Before the missiles and bombs stopped flying between Israel and Lebanon, poll results have been hurled across parliaments and newspapers in Europe and America in an effort to introduce restrictions on Muslim charities, political activities, and civil rights. But rather than speaking to Muslims with more nuance and breadth (or mainstream Muslims themselves speaking beyond the often conflicting statements of their representatives), the tendency of governments and media to rely on polls assessing the alleged behaviour of Muslims often confuses and frustrates more than it enlightens.

The recent terror arrests in London have led to an polled increase in support for passenger profiling in Britain and the US with a 'focus on Muslims' despite adherents spread across nearly every race. Polls implying a multitude of divided loyalties and violent tendencies have led to widespread fear, with Muslim leaders issuing plaintive and seemingly futile denials. However, many of these poll results have reasonable explanations or at least alternative interpretations.

For example, one observer points out that the identification by Muslims of their religion first rather than nationality is an obvious one, since Muslims will rally around themselves when under siege by their government, excluded by society, or under military attack elsewhere in the world. Oft-cited British polls showing minorities of Muslims sometimes justifying violence against civilians or sympathising with the objectives of the 7/7 bombers leave out some important caveats - that only slightly fewer non-Muslims agree with the violence (7% vs. 10%) and that the bomber's objectives, as possibly understood by a Muslim poll responder, might include the withdrawal of UK troops from Iraq and ending the occupation of Palestine - both points on which a majority of Britons agree.

Other polls showing a minority interested in implementing sharia law fail to differentiate between the hand-chopping Saudi variety and its use in civil disputes that - importantly - do not violate British law, a view many Islamic scholars have supported. Regarding extremism, not only do twice the number of British Muslims show concern about the rise of Islamic extremism - 43% - as Muslims elsewhere in Europe, but more Muslims want the British government to fight Islamic extremism than non-Muslims (56% to 49%), including a 48% support for surveillance of mosques (approximately equal to non-Muslims). There is also broad agreement on the Muslim need to integrate (66% vs. 74%) and even views on public drunkenness and short skirts on women (offended and not offended, respectively). Despite the similarities in these findings, poll results are consistently spun or selectively revealed to cast mainstream Muslims in the worst possible light.

Even the polled distrust of Muslims by Americans acknowledges dramatically lower numbers for those who actually know a Muslim personally (42% of them). Knowing this, the results - 39% think Muslims aren't loyal to the US, 22% don't want them as neighbors, and 39% want Muslims to have a special ID (a green crescent pinned to their shirt, perhaps?) - reflect public ignorance more than the existence of an actual threat.

Taking the most publicised polls at face value, while a minority of Muslims in Britain and the US do feel hostile towards non-Muslims, a majority of non-Muslims have now returned the favour. Over 50% believe "militant Islamism" is as great a threat as Nazism and communism and 63% believe are "very concerned" about worlwide Islamic rule (though apparently not concerned about how this would actually happen).

Sometimes, these broad judgements morph into the absurd, such as a rumour of New York Muslims offended by a Kate Moss poster - reprinted in newspapers worldwide - when no Muslims had actually complained. When this prejudice is correlated with statistics, it veers toward insignificance. Regardless of perceived sympathies, the number of British or American Muslims involved in terrorism is statistically near zero. Of course, it only takes a handful to commit an act of terrorism, but the actual accusations of involvement in terror to date do not indicate a "trend" that is somehow reflective of the larger Muslim community.

Obviously, none of this should deter Muslims from eliminating the tendencies toward terrorism and extremism within their communities, but neither should a fear of terror lead to hysterics where Muslims are thrown off flights for speaking, wearing, or praying in Arabic.

After all this, if one still wants to rely on polls, then other recent ones turn government policy towards Muslims on its head. Not only do a clear majority of Britons now believe that foreign policy has a clear link to terrorism (as a recent letter by 38 British Muslim groups and politicians to Tony Blair alleged), but support for the ruling Labour party has reached a 19 year low over the issue. In the US, support for the war in Iraq is, despite efforts to link it to Hezbollah and the recent terror arrests, the lowest ever measured, with a majority for the first time breaking the link between Iraq and the "war on terror." Yes, polls are just numbers subject to interpretation, but very often the most reassuring results just get swept under the rug.

Its not fair or just. BUT .. if you are muslim in a non-muslim country you will experience discrimination at some level. No different to a chinese person or a jew or a mexican. The discrimination will be built on ignorance and heresay, and will ultimately be a feeding ground for politicians. It can probably only be dissolved with education and clear, sane and distinct messages from muslim communities.

i agree.

That can be part of it, but I like the Japanese-American analogy: they experienced the kind of discrimination inherent in being different from the majority. But, the real nastiness came out after Pearl Harbor. I see it likewise with Muslims in the US: low levels of fear against what was different but outright hostility after 9/11. However, today there is no such discriminatation against Japanese-Americans as there was after Pearl Harbor for two reasons: Japan was defeated; Japanese-Americans distinguished themselves by contributing greatly to an American victory in WWII including staffing a Nissei regiment that was the most decorated American unit ever. Perhaps if Muslims here stopped whining about what's fair or not, maybe facilitating the demise of terrorism would do wonders for protecting our human rights instead of relying on the decreasing good will of the courts and public opinion. I was amazed at the outpouring of anger after the British airline plot was unraveled; this was even after a foiling of a plot by another Muslim which if properly exploited would polish our image and credentials with the public; imagine what would have happened if another 9/11 style attack occured. My God!

Omar- Why should I have to fight in wars I consider offensive and unjust to prove to the U.S. that I should be treated fairly?
Our constitution gives me the right of freedom of religion, this doesn't just apply to White American Christians (much to their dismay).

You personally don't; but the community should pony up. It should be obvious that the lack of Muslim input has allowed our government to go astray and loose its focus on fighting al-Qaeda et al. Its not simply that the Bush Admin didn't want to listen, it was mostly that the Muslim voices being heard were all disavowing themselves from al-Qaeda while trying to justify Hamas' similar tactics. These voice were unwilling to *do* anything, either by themselves or in collaboration with the country that has welcomed them , against the terrorism that threatens us much more as a minority than anyone else. Repeated denials mean nothing. See how the Muslims who do serve are treated? Chaplain Yee was only feted by CAIR and fondled by the MAS only when he himself became a victim, not when he was a Muslim in the military during a war against terrorism. Many Muslim Marines I knew were afraid to tell anyone in thier extended families, and so and so on.

The only clear loosers are us. It should also be just as obvious that the old way is not working; whining that we deserve rights are usually seen as us demanding privelages, especially when its widely preceived that we are doing nothing to benefit the US in time of war.

>>this doesn't just apply to White American Christians

Law gives us only so much protection; we essentially are relying on the good will of the culture to respect that Constitutional protection. However, with each day of conflict between the West and radical Islamism, that culture of tolerance is eroding, and its going faster these days. Its not fair, but every other minority has gone through this and so shall we as a religious minority. Its too bad we're so culturally fractured; at least the Japanese-Americans had and continue to have some kind of cultural cohesiveness so these things don't ahve to be explained from scratch over and over again.

If you mean that the Iraq war was offensive to you, we are in partial agreement; if you are also saying that overthrowing the Taliban and attacking al-Qaeda are offensive to you, then we are on very opposite sides of the equation.

I abhor the Taliban and Al-Qaeda, and their oppression and brutality towards women disgusts me. I find little moral high ground for the American military to stand on lately, however.
As far as Hamas goes, the Palestinians have endure a brutal occupation for decades and I really believe that Americans in this same situation would have been capable with similar if not worse tactics used by Hamas in defense of their homeland. As I have said before, I don't see a difference between terrorism imposed by individual groups or by state actors. In fact, state sponsored terrorism (such as the recent offensive against Lebanon) is much more insidious because so many are culpable for it.
Muslims need to combat terrorism, patriarchy and hypocrisy from within, and others need to worry about their own backyards before trying to clean up others. Peace.

peace, I do think Americans would do similar things in such a situation. In fact, most in depth histories of the American Revolution show exactly how brutal the colonials could get with the loyalists and so on. Yet, it did not smear the entire movement because the leaders condemned it an cut off its practitioners from credibility, legitimacy, and supplies.

In any case, something is wrong when Islam is unable to influence people away from such practices. We must admit, then, that the politics is more important to many Muslims than in seeing Islam influence thier behavoir away from terroristic tactics.

State warfare, especially in the industrial age is much more deadly than in any prior period. Yet, war has been a built-in feature of human life forever. I had hoped Islam was a way out the same-old and wouldn't succumb to the temptation of situational ethics; apparently, I was wrong.

I don't like the japanese-american analogy. Do you know how many japanese cities were burned to ashes before hiroshima and nagasaki? Its insane to pretend that Muslims should be okay with killing of innocent muslims on such a scale. And the japanese that did contribute .. what exactly was there incredible affiliation with Japan? The war is unjust .. supporting it is inhumane. Whether a person is a soldier or not, the step is always away from the killing .. not towards it. Not only have times changed, but the war, its cause and its aims are different too. Well.. thats what I think.

Facilitating the demise of extremism has everything to do with OPPOSING the current american disepnsation and the propogation of Islam into the US.

>> It should be obvious that the lack of Muslim input has allowed our government to go astray and loose its focus on fighting al-Qaeda et al.

But as american muslims, that input need not necessarily be the legitimising of the American military-industrial complex. If that means saying that the men and women serving in the US armed forces are mere puppets in a suffocating game of war and economic repression .. then that is in American favour and within the capacity and right of Americans because it is true and good.

It can't be expected of muslim people to start constructively attacking Al-Qaeda ideology. Terrorists subscribe to a marginalised ideology on the fringes of society in countries that are far removed from the American muslims reality. American muslims are barely getting a foothold on their civil rights. Many muslims are in fact american citizens for many generations.

Expecting that muslim people in the US are somehow going to ethically dissolve terrorism by co-operating with rather dubious American built institutions (like the CIA), is an insult to the Ummah and a harm to the American people at large. Getting behind the the functioning of the patriot act is in itself not just unIslamic, but I would think it generally inhumane .. and I've heard unAmerican too.