While the U.S. was still reeling from the devastation caused by the Boston bombing and before it was known who was responsible for the act, there were those on the left who assumed, even hoped, that it was an act of right-wing terrorism. When their hopes were dashed, they took a detour from grieving for the victims and began instead to focus on, as they imagined it, the probability of backlash against Muslim Americans. Apparently, they anticipated a string of retributive attacks against Muslim Americans. These speculators tend to be very selective about which victims deserve their attention and empathy. And, their ideology is based on the belief that “Islamophobia” like its cohort, racism, is a prevalent force in the world.
For example, following the Boston attack, the Guardian published a piece implying America is a country where the ill-educated think “all Muslims are terrorists”, so things could really escalate if “the perpetrator of the Boston bombings turns out to be a Muslim”. The whirlwind of post-Boston commentary included narratives regarding “the damage that Islamophobia can cause”, regarding the “ignorance and prejudice [that emerge] in the aftermath of a terrorist attack” and regarding Americans undergoing a “collective freakout steeped in Islamophobia”. Oddly, ordinary Americans are feared more so than terrorists.
But, just where is this unruly Islamophobic mob? According to some in the media, we should now be experiencing a sharp increase in hate crimes against Muslims. However, in the years following 9/11 only 10% of all hate crimes in which religion was the motive, were committed against Muslims. On the other hand, religiously motivated hate crimes against Jews total 68%. And, Christians are victimized by religiously motivated hate at a rate slightly lower than that of Muslim victims.
Hate Crimes Motivated by Religion – 2002 – 2011 (via the FBI)
Against Jews 9,366 (68%)
Against Christians (Protestant & Catholic) 1,136 (8%)
Against Muslims 1409 (10%)
Against Other Religions 1931 (14%)
The fact that Jews are victimized by hate crimes much more often than Muslims would lead one to question the mainstream media’s rationale for so vigorously defending the rights of Muslims while all but ignoring the blatant hostility against Jews. Hate crimes against Christians occur slightly little less often than anti-Muslims hate crimes, but the media often portrays Christians as perpetrators rather than victims, regardless of the facts.
Similarly, The International Centre for the Study of Radicalisation and Political Violence (ICSR), in a report labeled “Europe’s Counter-Jihad Movement” treats valid concerns regarding Islamists as evidence of extremism. The ICSR is affiliated with the Swedish Ministry of Defence, Chuck Hagel, several American universities, a number of Saudi sheikhs and a think tank in Jordan. In addition to that, it is affiliated with Georgetown University and home of the Saudi-funded Center for Muslim-Christian Understanding. Its founding director is John Esposito, one of the top allies of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood network.
The Clarion Project notes that, “rather than focusing on specific groups or individuals, the entire anti-Islamist movement is portrayed as extreme. As evidence of its extremism, the report points to the alleged influence of Robert Spencer and Pamela Geller, two activists based in the U.S. Yet, neither of them advocate violence, extremism or broad-brush treatment of all Muslims.” The Clarion Project also illuminates the credibility of the anti-Islamist movement:
“One of the features of being a ‘far-right extremist’ is being concerned about ‘the stealthy implementation of Islamic Sharia’—but that’s exactly the campaign described in the 1982 Muslim Brotherhood plan called ‘The Project,’ as well as the 1991 U.S. Muslim Brotherhood Explanatory Memorandum. In fact, Islamists describe their phased, incremental strategy as ‘gradualism.’”
And, in the case of convicted terrorist Sabri Bekhala, in a 2007 court filing, federal prosecutors state: “From its founding by Muslim Brotherhood leaders, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) conspired with other affiliates of the Muslim Brotherhood to support terrorists…the conspirators agreed to use deception to conceal from the American public their connections to terrorists.”
The following list of articles further supports the case against Islamists:
The Quran doesn’t have a single verse encouraging charitable acts towards non-Muslims. There are, however, 493 passages that either advocate violence or expound upon the hatred of Allah for infidels. The Quran’s primary function is to provide instructions on how Muslims are to think and act towards those outside of Islam. Those who will not submit to Islam, according to the Quran, are either to be killed or forced to pay a tax (Jizya). According to Peter Nilsson in his article titled, “The Violent Quran” over half of the Quran’s contents are texts derogatory towards infidels or which incite violence against them. The history of Islam fully demonstrates the influence of the Quran.
But, applying constructive criticism to the actions of Islamists is treated as being worse than the heinous acts themselves. Those criticizing Islam are branded with epithets such as “Islamophobe”, “racist” or “right-wing extremist”. A phobia is an unjustified fear of something. Criticizing Islam does not constitute a phobia. It simply analyzes and warns–which is justified.
Former Islamist imam Abdur-Rahman Muhammad recalls being at an International Institute of Islamic Thought meeting, during which the decision was made to begin using the term “Islamophobia” as a way of smearing their critics. CAIR, a group designated a U.S. Muslim Brotherhood entity by the U.S. government, routinely employs this tactic. The Islamophobia card is sometimes even used on Muslims. When an opponent of CAIR and some of its allies, Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, was appointed to a government position they accused him of being a “sock puppet for Islam haters and an enabler of Islomophobia.”
It should not be assumed that criticism of terrorists and Islamists is the same as excoriating all Muslims. There are obvious reasons for opposing the former. Those who cannot understand the difference between hating an entire group and identifying the dangerous elements within the group lack the most basic of critical thinking skills.