Islamophobia Roots Uncovered By New Report

By Omar Sacirbey
Religion News Service

(RNS) A small number of conservative foundations are propelling a handful of anti-Islamic activists who are fueling rising levels of Islamophobia, according to a report issued Friday (Aug. 26) by the left-leaning Center for American Progress.

The 130-page report identifies seven conservative funders who between 2001 and 2009 gave $42.6 million to eight anti-Islamic causes, most of them headed by individuals who critics say form an organized network.

The report is the latest among recent reports by CNN, The New York Times and The Tennessean that scrutinize these organizations. Authors of the CAP report hope the public pressure will persuade donors to stop funding these groups.

"The intention of this report is simple. We want to end Islamophobia," said Faiz Shakir, a report author.

The Donor Capital Fund in Alexandria, Va., was the single biggest funder and made the single biggest gift, $18 million, to the Clarion Fund, which in 2008 paid millions of dollars to disseminate an anti-Muslim DVD through local newspapers.

The next three largest funders named in the report were foundations belonging to newspaper publisher Richard Mellon Scaife ($7.9 million); the Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation ($5.4 million); and the Russell Berrie Foundation ($3.1 million)

Besides the Clarion Fund, other funding recipients include the website www.jihadwatch.com; the Middle East Forum headed by academic Daniel Pipes; the Investigative Project on Terrorism headed by former CNN reporter Steven Emerson; and the Center for Security Policy, headed by Frank Gaffney, a former defense official in the Reagan administration.

WATCH: POLITICAL CARTOONIST KHALIL BENDIB ON FLYING WHILE MUSLIM

Comments

[HaleemK]

05:15 PM on 10/16/2011

The picture in this article says no to war on terrorism!!
It is funny, I think these people should lead the war on terrorism instead of trying to stop it. Whos side are they on?

[HaleemK]

05:01 PM on 10/16/2011

So would a news like below be considered phobia or the truth about a danger that should be recognized?

http://truthdive.com/2011/10/16/Over-60-percent-Brit-terrorist-suspects-from-middle-class-backgrounds-secret-M15-file.html

London, Oct 16 (ANI): Two-thirds of British terror suspects are from middle-class backgrounds and those who become suicide bombers are often highly educated, a classified MI5 document as revealed.

The paper, marked ‘Secret: UK Eyes Only’, also debunks the myths that terrorists and suicide bombers are ‘loners’ and ‘psychopaths’, the Daily Mail reports.

Or how about this:

Three U.S. Muslims convicted in terrorism case

http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/nation/la-na-terror-trial-20111013,0,633641.story?track=rss

How do you class news like this?

Ken Bigley beheading video 'found' in defendant's home
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-15316326

A Birmingham bookseller accused of "priming people for terrorism" had video footage of British hostage Ken Bigley being beheaded, a jury was told.

[HaleemK]

05:21 PM on 10/16/2011

By the way all the above are fresh news.

[Safiya Malik]

01:52 PM on 09/07/2011

I won´t abide abusive treatment of Muslims or any people for that matter, but the term Islamophobia is a just a strawman. It´s wielded to intimidate & dismiss valid criticism of offensive jihad, killing of apostates, mistreatment of gays and women, and of course the jurisprudence out of the dark ages. It´s supposed to mean anti-Muslim but conveniently covers political Islam as well. People CAN change their religion, and unless you are trying to highlight the fact that apostasy still carries the death penalty, please use a more appropriate term.
I´ve visited counter jihad websites as well as jihadi forums and noticed a serious lack of empathy which is a complete turn off. Yes they both made good points but an effort to bridge differences was nowhere to be found. Some would rather die than disobey God which means eventually they will flout man made laws. There is little hope for them, but some might be willing to be more pragmatic. If Islam in the West were to `modernise´, would attitudes in turn also change? I hope so. Until then, being open to taking that step when the time does come wouldn´t hurt.

[Tina Iyer]

08:16 AM on 09/07/2011

IslamPhobia is myth like the sword and spread of Islam. This is not something new, but due to diligent effort of media it is getting prime time view and attention of the people.

Wonder why we do not hear of American desturction of Japan ( read atomic bomb) or the Columbus and his man killing the millions of native Indians of America.

Islam has survived at the time of Prophet (PBUH) when he was alone and now had reach 1.5 billion hearts in this world. Constant venom against Islam is not going to help erase the hatred but on the contrary it will fire back.

Islam means peaceful submission to the will of one GOD, and there are black sheeps in every society, country and white house as well.
http://www.ekhichdi.com/a/Why-do-west-hate-Islam-128.html

[xhawk2]

09:38 AM on 09/02/2011

How convenient that a group of liberals make excuses for radical Islam. "Islamophobia" is a myth, invented by liberals and Muslims in order to smear Jews, Christians, and other critics of suicide bombings. And CAIR is a front for Hamas.

[FR]

06:11 PM on 09/02/2011

And yet here you are to provide a living, breathing (?) example of the mythical phobia.

[HaleemK]

04:44 PM on 10/16/2011

So any criticism of Islam is prohibited? Why?

[MajorKong]

04:30 PM on 09/01/2011

Funny how when you walk these things back you can usually find a Scaife or a Bradley writing the checks.

[Damn Damien]

04:19 PM on 08/31/2011

"It is the nature of Islam to dominate, not to be dominated, to impose its law on all nations and to extend its power to the entire planet." So says Hassan al-Banna, founder of Muslim Brotherhood (whose current leader is appropriately named Mohammed Badie--and, you bet he's a 'badie').

Hassan's grandson is Tariq Ramadan, professor at Oxford, a moderate and a socialist to the bone.

In the following clip, Ramadan prays in Arabic (subtitles included in video), lists all the conflicts in the world involving Muslims, calls the opposing side the enemies of Allah, Islam and Muslims, and implores Allah to "strike" them--metaphorically, of course.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iMOjvK1tDbk

[J-Ho]

05:50 PM on 08/31/2011

exchange muslim references and replace it with christian references and you have 5 of the Republican Presidential runners platform.

[Damn Damien]

06:10 PM on 08/31/2011

Yeah. Typical nonsense.

Is it so hard to understand that a comparison between a current Oxford professor and al-Banna (a leading scholar of Islam) on the one hand, and some oafs on the other is a false one?

So, according to you, as long as there are some hicks around, the authorities of Islam have the right to double-speak?

[rhuffie]

11:15 PM on 09/01/2011

Logic like Swiss cheese... Tariq Ramadan represents all Muslims worldwide just like Louis Farrakan represents all blacks, or Pat Robertson all Christians.
Typical addict ..your drug is hate and so you justify your hatred with an pseudo-rational argument.

[HaleemK]

04:51 PM on 10/16/2011

I guess these lovely countries are exemplary then and deserve admiration:
KSA, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Indonesia, Somalia, not to mention Iran.

[Myoho Mod]

04:06 PM on 08/31/2011

“Hatred is never ended by hatred but by love” -Buddha.

[quedog]

03:48 PM on 08/31/2011

how can i donate

[Damn Damien]

08:06 PM on 08/31/2011

I take silver.

[xhawk2]

02:34 PM on 08/31/2011

No surprise that liberals make excuses for radical Islam...again.

[Doug Sandlin]

03:28 PM on 08/31/2011

Where's an example of someone doing that?

If for any reason you happen to be referring to me, let's clear that up right now:

I make no excuses for radical Islam / radical Muslims - ever. I am against extremist, radical, dogmatic mindsets wherever they may be found, and I utterly condemn all violent, threatening and other extremist attitudes or actions on the part of radicals (Muslims, and members of any other group).

I specifically support moderate, mainstream Muslims who are not radical, and who are falsely accused of thinking like radicals, and/or supporting them, when that's not true.

It's not a "pro-Muslim thing" as much as it's an "anti-Bigotry thing".

[Jay Patel]

03:45 PM on 08/31/2011

Doug,
I second you on that!!

[dockers]

06:38 AM on 09/02/2011

If you are Muslim there is no such thing as moderate.What does it entail to be a Muslim ?Please tell me this.Do so called moderate Muslims follow the Qur'an,if not they are not Muslims.

[Doug Sandlin]

02:10 PM on 08/31/2011

Some say there is no such thing as Islamophobia.

I say it's reaching levels that are truly concerning .... reminiscent of European anti-Semitism in the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries.

Case in point:

http://abcnews.go.com/US/911-coloring-book-draws-criticism-portrayal-muslims/story?id=14414149

Wholesale castigation of any large group of people is always a bad idea, because it's never based in fact, and the potential for truly innocent people being made to suffer is far too high.

Bigotry is ignorance.

Criticism is fine.

Falsely criticizing all, or most of, any large group of people, based on actions or statements by a tiny percentage of the worst examples from that group .... is bigotry.

Any questions?

[22Keys]

02:21 PM on 08/31/2011

Do you have any information for me regarding mainstream Muslims who have come to the defense of Ayan Hirsi Ali and criticized those that want her dead?

[Doug Sandlin]

03:24 PM on 08/31/2011

No I don't.

I'm not sure how aware many mainstream Muslims are, regarding what Ayaan Hirsi Ali is doing, and the threats by extremist Muslims, against her.

As I've said many times: extremists and the mainstream members of a given religion really aren't connected.

When fringe Christians make a threat against someone, do mainstream Christians always rally to support the threatened person? No. Mostly mainstream Christians just live their lives, maybe hearing about the fringe group via the news, and maybe not.

My sense of it is that many non-Muslims want to see Muslims speak out against extremist/fringe Muslims, in order that they can feel reassured that mainstream Muslims don't think in the same ways that extremist/fringe Muslims do, and that they don't agree with them.

I feel that mainstream Muslims have gone far above and beyond the call, in terms of letting the world know that they are about peace and tolerance, and that they don't support extremist behavior by anyone -- exactly as is true for almost all of the rest of us, as well.

If you want to see the extent of mainstream Muslims speaking out against violence ... just Google around; there are literally millions of results.

[xhawk2]

02:34 PM on 08/31/2011

The Ku Klux Kair is offended by anything.

[Doug Sandlin]

03:25 PM on 08/31/2011

So that makes a bigoted comic book for kids okay, somehow?

[kodimirpal]

11:18 AM on 08/31/2011

@artboxone: An example of intolerance and killing of Jains by Hindus and you have said there were no violant clashes.

Annigeri is a town in Karnataka. Recently the archeology department has found 601 human skulls in an excavation.

The skulls date back to 10th to 12th century.

According to reliable sources, Archeology Department has found very important materials and references mentioned in the Bombay State Dharwad Gazetteer about a massacre that took place near Annigeri.

J M Nagaiah, associate professor of Dr RC Hiremath Institute of Kannada Studies ( KUD), has said that he has discovered the inscriptions,.

According to the Hottur inscription, Chola emperor Rajaraja, during an expedition, had attacked Belaval-300 province with the help of his nine-lakh-strong army and captured Annigeri during 1007-08.

The emperor then tried to forcibly convert people into Shaivas (followers of Lord Shiva). He is also said to have ruthlessly chopped people, including children, who refused to be Shaivas. King Sataysharava Irive Bemdag of Chalukyas of Kalyan was ruling Annigeri then.

The Gawarwad inscription says emperor Rajadhiraja I of Cholas, during his expedition, attacked Annigeri, the then capital of Belavan Nadu-300 (comprising 300 surrounding villages). After capturing Annigeri, Rajadhiraja I destroyed Jinnalya, temples built by Jains, and also killed those who opposed the destruction of temples during 1018-1050.

The Hottur inscription is included in `Epigraphy India' (volume No. 16), while the Garwada inscription is included in `Epigraphy India' (volume No. 15).

[Ahmed Ahmad]

02:28 AM on 08/31/2011

Islamophobia absurd:

Let's suppose that you are a non-muslim. You are one of the 78% of the world population who does not believe in islam.

That leaves you with 2 options:

1) mohammed was a liar; or
2) mohammed was sincere, but delusional

Just by the fact that you are not a muslim implies that you think the creator of the islamic ideology was a liar, or mentally ill.

Conclusion­: You are surely an islamophob­e.

[kodimirpal]

11:48 AM on 08/31/2011

To help enhance your knowledge and sources Ahmed

The pandya king Nedunchadayan Paraanthagan for one destroyed the Jain monastries and killed thousands of jains who refused to convert to shivism(a sect in Hinduism) in and around Madurai.

The Jain (or samanars in Tamil) were were pioneers in Tamil Literature composing 2 of the 5 great epics in Tamil and Madurai happened to be the seat of Tamil sanghams (conventions).

In the North of Taml Nadu Jains were harassed by Mahendra Varma pallavan If you are aware of anything about the Pallava dynasty you must be familiar with the conversion of Mahendra Varma pallavan (who was a jain) to Hinduism.

This conversion spelled trouble for the Jain community in the South. Jains in Karnataka were persecuted by the vira saivite movement. Jains never made a revival until the advent of the vijayanagar dynasty.

Some 4 million jains were killed in tamil nadu alone by the shivaites (a sect in Hindus). Even the sankaracharya s muttu at kanchipuram was once a jain monastry. The author must have little knowledge in indian history before big mouthing world history.

Quoted from arul moraes, India,

http://www.expressindia.com/news/messages.php?newsid=47071&from=70

[Damn Damien]

04:01 PM on 08/31/2011

"Some 4 million jains were killed in tamil nadu alone by the shivaites (a sect in Hindus). "
=========
So, you are quoting somebody's comments on a website. Your 4 million figure is absurd--especially about Jains and Hindus of all people.

Jains are actually people who turn the other cheek, and probably wouldn't touch a weapon let alone use it in defense or offense.

So, this means, Jains just stood there and one by one, 4 million of them were sent to their deaths?

[FedUpIndian]

04:58 PM on 08/31/2011

I was intrigued by your post since I have never heard of millions of Jains being killed by Hindus in South India so I googled "Arul Moraes" whom you quoted in your post.
The only links I can find for him show that he is a troll on various websites in India, where he tries to provoke people by making outlandish claims - for example, in this one, he says Mr. Advani, who is a leader of the right-wing Hindu party BJP, is friendly with Al-Qaeda and is working for them.
http://www.rediff.com/messageboard/comments/news2006mar22spec/17

If some unknown clown who claims Advani is an Al-Qaeda operative is the best you can do, you are getting pretty desperate. I am just sorry I took your post seriously and wasted ten minutes of my time reading rubbish. It reminds me of this recent cartoon in the New Yorker:
http://www.cartoonbank.com/invt/129006/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=NewYorker&utm_content=TNYArticle

[Doug Sandlin]

03:57 PM on 08/31/2011

I'm non-Muslim, and I see Muhammad as the founder of a world religion and related societies. I don't see Muhammad as a liar, or delusional. Neither do I consider him to be a prophet in the way that Muslims do.

I see him as part of a general spiritual tradition / "mode" that can be found in all religions (that of an inspired sage / prophet) .... and I'm not religious myself. I would say the same about any spiritual leader whose history showed similar traits (revealing spiritual instruction, spending time in contemplation, and meditative states; display of prophetic traits, etc.).

Religion doesn't have to be either/or ... that's where people run into trouble ... with exclusivist views.

Religions are like maps, using different symbols, graphics, colors, languages, etc., to describe the same ultimate territory/destination.

The dogmatic, literalist-minded of the world's religions are holding their map upside down, while saying that others who hold their own map upside down (or right-side up, for that matter), are wrong, because only they possess the "one true map".

Which makes no sense when it's realized that religions are maps describing the same territory.

Muhammad was contextually correct within Islam as much as any other religion's leader or founder was contextually correct within their own religion (or the religion that was later started in their name).

[josesiem]

09:33 AM on 09/01/2011

What nonsense. Instead of facing the obvious question and answering it straight, you run around in circles, unwilling to face the truth. He was either a liar, lunatic, or spoke the voice of God. Those are your three options. Spare us the po-mo garbage, which nobody can take seriously anymore, unless they're interred in academic prisons.

It's plain sloppy thinking to put him in some "mode" and pretend all the "inspired sages" are the same. The main difference with Mo is he was a military leader who emphasized conquoring as much as spirituality. How can you put him in the same arena as the Buddha, Lao Tzu, and Jesus.

He's an updated Moses or Joshua, who'd both be tried for war-crimes if they appeared today.

"Contextual correctness." So, Mo was correct in slaughtering the polytheists in his campaigns? When Islam takes over an area, Sharia is contextually correct, so will you support the death penalty for apostasy and adultery?

[artboxone]

06:38 PM on 08/30/2011

"You can live with a religion whose principle is toleration. But how is it possible to live peacefully with a religion whose principle is "I will not tolerate you? How are you going to have unity with these people?... The Hindu is ready to tolerate; he is open to new ideas and his culture and has got a wonderful capacity for assimilation, but always provided India's central truth is recognised.

(Sri Aurobindo India's Rebirth 161,173)

[Doug Sandlin]

09:16 PM on 08/30/2011

Fair enough.

I personally have experienced zero intolerance from Muslims, and I see far more evidence that Muslims (and the mainstream teachings of Islam) are tolerant than that they are not. Of course, my sources are far more broad than news stories and professional anti-Islam information, alone.

Of course there are many news examples and website examples of intolerant Muslims (ditto Christians, Jews, Americans, Indians, Hindus, etc. etc. etc.) ... but for every extreme or sensationalist example that makes the news, there are millions upon millions of everyday people, just living their lives, who do not.

And so .... before suggesting that Muslims and/or Islam are intolerant (as you are presumably doing) ... maybe fact-check a bit, and do some more research, to see if that's truly the case ..... or not.

[msid]

04:27 PM on 08/30/2011

Just read an excellent book "The Great Theft- wrestling Islam from the extremists" by Khalid Abou El Fadl. Anyone interested in a real, scholarly distinction between moderate and extreme interpretations of Islam-- along with the historical context of how extremist interpretations are relatively new and have only gained power and influence in recent decades, should read this book. It exposes the weakness of the position of fundamentalists while also displaying the shallow nature of the hyper-opportunist/ trending genre of "Islamist" punditry.

Eid Mubarak to all.