Dr. Goleen Samari of the school’s Bixby Center for Global Reproductive Health wrote about this issue two years ago and alleges that she received an onslaught of hate mail and packages along with countless threats to her family. Yet she totally ignores the core reasons why many Americans hate Islam and fear Muslims.
TheCollegeFix (h/t Marvin W) A University of California-San Francisco Muslim researcher says that Islamophobia in the United States is literally a public health issue as it’s making Muslims ill.
In that article, titled Why we should treat Islamophobia as a public health issue, Samari claims:
“The ‘unfounded’ hatred of Islam or stigmatization, fear and dislike of Muslims rose to 67 percent in 2015, the highest it has ever been. Right after 9/11, unfavorable attitudes toward Muslims were at 60 percent. In fact, hate speech and crimes against Muslim Americans tripled after the San Bernardino and Paris attacks. Muslim Americans have been harassed on college campuses, they have lost jobs, mosques have been vandalized, Muslim charities have had their assets frozen, and racial profiling has occurred at airports and on the streets.”
“But there is an effect of all this that has not been widely reported: the impact on health. Simply put, Islamophobia has grave physical and mental health consequences for Muslims in the U.S. It is a public health issue. Yet, research on the health implications of this is understudied and often ignored by the masses.”
But not for lack of trying by Muslim pressure groups like designated terrorist group CAIR:
Now, she says Donald Trump’s rise to the presidency “coincides” with rates of anti-Muslim sentiment “that easily surpass the modern peak reached after 9/11.”
Her source? The Southern Poverty Law Center. Yes, that Southern Poverty Law Center. which has been totally discredited by the FBI. SPLC recently lost a lawsuit by a British Muslim reformer who was included on the SPLC list of anti-Muslim right wing extremists. They had to pay him more than $3 million and since then has taken down their list of anti-Muslim hate groups and individuals.
PJ Media No fewer than 47 nonprofit leaders maligned by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) — many if not most of whom are considering a lawsuit against the organization — warned a vast array of executives and leaders that if they parrot the SPLC’s damaging “hate group” labels, they would be “complicit” in “defamation.”
“Editors, CEOs, shareholders and consumers alike are on notice: anyone relying upon and repeating its misrepresentations is complicit in the SPLC’s harmful defamation of large numbers of American citizens who, like the undersigned, have been vilified simply for working to protect our country and freedoms,” the signatories wrote.
The letter followed news — broken at PJ Media — that no fewer than 60 organizations are considering suing the SPLC following a groundbreaking settlement in which the organization formally apologized to a Muslim reformer, Maajid Nawaz, for branding him an “anti-Muslim extremist.”
In 2016, the SPLC published its “Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists,” listing Muslim reformer Maajid Nawaz, a practicing Muslim, as one such extremist. The left-wing group listed various and changing reasons for including him, even at one point mentioning that he had gone to a strip club for his bachelor party. On Monday, the SPLC apologized and paid $3.375 million to settle a lawsuit Nawaz had filed.
LifeSiteNews The guide, published by SPLC in 2016 in conjunction with the George Soros–fundedMedia Matters for America, was compiled for journalists, painting high-profile individuals and groups who are critical of radical Islam as “extremists” who peddle “damaging misinformation.” The report was clearly intended to make sure that Islamic reformers would not get a fair hearing in mainstream media.
The SPLC, which serves as a tool of the Left by mislabeling mainstream conservative organizations and leaders as “haters” and “extremists,” is one of the best funded politically-oriented non-profit groups in the world. SPLC’s 990 IRS filing for 2015 reported $58,176,499 in total revenue, an astonishing amount for a politically-oriented non-profit. Moreover, SPLC self-reported an endowment fund of more than $319 million in its 2016 annual report, also unheard of in the world of non-profit organizations dealing with “culture war” issues.
The Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC) has since removed the “Field Guide to Anti-Muslim Extremists”
The SPLC list of alleged “hate groups” includes anti-Islam and pro-Christian sites like Bare Naked Islam, Jihad Watch, ACT for America, Alliance Defending Freedom, American Freedom Defense Initiative, America’s Promise Ministries, American Family Association, Center for Security Policy, Family Research Council, Jewish Defense League, Oath Keepers, Traditional Values Coalition, WorldNetDaily, Clarion Project, Understanding the Threat, Refugee Resettlement Watch, and more.
SPLC list of alleged extremists includes Frank Gaffney Jr., David Horowitz,David Yerushalmi, Joseph Francis Farah (World Net Daily), Larry Klayman, Lieutenant General William G. “Jerry” Boykin (Ret.), Pamela Geller, Robert Spencer and more.
Samari also furthers the narrative of the so-called “Muslim ban,” the upholding of which by the US Supreme Court “has further cemented” hatred of those who practice Islam:
“It’s not hard to understand how facing demonization and fearing that you might become the victim of a hate crime would be detrimental to your health. A recent study finds that religious discrimination targeting Muslims is significantly associated with psychological distress, symptoms of depression, higher levels of fear and anxiety, an unhealthier diet and worse blood pressure. Among women with Arabic names in California who gave birth within 6 months of 9/11, there was an increase in premature births and low birth-weight babies. There was no such increase for other women.”
Given the media narrative before and since Donald Trump’s election, one could easily believe that Muslims suffer the most religiously based hate-related actions and crimes.
However, this has not been, nor is presently, the case. The number one target of religious hate crimes by far remains those who practice Judaism.
In 2014, over 58 percent of religious hate offenses were those against Jews. In comparison, a little over 16 percent were anti-Muslim in nature. In fact, in 2015 the very University of California system which employs Dr. Samari “won” the distinction of having four of the top five anti-Semitic universities in the country: UC Santa Cruz, UC Berkeley, UC Davis, and UCLA.
A survey from 2010 noted that:
“Jewish students in California found them to feel ‘physically unsafe, emotionally and intellectually harassed and intimidated by peers and professors, isolated from their fellow students, and unfairly treated by faculty and administrators’. Their concerns are not felt to be taken as seriously as those of other minorities. ‘80% of all respondents expressed the belief that events, exhibits and campaigns that demonize Israel could incite violence against Jewish students on their campus; while several reported that it already had’.”
If Muslims in the US and elsewhere must grapple with the effects of radical Muslim fundamentalism worldwide, Jewish individuals bear the “burden” of whatever actions the country of Israel undertakes. Indeed, those who engage in anti-Semitic behavior often cloak their hatred as “anti-Zionism” and rationalize a difference between criticizing Israel the state and Jews as individuals.
Nevertheless, unlike Samari’s claim of a veritable social and medical apocalypse for Muslims, a 2017 report on anti-Semitism and its mental health effects notes that Jews who experience such typically utilize common coping mechanisms associated with any other sort of bullying — such as seeking out support from others.
Interestingly, given what Dr. Samari has written in the past should we “naturally” expect a percentage of Jews who experience anti-Semitism to resort to violence? Just replace “Jew”/”Jewish” for “Muslim” from this abstract:
“For example, anti-Muslim sentiment has promoted discrimination against Muslims, while also serving to marginalize and stigmatize Muslim communities. These conditions limit the social resources, like social cohesion, that Muslims have access to and make political violence more appealing to some.”