a) This article did explain some complexities to the issue of anti-Islam sentiment, but it failed to explain why it divided people politically. It had only been mentioned in some people's quotes that the rally should not be political, implying that others made it so. I didn't understand how any of it was political and how others made it so. b) They article did probe the issue in depth to a certain extent. I like how it went over all sides of the issue. I had hoped that the article would go more into depth on how the war, the mosque, and 9/11 all relate, or don’t relate for that matter, but it had not. All I got from the article is a quote from Obama saying the war doesn’t relate to Islam. I would’ve liked to see a quote from an American troop, or an American who thought the two do relate. c) It did a good job of clarifying my questions about both sides of the issue. It was very balanced satisfying all my questions concerning the Islamic communities feelings, family of 9/11 victims' feelings, and anti-Muslim people's feelings. d) Many people will start to talk about how anti-Muslim sentiment has grown or has not in this country. Many will start to wonder how all the events have perpetuated it or if they are just pseudo-events that make it seem like hate has risen. The article has many points to it that can be discussed having covered many different angles to the greater issue that we can’t even label itself yet. e) This article did have a cultural element. I really liked seeing quotes from Muslim leaders around the world and their perspective on the 9/11 and anti-mosque rallies. It gave a good look into how offended the Muslim community is by American’s recent actions. The article did a good job of promoting cross-cultural understanding.