Gallup Center for Muslim Studies

[JJ_BPK]

Originally Posted by Sigaba

There is another option—containment.

Yes, but that is not unilaterally.

[blue902]

Since the 40's the US has "donated" most of its foreign aid to countries in our war interest regions. Europe in the 40's, then SE Asia from the 50-70's, now the ME since the 80's get the vast majority of our "foreign aid" dollars.

And it's not the biggest expenditure we have, usually less than 1% of the federal budget. But it buys us people and loyalty and information and cooperation, in addition to all the other efforts to secure the same things.

That's what I was referring to-- We can feed Egypt and the Saudis and the Pakistanis and at the same time show them "this is what happens when you really join the other side and work against us, please see the New Iraq and A-stan for examples".

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by blue902

Since the 40's the US has "donated" most of its foreign aid to countries in our war interest regions. Europe in the 40's, then SE Asia from the 50-70's, now the ME since the 80's get the vast majority of our "foreign aid" dollars.

And it's not the biggest expenditure we have, usually less than 1% of the federal budget. But it buys us people and loyalty and information and cooperation, in addition to all the other efforts to secure the same things.

That's what I was referring to-- We can feed Egypt and the Saudis and the Pakistanis and at the same time show them "this is what happens when you really join the other side and work against us, please see the New Iraq and A-stan for examples".

You do realize that the vast majority of foreign aid goes to two nations in the Middle East. They are already being paid off not to fight.

Originally Posted by Sigaba

There is another option—containment.

How do you do that with the huge number of expatriate Muslims living outside the area of the problem?

We cannot even keep the worst locked up in Gitmo.

TR

[akv]

The manipulation of the scientific process to reach a predetermined conclusion is obviously ripe for nefarious means which history has shown extend beyond agricultural methods. In this instance questioning the efficacy and bias of the Gallup polls implies these moderate Islamic attitudes may not be accurate, so perhaps as you suggested the Canadians or whomever might represent a neutral observer, labeling such a study as an instance of lysenkoism, may very well result in a positive, inspiring a more unbiased accurate study, or just as easily brush off valid observations and walk far enough down the path into the camp of folks who simply believe the nature of Islam is evil, static, and incorrigible, and as you would with a rabid dog, there is only one solution. At the point what's the utility of anything less extreme such as feeding with one hand smashing with the other etc?

At that point history has shown the stronger tribe eliminates the weaker, just as one would with a tumor, or a rabid dog, there is no evolution, compromise, or negotiation at that point. I actually agree with you, Radical Islam has glaring weaknesses which we can exploit without mass bloodshsed. But what about our own bias?

[blue902]

You do realize that the vast majority of foreign aid goes to two nations in the Middle East. They are already being paid off not to fight.

I do, and also that others are getting paid to chase terrorists and leave Israel alone.
Every little bit of aid goes a long way though, even if the proportionate numbers are all pointed at Cairo and Jerusalem being the main recipients.

Entire post by akv

I'm not sure what we agreed on.. But I don't agree with the last sentence or understand what you're on about with the first two, except that you maybe are trying to get across that we should not be prejudiced against Muslims conducting a poll and interpreting the results questionably.

[Sigaba]

Originally Posted by The Reaper

How do you do that with the huge number of expatriate Muslims living outside the area of the problem?

IMO, the problem area is not just defined as geographic locations. The areas of conflict include intrapsychic spaces and interpersonal matrices.

The power of culture has been thus far an underutilized resource.

[blue902]

IMO, the problem area is not just defined as geographic locations. The areas of conflict include intrapsychic spaces and interpersonal matrices.

The power of culture has been thus far an underutilized resource.

The harb al dawa has to have some handle/control. It would be an interesting idea if the US made a puppet and brought him in line, to make favorable proclamations.
We're always hearing about how gullible our sheep are and how their radicalism is such a small minority- if those are true, then why not their sheep presenting a broad spectrum of controllable population?

It seems strange that there isn't a strong pro-US voice anywhere in the muslim world, if the above stipulations were true.

[Richard]

The harb al dawa has to have some handle/control. It would be an interesting idea if the US made a puppet and brought him in line, to make favorable proclamations.
We're always hearing about how gullible our sheep are and how their radicalism is such a small minority- if those are true, then why not their sheep presenting a broad spectrum of controllable population?

It seems strange that there isn't a strong pro-US voice anywhere in the muslim world, if the above stipulations were true.

Perhaps you should try using the SEARCH function before posting - you might be surprised at the answers you will find already posted here in answer to your own musings.

Richard

[robert2854]

I went to the website and at the end in the SEARCH space I typed in Chrisian Love-No matches found. So I quess they will kill us(at least try) RATHER BGE TRIED BY TWELVE THAN CARRIED BY SIX

[akv]

Originally Posted by blue902

We're always hearing about how gullible our sheep are and how their radicalism is such a small minority- if those are true, then why not their sheep presenting a broad spectrum of controllable population?

It seems strange that there isn't a strong pro-US voice anywhere in the muslim world, if the above stipulations were true.

US sheep have a bill of rights, a vote, and a quality of life the 3rd world envies.

Our "friends" in the Middle East are selected by strategic importance to US interests not the basis of their virtue. Saudi Arabia is a monarchy, Pakistan is a military dictatorship, neither is super stable, Egypt is a republic and secular, but volatile. Sheep in these areas are likely wise to keep a low profile.

Albania and Turkey are both supportive NATO allies, and though secular, predominantly Muslim. ( though the Turks are currently miffed about the Armenian thing).

[blue902]

Perhaps you should try using the SEARCH function before posting - you might be surprised at the answers you will find already posted here in answer to your own musings.

Always a good point. My findings were that there have been a lot of differing views on what's up over there and with the Muslims over here.

I never personally ran into any finding that there is a pro US Muslim in power that can affect the residents of the Dawa; least of all the putative leaders put in place in Iraq/A-stan. They have a tough time so far staying in the driver's seats at all.

(Sir) Richard,
Do you really think that those interpretations of those questions are unbiased or set to change ideas? If the latter, is there some objective point that tells you the motive for manipulation is in the reader's interest to take it all to the bank?

I didn't say the writers were extremists; I said they were Muslims, and that raises a reasonable objection to the bias/lack thereof in the readings. If you prefer to believe what you read, that's yours.

If I were in their position and I were going to try continue to soften American leftist opinion on Islam, by appealing to their taste for intellectual, educational arguments, I wouldn't change a thing.

[Richard]

Do you really think that those interpretations of those questions are unbiased or set to change ideas? If the latter, is there some objective point that tells you the motive for manipulation is in the reader's interest to take it all to the bank?

I didn't say the writers were extremists; I said they were Muslims, and that raises a reasonable objection to the bias/lack thereof in the readings. If you prefer to believe what you read, that's yours.

My position on 'opinion' polls is consistent and can be found throughout these forums.

I posted the original to this thread for information purposes only as some of the findings were interesting - I did not infer whether they were biased or not, that began with the first post in response and was followed in quick succession by one opinion after another - certainly no bias in that.

Q: How does one conduct a valid poll of a Muslim dominant region (where there are also non-muslims or many variants of Muslims) without including Muslims (or others with Muslim-like names) as members of your polling team? To not include them exhibits an overt bias in its own right. (This principle applies to all regions of the world.)

Q: In the world of polling and polls, GALLUP is considered to be the 'gold standard' for such activities - would that established reputation not reasonably challenge (lessen) the perceptions raised here of overt bias? And if not, why?

There is much information readily available and influencing opinions in the world today, and polls such as this just might be of interest and value to some.

However - YMMV - and so it goes...

Richard's $.02

[SF-TX]

Originally Posted by Richard

I posted the original to this thread for information purposes only as some of the findings were interesting - I did not infer whether they were biased or not, that began with the first post in response and was followed in quick succession by one opinion after another - certainly no bias in that.

So, we should ignore the source of the information because the findings are interesting?

[Richard]

So, we should ignore the source of the information because the findings are interesting?

No - and I neither said nor inferred doing such a thing.

My point was that in alluding to bias in others, perhaps we should also look to recognizing and weighing our own biases in the equation, too.

However - YMMV - and so it goes...

Richard

[The Reaper]

Originally Posted by Richard

Q: In the world of polling and polls, GALLUP is considered to be the 'gold standard' for such activities - would that established reputation not reasonably challenge (lessen) the perceptions raised here of overt bias? And if not, why?

I would say that there is a big difference between brand recognition and performance.

Rassmussen has proven to be much more reliable over the past few years.

TR