Trump Touts Questionable Survey Results

A national survey promoted by President Donald Trump may not show that “50% of Americans AGREE that Robert Mueller’s investigation is a Witch Hunt,” as he tweeted.

The Suffolk University/USA Today survey, taken March 13-17, asked the following: “President Trump has called the Special Counsel’s investigation a ‘witch hunt’ and said he’s been subjected to more investigations than previous presidents because of politics. Do you agree?”

Of the 1,000 registered voters questioned, 50.3 percent of them answered “yes”; 46.8 percent said “no”; 2.7 percent were “undecided”; and 0.2 percent “refused” to answer.

But it’s not clear which of Trump’s claims respondents were agreeing or disagreeing with — that the Russia investigation is a “witch hunt,” or that there have been more politically motivated investigations of Trump than other presidents.

The survey question is “flawed,” Timothy Johnson, a past president of the American Association for Public Opinion Research, told us in an interview.

Other recent polls indicate that Americans have a more favorable opinion of Mueller’s investigation into possible collusion between the Russian government and Trump’s 2016 presidential campaign.

A CNN poll published in February found that 58 percent of respondents said Russia’s election interference is “a serious matter that should be fully investigated,” while 37 percent said the Mueller investigation is “mainly an effort to discredit Donald Trump’s presidency.”

In addition, a Washington Post/Schar School poll published last month found that 57 percent of adults thought “Mueller is mainly interested in (finding out the truth),” while 36 percent said he is “mainly interested in (hurting Trump politically).”

Trump, who has repeatedly referred to the nearly two-year-long investigation as a “witch hunt,” sent his tweet after the Suffolk University/USA Today poll results were released March 18.

Wow! A Suffolk/USA Today Poll, just out, states, “50% of Americans AGREE that Robert Mueller’s investigation is a Witch Hunt.” @MSNBC Very few think it is legit! We will soon find out?

— Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) March 18, 2019

USA Today published an article about the results that carried the headline “Poll: Half of Americans say Trump is victim of a ‘witch hunt’ as trust in Mueller erodes.”

But the responses were based on a problematic survey question, some experts say.

Again, the survey asked: “President Trump has called the Special Counsel’s investigation a ‘witch hunt’ and said he’s been subjected to more investigations than previous presidents because of politics. Do you agree?”

“The first problem is that it’s a double-barreled question,” said Johnson, who is also the director of the Survey Research Laboratory and professor of public administration at the University of Illinois at Chicago. A double-barreled question is one that asks respondents to answer two questions at once.

Are they being asked if they agree that the investigation is a “witch hunt,” or that Trump has been investigated more often because of politics, Johnson said. Those who responded with “yes” could have been answering either question or both.

Monmouth University Polling Institute Director Patrick Murray made a similar point about the Suffolk University/USA Today survey question in a Twitter thread on March 18.

Another issue is that the question doesn’t offer a counter to Trump’s claim. “It only tells one side of the story,”Johnson said.

He said it would be better to ask respondents if they agree that the investigation is a “witch hunt,” as Trump claimed, or if they agree that possible collusion is something that “needs to be investigated thoroughly,” as others have claimed.

“It’s always the goal to be balanced,” he said.

Also, only asking “do you agree” can lead to acquiescence bias, which is when respondents are likely to agree regardless of the content of the question, Johnson explained.

“Some in our population will agree with any statement” that is presented to them, he said.

“Given the flaws mentioned,” Johnson said, “we’re not certain that this accurately reflects public opinion.”

Responding to the criticism, David Paleologos, director of the Suffolk University Political Research Center, told FactCheck.org in an email: “The statement links President Trump by name to his viewpoint on the investigation. If respondents were conflicted in any way, they opted for ‘undecided’ or ‘refused.'”

Similarly, Chrissy Terrell, director of communications and PR at Gannett, USA Today‘s parent company, emailed us a statement, saying: “USA TODAY and Suffolk University take seriously the framing of each question to ensure fairness and accuracy in response. We offer options that include ‘undecided’ or ‘refused’ for those who are unclear. Our reporting always specifies our methodology and with Suffolk University, we post the toplines and crosstabs to give transparency to the entirety of our polls.”

What Other Polls Show

The Suffolk University/USA Today survey is not the only one that has tried to measure how Americans view the Mueller investigation. Here are the questions and results from six other polls taken in the last five months. Some indicate there’s less skepticism of the special counsel’s probe.

Washington Post/Schar School Poll, Feb. 6-10 (margin of error ±4 percentage points)

Q: Do you think Mueller is mainly interested in (finding out the truth), or that he’s mainly interested in (hurting Trump politically)?

Finding out the truth: 57 percent

Hurting Trump politically: 36 percent

No opinion: 8 percent

CNN Poll, Jan. 30-Feb. 2 (MOE ±3.8 percentage points)

Q: Thinking about the investigation into Russian efforts to influence the U.S. presidential election in 2016, which comes closer to your point of view about it?

You think it’s a serious matter that should be fully investigated: 58 percent

You think it’s mainly an effort to discredit Donald Trump’s presidency: 37 percent

No opinion: 5 percent

CBS News Poll, Jan. 18-21 (MOE ± 3 percentage points)

Q: As you may know, there is an investigation into dealings between Trump associates and Russia. Do you think the investigation is justified, or is the investigation politically motivated?

Justified: 50 percent

Politically motivated: 45 percent

Don’t know/NA: 5 percent

Hill.TV/American Barometer Poll, Dec. 15-16, 2018 (MOE ± 3.1 percentage points)

Q: Which comes closest to your view of the Special Counsel’s investigation into the 2016 election?

It is an unbiased investigation dealing with serious issues: 58 percent

It is biased political investigation designed to hurt President Trump: 42 percent

NPR/PBS NewsHour/Marist Poll, Nov. 28-Dec. 4, 2018 (MOE ± 3.7 percentage points)

Q: Which of the following statements comes closer to your opinion about Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s investigation into possible wrongdoing and Russian interference in the 2016 election?

It is a “witch hunt”: 33 percent

It’s a fair investigation: 54 percent

Unsure: 13 percent

Quinnipiac University National Poll, Nov. 14-19, 2018 (MOE ± 3.5 percentage points)

Q: Do you think that the investigation into any links or coordination between President Trump’s 2016 election campaign and the Russian government is a legitimate investigation, or do you think it is a political witch hunt?

Legitimate: 50 percent

Witch hunt: 44 percent

Don’t know/NA: 6 percent

The post Trump Touts Questionable Survey Results appeared first on FactCheck.org.

The Facts on White Nationalism

In the wake of the attack on two New Zealand mosques, President Donald Trump said he did not see white nationalism as a rising threat around the world, but rather “a small group of people that have very, very serious problems.”

Experts, however, say there are a number of indicators that suggest white nationalism and white supremacy — and violence inspired by them — are on the rise, in the U.S. and around the world.

  • The Southern Poverty Law Center reports a dramatic increase in the number of white nationalist groups in the U.S., from 100 chapters in 2017 to 148 in 2018.
  • The Anti-Defamation League reports a 182 percent increase in incidents of the distribution of white supremacist propaganda, and an increase in the number of rallies and demonstrations by white supremacy groups, from 76 in 2017 to 91 in 2018.
  • A study by the Center for Strategic and International Studies found the number of terrorist attacks by far-right perpetrators quadrupled in the U.S. between 2016 and 2017, and that far-right attacks in Europe rose 43 percent over the same period. Among those incidents, CSIS states, the rise of attacks by white supremacists and anti-government extremists is “of particular concern.”

The issue of white nationalism came to the forefront after a gunman opened fire at two mosques in New Zealand on March 15, killing at least 50 people. In a manifesto posted by the alleged shooter, he describes himself as an “ordinary white man” whose goal was to “crush immigration and deport those invaders already living on our soil” and “ensure the existence of our people, and a future for white children.” In it, he answers the question of whether he is a supporter of Trump: “As a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose? Sure. As a policy maker and leader? Dear god no.”

When a reporter told Trump on March 15 about the reference in the manifesto, Trump condemned the attack, which he described as “a horrible, disgraceful thing and a horrible act.”

The president was also asked by a reporter whether he saw “today, white nationalism as a rising threat around the world.”

“I don’t really,” Trump replied. “I think it’s a small group of people that have very, very serious problems. I guess if you look at what happened in New Zealand, perhaps that’s the case. I don’t know enough about it yet. They’re just learning about the person and the people involved. But it’s certainly a terrible thing.”

Shortly after Trump made his comment, a reporter asked New Zealand Prime Minister Jacinda Ardern whether she agreed with Trump’s belief that “he did not think white supremacy worldwide was a problem that was rising in any way.”

“No,” Ardern responded tersely.

On CNN’s “State of the Union” on March 17, Democratic Rep. Rashida Tlaib said Trump “needs to pick up the phone and call the Department of Justice.”

Tlaib, March 17: There’s real data and information currently right now of the rise of white supremacy right here in this United States of America. He needs to look at the data and the information and the facts and actually listen and understand the tremendous responsibility he has in being our president, our leader of our country.

He cannot just say it’s a small group of people. There’s too many deaths, not only from the synagogue to the black churches to the temples to the — now the mosques. We need to be speaking up against this, and it has to start with him reiterating the importance of real information and data that says it’s on the rise.

You can’t just say it isn’t, when the facts say the complete opposite.

So, what do the data show?

Justice Department Hate Crime Statistics

Let’s start with the Justice Department’s FBI data on hate crimes, since that was specifically referenced by Tlaib.

According to the FBI, there were 7,175 hate crime incidents in 2017, a 17 percent increase from 2016 and the third year in a row with an increase. The number of incidents in 2017 was also the highest yearly total since 2008. About 58 percent of the hate crimes in 2017 were motivated by race/ethnicity/ancestry.

Digging deeper into the numbers, anti-black or African American hate crime rose 16 percent to 2,013 incidents in 2017; anti-Hispanic incidents rose 24 percent, with 427 incidents; anti-Arab crimes doubled to 102 incidents. Anti-Jewish hate crime incidents also rose 37 percent to 938 in 2017, but anti-Islamic hate crimes dipped 11 percent to 273.

Experts, however, caution that the FBI’s hate crime statistics are an imperfect way to track the rise of white nationalism. Not all of the hate crimes overall were committed by white nationalists (some of the documented incidents, for example, were anti-white). The data do not identify the perpetrators that way.

There was also an increase in the number of agencies participating in reporting hate crimes to the FBI and a subsequent increase in the population covered of 5.7 percent between 2016 and 2017. So some of the increase is likely tied to that alone.

Issues also have been raised about inconsistencies in the ways different jurisdictions report hate crimes, which skews the data. There are clearly differences in reporting standards used by different agencies, Heidi Beirich, who leads the Southern Poverty Law Center’s Intelligence Project, told us. She noted, for example, that there was just one assault reported as a hate crime in Alabama in 2017, compared with 242 in California — which she said suggests hate crimes are under-reported in Alabama.

Beirich said there is a lot of evidence pointing to a rising threat from white nationalism, but, she said, “I’m not sure FBI hate crime statistics prove the point.” She notes that a Department of Justice crime victimization survey in 2015 found “U.S. residents experienced an average of 250,000 hate crime victimizations each year from 2004 to 2015.” But the survey does not show trends over time, Beirich said.

FBI hate crime data “doesn’t fit into a neat package” when it comes to tracking the threat of white nationalism, John D. Cohen, a former counterterrorism coordinator and acting under secretary for intelligence and analysis of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security under President Barack Obama, told us in a phone interview. But Cohen, who also served in the Office of the Director of National Intelligence under President George W. Bush, agrees there are other, more telling measures.

“There is pretty broad agreement among law enforcement in the U.S. and the European Union that violence as a result of far-right groups, particularly white supremacists, is on the rise,” said Cohen, who is currently a professor at Rutgers-Newark. “It’s a growing problem. We are seeing more hate crimes and targeted attacks by people who identify with that ideology.”

Number of Groups Rising

The Montgomery, Alabama-based Southern Poverty Law Center, which tracks domestic extremism, last month reported a 7 percent rise in hate groups in the U.S. in 2018, with 1,020 groups identified. White nationalist groups, specifically, surged nearly 50 percent, growing from 100 chapters in 2017 to 148 in 2018.

Last year marked the fourth year in a row that the number of hate groups increased, after a short period of decline. The rise, SPLC says, was fueled by political polarization, anti-immigrant views and the ease of spreading those ideologies through the internet.

Beirich noted that Alexa web traffic analytics show the neo-Nazi Daily Stormer site now gets about 4.3 million page views a month.

“More and more people are interested in their ideas,” she said.

In an ABC News/Washington Post poll taken just after the Charlottesville rally in August 2017, 9 percent of the respondents said they thought it was strongly or somewhat acceptable to hold neo–Nazi or white supremacist views. As ABC News reported at the time, that’s equivalent to about 22 million Americans.

Rise in Propaganda/Rallies

The Anti-Defamation League, meanwhile, reports that white supremacy groups have stepped up their propaganda efforts.

“ADL’s Center on Extremism (COE) continues to track an ever-growing number of white supremacist propaganda efforts, including the distribution of racist, anti-Semitic and Islamophobic fliers, stickers, banners and posters,” according to a recent ADL report. “The 2018 data shows a 182% increase of incidents from the previous year, with 1,187 cases reported, compared to 421 in 2017.”

The group said that level of activity far exceeded any of its previous distribution counts.

The ADL also reported that the number of racist rallies and demonstrations rose last year. “At least 91 white supremacist rallies or other public events attended by white supremacist were held in 2018, up from 76 the previous year, with hate groups increasingly employing ‘flash mob’ tactics to avoid advance publicity and scrutiny,” the ADL reported.

“We are seeing an increase in the public expression of far right, white supremacist ideological viewpoints,” Cohen told us. “It is more open in its expression, both online and in protests like in Charlottesville.”

Other Evidence

Cohen said he prefers to look at the issue from the perspective of an overall threat assessment. In today’s climate, he said, it’s not just a matter of tabulating the number of members of various white nationalist groups. The internet and social media have changed the game. People self-connect with ideologies espoused by hate groups online. They often act independently of those groups, he said, though they may be inspired by their messages.

So while the number of white nationalists could have remained steady, the threat they pose may be increasing, Cohen said. Whereas people with these ideas used to be isolated geographically, they are now able via the web to reach people who are disaffected and mentally unwell, inspiring them to commit violent acts.

A November report called “The Rise of Far-Right Extremism in the United States” from the Center for Strategic and International Studies found that “the number of terrorist attacks by far-right perpetrators rose over the past decade, more than quadrupling between 2016 and 2017. … There has also been a rise in far-right attacks in Europe, jumping 43 percent between 2016 and 2017.”

“The threat from right-wing terrorism in the United States—and Europe—appears to be rising,” wrote the report’s author, Seth G. Jones. “Of particular concern are white supremacists and anti-government extremists, such as militia groups and so-called sovereign citizens interested in plotting attacks against government, racial, religious, and political targets in the United States.”

Another indicator is the perception among minority groups about the threat they face. Cohen pointed to a December 2018 report from the European Union Agency for Fundamental Rights that surveyed nearly 16,500 individuals who identify as being Jewish from 12 European Union countries and found widespread fear of being targeted for harassment and attacks.

Trump may be correct that those who are members of white nationalist groups, compared with the overall population, are a “small group of people,” Cohen said. If one looks at the number of gun crimes in the U.S., for example, the number of violent attacks carried out by white nationalists is a relatively small subset, he said. But law enforcement officials are concerned about the rising threat of white nationalists, their growing influence through social media and the devastating impact hate-inspired attacks have on the public.

The House Judiciary Committee plans to hold a hearing in April on the rise of white nationalism in the U.S. According to the Daily Beast, “the committee expects to bring in officials from within DHS and the FBI for questioning on the rise of white nationalism in the U.S and the efforts the agencies are currently adopting to combat it.”

The post The Facts on White Nationalism appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Satirical Story on Harris Treated as Fact

Quick Take

A story originally written as satire has been circulating online without a disclaimer, sparking angry comments from social media users on the story’s made-up claim that a new bill from Sen. Kamala Harris would restrict the use of weapons by police.

Full Story

A bogus story about new regulations on police officers has stirred up anger on social media and has been presented as legitimate news by a nationally syndicated talk-radio show.

The made-up story claims that Sen. Kamala Harris of California, who is one of several politicians running for the Democratic nomination for president, has sponsored legislation that would require permission from a supervisor before a police officer is allowed to use a weapon. The story says, “As part of the bill, officers finding themselves in a life threatening situation would first need to call their supervisor and ask before introducing their service weapon into the scenario. Further, the supervisor would then in turn have to call a local civilian committee to discuss the matter so that a community backed decision can be made.”

A search of the Congressional Record shows that Harris has sponsored no such legislation.

But it’s obvious that the whole thing is fabricated because the story is labeled as satire on the website that originally published it. A website called BNN, or Blue News Network, posted the story on March 12, and the site describes its content as satire at the bottom of each page. It says on its “about us” page: “If you haven’t figured it out yet, this is a satirical news website.”

That disclaimer doesn’t show up on many of the Facebook pages that shared the story, though. There, readers left comments such as, “She is too stupid to be in Congress much less run for President” and, “It’s easier to ask forgiveness than it is to ask permission…shoot first…ask questions later….this women is a TOTAL MORON.”

Facebook users weren’t the only ones who were fooled. Several blogs have reposted the story as though it were legitimate news, and “The Ben Ferguson Show,” which is aired on more than 70 radio stations across the country, according to the show’s website, posted the story among news articles on its official site.

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to debunk misinformation shared on the social media network.


New Bill Would Require Officers to Call Supervisor Before Drawing Weapons.” BlueNewsNetwork.com. 12 Mar 2019.

Congressional Record. Legislation Sponsored or Cosponsored by Kamala D. Harris. Accessed 19 Mar 2019.

New Bill Would Require Officers to Call Supervisor Before Drawing Weapons.” The Ben Ferguson Show. 600wrec.iheart.com. 12 Mar 2019.

The post Satirical Story on Harris Treated as Fact appeared first on FactCheck.org.

Meme Distorts Quran Verses

Quick Take

A viral meme has paired old misrepresentations of the Quran with a picture of Rep. Ilhan Omar.

Full Story

A handful of distorted quotes from the Quran have been circulating on blogs and anti-Islamic websites for years, but their exposure recently surged when they were paired with a picture of Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota in a meme.

That meme has been shared more than 50,000 times on Facebook alone.

It says that the Quran is Omar’s “daily Bible,” but the interpretations of the verses it quotes don’t come from any translation of the Quran we could find. Rather, they appear to have come from a 2005 post on a website called Islam Watch, which explains on its “About Us” page that it was started by six former Muslims. The site says they “felt it incumbent upon us to make the non-Muslim world aware of the reality of Islam, and undertake timely precautionary measures against this religion of terror, hatred and mayhem.”

The interpretations of nine verses from the Quran that the meme includes were made by one of the founders of the site, who describes himself as a freelance writer, not a religious scholar. In total, he had offered 36 reinterpretations of verses from the Quran. Several of them have been repeated in online publications since then, illustrating how misinformation persists for years and spreads online.

The writer, Abul Kasem, did not respond to an email seeking comment.

One of the problems with the meme is that the interpretations it gives lack historical and textual context. Joseph Lowry, an associate professor of Arabic and Islamic studies at the University of Pennsylvania, explained to us some of the history that helped to form the Quran and how the meaning of the verses can be distorted out of context. Muhammad, the founder of Islam, was persecuted, at least in part, for his religious message and had to flee his home in Mecca for the nearby town of Medina. There, he and his followers remained in conflict with the Meccans, and those struggles are referenced in the Quran.

Two chapters — called surahs in the Quran — out of a total of 114 discuss most directly this political and military conflict with the Meccans. They are surahs eight and nine, and two-thirds of the verses in the meme come from them.

We went through the nine interpretations that are included in the meme with Lowry and compared them with an online resource from the University of Leeds that draws from some common English translations of the Quran.

Here’s how the meme’s language compares with those sources for each surah and verse it claims to quote:


  • The meme said: “Muslims must not take the infidels as friends.”
  • Lowry pointed out that it’s only half of the verse, and the Arabic word translated as “friend” is better translated as “tribal allies.”
  • The Sahih International translation featured on the University of Leeds website said: “Let not believers take disbelievers as allies rather than believers. And whoever [of you] does that has nothing with Allah, except when taking precaution against them in prudence. And Allah warns you of Himself, and to Allah is the [final] destination.”


  • The meme said: “Any religion other than Islam is not acceptable.”
  • Lowry said this passage poses a difficult translation problem since the Arabic word for Islam means something like “to submit.” This passage could refer to all monotheistic religions, as opposed to pagan religions. “It’s not clear that this doesn’t include Jews and Christians,” he said.
  • The Yusuf Ali translation featured on the University of Leeds website said: “If anyone desires a religion other than Islam (submission to Allah), never will it be accepted of him; and in the Hereafter He will be in the ranks of those who have lost (All spiritual good).”


  • The meme said: “Maim and crucify the infidels if they criticize Islam.”
  • Lowry said that interpretation is “totally inaccurate.” The verse is understood to address robbery and mayhem and, importantly, the punishment for it applies to Muslims, as well. Also, it does not include the word “infidel” or the word “criticize.”
  • The Sahih International translation on the University of Leeds website said: “Indeed, the penalty for those who wage war against Allah and His Messenger and strive upon earth [to cause] corruption is none but that they be killed or crucified or that their hands and feet be cut off from opposite sides or that they be exiled from the land. That is for them a disgrace in this world; and for them in the Hereafter is a great punishment.”


  • The meme said: “Terrorize and behead those who believe in scriptures other than the Qur’an.”
  • Lowry noted that this passage refers to a specific historical battle — the Battle of Badr, in which Muhammad made his first significant victory. In this verse, God is urging the angels, not Muhammad’s followers directly, to help his followers during the fight, he said.
  • The Sahih International translation said: “[Remember] when your Lord inspired to the angels, ‘I am with you, so strengthen those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieved, so strike [them] upon the necks and strike from them every fingertip.'”


  • The meme said: “Muslims must muster all weapons to terrorize the infidels.”
  • Lowry pointed out that this verse calls for military service and aid to Muhammad’s followers. Generally, verses like this one are limited to the specific historical tension in Medina and Mecca at the time, he said.
  • The Muhammad Sarwar translation featured on the University of Leeds website said: “Mobilize your (defensive) force as much as you can to frighten the enemies of God and your own enemies. This also will frighten those who are behind them whom you do not know but God knows well. Whatever you spend for the cause of God, He will give you sufficient recompense with due justice.”


  • The meme said: “The unbelievers are stupid; urge the Muslims to fight them.”
  • Lowry said that there are, clearly, verses that urge Muslims to fight their enemies. But, in this one, he said, “it doesn’t say the unbelievers are stupid.”
  • The Arberry translation featured on the University of Leeds website said: “O Prophet, urge on the believers to fight. If there be twenty of you, patient men, they will overcome two hundred; if there be a hundred of you, they will overcome a thousand unbelievers, for they are a people who understand not.”


  • The meme said: “When opportunity arises kill the infidels wherever you catch them.”
  • Lowry identified this verse as part of a treaty between Mecca and Medina. In its historical context, this verse refers to the Meccan pagans with whom Muhammad’s followers were fighting.
  • The Sahih International translation said: “And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful.”


  • The meme said: “The Jews and the Christians are perverts; fight them.”
  • Lowry said this verse did not call Jews and Christians “perverts.” He said, “It certainly doesn’t say that.” Also, the verse doesn’t have an imperative verb urging Muhammad’s followers to fight. Rather, it has an optative verb, one that expresses a wish; in this case, wishing that God would fight.
  • The Sahih International translation said: “The Jews say, ‘Ezra is the son of Allah’; and the Christians say, ‘The Messiah is the son of Allah.’ That is their statement from their mouths; they imitate the saying of those who disbelieved [before them]. May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded?”


  • The meme said: “Make war on the infidels living in your neighborhood.”
  • Lowry said that this verse is probably best understood as referring to the military situation around Medina.
  • The Shakir translation featured on the University of Leeds website said: “O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil).”

As with many historic texts, the Quran can be challenging to translate, and reasonable minds can differ about how best to do it. But Lowry concluded that some of the interpretations given in the meme are mistranslated, and all of them are taken out of context. “It’s designed to be inflammatory when presented and translated like this,” he said.

Editor’s note: FactCheck.org is one of several organizations working with Facebook to debunk misinformation shared on the social media network.


Kasem, Abul. “Whither the Islamic Infidels?” Islam-Watch.org. 23 Jun 2005.

Muhammad — Prophet of Islam. Encyclopaedia Britannica. Accessed 14 Mar 2019.

Sahih International. “The Quran: Arabic Text with Corresponding English Meanings.” Abul Qasim Publishing House. Corpus.quran.com. 1997.

Ali, Yusuf. “The Holy Quran: Translation and Commentary.” Reprinted by Islamic Vision. Corpus.quran.com. 2001.

Sarwar, Muhammad. “The Holy Quran: Arabic Text and English Translation.” Elmhurst. Corpus.quran.com. 1981.

Arberry, Arthur John. “The Koran Interpreted: A Translation.” Reprinted by Touchstone. Corpus.quran.com. 1996.

Shakir, M.H. “The Holy Quran Translated.” Tahrike Tarsile Quran. Corpus.quran.com. 1999.

Hossein Nasr, Seyyed. The Study Quran. HarperCollins Publishers. 2017.

The post Meme Distorts Quran Verses appeared first on FactCheck.org.