Thanks, I'll avoid CSP. Are Pew and al-Jazeera good enough for you?
al-Jazeera Poll (2015): 81% of respondents support the Islamic State (ISIS).

@12 FTR I am firmly in the "Not bomb at all" camp. But we keep trying to fool ourselves into thinking that there is war without killing civilians. There is not.

@23 You got that from Brietbart and other rightwing bullshit aggregators that provided NO cite. Go ahead find the poll on Al Jazeera. Go ahead find it. the link Breitbart linked too was in Arabic and said no such fucking thing.

They didn't poll a billion Muslims you idiot.

60% of Afghanis and iraqis believe honor killings of women are often or sometimes justified. In other Muslim nations substantial minorities agree. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-w…

Large percentages (e.g. 84% in Pakistan) favor making Sharia the law of the land. Significant percentages of those believe it should apply to non-Muslims (34% in Pakistan). Large percentages of Muslims who believe Sharia should be the law believe the penalty for adultery and for leaving the faith should be death. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-w…

70-90%+ of Muslims in 33 countries say homosexuality is morally wrong. http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-w…

Islam teaches that that homosexuality should be punished violently, by lashing, stoning, burning, or throwing the offender from a high building. At least 10 Muslim nations today have the death penalty for homosexuality, including Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. In Iraq, which does not officially criminalize homosexuality, death squads operate against people perceived to be gay, employing methods including gluing the target's anus shut and inducing diarrhea. http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Homo…

These beliefs are barbaric, and they are not held by just a few extremists.

@28: Similar beliefs abound in third-world countries dominated by Christian ideology or others. People have a bad tendency to attribute to religion what is the result of politics.

@29:

Replace "Islam" with "Christianity" and "Sharia" with "Biblical" and most of those assertions would be almost equally as valid. And yet, as we are informed time-and-again, we are not supposed to condemn an entire religion for the extreme views of some of its adherents; EXCEPT, apparently when the religion is NOT our own.

Sorry, @29 should have been @28...

It is not necessary to condemn 'an entire religion' to say, as I did, that *these beliefs* are barbaric. Christians in third-world countries may also have barbaric beliefs but I am not aware of a widespread, violent movement to impose those beliefs around the world. I can't name a lot of Christian groups routinely massacring hundreds of people, posting videos of beheadings, throwing gays off rooftops, and flying planes into buidlings. Some cultures and belief systems are worse than others, and some groups are more aggressive about enacting their beliefs in the real world than others.

@29 People have a bad tendency to excuse belief systems in order to appear tolerant. Please explain how throwing gays off rooftops is the result of politics. Then point to one or more political systems that teach that if you die in their defense, you go immediately to paradise. Explain which political philosophies require death by stoning for adulterers.

Watching the whole interview on CNN, it is clear that the two conservatives, Kurt Schlicter and Scottie Hughes just could not even TRY to hold back their spewing of rhetoric while Arun Kundani was calmly telling them facts.

@33 Did she calmly tell them the facts about the high percentage of Muslims who believe in death for apostates, gays, adulterers, and women who have sex out of wedlock?

@34 Apostates? Is there a religion in the world that doesn't jump up and down screaming about Apostates?

Lord have mercy Christians with their never ending stream of "the one true interpretations (Denominations) of the "TRUE FAITH"". Certainly know something about Apostates and how to kill them.

@35 how many atheist bloggers have Christians murdered lately?
"A Bangladeshi blogger known for his atheist views has been hacked to death by a gang armed with machetes in the capital Dhaka, police say. He is the fourth secularist blogger to have been killed this year by suspected Islamist militants in Bangladesh."
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-33819…

How many fatwas have Christians issued? How many writers are in hiding as a result? And remind me, how many died in the Christian riots over the artwork "Piss Christ," or when Sinead O'Connor tore up a picture of the Pope?

"Apostates? Is there a religion in the world that doesn't jump up and down screaming about Apostates?" Why yes, there is. Jainism. Buddhism. For that matter, I have not seen surveys indicating that large percentages of modern Jews or Christians believe in death for apostasy (which is what we are talking about--holy texts are relevant, but the key is how the religion is practiced today). But I am sure you will cite those surveys for us if the exist.

@36:

Funny you should cite two specifically non-theistic religions as being at the top of your list for not freaking out about apostates.

And there are roughly a dozen major denominations that even today actively affirm the possibility of apostasy (The Catholic Church, The Eastern Orthodox Church, United Methodists, General Association of Baptists, Church of The Nazarene, the Mennonites, even the Salvation Army, to name a few). As far as they're concerned, it's still very much "on the books", and given the penchant for organized religions to push the most extreme examples of their dogma whenever they get a hint of power, I wouldn't count any of them out of reintroducing capitol punishment for apostates at the first opportunity. I suspect the only reason they don't execute apostates today is simply because they haven't figured out - yet - how to get around Secular laws forbidding the practice.

@37 I do not understand why you want to talk about the hypothetical persecution of apostates by other religions rather than the current and ongoing terrorism and murder (of women, gays, atheists, nonbelievers in general, Muslims of different sects, etc.) being perpetrated by Islamists. The conservative pundit was asked for stats about dangerous Muslims. I have demonstrated that, although he failed to come up with them on the spot, such stats exist aplenty.

On second thought I do understand why you want to change the subject.