The Hatewatch blog is managed by the staff of the Intelligence Project of the Southern Poverty Law Center, an Alabama-based civil rights organization.

FBI Reports Dramatic Spike in Anti-Muslim Hate Violence

By Mark Potok on November 14, 2011 - 1:00 pm, Posted in Anti-Immigrant, Anti-Latino, Anti-Muslim, Hate Crime

Anti-Muslim hate crimes soared by an astounding 50% last year, skyrocketing over 2009 levels in a year marked by the vicious rhetoric of Islam-bashing politicians and activists, especially over the so-called “Ground Zero Mosque” in New York City.

Although the national statistics compiled by the FBI each year are known to dramatically understate the real level of reported and unreported hate crimes, they do offer telling indications of some trends. The latest statistics, showing a jump from 107 anti-Muslim hate crimes in 2009 to 160 in 2010, seem to reflect a clear rise in anti-Muslim rhetoric from groups like Stop Islamization of America. Much of that rhetoric was aimed at stopping an Islamic center in lower Manhattan.

It was the highest level of anti-Muslim hate crimes since 2001, the year of the Sept. 11 attacks by Muslim terrorists in New York, Washington, D.C., and Pennsylvania. That year, anti-Muslim hate crimes hit a total of 481.

At the same time, the new FBI statistics showed a rise of almost 11% in anti-Latino hate crimes. The increase may be related to anti-immigrant rhetoric deployed as Arizona passed a harsh law targeting immigrants in 2010. Since then, even more anti-immigrant rhetoric has been heard around the country, suggesting that when the FBI’s 2011 statistics come out, they will show a further rise in anti-Latino hate crime.

Earlier, anti-Latino hate crimes rose some 40% between 2003 and 2007, then diminished in 2008 and 2009. The newly reported apparent rise in these crimes last year also reflected, albeit in a diminished way, a 2010 rise in anti-Latino hate crimes of almost 50% reported earlier in California.

But it was the anti-Muslim numbers that were dramatic, and they occurred in a year when many watchdog organizations, including the Southern Poverty Law Center, reported an increase in Islam-bashing rhetoric. The year 2010 saw multiple verbal attacks on planned mosques, along with several violent attacks and arsons.

It’s not provable precisely how hateful rhetoric from public figures drives criminal violence. But anecdotal evidence suggests the link it a tight one. Immediately after the 9/11 attacks, anti-Muslim hate violence skyrocketed some 1,600%. But then-President Bush gave several speeches that fall emphasizing that Muslims and Arabs were not our enemies — only Al Qaeda was. Almost certainly thanks to that, anti-Muslim violence declined the following year by almost two thirds.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    You know Dick, I just thought of something last night. You keep insisting these Muslim terrorist organizations, and their training camps, exist in the US, even despite evidence that they do not. So my question is this: Have you EVER contacted law enforcement agencies, either local or federal, and reported these terrorist training camps? If not, why not?

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    “And a little advise for those who are constantly challenged to prove your points. ”

    Yeah Dick, that would be you, and you CAN’T debate a leftist because you can’t provide any facts. The one time you attempted to prove your wacky theories about Muslim terrorist training camps in the US, your theory was shot down and it’s a smoking crater now.

  • Mitch Beales

    Dick I have tried to ridicule you but I am not nearly as successful as you are.

  • CM

    Dick,

    “Many of those ‘watchdog organizations’ wouldn’t happen to be Muslim ‘charities’ or CIAR? The reasoning is circular if invoking the SPLC as authoritative in this blog heavily associated with the SPLC.”

    There’s no circular reasoning in stating the fact that the SPLC has previously called attention to the rise in Islam-bashing. You can give whatever weight you want to this fact. Some of us will give it quite a bit of weight because of the SPLC’s long history of providing accurate, valuable information about hate groups. Obviously, you have an anti-SPLC and anti-Muslim animus, so you dismiss it — another fact that we can all weigh for ourselves.

    “Using the phrase, ‘may be related to’ is an old journalist psycological trick to imprint in the mind of the reader a certian point of view without actually making a direct factual statement. The SPLC related reports are full of these.”

    Speaking as an old journalist myself, “may be related to” could also be an indication of intellectual honesty in describing information that is suggestive of a connection but not supportive of absolute certainty — the opposite of what conspiracy theorists do when, for instance, they point to a disused government facility of some sort and think, “This could be a FEMA camp,” and then boldly declare, This IS a FEMA camp!” (Or a Muslim terrorist training camp.)

    “You cannot debate a leftist.” Obviously, one CAN debate a leftist, since that’s what you’re doing here; you just don’t like it that they debate back.

    “Ridicule is their only recourse and as you see on these posts, it is rampant.” So what do you call your remark about “another zinger from Mark”? In any case, your claim that “Ridicule is their only recourse” is false; “they” have lots of other “recourses.”

    “Do not try to accomodate those who will not look at your facts. They can’t. But they can call you names. It makes them fell victorious. Indulge them. An open-minded reader is your target. Don’t waste your time on juvinile taunts.”

    Again, what about that “zinger” comment? But the problem you’re finding with people’s responses to your comments isn’t that they “will not look at your facts,” it’s that they dispute that what you offer are facts at all. It doesn’t help that the reason “They can’t” look at your facts is because you resolutely refuse to provide sources, which tempts us to conclude that you’re relying on totally unreliable sources like WorldNutDaily. So it seems that your “target” is not an “open-minded” reader but a totally unquestioning one.

  • http://www.twitter.com/AronL Aron

    Dick,

    Muslim terror training camps.

    That is all.

  • Dick Lancaster

    Mark Potok: “But it was the anti-Muslim numbers that were dramatic, and they occurred in a year when many watchdog organizations, including the Southern Poverty Law Center, reported an increase in Islam-bashing rhetoric.”

    Many of those “watchdog organizations” wouldn’t happen to be Muslim “charities” or CIAR? The reasoning is circular if invoking the SPLC as authoritative in this blog heavily associated with the SPLC. Would you believe the Bible is the word of God if I presented proof by affirming that the Bible itself says so?

    Here’s another zinger from Mark: “At the same time, the new FBI statistics showed a rise of almost 11% in anti-Latino hate crimes. The increase may be related to anti-immigrant rhetoric deployed as Arizona passed a harsh law targeting immigrants in 2010.”

    Well, yes, that could be a factor. But another factor could be the the extremely high unemployment rate among black young men who blame the scarcity of jobs on illegal aliens, most of whom are Latino. Using the phrase, “may be related to” is an old journalist psycological trick to imprint in the mind of the reader a certian point of view without actually making a direct factual statement. The SPLC related reports are full of these.

    And a little advise for those who are constantly challenged to prove your points. Much of what you write is easily verifyable. You cannot debate a leftist. These are common tactics used when your opponent cannot hold his own. Ridicule is their only recourse and as you see on these posts, it is rampant. Do not try to accomodate those who will not look at your facts. They can’t. But they can call you names. It makes them fell victorious. Indulge them. An open-minded reader is your target. Don’t waste your time on juvinile taunts.

  • Linnea

    Yep, CC is definitely a whack job. I’m only in my ’30′s, and even I know about Hoover’s abuses of power (which *were* abuses, regardless of propaganda). I’d say CC has had too many glasses of Long Island Iced Tea… easier to OD and get hammered on that than on mint juleps. Whether CC is one person or more than one, it doesn’t much matter in the end.

  • http://www.twitter.com/AronL Aron

    CM and Reynardine,

    I can also attest that a mint julep is damned refreshing, as well. Perhaps not so much as a Mojito, but certainly close.

    And it’s one of the few bourbon-based cocktails I drink. When I go for that Kentuckian ambrosia, I generally drink it neat or with an ice cube or two.

    But CC is still a whack-job. And I think that’s what really matters here, heh heh.

  • CM

    Reynardine,

    Per Wikipedia:

    “A mint julep is traditionally made with four ingredients: mint leaf, bourbon, sugar, and water. Traditionally, spearmint is the mint of choice used in Southern states, and in Kentucky in particular.”

  • CM

    Jeff,

    Read the post again, carefully this time:

    “The latest statistics … seem to reflect a clear rise in anti-Muslim rhetoric from groups like Stop Islamization of America.”

    The post doesn’t make any allegation that “people involved with Stop Islamization of America” committed any incidents, only that SIOA ramped up its rhetoric. You can dispute whether the rabid anti-Muslims at SIOA, by spewing their bogus propaganda, bear any responsibility for the increase in hate crimes, but the fact that they did spew it is indisputable.

  • Jeff Indy

    Please show proof that any of the extra 57 incidents were by people involved with Stop Islamization of America.

  • Reynardine

    I’ve got it! Jim de Mint!

  • Reynardine

    What mint? Five-fingered mint? Or just Mint from Hell?

  • CM

    Re Concerned Citizen’s swings from coherence to incoherence, I had noticed them, too. My theory: it depends on whether he posts before or after hitting the mint juleps.

  • http://www.twitter.com/AronL Aron

    Mitch,

    I’m guessing it’s multiple people with the same alias.

    Though I do enjoy your theory.

    Also, Ruslan, I’m glad to see you decided to stick around. Your beat-downs are far too enjoyable for us to lose.

    Cheers

  • Mitch Beales

    Concerned about concerned citizen? Once in a while Concerned Citizen seems to have a rational period but it appears he’s gone off the deep end on this thread. Are there multiple users with this ID? Does this person suffer from multiple personalities or a neurodegenerative disorder? I believe a visit to the doctor is in order. Perhaps a change of meds?

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    Concerned, please provide evidence of your claims.

    Also, while Hoover did monitor the Klan, he was a notorious racist who spent most of his time trying to sabotage civil rights.

  • http://www.twitter.com/AronL Aron

    Concerned,

    Also, Mr Genius, muslin is a fabric. Similar canvas.

    Get it right, goon.

  • http://www.twitter.com/AronL Aron

    Concerned,

    J. Edgar was the greatest FBI director? Hardly.

    William Sessions was. If only for ‘Winners Don’t Use Drugs.’

    J.E.H. was a paranoid loon who refused to give credit to anyone else for Bureau accomplishments. Why, why, why was it so necessary to keep files on so many Americans? He was a neo-McCarthyist, and everyone with even half of a brain knows that.

    And you’re calling the Klan an ‘alleged’ civil rights abuser? I really wish I could abuse your ‘right’ to not be bonked on the head with a rubber chicken right now. That’s how ridiculous that statement was.

    Go home, you damned Freeper.

  • Concerned Citizen

    The FBI is nothing more than a front run by the left, corporate America and pseudo conservatives. J. Edgar Hoover was and is the greatest FBI director of all times, but even he caved in the Johnson administration in the 60′s as the FBI cracked down on the KKK and other suppoesed civil rights violators. Sure. The FBI can blow smoke by playing a tough anti Arab and Muslin stance in the name of protecting our borders. Really. Who cares about the FBI and our other federal angencies?

  • Gregory

    Credibility is instantly lost to anyone who gives credence to the “New World Order conspiracy”.

  • Ruslan Amirkhanov

    Concerned: EVIDENCE PLEASE!!!

    The FBI is run by leftists? Prove it.

    Gun rights are being chipped away by the government? Prove it. (HINT: the Federal government at least has been liberalizing gun laws, allowing them in national parks and on trains)

    The FBI is going after innocent pro-lifers? Prove it.

    Evidence, Concerned, on Free Republic or Stormfront it’s not so important, I know. But out here in the real world, you have to bring it.

  • Concerned Citizen

    Who controlling the FBI? The lefties? Not since J. Edgar Hoover has the FBI has been a great organiztion.
    Is the FBI and the ATF are involved in the new World Order conspiracy?
    Gun rights are being chipped by our own government. Unfortunately.Conservative politicians don’t really care at all so not offending certain elements on the left.
    The FBI goes after pro-lifers and other right wing extremists. We must defend our rights against any aggressions, regardless of which end of the ploitical spectrum, left or right.

  • CIA Jon

    Gee
    I wonder what’s driving those numbers up
    I’ll give you a hint, it rhymes with Faux

  • Erika

    conservative media reaction claiming that this report is the Obama administration demonizing Christianity and undertaking a pro-terrorist agenda in 3 . 2. 1 .

  • Mitch Beales

    Coming from the FBI which engages in Muslim-bashing itself this report is truly frightening.