Study shows 'Islamophobia' in U.S. a myth

Flag of the Organization of the Islamic Conference

Troubles from “Islamophobia”? Not in the United States, according to a new study today that says attacks on Muslims do not happen a great deal more than attacks on Christians. And attacks on Jews number up to eight times as many.

The results come from the Center for Security Policy, which produced a 42-page report called “Religious Bias Crimes 2000-2009: Muslim, Jewish and Christian Victims – Debunking the Myth of a Growing Trend of Muslim Victimization.”

The evaluation used statistics on reported crimes from the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program.

The study contradicts claims that religious bias crimes against Muslims have increased because of the spread of so-called “Islamophobia.” The report said “religious bias crimes – also known as hate crimes – against Muslim Americans, measured by categories of incidents, offenses or victims, have remained relatively low with a downward trend since 2001, and are significantly less than the numbers of bias crimes against Jewish victims.”

Center President Frank Gaffney said the report “is important because it exposes a false belief perpetuated by a few vocal groups that religious bias crimes against Muslims are on the upswing.”

“The truth is quite the opposite,” he said. “These arguments, unsubstantiated by hard factual data, are corrosive to community relationships at every level of American society, and a potential threat to national security. ”

Results delivered to Congress

Center staff said their results were delivered today to Sen. Richard Durbin, D-Ill., and other members of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s subcommittee on the Constitution, which was holding a hearing on the issue.

WND also reported today that a Palestinian activist tied to a Hamas-front group, the Council on American-Islamic Relations, helped shape the Senate hearing to spotlight alleged “anti-Muslim bigotry” in America.

Durbin aide Reema B. Dodin – who’s in regular contact with CAIR – is a Palestinian-rights activist who organized anti-Israel rallies as a campus radical at the University of California at Berkeley.

Commenting on the 9/11 attacks as a leader of the radical Muslim Students Association – which was founded by Muslim Brotherhood members – Dodin explained away the suicide attacks as a tragic but inevitable response to U.S. support for Israel, which she says is “angering” Muslims the world over.

“No one wants to stop and think that these young men, in the prime of their lives, choose to do this to themselves. Why?” she asked in an interview with a campus magazine. “Because now you have three generations of Palestinians born under occupation.”

Christine Brim, chief operating officer for the Center for Security Policy, said the move to create an atmosphere in which Muslims are portrayed as victims so that they have legitimate reason to attack others “defensively” is worldwide.

She attributes the effort to the Organization of the Islamic Conference, a global Muslim organization that advocates for Islamic law, or Shariah, and Muslim control.

Muslim community successful

She said the Muslim community in the United States has been extraordinarily successful, occupying leadership positions in politics, economics, education and other fields. The household incomes of Muslims are higher than average and they have more new business starts.

The effort to create alarm about “Islamophobia,” then, is an “attempt to turn what was a very successful story into one of victimization.”

That assertion is simply not true, she said.

“The good news is that this is a tolerant and basically understanding country,” said Brim. “The bad news is our political elites on the left don’t take that to be good news. They find that useless. What they are doing is seeking to create a victimized class of Muslims where none exists.”

Seen as victims, Muslims could be given special protections then could be exploited to expand the influence of Shariah demands, she said.

According to the Center’s analysis of the FBI information, during 2009 Jewish victims of hate crimes outnumbered Muslim victims more than 8 to 1, (1,132 Jewish victims to 132 Muslim victims).

The study showed that crimes reported against Muslims over the decade totaled 1,899, against Jews 11,175 and against Christians 1,239.

The annual totals of crimes against Christians, beginning in 2000, were 125, 76, 129, 134, 116, 119, 151, 137, 151 and 101.

Against Muslims, the numbers mostly ranged between 130 and 200, with the exception of 2001 when Muslims, mostly from Saudi Arabia, hijacked four jetliners and killed nearly 3,000 Americans in the worst terror attack ever in the U.S. That year there were 554 reports of crimes against Muslims.

But even that number is small next to the annual “hate crime” totals against Jews of 1,269, 1,196, 1,085, 1025, 1076, 977, 1,144, 1,127, 1,145 and 1,132.

Creating victims

The study raises concern over the publicity campaign under way in the U.S. to make Muslims victims.

“The persistence, scope, and sophistication of the campaign to portray Muslims in American inaccurately, as making up the majority of ‘hate crime’ victims, points to an organized effort whose potential implications derive from Islamic law (Shariah),” the report said. “Insults towards Islam, Islamic doctrine and individual Muslims, especially by non-Muslim infidels, can carry serious penalties under Shariah law. Further, because the ‘crimes’ of insult, slander and blasphemy are so subjectively defined in Shariah, the doorway is wide open for those with an agenda of victimology to lay a foundation that not inconceivably could lead ultimately to a declaration of ‘defensive jihad’ against persons, property or the broader community.”

The assessment warned that allowing the creation of a class of “victims” based on claims, not statistics, could result in jihad terrorism by those who insist they are “defending” their faith when they attack people of a different faith.

The study cited Louay Safi, a Muslim author who has served in the top ranks of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is dedicated to worldwide Islamic domination.

He wrote, “When wrong is inflicted on a Muslmi individual by a member, or members, of another political community … the Islamic state is obligated to make sure the individual, or his family, is compensated for his suffering, and that his rights are upheld. . It suffices to say that the Islamic state should ensure that justice has been done to the wronged Muslim, even if that take[s] a declaration of war.”

The report cited the instances of Islamic threats against dissenters: Salman Rushdie, the 2004 murder of filmmaker Theo van Gogh and others.

Consequences ‘should not be underestimated’

“The consequences, therefore, of being accused by a Muslims of offending Islamic beliefs, customs, or laws should not be underestimated. The developing concept of ‘Islamophobia’ obviously is heading in this direction,” the report said.

Concerns and hearings over “Islamophobia,” then, “are not based on facts but rather on a political agenda.”

There are a number of websites, including TheReligionofPeace.com, that address “Islamophobia.”

TheReligionofPeace.com defines “Islamophobes” as Hindus, Christians and Jews who don’t want to be third-class citizens, atheists who challenge religious orthodoxy, women who don’t want to be draped in black bags, those who drink alcohol, dog lovers, intellectuals who value freedom of public dissent and others.

Brim did note one class of people targeted by “hate” that the FBI does not monitor: those who leave Islam.

“If you leave Islam, under Islamic law if you are a man you are under the threat of death. A woman [could be] imprisoned until she recants or is under the threat of death,” she said.

WND previously has reported on the long battle fought against the U.S. “hate crimes” law signed by President Obama.

Barack Obama

A challenge to the constitutionality of the law now is pending before the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.

The Thomas More Law Center, which is fighting the law, has raised questions, including why the law will attack Bible-following Christians who follow its instructions.

Special protections

The law designates certain groups, such as homosexuals, for special protections that are not available to other groups of citizens. The campaign for Muslim victimhood also appears to want to place Muslims in a similarly protected zone

“According to the Bible, which plaintiffs promote through their religious activities, homosexual acts are acts of grave depravity that are intrinsically disordered. The Apostle Paul, writing by inspiration of the Holy Spirit, declares that those who engage in homosexual acts ‘shall not inherit the kingdom of God,’ stating further, ‘And such were some of you,’” the appeal explains.

“Plaintiffs believe and profess that homosexuality is an illicit lust forbidden by God, who said to His people Israel, ‘Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind; it is abomination.’ In every place that the Bible refers to homosexuality, the emphasis is upon the perversion of sexuality. The person engaging in homosexual behavior is guilty of ‘leaving the natural use of the woman,’ meaning that his behavior is ‘against nature,’ and thus contrary to God’s will.

“Consequently, plaintiffs have ‘willfully’ engaged in, and will continue to ‘willfully’ engage in, conduct that is proscribed by the Hate Crimes Act because the Act does not limit its reach to physical acts of violence, but expressly includes within its reach so-called ‘hate’ speech and ‘hateful words,” thereby subjecting plaintiffs to federal investigation and punishment.

“The Hate Crimes Act was clearly intended to intimidate Christians and their religious leaders into remaining silent concerning their religious beliefs that homosexual conduct is an abomination and a sin,” the law center said.

The Hate Crimes Act was dubbed by its critics as the “Pedophile Protection Act” after an amendment to explicitly prohibit pedophiles from being protected by the act was defeated by majority Democrats. In fact, during congressional debate, supporters argued that all “philias,” or alternative sexual lifestyles, should be protected.

Obama signed the “Matthew Shepard and James Byrd Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act” in October 2009 after Democrats strategically attached it to a “must-pass” $680 billion defense-appropriations bill.

The law cracks down on any acts that could be linked to criticism of homosexuality or even the “perception” of homosexuality. Obama boasted about the “hate crimes” bill when he signed it into law.

“After more than a decade, we’ve passed inclusive hate-crimes legislation to help protect our citizens from violence based on what they look like, who they love, how they pray or who they are,” he said.

The bill signed by Obama was opposed by the U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, which called it a “menace” to civil liberties. The commission argued the law allows federal authorities to bring charges against individuals even if they’ve already been cleared in a state court.

---