The New America Foundation has received over a million dollars from George Soros’ Open Society Foundations. This article highlighting its “report” on “anti-Muslim activities” is a particularly insidious example of how the Left works to inhibit and shut down all resistance to jihad terror and Sharia oppression.
The “report” claims to track “more than 650 separate anti-Muslim incidents across the country since 2012. These incidents include public denunciations of Islam and Muslims by elected officials, proposed laws targeting Muslim religious practice, mosque vandalism, and acts of violence.” It claims that there is no “spike” in “anti-Muslim activity” after jihad terror attacks, but only after “folks running for elected office” use “megaphones to talk about how dangerous Muslims are.”
The idea here is to claim that “anti-Muslim activity” is simply gratuitous bigotry, and if people would just stop talking about how dangerous Muslims are, there would be no more “anti-Muslim activity.” So at heart, this article is a call for restrictions on the freedom of speech, to end critical speech about Islam and Muslims and bring the public discourse more in compliance with Sharia blasphemy laws.
In service of this, the NAF presents an argument that is fundamentally incoherent. “Anti-Muslim activities” include “public denunciations of Islam and Muslims by elected officials” and are fueled by “folks running for elected office” who use “megaphones to talk about how dangerous Muslims are.” So politicians talking about the dangers of Islam leads to politicians talking about the dangers of Islam? Got it.
And in reality, why are these politicians (who? when?) supposedly denouncing Islam? Why is anyone calling for “laws targeting Muslim religious practice,” by which is meant anti-Sharia laws (which don’t really target Muslim religious practice at all, but only the elements of Sharia that contradict American laws and freedoms)? Because of jihad terror activity. So this study that purports to show that “anti-Muslim activity” isn’t a reaction to jihad terror at all, but to politicians’ rhetoric, fails to note the obvious, that the politicians’ rhetoric is itself a reaction to jihad terror.
What’s more, the whole idea that opposition to jihad terror and the elements of Sharia that violate American law is “anti-Muslim” contradicts the claim that Muslims in America overwhelmingly reject jihad terror and accept American laws and principles of human rights. If they do, then why is opposition to jihad terror and Sharia oppression “anti-Muslim”?
In response to all this, if they deign to take any notice of these points at all, Murtaza Hussain and Maryam Saleh will just charge me with “Islamophobia.” And the whole cycle will begin again.
“Bigoted Election Campaigns, Not Terror Attacks, Drive Anti-Muslim Activity,” by Murtaza Hussain and Maryam Saleh, The Intercept, March 11, 2018:
An upsurge in anti-Muslim activities across the United States in recent years has tracked closely with changes in the political cycle, according to data released in a new report by the New America Foundation. The report, “Anti-Muslim Activities in the United States: Violence, Threats, and Discrimination at the Local Level,” tracks more than 650 separate anti-Muslim incidents across the country since 2012. These incidents include public denunciations of Islam and Muslims by elected officials, proposed laws targeting Muslim religious practice, mosque vandalism, and acts of violence.
According to the data, these incidents have markedly increased in recent years, with public attitudes toward Islam and Muslims darkening significantly. But it’s not clear that these attitudes are being driven solely by acts of terror committed by Muslim terrorism. Several major terrorist attacks that took place during the period of the study did not produce a surge in recorded anti-Muslim incidents. Those attacks that did coincide with increased anti-Muslim incidents came in particular political contexts. The largest spike in the incidents came after the November 2015 terrorist strike in Paris, but the attack at the Bataclan came as the 2016 presidential campaign was getting into full swing, with Donald Trump’s candidacy propelling anti-Muslim sentiment into the spotlight.
“Looking at the statistics it is clear that the rise in these incidents are tied to the election cycle,” said Robert McKenzie, a senior fellow at New America and the author of the report. “If spikes in anti-Muslim activity only occurred due to terrorism we would expect to see more incidents following high-profile attacks like the Boston Marathon bombing and Charlie Hebdo, but we didn’t. What we do have are folks running for elected office who are using megaphones to talk about how dangerous Muslims are.”…