Talk:Islam in the United States/Archive 1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Archive 1 Archive 2

DO NOT EDIT OR POST REPLIES TO THIS PAGE. THIS PAGE IS AN ARCHIVE.

This archive page covers approximately the dates between November 8, 2004 and March 14, 2005.

Post replies to the main talk page, copying or summarizing the section you are replying to if necessary.

Please add new archivals to Talk:Islam in the United States/Archive02. (See Wikipedia:How to archive a talk page.) Thank you. Palm_Dogg 04:07, 23 November 2005 (UTC)


Inflated Numbers

There are only 2 million Muslims or so in the US, not the 5-7 million that this article claims. See: http://www.danielpipes.org/article/76 . US Muslim organizations are known to lie and inflate their own numbers, so an objective source should be used. BSveen 12:37, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

Daniel Pipes is also known to be an anti-Islamic bigot. You can't take his words about anything either. OneGuy 12:47, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
Read the article before you condemn him. It is not an opinion piece. He quotes many different independent studies that have been conducted, studies that have consistently shown that there are fewer than 2 million US Muslims. BSveen 12:57, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
I read the article. Do you think studies cited by an anti-Islamic bigot should be accepted without question? You don't think author like Pipes will conveniently not mention studies that contradict his hypothesis? Are you sure about that? And why do you think we too should accept it? OneGuy 13:03, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)
OK, find me a source other than those from US Muslim oragnizations (known liars) that states that there are 5-7 million Muslims in America. I have provided you with 3 in the Pipes article that state there are 2 million or thereabouts. All of the sources in the Pipes article are indepedent studies from groups that are not known liars and have no reason to grossly inflate the numbers of Mohammedans in America as the crooked US Muslim Orgs have. BSveen

Sure:

From http://www.adherents.com/Na/Na_344.html

According to World Almanac and Book of Facts 1998; K-III Reference Corp.:

5.1 million Muslims.

That's a neutral source.

If you go to the above site, you will see all kinds of various states from 1 million to 10 million. Just as I expected, anti-Islamic bigot Pipes didn't mention these various estimates. He somehow claimed to know the truth. Proves again you can never trust a bigot as a source OneGuy 13:30, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)


Also, you need to watch your mouth. Calling Muslims Mohammedans is an insult similar to calling blacks as nigger. If you don't watch your mouth next time, I will report you officially. OneGuy 13:37, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I was asking for a primary source, a study conducted by a university or something similiar. Something we know is objective and not the obviously false figures that the lying crooks in the US Muslim organizations are peddling. All of those figures on Adherents.com that are over 3 million are most likely from the US Muslims organizations. The independent studies all put the number of Moslems much lower.
the 5.1 million figure is not neutral, it reports the inflated numbers that the US Muslim organizations (known liars) tell them -- I quote from the "Notes" section next to the 5.1 million figure: Table: "Membership of Religious Groups in U.S. "; Membership figs. generally based on reports from officials by each group. Figs. are inclusive: refer to all "members, " not simply full communicants. . We have arleady established that we cannot trust the Muslim oragnizations. This is not a neutral source.
And I will call Mohammedans/Muslims whatever I want to. Mohammedan was standard usage until recently , many history books from Western countries still refer to Mohammedans as such. BSveen 14:02, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)

And nigger was a common usage a few decades ago. Doesn't mean you should be allowed to call blacks niggers here.

Another source on the page states, 5.7 million according to Britannica Book of the Year. And in the notes section, it states: "Table: Non-Christian Religious Adherents in the United States. Year 2000 projection done in 1995."

I don't see why I should reject all these numbers by Britannica and World Almanac OneGuy 14:14, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

And according to dictionary.com on Mohammedan

http://dictionary.reference.com/search?r=2&q=Mohammedan

Offensive. Of or relating to Islam; Muslim.

So now there is should be no question about you not being aware that the word is offensive. OneGuy 14:24, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

OK I won't use the term "Mohammedan" anymore. Sorry if you were offended, I meant no offense. I own several history books and an atlas pubslished in the 1970s that use the term, so i was unaware that it was considered so offensive. BSveen 15:22, Nov 8, 2004 (UTC)
Thank you. And no, I am not Muslim. I atheist, so I wasn't offended; but i do know know the word is offensive OneGuy 15:28, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

I would suggest that the difference in estimated numbers be fleshed out, with explantion of where the various numbers come from, and why each group would wish to over- or under-represent the actual number. A good source for this appears to be: http://www.religioustolerance.org/isl_numb.htm which seems to take an evenhanded view of the controversy, and includes 14 different estimates.

Also, the sentence about 38% of Americans would not vote for a muslim would seem to fit better in the section on interaction with American culture rather than the section on organizations. This is something else that appears to need good sourcing, and to put it in context it might be interesting to see how many americans would refuse to vote for a Catholic, Jewish person, or atheist. Mykej 15:56, 8 Nov 2004 (UTC)

Isn't Nation of Islam (and consequently ASM) considered by most Muslims to not be Islamic? Or am I wrong here... -gren

Unlike Nation of Islam, ASM is orthodox. It was converted into orthodoxy by Elijah Muhammad's son, Warith Deen Muhammad OneGuy 02:17, 13 Dec 2004 (UTC)
Ok, I did not know that the reforms made them fit into the mainstream. The way it sounded was that it still was for "Black Muslims". -gren

American Mosque

I think it would be nice to have a picture of (typical) American mosque architecture and maybe some discussion about it. I mean, most people see Masjid al-Haram as their representation of a Mosque I believe and that is obviously not what they are all like just like All Catholic cathedrals are not St. Paul's. I (living in DE, USA) have not seen a Mosque in America and realized it ever so I think it might be a good idea...? comments? gren

Numbers again

Funny that in an article with the title "Islam in the United States," BSveen thinks that no Muslim should be cited as a source because all Muslims (according to him) are liars! Says a great deal about what kind of a POV pusher we are dealing here. Anyone else has an opinion on that? OneGuy 21:49, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

IslamistGuy--If the Catholic Church claimed that 100 million Americans were Roman Catholic, should we then add that figure to the Catholic page even though it is obviously false? If the Lutheran Church claimed that 40 million Americans were Lutheran, should we add that to the Lutheranism page, even though we know it to be false?
The simple fact is, the crooks in CAIR peddle this '7 million Muslims' lie and it is not supported by any of the real studies. In fact this 7 million figure is so obviously inflated that it makes no sense to even use it at all, using it would mean you are pushing pro-Muslim POV.
Crooked American Islamic Rats (CAIR) claim that 1 in 3 US Muslims is African-American (i.e. black with ancestors living in America for many generations, in other words not literally from Africa as many US Muslims actually are today.) This would mean that, if we are to believe the '7 million Muslims' figure, 2.3 million African-Americans are Muslim. This is a gross exaggeration of the number of followers of the Nation of Islam and is but one example of how the crooks in CAIR skewer the numbers. --BSveen 21:49, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

Deception removed

BSveen has very cleverly and deceptively inserted references to the same studies sponsored by Jewish groups with different names, and he calls it "All recent independent studies and surveys."

Please read the following carefully.

The first study cited on the page "National Opinion Research Center" is the same study that was sponsored by American Jewish Committee. The 2.8 million American Jewish Committee (revised figure) uses the same study as the source. The proof follows:

One study, an analysis of more than 20 Muslim population estimates, was conducted for the American Jewish Committee by Tom W. Smith of the National Opinion Research Center in Chicago. The survey concluded that Muslim population figures ranged between 1.4 million and 2.8 million. [1].

Another example: BSveen added another item: "City University of New York [0.5% of national population]." BUT this is the same as ARIS study [0.6% of national population]. See the reference 2 on this page. This study was also carried out by pro-Israeli Jewish groups. Like the above one, it's not an independent neutral study. Proof follows:

The other study, a random telephone survey of religious identification of 50,000 households, was conducted by Jewish researchers at City University of New York. That survey found that the Muslim adult population had doubled since 1990, with 1.1 million Muslim adults and 650,000 Muslim children. http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028usmuslimsnat7p7.asp OneGuy 21:03, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)


Yes, I made a mistake on the latter as it is a duplicate, I was going to remove it myself but you already had. As for the Natl Opinion Research Center -- They did indeed do a different study, in the year 2000 in which they found that 0.4% of Americans self-idenitfy as Moslems (0.4% of the population of the USA is ~1.2 million). The City University of NY study was a telephone survey. It wouldn't matter if the "researchers" were Martians, they cannot change what people will say over the phone! There is no conspiracy here IslamistGuy, & I think your rabid anti-semitism is clouding your judgement ;-) --BSveen 21:42, Jan 29, 2005 (UTC)

No, being a rabid anti-Muslim (as you admit you are on your user page) is clouding your judgement. I explicitly deny being "anti-Semitic" (unlike you who admits it). I consider that another personal insult, like you distorting my name to "IslamistGuy." As I said, keep on going. Every single thing you write is saved in history and will be used as evidence of abuse and consistent violation of No personal attacks policy OneGuy 21:58, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
Keep on whining IslamistGuy. It makes you look real respectable! -BSveen.

National Opinion Research Center is the same study sponsored by American Jewish Committee. I posted the proof above:

One study, an analysis of more than 20 Muslim population estimates, was conducted for the American Jewish Committee by Tom W. Smith of the National Opinion Research Center in Chicago. The survey concluded that Muslim population figures ranged between 1.4 million and 2.8 million. [2].OneGuy 22:04, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

If you claim there was a different National Opinion Research study than this one, then post the link to the site (and not a site like Daniel Pipes) OneGuy 22:07, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

http://www.prb.org/Template.cfm?Section=PRB&template=/ContentManagement/ContentDisplay.cfm&ContentID=7298 -- hit Ctrl-F and type '0.4' (without the ' ') and hit find. Read the relevant sentences.
By the way, Pipes is 10 times more reliable than a group like CAIR. -BSveen

And this has nothing to do with anti-Semitism. Muslim are accusing pro-Israeli Jewish groups of releasing false, low numbers. If a study is carried out by a pro-Israeli Jewish groups, that fact should be mentioned. It is not irrelevant or "anti-Semitic." If a study by a Muslim groups is done about Jews in the US, the source of that information should be mentioned too. Mentioning the source would not be "Anti-Muslim." OneGuy 22:13, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

And lastly I will add, that BSveen claims that mentioning the study was done by Jewish groups is "anti-semitic." Oh really? Even a neutral newspaper, post-gazette.com mentioned that it was a Jewish study:

MohammedanGuy, you are clearly an anti-semite. I will not even argue with you about this because it is self-evident that you are anti-semitic if you add such nonsense as "jewish researchers". End of discussion. -BSveen
The other study, a random telephone survey of religious identification of 50,000 households, was conducted by Jewish researchers at City University of New York. That survey found that the Muslim adult population had doubled since 1990, with 1.1 million Muslim adults and 650,000 Muslim children. http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028usmuslimsnat7p7.asp

So according to BSveen logic, gazette is an anti-Semitic newspaper OneGuy 22:18, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Notice also how BSveen keeps deleting World Almanac reference from the list, the most neutral source of all besides Britannica in the list. The only reason for deleting World Almanac reference is because that number contradicts his POV opinion that he is trying to push OneGuy 22:51, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

IslamistBigot: World Almanac does not do its own research. I read the pro-Muslim anti-American webpage you quoted and it did not mention that they did their own research. For that matter, CAIR does not do its own research either, they just pull numbers out of thin air! But if you were an objective observer and not a Muslim stooge, you would know this. -BSveen.


Keep on going. These personal insults do not bother me. I have a very thick skin. I assure you though that they will be used against you as evidence of abuse someday (since everything you type goes into archive forever). And how do you know that World Almanac reference didn't do their own research? Their number is different than anyone else. The source is authoritative and can't be deleted just because it contradicts your POV. Also, Ilyas Ba-Yunuss is professor of demography at State University of New York. He has done his own research and is quoted even on this page http://www.post-gazette.com/headlines/20011028usmuslimsnat7p7.asp OneGuy 01:36, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Some of the variation in number may be explained by people who have got interested in Islam and said the Shahada, but later drifted away from Islam. There are likely people who take up Islam and later drift away from Islam, same as there are people who drift away from scuba diving or chess or any other interest or activity. Anthony Appleyard 23:29, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)