that evangelicals were they part of the opposition to mormonism and it turns out the survey reveals that only 34% of white evangelicals regard torments as christians. however, 66% of white evangelicals approve of mormons. what that suggests is that there are features of mormonism other than theology probably having to do with family values and a very traditional lifestyle that these cultural features of mormonism trump theological reservations even in the minds of white evangelicals who are about as likely to approve of mormons as the population as a whole. fifth and finally, age and

education. you know, as robbie's charts clearly indicated there does tend to be a very strong age and education effect influencing attitudes towards islam, immigration and a number of other cultural religious issues as well. said the survey indicates all of the expected correlations with regard to african-americans, hispanics, muslims and immigrants patterns of social relations and the importance of religion itself. but, and this will be my concluding point, there were some surprises. we did not -- we expected to find a much bigger divide between the youngest and the oldest americans on the issue of whether reverse discrimination, discrimination against whites has become as important an issue at as discrimination against minorities. we expected to find a

significant gap on the question of whether discrimination against minorities remains an important issue in american politics and society today and also on the question, the very dramatic question of whether muslims who commit acts of violence are indeed muslims and the survey did not reveal the kind of age effect that one might have expected. and so there are real discontinuities by age and education but also some important continuities. with that i will subside. [applause] >> thank you very much pill. if i could just reiterate to our audience that if you want to ask a question it is hashtag diversity poll. i think we might christine begin with one of our questions from

outside the room when we get to the q&a. i'm grateful to robbie for mentioning the ford foundation is supporting both of us and i particularly want to think of sheila who has been a real friend to us. she has a passion for these issues and also a deep and broad knowledge of these issues so that is a really good combination we are very grateful to her. i also want to welcome my friend melissa rogers who is a nonresident senior fellow and a partner with bill and me on many of our religious and public life projects. if we had pulled other students of religion, religious pluralism and religious freedom and asked who should we invite -- somebody will help me on that -- to be the respondents on the survey they would have come up with dr. dr. muqtedar khan and dr. keeter without any of those demographic breaks. dr. muqtedar muqtedar khan is ar

in the department of political science and international relations at the university of delaware. he is the founder of the islamic studies program at the university of delaware and was its first director from 2007 to 2010. his most recent book is debating moderate islam, the geopolitics of islam and the west. he will be our first respondents. dr. jose casanova is one of the world's top scholars in the sociology of religion. that is not a nice thing to say an introduction. that is actually true. he is a professor at the department of sociology at georgetown university. he has the berkeley centers program on globalization, religion and the secular. he has published works in a broad range of subjects including religion and globalization. migration and religious pluralism transnational religions and sociological theory. so i welcome first stop your khan and dr. casanova. and thank you so much for being

with us. >> thank you e.j. and thank you robert for inviting me to this exciting discussion. i'm delighted to be back at brookings. i used to be a fellow here for a long time. there are several such surveys that are coming out about muslims and muslim attitudes about america and about american attitudes towards muslims. for me, who is consuming all of these surveys it is an emotional rollercoaster. i looked at a recent survey by gallup, which says that 80% of american muslims approve of obama. maybe they are not reading the news. 66% of the american muslims say they are thriving and happy to be here and they are doing better than anybody else. in terms of religious tolerance towards others, the american muslims, more of them than

anybody else, one point about the mormons in the u.s.. that may be very happy and that i looked at the survey and i am really very depressed. , let me tell you the good news or get the good news is that regardless of the nature of the favorability that is reported, it has become obvious that attitude towards islam and attitudes towards muslims has become a constitutive element of american identity. you cannot be an american without having a position on islam and towards muslims. and the kind of position you take about islam and towards muslims will also define the kind of american you are. in that sense, islam is here and has become a part of a americas social, cultural and political identity and its fabric. so that is the most interesting thing that i find. attitudes and change.

sometimes data looks different if the question is framed differently. that is the first thing. the second thing that i found was that muslim bindings to me were not surprising. they were concerning, some of the suspicions we have in the trends that we have observed based on several episodes. now we have the numbers that confirms the fears or hopes, depending on how you look at this. the number 47%, 47% of americans disapprove of islam and muslims particularly the disapproval of islam has been quite stable actually since 2002. the first time i saw that was in a pew study survey in 2002 and confirmed again and again and again. so that is constant. but what has changed is why the disapproval. that is to me the most dangerous and the most frightening thing.

when you ask people in the past why did you disapprove of muslims or islam, the 47% who did disapprove talked about terrorism. now they talk about sharia. that is dangerous because terrorism is -- of politics changes. if bin laden is killed, if al qaeda is destroyed. that force of disapproval, that source of insecurity, which prompts unfavorable attitudes towards muslims can disappear. but if the source port is favorable attitude towards muslims is muslim adherence to sharia then this is never, ever going to disappear. i just spent a whole month, every living moment of that month, trying to apply sharia in my life. the whole point of ramadan is too fast and pray and to think of god and to internalize and internalize the sharia and

muslims do that every year they will do that. so living by the sharia is an important aspect of muslim life and if they are going to be disapproved because of that than we are going to have a perennial problem. i think that is something we need to do, unless we do a better job of educating americans about what the sharia is. in my opinion, 90% of the sharia is already applied and the united states. thou shall not kill, thou shall not cheatsheet, thou show not lie. i wonder if those opposed to sharia if they would find out that murder is prohibited by the sharia, will they approve? killing, robbing, creating krupp shin and society. all of these things are prohibited by the sharia. i have one more comment about the sharia. it is amazing these attitudes

towards the sharia. especially by those who are more religious christians and those who are on the side of the republicans. for several decades, many hundred million americans have struggled hard to implement two elements of the christian sharia, banning abortion and preventing marriage. so how do they expect less than 2% of muslims, less than 2% of the american population, how do they expect less than 2% of the population to implement the entire islamic sharia in america? muslims has failed to implement the entire islamic sharia in countries where they have struggled with 100% muslims, 95% muslim, iran 95%. they haven't been successful in implementing. the point is really that sharia is just a prop, and attempts to

say we don't like islam and muslims i don't know and i don't care. but if you want to have an excuse here is one. let's try sharia. i think that is what it is. i have one non-islam related -- about this report which i find perplexing and interesting. the favorability numbers towards african-americans are 89%. nearly everybody, 90% is a huge number. so why is race an issue in this country? why do people feel that they institutionalize discrimination in this country? what it tells me is there is no connection between favorability and institutionalized discrimination. so it is quite possible that you could have just favorability

numbers very high towards muslims in the u.s. without having institutionalized discrimination against muslims and that is why you find of muslims in america are much much happier than this data actually suggest. that is why two out of three american muslims say they are thriving even though there are nearly half of americans that say they don't like them. there is no connection between surveys the major favorability and institutionalization of discrimination etc.. the second thing i found interesting is that mormons enjoy higher favorability ratings than muslims while -- don't. i'm assuming that the majority of mormons in a large number of atheists are white, so how does religion raise the dynamics play out in this connection. i don't understand and perhaps future study somebody could try to flush that out. they are disliked compared to

muslims even though mormons are white. there is an interesting finding in this report, which is the marriage between knowledge and prejudice. this is fascinating. the people claim that they know most of islam are the people who are the most ignorant in my opinion but also the most prejudiced in their own opinion about islam. knowledge apparently is nurturing prejudice and that is because of our game equally new institution called. people who seem to watch "fox news" and trusted the most think that they know more about islam than anybody else and have extremely unfavorable ratings towards muslims. that is really fascinating. in the last two or three years, especially since you been to the

mosque issue, islamaphobia has become a campaign strategy for the republican party. nobody cares whether imam is raising money or not for the mosque at wtc. it was only until november that it was such a big issue. i wrote weight until the elections are over and nobody will worry. we will see that issue come up again as we get closer to the next election. so islamaphobia in combination with fox has become a campaign strategy for the republican party. without urges toward muslim herman cain would have no status in this entire republican nomination. if it is one point candidate, i know how to hurt muslims and i can show you how. that seems to be his entire campaign strategy.

the second thing that i want to point out is that if you look at this data about the media, you find that this number is very disturbing. americans to trust who trust broadcast news networks are least likely to report knowing a lot about muslims. so only 7% of the people who watch broadcast news say that they know about islam and understand it. people who seem to watch "fox news" seemed to claim that they know a lot about islam and they are prejudiced towards muslims. so i think that a lot of mischief that is being caused by "fox news" is the dividend of the stuff that broadcast news are not doing. if the mainstream news channels did a better job of educating the americans about islam and muslims, then i think that vacuum of knowledge will not be

exploited as much by "fox news." and that is an important lesson i think from this report. i also want to talk about the good guys. at first when i read the report the first time i was constantly distracted by all the negatives. when i read at the second time, i said oh my god while bigots will be bigots the good guys are also scary. for example, if you look at the state on the question of feeling of -- of concern, muslims wearing the burqa, muslims at the mosque and muslims praying at airports etc. those who seem to be uncomfortable are 48, 56, 40%. those are really high numbers. and even from those who are democrats, and those who watch public television and those who

do not watch "fox news," the numbers of ignorance about islam and prejudice of islam continues to hover around 30%. so while we can blame fox and right-wing leaders and preachers for fostering and nurturing the discourse of hate, against muslims probably, but the others are also not doing very well and that to me is also a worrisome issue. especially for american muslims who see america as their home, there is the idea of permanent deportation that is not possible. now nearly 40% of all american muslims are indigenous muslims and within another 10 or 15 years the majority of american muslims will be indigenous americans. so this whole idea that we will continue to be unaccepting of islam is disturbing. i also would like to add an

impression to the -- how am i doing on time? >> pretty close. >> okay. i also have one question. beatitudes, the data that i am interpreting as perhaps prejudicial, how much of that is being affected by the general political climate in this country? the polarization that is taking place in the united states, united states, the perception that obama is not really one of us and this foreign guy from africa who sometimes wears a turbine is take no for our country. you know obama is the only guy i know who is converting to islam in slow motion. you know, and one point he was 30% muslim and now he is 20% muslim. i think by 2012, by the time we are pulling in november he will be 50% muslim. so, and then the joblessness,

the insecurity about the economy, and they think a major global restructuring of the united states as a less powerful economic and military entity i think is -- the shock that we are not the big honcho that we used to be, all of that also i think it's manifesting in their prejudices towards primarily islam and muslims and they think that perhaps while it is quite possible that the surveys may be underestimating the amount of prejudice there is towards muslims because nobody wants to tell people that look i am the bigot on the phone when they answer these questions, but even though they might be underestimating the prejudice against muslims that it is also quite possible that it is superficial and reacting to the current economic and political environment. and i think that once things get better, these numbers will get that are too.

thank you. [applause] >> well the questioner works their way up i want reminded viewers to remind the viewers that they can comment -- i want to remind viewers they can comment at hashtag diversity pulled. we invite dissent as well as questions are many point of view including perhaps muslims who are republicans or "fox news" viewers. muqtedar thank you for joining our conversation. dr. casanova dr. said dr. casanova it is on the honor to have you here are too. >> i'm thankful for the invitation. i have for brief points or comments which i will keep to two minutes each will be sufficient. first, the relation between private opinion and public opinion, what we actually call public opinion is privately self opinions made public by such surveys of course as this one.

it is important -- change by being made public and what are they reinforcing loops between the media, private prejudices in a positive sense and prejudgment approaching the negative sense of a not write views of things. so in the survey results we saw a striking look between the media, the media we watch and the pre-judgments we have, especially of course this comes extremely striking in the case of "fox news." and one question i have is do we have any evidence that, when public opinion is made public it ever leads to changing our prejudices or are we only reinforcing what we see in our selves in certain groups.

i am not concerned about it so the public opinion reinforces that i belong to the right group. i don't think ever public opinion leads to changing prejudice him. this of course is a very interesting issue. the second is the striking points between views, opinions attitudes and prejudices towards immigrants. the striking consistencies are all groups in america, religious groups, white evangelical protestants, catholics, black partisans but also liberals and conservatives. they are very similarly favorable or unfavorable view towards muslims and this is striking because an american muslims and immigrants are two radically different groups. most immigrants are muslims and most muslims are -- in america muslims are a small proportion

of immigrants and in one pull muslims are not -- so the fact that the two are put together is very interesting. imagine if actually they would be the same group. then of course the prejudice would be doubled which is what imagine what happens in europe. in europe, to be in the immigrant and to be of no racially -- imagine in the 19th century blacks and catholics. most catholics were blacks and most blacks were catholics. most muslims were hispanic and most hispanics were muslims or of course the prejudice would be of course very very striking. it is very interesting to us this question of how the two things are linked together. ..

i'm not sure in the most striking that less favorable ambivalent views to words them in the hispanics immigration but here the important issue is how the immigration enters. it's a good thing for the minorities and in the country the prejudice we must watch had

it not been this the case and we see for instance how the muslims also less favorable reviews are still 58% of americans not islam but of american muslims, much higher than the only 45% who have favorable views while 46% said unfavorable and the most striking difference with tear up where in europe you have the fusion of the religious prejudice, secular prejudice, politically right prejudice, left, the extreme right, the catholic center, the liberal sector, all of them gang up on muslims and islam. thank god in america we are divided. [laughter] we are divided and therefore we

cannot to gang up on them. as in this respect to de nativism in america in the 19th century is easily unviable from the view because precisely the american society is changing so dramatically but also precisely because the majority is not possible. it would be precise in the republican majority and the white majority in the 19th century it is not possible to the society any more racially much more diverse and it hasn't even appears in the category. the age has disappeared. the chinese work in the most racially discriminated nativist attack. finally on the fourth and final point about the future about are

they so much more open because as it points out they are the most religiously and ethnically diverse generation and the country and its one interesting point or is it because they're so young, namely the question is for the local port and as they grow older they will also become less tolerant of the diversity and this is of course the issue about young people being less religious. young people are always less religious and they become more religious and get married and have children. so this we know and this has been an issue that all argue against people using the evidence of the next generation therefore the american people are going to be in was religious because the generations are less religious. it is the communication of both factors and they are distinguished is disaggregate what is characteristic of the generation because they are young and what it is because

they represent the future of the country. think you. [applause] i have this question in my mind of someone express's a private opinion and a forest and there's no pollster around to record of you what is the public opinion? what a wonderful presentation. before you go, raviv just wanted to put a few other numbers on the table in response and presentation and then we will go to the twitter feet and then opened up for questions but we will keep also going to the viewers on c-span. >> thanks, ej. there's one more thing i can respond to but i want to take a couple moments that may help put

a few more things on the ground related to the things that dr. kahn raised. one is the source of about knowledge, knowledge of islam in particular and about the belief and practice of the muslims. the source of knowledge matters. interestingly enough dr. kahn said that it's true that those who said the most report knowing more because than those who have other news sources. however, on this question there were two groups that say they know more than others and the other curtis public television viewers who tend to be on the opposite end of the opinions spectrum on this particular question so what we have is those who say they must trust public television saying that they know a lot and those who however the numbers are small even for those groups most say they don't know a lot but they are higher for the two groups and the difference is those who

say the most watched fox news or twice that court is like twice the size of their group the most trust so there is a kind of asymmetry in that regard. the other thing i want to just raise is how much is this affected by the polarization of the country and i want to reemphasize the point i do think that it's right as dr. kahn said to put an explanation on this that having the opinion on islamic and on the immigration and immigrants is well is becoming a kind of defining feature of the american public debate and how people locate themselves in the ideological circles as well, and that i think we kind of identified as a looming issue about a year ago and we got evidence that that is coming into the provision. finally on the question of the correlation, you know, the kind of views of muslims and immigrants we do see the striking patterns.

however, it is clear there's a correlation so we ran the correlation analysis to see the favorability of muslims connected with and it is statistically significant but very modest and the favorability of the muslims and hispanics and the correlation is specifically statistic but very modest so it is there but it is very complicated. it isn't a one-to-one correlation and there's different dynamics happening in that debate. and the last thing that both of you raised is this high favorability rating and then some policy issues there doesn't translate in a one-to-one direction that's absolutely true to read a couple reasons may be and it is clearly the case that when these were all telephone surveys people call and sort of answer and as a human being, stranger on the other end of the line asking questions something sociologists are talking about

is the social desirability that me and fleet numbers and we know for example the number of people who attend religious services on a weekly basis is probably about double the number of people ought to lie there on any given sunday. it's the kind of desirability of fact and there probably aren't enough of you is how the number of people say they actually attend religious service on a weekly basis of america and people understand understanding the direction that the social desirability effect works is actually quite interesting so if there's a social desire ability that is and fleeting for a simple favorability numbers it tells you something about what people expect is acceptable and the society and that truly matters for the debates. for how the iran and the last thing about the melanie >> caller: ward or lifecycles is a huge debate in the sociological circles when people get older, kids from a mortgage to become more conservative.

you're right every generation is less religious, the younger generation because they tend to join churches and they have church but there's good evidence this generation is less religious than evin previous generations were at this point in time in their life cycle so there's something new and different happening with religion and the unaffiliated millennials generation and this generation is more diverse and just one point on that that one of the things we find this to be predictors on these issues is true on issues like gay and lesbian rights that social relationships matter for people's views and when we run their regression models to tease out what are the most independent predictors of one's view on this is kind of issues that relationships matter and it's true in both the case of immigrants and muslims that never having contact with someone muslim is a hi predictor of having a sort of negative view towards muslims and the same is true never having contact with his genex is a kind of high predictor, independent

predictor holding all kind of other things constant. so there's certainly a sense the millennials generation be the most diverse that we have ever seen ever is those things as long as the social relationships stay intact as they move to the life cycle and the way they are now will continue to be a factor >> i had with a french pollster who observed that americans over report attendance at religious services because they feel guilty when they don't go and the french under report they feel guilty when they do. i had no idea there is a scientific finding but it's a wonderful observation. >> the sociability in the >> the sociability in thern europeans seem to be modern to be secular therefore they should not be as religious as they are and when you ask them they tell you 30% they go, but only 20%

are religious so the scripture of the resource as well as the actual practice. thank you so much, professor. belli will give you a chance to respond if we can go to our tweet first or do you have something --. the views expressed in the survey drive you all over this already but just again neil with the progress of change campaign committee in washington wanted to see any analysis of the causation between the media consumption and the public opinion is a kind of do they have their views to have negative perceptions or does the data show that negative

perception watch fox and then secondly the other question that came up came through the interfaith alliance, one of the fathers wanted to know of the 12% who don't think religious freedom is a foundation of the u.s. what exactly do they believe in and did you actually do exploration of that as well? >> we did not ask a follow-up question what we think it is founded on. we have some other data that has a fairly high number of americans who will say we actually overlap them what say that america is founded as a christian nation. that would be the alternative to that question rather than found on religious liberty. and again, there's probably to do the analysis there's probably some overlap between people who would say in some ways both inconsistent. the question on the causation is the thing that sort of just haunts the political scientists,

kind of sorting out the causation we can't fully sort out the correlation is not causation, right, that's the mantra of the social science but what we can say, the closest we can do is we did run regression models to tease out whether there are other intervening variables that somehow or explaining for example. >> fox news on sorry, but on the media question whether the media influences views or whether people will certain views gravitate toward certain media because they hold those we can't sort that all and to be our questions are about the most trusted media sources and frequency of the use but people say the most trust the television news source. they hold and a lot of other demographic variables constant. what we see is that trusting fox news does show it to be a solid independent predictor of the

views on muslims and views on islam that is holding constant being conservative, being a republican region gender education and a bunch of other demographic variables but that doesn't cause the issue causality but what it does is it is not some intervening variable let chollet explaining that that it's actually the most trusting fox news is an independent predictor apart from in fact it is quite as powerful as any other thing in the model living in the south and other things you might think of the would be strong predictors. >> one of the interesting things about fox is the second biggest owner of fox is a muslim in saudi arabia. that is an interesting fact in the profit-making enterprise and then gives $20 million to the universities to combat what fox is doing.

figure that out. if you look abroad media studies you will find that the reader has changed they don't go looking for information, we are shopping for evidence that will confirm our pre-existing opinion on certain issues. so i have a feeling that the fox audience is preselected by the attitude they already have. but fox does is talk legitimizes by look i have this information and i have this expert on islam to simply come here and verify your work about islam so they are merely combating to confirm the prejudice and opinions that the consumers already have. >> we were speculating this at breakfast with some folks and on the one hand as robbie importantly underscored that fox news or the media consumption question generally is partly

attitudinal as well as behavior that a naughty inslee guinn 65, 35 on one side and come out 83 code 20 and have a complete change in view and reinforce the new views but this goes beyond the confines of the survey to try to figure out what it means. so, who in our present audience -- what's bring a microphone to the front, our old friend. mr. mitchell. >> garate mitchell from the natural report. when we last met with your earlier survey on american values it seems to me that bill made the observation that one of the most salient pieces of information that came out of

that was coming and i believe as he made it he looked towards the white house and said it would be important for someone who understood the survey to understand the importance of american exceptional was some. today -- and by the way there seem to be some moves by the president shortly thereafter that suggest maybe he had understood that. so, today bill begins his presentation by quoting a chester san america the country with the soul of a church and then says in that church is america or americanism. and i wonder if you could flesh that out all little bit for us. what does that mean, and whether that is directed at the white house or candidates and other parts what is to take away, what does that really mean? >> that exceptional question.

how much time do we have? >> let me be inadequately had briefed but i will stay very close to the survey itself in an effort to answer that question. as we reflected on the the survey thinking about the essays we narrowed a very rough and ready answer to your question down to the three propositions. number one, a broad acceptance of american constitutional principles and values. now obviously there is a big zone of contestation but there is also a big zone of agreement among americans in the rough and ready way as to what those are.

second is buying into the american dream, however temporarily counterfactual that commitment may be. in the sense that people who want to become americans are expected to embrace the personal responsibility, family responsibility contribution to the community etc. that general basket and third, you are expected to accept one of the principal symbolism practices of american community that is the english language and the survey that a lot of non-immigrant americans have reservations about a lot of immigrant americans on the ground that is a stick to themselves and don't learn

english and are seen as forming enclosed communities. that is a big problem. so, those are three propositions about the religion of america being american is some that i think are completely consistent with the findings of the survey. let me take the opportunity to draw out some of the implications of the parallel that i drew between the position of catholics in america and the 19th century it is very may well be when you simply look at american catholics in the 1870's and 90's at the time it was around romanism and rebellion and controversy and things of

that sort and what people thought about, with them on catholic americans thought about, catholics namely the theocratic tendencies, the logical objections for liberals and constitutionalism to some foreign entity, the pope, all of those may have been counterfactual believes none the less american catholics took those seriously and did their part to rebut them coming and one of the things that i think the representatives of the american muslim community should ask themselves is whether they now have a historical task they did not choose that must discharge to rebut the propositions that stand in the

way of their full acceptance and integration. in the case of american catholics it meant not only rebutting falsehoods but also making important doctrinal shifts that removed the other points of disagreement. there are things that muslim and america could do in the next two decades of the 21st century. to pound home the point that there is a distinction between lifting a life according to the sharia law as an individual or as a community as opposed to the theo craddock and pulse to describe in the wall of the land because that is the question of the survey. it's nothing to do with the communal observance. it has everything to do with the expansion of that to the legal and constitutional framework of the united states and there were similar fears about catholics of 19th century so it seems to me that you told half the story

that there's another half of the story. there's a reciprocal responsibility on the part of the muslim community. and i am making that point especially because i am struck as a student of american history by the fact that the reaction against american muslims after 9/11 wasn't nearly as severe as the reaction against japanese-americans after december 7th, 1941 and i was struck by the fact that president george w. bush was coming for his share of criticism did a lot more than fdr to the force of prejudice against such groups so there has been some reciprocity on them on the muslim americans saw it coming and i think that there is room for a sort of broad dialogue here. >> could i say very quickly i want to see one of the things that harmed me looking at these

numbers is thinking about history because i think two things. one on the language front, there was always the view that the new immigrant groups were not assimilating fast enough on the language ground. we always had for renehan language media going back in our history. second, the parallel between catholics in the antiislamic feeling it just strikes both of us as a very, very strong and as bill suggested there has been changed a few will there was change over time on both sides of that though it took a very long time one can measure the distance between the house with campaign in 1928 and the john kennedy campaign in 1960. that was a lot of years. nonetheless, it did eventually change although i suppose if you are a muslim american that is an awful long time to wait but it has happened.

>> i don't think anybody who had any kind of leadership position in the community would disagree with what they had to say. in fact the community has been conscious of this for more than a decade and a half. for example, the perception that islam and democracy are incompatible and i dedicated my life to make the point that it is not, and that has two things. bonn is diffusing the misconception about islam other than the media, but also required the reforming interpretation itself. so what you're suggesting is to change the perceptions of islam. so both of those have been on the issue of islam and democracy. in 1999 there's a significant amount of american muslims saying that democracy is quicker and belief and not what is no longer an issue, nobody talks about it.

similarly, there are other aspects of which -- not to discuss economic reform the american muslim leaders and imams and thinkers have been working on this issue. what is the challenges that the community is small, the media as a result of 9/11 is extremely intense, and we also had this phenomena of ongoing immigration in the new congress. so by the time he have educated your mean believe, the base has expanded for people who are coming from other parts of the world and so, when muslims are busy in gauging the media, they also don't have the resources and the time to reeducate the new entrants into the community and that is for muslim americans no doubt about it. >> i'm going to bring several questioners at once so other people can get in.

>> if i may add a constructive comparison. in both cases muslims were before september 11th but for very different reasons. in america they were unreasonable because they were integrated as individuals, they have higher levels of and come than the average american and the have no demographic concentration manila slum neighborhoods. so they were invisible for good and for that. finally, there were no prejudice is because they were unknown. this was a nation of islam, the only public disability in america. in europe because they were turks, pakistanis. there were no muslims in general before 2000, there were no muslims in great britain, there are no muslims in france. they became muslims and in moderate they became muslims.

before there were turks and no muslims, this is an interesting comparison. there were clearly prejudiced against them as ethnic groups but other religious groups and the prejudice against islam itself that has become the most important characteristic. >> thank you for that acute observation. that's very helpful. let's go right across the middle. the lady and is that sort of red, please call and if you can see who you are the would be great. >> i noticed you said the surveys are the most positive indicators for the acceptance of the social contact but in the rural areas obviously there are not as many muslims and i wonder if you would look into that i wondered particularly about the role of the fis leaders in particular speaking positively about muslims as a way of countering islamophobia or what otherwise would be positive to counter? >> can we pass the microphone, can somebody stay with the

microphone. this gentleman on the left and that gentleman up there. >> i left in the geographic sense. i have no idea where your views are. >> you've commented that the america is founded on the principal of religious freedom. also that we see that decline of religious practice in the millennials group, and an that informs our morality what is the forward-looking -- what is that suggesting for the forward-looking view and i would raise the question specifically to we have any idea or any reaction about what we as americans are willing to accept in our society? so if we have the perception that muslims are terrorists, are we willing to accept acts of violence against the communities that were this is headed?

i would raise that as a community question that we need to consider seriously. >> thank you three much. there is an interesting question on that subject in the survey that can be reported. thank you. >> ellen crowley teach immigration history at american university in byman on resident fellow at the migration policy institute. i'm wondering whether or not you taken your data and contextualized it with other opinions data of the earlier era. for example a lot of the questions you asked and the responses you got are remarkably similar to some of the gallup polls conducted about jews in the late 1930's, very, very similar, and i think it would make an interesting comparison to do that, and that it would enrich when you are saying because in fact there has been enormous progress and diminishing anti-semitism and perhaps offers some optimism as well as the pessimism and then what about the issue of

recession and the war? one of the things i thought was missing from the presentation is any mention of the kind of economic tensions that a rise from the recession and often at least in the earlier waves of immigration have led to the intensity of nativism and the intensity even of prejudice against a particular religious and racial groups. >> thank you. that's a great point. i did a survey. there is strong and approval. the jews are one point ahead of catholics, which has absolutely no statistical significance but is a great fact use of a cocktail party. [laughter] >> yes? >> first on the social context question you are right the muslim population as is pointed out is less than 2% of the population and geographically concentrated, so it's not evenly

spread over the country. so it is probably going to have limited nationwide effect. fortunately i can say this, the effect is there that the sort of thing that's most when there is having never talked with a muslim is the sort of fact this stands as an independent predictor about muslims. however it is less strong if there is any heartening thing it is illustrative on the van it is having never talked to hispanic influences anyone who's spent a the two hispanic influence on immigration, so those relationships are on immigration which i would maybe give to you it is still there but it is not as powerful. the things ahead of it again are the media, trust in media, a conservative ideology, living in the south, all of those are a little bit more powerful than in the independent predictors' than

never talked with a muslim but the other piece of it is i don't see a silver bullet here because there is also no education as a pointed out earlier it depends what the source of knowledge is. it's not just getting the facts out there are going to completely solve the problem. i think it has to be a sort of, you know, sort of more general familiarity with is on that is maybe less a ideologically driven and it's a great tool. i used to be in higher education it's a great role for higher education to kind of to some of this, kind of give objectives of the study of islam and muslims in america and we are seeing some things like where does for example the history show up and primary and secondary school textbooks. is that a part of the curriculum or not? is that part of the american story and that is the biggest part of the story is that part of the american story or not and one of the things you will see with millennial is it will

increasingly be part of the american story. one anecdote we talked about president bush so far as i know president george w. bush was the first to use the word mosque in the context of saying american churches, synagogues and mosques he included in the kind of landscape as after 9/11 and i think that itself is a significant marker of the inclusion of the institutions and the society. on the question of the gallup context, you are absolutely right. the survey can out of the field august 14th, so on the academic timeline we are sprinting to get the results out. but you're absolutely right doing that would be really interesting and really nailed down the point. but ej and bill makes the point that not with a democrat point in the essay and a section they write. we don't of the trend of the recession i wish we had a longer trend on the particular question we have to sort that out. the millennial point being that

is religious. let me make one quick thing here. the millennials are less religious but it means by that i mean on a number of measures they are unaffiliated, officially kind of that doesn't mean that they are easiest it means they are not affiliated and there's a big number of them that fall into the spiritual but not religious category if you ask if religion is important to their lives a large number of them say yes so they are not antireligious. i want to be about that. they are formally affiliated. it is a less hard stand it is just the sort of not being formally affiliated with religion and there's one other question. islamic the question and the survey that too many americans believe that muslims are terrorists, something like that i think what report the number which goes on if you will the

positive side of the ledger in terms of the views but still was split. i've is addressing a colleague of mine talking about muslims and he kept saying our muslims are not like that and i said what you mean our muslims? ayman american muslim. what you are trying to say let me tell you even those who don't know muslims would like to say that there are muslims who are better than the muslims in europe and our muslims are not like the muslims of iran so even those that have had no contact would be predisposed to having a slightly positive delta attitude relatively speaking. but also this clearly shows anybody that knows a muslim personally has a very positive views about muslims and does not have the striking the high

unfavorable views about islam. but in the republican party is very interesting. even though people in texas and oklahoma that have never met muslims but to somebody they like like rick perry who is very close or christie from new jersey, these are people that are not talking in the islamophobia language. i have a feeling that if muslims can reach out at least to the leaders and the opinion makers the fact that not every american can no muslim can be part of a affected by muslims knowing who shares their attitude and their opinion making for half the american muslims particularly is really gargantuan. >> tell me how much time we have left because i want to go back to the twitter feed. we will begin and end with twitter if somebody can bring a microphone just pass along this

one piece. >> one more thing i could have included in the positive views but didn't make it for time we also had a question about too many americans think that all muslims are terrorists do you agree or disagree? six of ten americans agree with the statement to many americans think all muslims are terrorists. so there is a clear sense that a strong majority of americans think that muslims have been judged in a harsh manner in this point. >> christine and then we will bring in a couple of more. >> this comes from and water in washington. the u.s. muslim population seems to be generally describing themselves as a thriving and part of the american social fabric despite the negative views described in the report. does this reflect that there are an insular community not aware of the public perceptions about them?

>> dr. khan? >> when i looked at the numbers the question that kept bothering me all have the american muslims become so socialized and politicized that they are gaining when they are being asked questions are answering in a strategic way. but then i thought maybe everybody answers questions in a strategic way i always do. >> you are a social scientist. >> what are we trying to find out? let me tweak the data. that is one possibility to read the other thing is that american muslims particularly immigrant muslims when the contrast why is in the u.s. from where they have come, it is america at its worst has been better than many of the places they have come from at its best. so even though they recognize that there is the height islamophobia, the worst thing that can happen is getting off

the plane or giving someone a ticket when you don't deserve it or a condescending remarks and you are a legal then you get locked up but that's a different issue. back home many of the country's you could be tortured for a similar non-offense. so for the american muslims particularly to realize that they are doing financially better and they are doing very well on the skill of the discrimination plus all the american muslims realize that they are free to practice the kind of religion they want in america as opposed to other muslim countries even in the so-called islamic countries there's only a certain kind of islam which is permitted for the practice. so the religious freedom is the first thing that hits the immigrant muslims and the second is economic opportunities and in spite of the recession they do well. >> thank you for that because understanding dr. casanova make the point that the difference between america and europe in

this respect that on the whole people that are part of the emigration from the muslim countries have done well in the u.s. and the surveys are not a reflection about the assistance of prejudice or the success in the united states for the most part. >> i lived 22 days in oxford as a fellow and nearly 22 years in the u.s.. i have more incident of the discrimination and racism than i experienced in 22 days in england than i have and 20 years in the u.s.. this is the fact. >> peggy over here if we can bring a microphone. let's do three questions. here, back there or friend and i am sorry, we in the back. forgive me. my former students, i hope he will forgive me. >> congressional correspondent with the hispanic outlook, higher education.

i write a lot about immigration, and especially with hispanics, immigration is about jobs, it's about work. so naturally with your orientation towards religion, i think the tone seems to be more that immigration is a civil right, and i would love to see in some of your questionnaires what percentage of americans who think the immigration is a civil rights, which of course it isn't, and how many think that being here in the country illegally is a civil right. this kind of orientation makes it a moral issue when it's really about jobs so i also agree with the gentleman behind me that there was a lack of the impact of the recession. so another question would be interesting is how many americans think that illegal

immigrants are doing jobs that americans do or do they really think that all the illegal immigrants do jobs that americans want to or don't do or can't do, and i think that you would get a different feel about that if you enforce the immigration law its anti-immigrant and i don't think it is, and we are talking about job opportunity in the recession. >> thank you very much and then passed back to my former students i feel guilty. >> rachel, the communications on monday. i first want to start by thanking robbie and ej and bill forethoughtful poll and all of you for a very insightful presentation that's great. dr. khan my question is focused at you. you talk about how the broadcast news could play more of a role in educating americans perhaps about muslims and i wanted to turn it back to how you thought the president should be doing

today some pieces of the post have an article feeling ignored of home how they are noting that president obama has visited any mosque yet since he was president and i'm wondering whether you have any insight with the president could be doing on the innovative ideas, and also with a muslim community has been in touch with television, and sort of hollywood because you know, we've all seen the role that television shows and how we would have played with gay rights for example. >> just pass it right back and then this gentleman over here if we can bring a microphone to him and get them both in. >> a quick question from robbie on the fox news correlation. did you find in the survey what percentage of those that trusted fox news identified as well as independent or democrat and were there enough of them that use all the same kind of difference that you saw among fox news republicans and others to kind of suggest the stronger variable if there were a enough of them?

>> proving he was brilliant in georgetown, thank you very much. >> i teach down the street here. i have an anecdote in search of a polling question but have sacked in to build. i had a student just this last summer who is an egyptian academic and so i asked him about the mubarak and so forth and he seemed very early and how much he loved to visit paris, and after this exchange i asked him what about this poll post mubarak that said an overwhelming majority of the egyptians favor the death penalty for congress from islam and you said yes, absolutely. anyone who would renounce his religion is capable of any crime

whatsoever and i was astonished so i asked him to spell it out and he was very adamant. i'm wondering whether the question that you've raised on sharia law touches on this attitude or whether you have any other data about the attitudes of muslims in america whether they adhere to the overwhelming majority of the sentiment in egypt has detected by that. >> thank you. thank you very much. that's a good question. but i will do is give everyone a shot at responding to these questions and making a closing comment and i will just go right down the panel with dr. casanova. >> we must remember that weeks before september 11th, president bush and president fox of mexico trying to fix the immigration problem. they were trying to introduce dual citizenship mexicans and

america said it was unthinkable after satori 11th but what i want to point out is the bringing together, the linking of the issues on the immigration is one of course of the consequence of september 11th. that securing the borders became a particular issue after september 11th and in the borders they took issues now of security and jobs in the recession come so the precision of these issues, immigration, security, islam and of course jobs but that is what is making the issues so critical. >> dr. khan? >> i went to start commenting that the media. if you look at the media before and after 9/11 there has been an exponential improvement in the positive coverage of islam. the media have done positive

stories great ones like the empire by pbs, really every mystery and law and order shall have done positive episodes on islam etc. but this is a huge country so this tends to be more than what is done. not only that but the muslims have become part of the media. any muslim who could put together the three sentences became an op-ed columnist. every face of all "washington post" and salon.com, a "new york times" has muslims right so they are not implicated in the media and its coverage. it's part of that that muslims are endorsing what is happening overseas when the explosion, one mosque being blown in pakistan, one pakistani immigrant trying to blow up times square and then

ought positive work that has been done for a long time is completely negated. so that is one of the reasons why i think that the negative attitudes endure because the shocking impact of the image is depicted, and continues to happen in a love muslim world were here. so i think that it is really doing a pretty good job that needs to of moving the broadcasting corporation did something called the mittal mark on the prairie. this is a fantastic, the show that's been going on for several years. it's a shame and no one brought it to the u.s.. all you have to do is a big and you will get it. so that is something that there has been no sustained effort at combating. elon's government did a great job of sustaining the attempt to combat by producing the most

expensive public television show of and i iranian falling in love with a jew during the holocaust in paris and is embarrassing that there hasn't been such a significant effort in the u.s. to generally combat this. the second point i want to make is about a similar question when muslims are asked about the implementation of sharia you ask and they are thinking yet the most important thing is the leading in the one so everywhere in the world muslims want but when others who are not muslims think of sharia they think of the taliban so there are these two different things that they are talking about when they are talking about sharia. so i suspect even for a long time the muslims are going to have a problem on how to combat this perception about muslims with regards to shelia because i

suspect that in private a large number of muslims would like to see it implemented whatever it means which means they are about to pray and fast and build islamic schools but that doesn't mean we want to force you to fast and force others to pray. that is not with your thinking. so i think that if the sharia law in this dangerous the way that it's been handled in the media and i think that it will continue to endure for a while between scirica before they become strict about it and others become more compassionate and aggressive in addressing this issue. being short, let me pick up on this point because i do think it is an example of a doctrinal problem that serves as an

irritant, a symbolic irritant being precise. the classic american understanding of the free exercise and provision is including the proposition that you are free both to join the community of your choice and to exit from that community without any civil disabilities or penalties and the eyes of the law. so the proposition that it should be punished by death is a direct affront to free exercise of religion as americans understand. and if i were to give to follow on the analogy with catholicism, you know, i would urge as a n doctrinal matter that muslim theologians in america do some work on the question of the stance towards apostasy should be, and that is not a simple

matter i know, but it is very fundamental because to have a majority of muslims and a muslim majority nation standing firmly for the proposition that it ought to be punished by death scares americans. >> i want to move we have to close down because we are running overtime. i'm sorry. i knew that would open a big discussion. robbie jones to close. >> i want people to get to all of them in the time we have but one thing you're absolutely right about immigration be related to jobs. and we have asked in the past about immigrants who do jobs and i can get you the number the last time we ask that question. i don't have a off the top of my head. it's a sizable number of americans who say they do jobs that americans don't do. don't, that americans won't do i think is the will be asked the

question pulaski the wording after we are done, and on immigration we do try to ask the question in multiple ways to get the complexity of the answer so we can kind of see not just one shot but here's how it looks if you ask in different ways and we report on all of them so you can see it. on the fox news connection we can't break down just because the sample size limitation we can't break down independent or democrats who say they trust fox news and that is mostly because that group is dominated by republicans so those groups are so small to break down the one thing to say the which i want to emphasize here is that those republicans is a trust fox news are sort of more opposed on both immigration and favorable attitudes toward muslims. republicans who watched any other news source look like the general population so it makes quite a difference not only in the general population but among the conservative groups that fox

news in fact continues to kind of health and affect their but one thing i think we want to see is kind of a bigger point that if we step back one of the things we are seeing here to go back to the term of rustling it is a fundamental principle that goes back to the founding of the country, and the idea of american exceptional the sum was raised and goes to why the stakes are high because in the previous survey that we are releasing here with e.j. and bill and americans say that america has a special place and that god has granted america and a special place in human history and one of the things we see here is americans are really concerned about how recent immigrants particularly muslims and latinos are changing american society. one tidbit i will leave you with is a little bit of a conundrum we asked the question about whether immigrants are changing,

recent immigrants are changing american communities on the ground the people's local communities add about four of ten saber change in american communities a lot, and the country was split on the this limit majority saying there was a good thing, the four in matane and the big partisan divide. when we asked about american society, interestingly enough, we got higher rates saying that they were changing american society them we did changing communities on the grounds of there's the perception gap sure that even if all local level people aren't seeing such high levels of change, they are sensing or having a perception that the immigrants are changing american society and interestingly enough the same division about 52% say a good thing and the partisan divide on the generational divide on the question, and the interesting thing is there was and a logical device on the question about the society about changing perception of a changing society there is no pity the budget will

decide on the perception and change of the communities it is a kind of interesting tidbit i'm going to leave you on the differential perceptions of on the ground forces the kind of more symbolic thing of how does this change america and what we think of as america? >> i just want to close by saying americans often have complicated views on important questions not only because of polarization but also because they are torn come across pressured and still working through what they think. so, be aware of anyone who says confidently americans seem that unless they add americans also think that and i want to salute robbie for reminding us of all of those also's and comcast and jones and all of you and the wider audience and our highly informed c-span audience for joining us today. thank you very much. [applause] mi

6. with questions from members of parliament, this is just under an hour 25 minutes. >> or that statement, the prime minister. >> thank you, mr. speaker. with permission, i would like to make a statement on libya. when we met here on that friday in march, gadhafi's tanks bore down on benghazi. his air force had already begun strikes against his people and his army had smashed through with a grave loss of life. gadhafi had vowed to hunt down his own people like rats using the full might of his armed

forces backed up by mercenaries. i didn't think britain should stand by as gadhafi slaughtered his people. nor could we allow a failed pariah state festering on europe's southern border with a potential to threaten our own security. the libyan opposition and the arab league both called for nato to protect the civilian population. so together, with the u.s. and france, we secured agreement for u.n. security council resolutions 1970 and 1973. and with this clear legal mandate, this house voted by a majority of 544 in favor of military action. today, the libyan people have taken their country back. mr. speaker, i am grateful for the support that all sides of this house have given through these last six months and i'm sure the whole house will join me in paying tribute to the incredible dedication and professionalism of our pilots, sailors, ground crew and

everyone in our armed forces that have been involved in this mission. but we should also pay a full tribute to the bravery and resilience of the libyan people themselves. this has been their revolution and none of it could have happened without them. ordinary libyans from all walks of life came together and rose up against gadhafi. from the villages of the mansions, to the blocks of misrata, the alleyways of za we are and the streets of benghazi, the libyan people fought with incredible courage. many paid with their lives. others have been seriously injured. the struggle is not over. they still face forces loyal to a dictator who threat yented to turn libya into a hell. the long work is just beginning. what is clear is that the future of libya belongs to its people. the task of the international community now is to support them as they build that future. that means helping to finish the job, ensuring security,

addressing the immediate humanitarian needs and supporting a longer term process of reconstruction and political transition to democracy. let me address each in turn. first, finishing the job. britain has been at the forefront of the military operation to protect the libyan people. our aircraft have made over 2,400 soldiers across libya carrying one fifth of all nato air strikes against some 900 targets in gadhafi's war mission. our warships supported this effort, helping to enforce the u.n. arms embargo and brigade to those in need. at the peak, 2300 british servicemen and women were deployed on the operation with 36 aircraft, including 16 tornadoes, six typhoons, fifa tack helicopters, tankers and aircraft and helicopters. these were supported over the course of operation by eight warships and a hunter killer submarine. the job is not over.

as we stand the free libya forces have liberated tripoli and controlled the key population centers. pro-gadhafi forces still pose a threat, in particular control sirte and other towns south of the country. the national transitional council has been working to negotiate a peaceful out come. but the leaders specifically requested that nato continues its operations to protect civilians until that is achieved. over the weekend, tornado struck eight military command and control installations southwest of rah dan and nine weapons -- for as long as gadhafi remains at large, the safety and the security of the libyan people remains under threat. so let me be clear. we will not let up until the job is done. first britain and nato a lice will continue to implement u.n. security council resolutions 1970 and 1973 for as long as we are needed to protect civilian

life. those thinking that nato will somehow pull out or pull back must think again. we are ready to extend the nato han date for as long as is necessary. second, we will support the libyan people in bringing gadhafi to justice. mr. speaker, this is a man whose crimes are becoming evermore apparent every day and who is wanted by the international criminal court. there must be no bolt hole, no pampered hiding place from justice. he must face the consequences of his action under international and libyan law. turning to security, the early signs have been encouraging. there has been some disorder that it's focused on symbols of the regime. the council is moving to stand down fighters from outside tripoli. the police are returning to the streets and the council leaders have been clear and consistent in cautioning against disorder and crucially against reprisals. britain and the international partners are helping too, working closely with the national transitional council in

securing chemical weapons sites and -- in misrata and benghazi and other areas. there has been -- the prior orts today are health, water, food and fuel. on health, humanitarian partners report that hospital and clinics in tripoli are functioning well and are returning to work. britain is providing additional support to the international committee of the red cross, including surgical teams and medicines to treat up to 5,000 war wounded patients. on water, substantial numbers of people in tripoli are still without running water. however, unicef is procuring 11 million liters of bottled water and the libyan authorities are working to fix the system. 100 wells are back on-line, representing 20% of capacity. on fuel, there remains significant short ajts, but the situation is improving. the world food program shipment is supporting the national transitional council with the

procurement of 250,000 liters of fuel. let me turn to reconstruction. mr. speaker, libya is a country of 6.5 million people. one of the richest in africa. libya is fully capable of paying for its own reconstruction. there's a role for foreign advice, help and support. i didn't think we want to see an army of for represent consultant driving around giving the impression this is something being done to the libyans rather than something done by them. what the libyans need above all is their frozen assets back. a week ago britain gotta agreement to release one billion pound worth of did he nars back to the central bank of libya. planes have thrown in hundreds of millions of these bank notes. at the summit, the international community committed to unfreezing $15 billion of libyan assets. and for their part, we expect

the new libyan authorities to meet their pledge of ensuring transparent and accountable financial system. next, political transition. some people warned as gadhafi himself did, that the libyan people could not be trusted with freedom. that without gadhafi there would be chaos. what is emerging now, despite years of repression and the trauma of recent month, i believe is impressive and encouraging. in a far-reaching roadmap and constitutional declaration, the new authorities set out a clear vision and a process for a new democratic libya. this is not imposed from above. it ises being shaped by the libyan people. at the paris summit, the determination was spoken of building a society of tolerance and for give necessary with respect for the law. a national conference will bring together all the tribes, civil society, men and women from east and west united to shape this political transition. they are planning for a new constitution and elections within 20 months and britain is also in discussions in new york

about a new u.n. security council resolution to reflect the new situation. the new libyan authorities must now be able to represent their country at the u.n. as they did last week at the arab league. mr. speaker, rpt ro building a bilateral relationship. we have close relations through our mission in benghazi and the special representative is going to tripoli to re-establish our full diplomatic presence in that city. our relationship with the new libya must of course deal with the serious issues from the past. on megrahi, i believe he should never have been sent back to libya in the first place. on wpc yvonne tlefletcher, i wa to see justice for her family. there is an ongoing police investigation and the house will wish to know that the prime minister has assured me of the attention to cooperate fully.

finally, significant accusations have been reported today that under the last government, relations between the bit british and libyan security services became too close, particularly in 2003. it was because of accusations of potential complicitly by the british security services in the mistreatment of detainees overseas, including rendition, that i took steps in july last year to try and sort this whole problem out. as the house will remember, we acted to bring to an end the large number of court cases being brought against the government by former inmates of guantanamo. we've issued new guidance to security intelligence services personnel on how to deal with dee tien ease held by other countries. we've asked retired judge to examine issues around the detention and treatment of terror suspects overseas. this inquiry has already said it will look at the latest accusations very carefully. my concern throughout has been not only to remove any stain on

britain's reputation, but also to deal with these accusations of malpractice so as to enable our security services to get on with the vital work that they do. and because they can't speak for themselves, let me put on record once again our enormous gratitude for all they do to keep our country safe. mr. speaker, the achievement of the libyan people gives hope to those across the wider region who want a job, a voice and a stake in how their country is run. on syria, britain will lead the argument for a u.n. resolution to build on build on the oil embargo now in place. the message to president assad must be clear. he's lost all legitimacy and can no longer claim to lead syria. the violence must end and he should step aside for the good of his country. it is the libyan people who liberated their army. there was no foreign army. this was a libyan-led process

assisted by the international community. many critics claim stalemate and asserted gadhafi would never be defeated. the libyan people proved them wrong. it was a unique set of circumstances and not something that we can or would wish to repeat all over the world. but i've never accepted the argument that because you can't do everything you shouldn't do anything. mr. speaker, removing gadhafi from power was a major achievement. although the work is not yet done, the libyan people can be proud of what they've achieved and we can be proud of what we've done to help them. i commend this statement to the house. >> i start by thanking the prime minister for his statement and i join him in paying tribute to the libyan people and their courage because this was their uprising. they knew the price that might be paid if they rose up against the regime to claim a better future, yet they found the courage to do so and win through. we on this side salute that bravery and sacrifice.

but change in libya would not have come without action by the international community. let me therefore commend the role of the prime minister and the british government in making this happen. the initiative of pressing for u.n. resolutions 1970 and 1973 is what made the actions to protect civilians possible. it was a risk and it was the right thing to do. for our part, we supported it at the time. we've remained steadfast in our support and we support it now. if we have not acted, mr. speaker, we would have been spending recent months not talking about the progress of our action in libya but wringing our hands over slaughter in benghazi as we did after bosnia. but this time the international community did not stand by. it acted through and with the authority of the united nations. and once again as the prime minister said, it was to our brave british servicemen and women that we turned. as always, they have risen to the challenge. they represent the best of our country and again we owe them a

debt of gratitude. mr. speaker, i want to ask a number of questions about the security situation, economic stablization, the political settlement now required and some of the wider lessons. let me first say that i agree with the prime minister that the gibson inquiry must get to the bottom of the allegations we have seen about the involvement of the security services in relation to libya. no part of the british state should ever be complicit in torture. let me first turn to the security situation. the prime minister is right to say that there should be no artificial deadlines for the end of nato action. we are in libya to enforce a security council resolution and should be engaged action for no more and no less than the time it takes to make sure that the u.n. mandate is fulfilled for the protection of civilians. mr. speaker, given these symbolic and substantive importance of the national transition council ttc taking up their place in government in

tripoli can the prime minister give us a sense from the paris conference about when we might expect that to happen? because that will speak to the security situation in tripoli. >> we also know from past conflicts that security matters but that essential to a successful transition is economic and social reconstruction and we all agree it must be libyan owned. i welcome the extra assistance the government has announced to help provide medicine, food, and help reunite families affected by the fighting. i'm sure the prime minister will agree the role of the u.n. is going to be very important in coordinating this help and therefore can he say what discussions he has had with the u.n. special envoy al khatib and how prepared he believes the u.n. are to provide the necessary help to the libyan people. can you also share with the house, mr. speaker, his thoughts on how the new u.n. resolution that he talked about to provide recognition for the new government will also provide a mandate for a longer-term u.n. mission to support the libyan

government? the prime minister is right to say that the oil wealth of libya offers huge potential for its people. given the legitimacy of this popular uprising was based around the fact that the libyans themselves were clearly in the lead. that clearly also needs to be true in relation to the oil resources. does he agree we should learn lessons of the period of past conflicts and ensure the role of private companies in libya is to operate transparently and in a way which clearly benefits the libyan people. on the politics i join the prime minister in welcoming the ntc's commitment to establishing a new constitution and holding elections within 18 months. we agreed we should provide full support to the libyan people and its new government in bringing colonel gadhafi and the leadership to justice either through the icc or the libyan courts. but we've also learned, mr. speaker, from past conflicts, that the need for a broad based inclusive process of reconciliation, indeed the prime minister talked about that in his statement, but also the

vital work of maintaining government services. can the prime minister share with the house his understanding of how the ntc is continuing to use officials from a lower level of government to keep basic services running? we also know that democracy takes root not just through the formal process of the ballot box but through a strong, vibrant civil society. can the prime minister tell us what specific plans there are for direct relationships between libya and organizations such as the bbc world service, westminster foundation for democracy, and the british council who can play an important role in helping build up civil society? let me finally ask about the lessons of this conflict for britain and for the international community. mr. speaker, the arab spring was clearly not envisioned at the time of the strategic defense and security review and is meant to call on some resources which are due to become obsolete. can i ask the prime minister whether he sees the case that i see for there to be a gain in formally looking afresh in light

of events in libya and the arab spring. for the international community as a whole, the lesson is of the effectiveness it can have when it comes together through the u.n. and speaks with one voice. now, no two situations are the same as the prime minister said. and of course the situation in syria is different for a number of reasons not the least practical issues to the idea of military intervention and lack of support for it. we support the use of all nonmilitary means at our disposal in libya and i've heard his remarks about president assad and share his view. he talked about the need for a new u.n. resolution but can he tell us how he assesses the chances of that new u.n. resolution and in the absence of that resolution what further steps he believes can be taken against the assad regime? mr. speaker, let me end on this thought. the arab spring has seen the overthrow of authoritarian regimes in tunisia, libya, and egypt. it is right that britain has been on the side of those who are fighting to enjoy the basic

social, economic, and political rights we take for granted. let me end in agreement with the prime minister. we should take pride in the role we've played in protecting the libyan people as they claim a better future and should now help the libyan people with the next phase from popular revolt to stable, democratic government. >> thank you, mr. speaker. can i thank the gentleman for his kind remarks and what he said in his response to my statement. i think he's right to oppose the alternative of what would have happened had we stood back and done nothing, what would be we discussing today? of course he is right to praise our brave service personnel. i also note what he says about backing the gibson inquiry and the important work that now needs to do to look at all the accusations of accomplicety. on his issues of security, stablization, and politics, let me try and answer his questions. first of all, on security think he's right to say no artificial

deadline for nato. we must continue until the job is done. on the issue of the ntc's move from benghazi to tripoli, that is already under way and parts of the ntc have moved. i think it's very important they move as a whole. we shouldn't try and second guess everything that they do. i've been very struck through this process that the ntc often gets criticized and calls are made will it do this and will it do that? in the end that does always seem to rise to the challenge and i think has been effective and we shouldn't under estimate the people working in it. on stablization he mentioned the u.n. role. it's important to differentiate between the role of mr. tipp who was trying to look at ways of finding a peace process before this conflict resulted in the fall of tripoli and the person who specifically is drawing up the plans for a u.n. mission to libya. i think those plans are well

under way. i think it's very important that we focus on those things that the libyans want, rather than things we think they might want. and it was quite interesting in paris listening to the specific things they cared about most. clearly, one of the roles the u.n. can play is to make sure the elections when they come are properly observed and are free and fair. the point he makes about private companies is a good one and i think we should learn all the lessons from past conflicts as he says. in terms of the process of reconciliation, maintaining government services, one of the things the ntc has been trying to do, and i think again quite effectively, and we've been advising and helping where we can, is to make sure there is no process, that junior officials in departments were encouraged to go back to work. it is very early days and there are going to be huge problems at the end of a conflict like this. but i think the signs are that things like the rubbish collection, the hospital services, the police back on the streets, those things do seemo