9/11 has changed the life of Muslims substantially. Almost overnight, they
become the target of media-hype, various “anti-terror” efforts, religious
intolerance and hate crimes.
Increase in Hate Crimes Against
Muslims in the U.S.A.
Anti-Muslim hate crimes in the USA increased fivefold, reaching
an average of 100-150 recorded cases per year. Muslims make-up less than 1
percent of the U.S. population, however, represent 13.7
percent of the victims of hate crimes based on religious biases in 2013;
noteworthy is the increase of approximately two percent from 11.6
the previous year, even though an overall decrease in religiously motivated
hate crimes was recorded.
It is important to note that recorded hate crime numbers are subject to
under-reporting since the participation in tracking programs is voluntary in the U.S.A. Additionally, applicable cases may not always be
accurately identified as hate crimes, and therefore add to an increase in under-representation.
In spite of the potential for under-representation,
hate crime data is a useful method to track development patterns over time.
How Does the U.S.A. Measure up Against
Western European Countries in Context of Biases and Crimes Against Muslims?
The backlash against Muslims in major Western European countries after 9/11
was more severe than in the U.S.A., particularly considering that 9/11 happened
on U.S. soil. According to The Guardian, “hundreds of anti-Muslim offences were
carried out [in the U.K.], in 2013, with Britain's biggest force, the
Metropolitan police, recording
500 Islamophobic crimes.” In the U.S.A., in 2001, shortly after 9/11, a spike
in hate crimes against Muslims — over 400 cases — were recorded, followed
by a drop, and remained constant below 200 since 2002. Adjusted to the
difference in population, there is a substantial gap in the number of hate
crimes committed in the U.K. versus the U.S.A.
France does not track hate crimes. However, strong anti-Muslim sentiments
became evident, among other, in various legislations that went as far as aiming
to limit freedom of expression of Muslims; the ban on burqas and the law
against denial of Armenian genocide are some of such examples. The latter legislation
was overturned as the country’s highest judicial body deemed it unconstitutional.
Similarly, Switzerland passed a legislation banning the construction of
minarets from Mosques, while claiming that the ban was “not a
rejection of the Muslim community, religion or culture.” Severity of the
anti-Muslim sentiment in Germany was demonstrated, among other, in the outcome of
the European
Parliamentary election in May 2014, during
which right-wing parties recorded substantial gains. Furthermore, recently
formed right-wing radical groups such as Pegida (Patriotic Europeans Against the
Islamization of the West) emerged and enjoys major
support among the general population in Germany.
9/11 Repercussions — Anti-Muslim
Policies in the U.S.A.
CNN correspondent Peter
Bergen reported
last April that “since 9/11, extremists affiliated with a variety of far-right
wing ideologies, including white supremacists, anti-abortion extremists, and
anti-government militants, have killed more people in the United States than
have extremists motivated by al Qaeda’s ideology.” The $1.6 trillion that was
spent in the U.S.A. since 9/11 on the “War on Terror,” however, does not target
all terrorists equally, but clearly singles out the ones associated with the “Middle
East,” “Islam,” and other similar stereotypical categories; therefore, most
people do not associate the “War on Terror” with angry
white males who go on a shooting rampage
the way Stephen Hick did when he shot and killed three
young people of Muslim faith in Chapel Hill earlier last month.
This “War on Terror” changed the lives of average Muslims in the USA
substantially, as they became suspects and potential terrorists in the
aftermath of 9/11. The FBI
and NYPD started mapping Muslim communities, U.S. Citizenship
and Immigration Services (USCIS) denied many Muslims
the citizenship and U.S.
veterans ended up on a No Fly list
without due process. The New York Times reports that the FBI even scrutinizes
its own employees with “ties” to the
Middle East without a probable cause.
In some states, like Alabama
and Oklahoma,
Americans apparently have become so paranoid about Islam that they have
proactively banned Sharia Law, defying basic human reason since there is no
evidence that Sharia is in any way a threat to the U.S. judicial system. This was
made possible, in spite of the fact that a ban which singles out one religion violates
not only basic American values, but also the First Amendment.
War
Against Islamic Extremists, not Against Muslims?
U.S. authorities repeatedly claim that the U.S.A. is not at war with
Muslims, but with Islamic or, as President Obama recently put it, violent
extremists. The repercussions of anti-terror
efforts that single out Muslims, even though more and more extremist recruits
have diverse
backgrounds and many of them have little
to do with Islam, unfortunately paint a different picture. Negative images under
which Muslims have to suffer are not only a result of the messages conveyed
through the steps taken against them by the authorities, but also a result of the
sensationalism and the dissemination of repeat stereotypes and biases by the
mainstream media. No wonder so many
Americans are becoming suspicious of their fellow citizens.
“War On Terror,” Increase In
Terror Plots
As another recent threat of terrorist attacks
on American
malls has demonstrated — contrary to claims by
experts such as Thomas Kean,
former New Jersey governor and chair of the 9/11 commission — in spite of the excessive spending and erosion of civil liberties, the “War on
Terror” did not result in more safety for Americans, at least not according to
average Americans. As a recent poll conducted by NBC News/Wall Street Journal demonstrates:
47 percent of Americans report feeling less safe after 9/11, whereas only 26
percent feel safer and another 26 percent report no change — notion that is
supported by The Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington D.C.,
which confirmed that terror
plots have increased since 9/11. Of the 60 terror
plots, 49 were reportedly “homegrown,” indicating that the source of the threat
is complex and diverse.
Threat of Military Industrial
Complex Identified by President Eisenhower 50 Years Ago
Without a doubt, terrorism is a real threat
that the U.S.A. and its allies have to combat. However, there must be a better way
than the excessive waste and abuse of tax payer money and fear-mongering to
fight this war. If we were to remain consistent in our “War on Terror” strategy,
American tax payers would have to spend more money, give up more freedoms, and
become less safe in the future.
The current “War on Terror” is the Military
Industrial Complex that President Dwight Eisenhower warned Americans against
more than 50 years ago. Many beneficiaries of the “War on Terror” understandably
don’t
want this war to end, no matter how much animosity it has created and how unsuccessful
it has been. However, as American tax payers pick up the tab, we should
consider questioning what the rest of us have exactly gained from spending the
money, a good portion of which we could have spent on improving our schools,
investing in research and development, creating sustainable jobs, and establishing
preventive programs for many ailments in our society.
Original link to this article: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alev-dudek/war-against-muslims-post-_b_6772870.html
Keine Kommentare:
Kommentar veröffentlichen