Polls of Muslims in a variety of country demonstrates that significant percentages of them (i.e. double digit %'s) believe suicide bombings are justifiable to defend Islam.

And so YOUR response is to essentially label those who read the poll and conclude that significant percentages of Muslims (i.e. double digit %'s) believe that suicide bombings are justifiable to defend Islam are somehow a bunch of naive yokels?

Would you care to put up YOUR travel experience against mine, Def?  If you want to have a "who is more worldly" comparison, I'm all over that.  Don't sit around and take on the air of quiet superiority and toss off those who don't share your views as a bunch of unenlightened primitives unless you're willing to put up your own enlightened bonafides.  How many Islamic nations have you traveled in? How many months/years have you spent in them? How many other countries have you visited?

Speaking of stereotypes, your post is a good textbook example of the problem with the American left.  Those who disagree with you aren't simply wrong. They are wrong because they're a bunch of unelightened, stupid, provincial rednecks. 

If only you could..somehow educate us then we too would see the obviousness of your wisdom and opinions.

But by all means, if you want to get into a bonafides comparison, let's do it.  But if I were in your shoes, I'd be trying to address the poll results (i.e. what exactly was invalid about the poll I showed? A single poll from Britain does nothing to counter what I posted and certainly doesn't justify your rather nasty insinuations of those whose opinions you don't share) rather than attacking me personally as somehow being some ignorant provincial. 

Please.  You know what's more obnoxious than someone writing a blog about someone else? Someone who writes a blog about someone else and then gets called on it and then tries to backtrack.

I'm the one who has been very explicitly stating that I think Islam is an ideology that promotes violence. Your article is largely in response to the poll I put up.

You, not I, are the one that claimed that people who think Islam and terrorism are tied together are a bunch of ignorant, unworldly people who probably have never met a Muslim. 

I don't think my experiences make your opinion invalid. YOU are the one who tried to argue that people who equate Islam and terrorism are unworldly. I was demonstrating that no, there's no such correlation.

To be specific: If you want to argue that Islam and terrorism aren't linked, then fine, do so. But if you're going to write a post that mostly is about belittleing people who have different opinions than you, then I'm going to address that too.

Worse than just supporting terrorism, but literally supported a specific terrorist event -- the 7/7 bombings.  I.e. According to the poll deference provided, 1% of Muslims supported a specific attack that could just as easily have killed them.  Talk about an apples to oranges poll. Even 1% is amazing considering that it was about a specific attack that could have affected them directly.

To use an analogy, a poll asking whether Americans support bombing cities in the United States that have terrorists is likely to have very different results than a poll asking whether Americans support bombing cities that aren't in the United States.

As Bakerstreet points out, 15,000 British Muslims don't just support terrorism, but support indiscriminate terror bombings in the country they are currently residing in that have no specific point other than to kill British citizens.

So not only can we equate Islam to terrorism but we can now equate Islam to idiocy as well thanks to Deference's poll.