DOCSLIB.ORG

Counter-Jihad’ Movement

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Counter-Jihad’ Movement Aked, H., Jones, M., & Miller, D. (2019). Islamophobia in Europe: How governments are enabling the far-right ‘counter-jihad’ movement. Public Interest Investigations. http://powerbase.info/index.php/Islamophobia_in_Europe:_How_gover nments_are_enabling_the_far-right_%27counter-jihad%27_movement Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record License (if available): CC BY-NC-SA Link to publication record in Explore Bristol Research PDF-document This is the final published version of the article (version of record). It first appeared online via PowerBase at http://powerbase.info/index.php/Islamophobia_in_Europe:_How_governments_are_enabling_the_far- right_%27counter-jihad%27_movement . Please refer to any applicable terms of use of the publisher. University of Bristol - Explore Bristol Research General rights This document is made available in accordance with publisher policies. Please cite only the published version using the reference above. Full terms of use are available: http://www.bristol.ac.uk/red/research-policy/pure/user-guides/ebr-terms/ Islamophobia in Europe: How governments are enabling the far-right ‘counter-jihad’ movement Hilary Aked Melissa Jones David Miller PUBLIC INTEREST Authors INVESTIGATIONS Hilary Aked Public Interest Investigations (PII) is an Hilary Aked is a freelance independent non-profit making organisation. writer and researcher currently Founded in 2004, PII promotes greater writing a book about the Zionist understanding of the role of PR, propaganda and movement in the UK and lobbying and of the power networks that they Israel’s response to the Boycott, support, through its website Spinwatch (www. Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) spinwatch.org) and its investigative wiki site movement. They hold a PhD in political sociology Powerbase (www.powerbase.info). Spinwatch is from the University of Bath and previously co- a founder member of the Alliance for Lobbying authored The Britain Israel Communications Transparency and Ethics Regulation in the and Research Centre: Giving peace a chance? EU (ALTER-EU) and the Alliance for Lobbying (Public Interest Investigations, 2013) and The Transparency UK (ALT-UK). Henry Jackson Society and the degeneration Further information: of British neo-conservatism (Public Interest Investigations, 2015). Website: www.spinwatch.org Melissa Jones Email: [email protected] Melissa Jones has been managing editor of Mail: Spaceworks, Easton Business Centre, Public Interest Investigations/Spinwatch and Felix Road, Easton, Bristol, England, BS5 0HE its Powerbase website since 2010. She has a background in journalism and not-for-profit investigations, and holds a masters’ degree in human rights from the Human Rights Centre at the University of Essex. David Miller is a director of Public Interest Investigations. He is also Professor of Political Sociology in the School for Policy Studies at the University of Bristol in England. From 2013-2016 he was RCUK Global Uncertainties Leadership Fellow leading a project on understanding and explaining terrorism expertise in practice. Recent publications include: What is Islamophobia? Racism, social movements and the State (co-editor, Pluto Press, 2017); Impact of market forces on addictive substances and behaviours: The web of influence of addictive industries. (co-author, OUP, 2018); The Israel lobby and the European Union (co- author, Public Interest Investigations, 2016); The Henry Jackson Society and the degeneration of British neoconservatism’. (co-author, Public Interest Investigations, 2015); The Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre. Giving peace a chance? (co-author, Public Interest Investigations, 2013) Islamophobia in Europe: counter-extremism policies and the counter-jihad movement • 3 Contents Acknowledgements 3 List of figures & acronyms 4 Executive summary 5 Chapter 1: Introduction 8 Islamophobia, racism and the ‘war on terror’ 8 Why study the counter-jihad movement in the context of counter-extremism? 10 Scope and structure of this report 11 Chapter 2: Understanding the counter-jihad movement 13 The changing face of the far-right: extreme anti-extremists 13 Inventing ‘Islamofascism’, appropriating anti-fascist history 14 Working through the state 15 Transnational organising 17 Islamophobia as ‘free speech’ 18 Chapter 3: United Kingdom 20 UK counter-extremism policies and practices 20 The UK counter-jihad movement 21 Interactions between counter-extremism policy and the counter-jihad movement 23 Counter-jihadists within the political elite 23 Counter-jihadists waging ‘counter-extremism’ 24 Official responses to the counter-jihad movement 25 Conclusion 27 Chapter 4: Germany 30 Government counter-extremism policies 30 ‘Islamist’ extremism and counter-measures 31 Right-wing extremism and counter-measures 32 The German counter-jihad movement 32 Counter-jihadists waging ‘counter-extremism’ 34 Counter-jihad ideas in the mainstream 36 Conclusion 37 Chapter 5: France 39 French counter-extremism policies and practices 40 The French counter-jihad movement 41 Islamophobia within the elite 42 The rise of the Front National 43 Official responses to the far-right 44 Conclusion 45 Chapter 6: Counter-jihad movement funders 48 The shadow giving system fuelling Islamophobia across the Atlantic: donor-advised funds 48 Transatlantic funding flows and in-kind alliances: the key players 51 Counter-extremism groups: transatlantic funding and in-kind alliances 61 US donors funding counter-jihad and counter-extremism groups with links to Europe 64 Conclusions 78 4 • Public Interest Investigations List of tables Figure 1: Breakdown of Middle East Forum donors from 2009-16 54 Figure 2: Middle East Forum known donors contributing above US$50,000 between 2009-16 55 Figure 3: Gatestone Institute known donors contributing above US$50,000 between 2012-16 57 Figure 4: David Horowitz Freedom Center known donors contributing above US$50,000 between 2009-16 59 Figure 5: Center for Security Policy known donors contributing above US$50,000 between 2009-16 60 Acknowledgements The research for this report and related profiles on our investigative wiki website Powerbase.info was made possible by the generosity of the Open Society Foundations, Isvara Foundation, Islam Expo and general fundraising. We thank OSF for their patient support. We would also like to thank Liz Fekete of the Institute of Race Relations (IRR) for valuable advice; Yasser Louatti, formerly of the Collectif Contre l’Islamophobie en France for his insights on France; Jawaab and MEND; Clementine Boucher for help with Powerbase profiles and who along with Riccardo Boscherini helped us trawl thousands of pages of US non-profit tax filings. Thanks also to PII colleagues and freelance associates Tom Griffin, Andy Rowell, Sarah Marusek, Tom Mills, Narzanin Massoumi, Will Dinan, Eveline Lubbers and Tamasin Cave. British Cataloguing-in-Publications Data. A catalogue record for this report is available from the British Library. ISBN 978-0-9570274-9-7 Editorial: Melissa Jones Printed and bound in the UK. COPYRIGHT Public Interest Investigations © 2019 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored or transmitted in any form of by any means without the prior permission from the copyright holder. DISCLAIMER Views and opinions expressed in this publication are those of the individual contributors and do not necessarily reflect those of Public Interest Investigations/ Spinwatch. ORDER COPIES This report is available for download free from the Spinwatch website or you can order hard copies online: http://www.spinwatch.org Islamophobia in Europe: counter-extremism policies and the counterjihad movement • 5 Executive summary Chapter 1: Introduction Counter-jihadists and the far-right more generally are willing and able to work through the state, This report begins by defining Islamophobia rather than against it, which helps to explain why and explaining why it should be understood they are viewed as a public order problem rather as a form of racism. Unlike most other forms than a strategic threat. Yet the elite support of the of racism in Europe today, Islamophobia has counter-jihad movement and the extent to which been institutionalised by government policies to Islamophobic parties are winning political power varying extents in different countries. It has been is nonetheless extremely dangerous for minorities rejuvenated by the ‘war on terror’, rendering and for democracy – though key actors may use Muslims an officially ‘suspect community’. legitimate means such as the ballot box. Therefore, rather than examining the counter-jihad movement in isolation as most prior research has Both at the grassroots and elite level, the counter- done, this report looks at its activities in relation jihad movement is organising across borders. to official counter-extremism policies. It does this One of its main rallying cries has been ‘free because we are concerned with Islamophobia in speech’, garnering it sympathy from the wider general as opposed to the far-right per se. anti-‘political correctness’ lobby. Our analysis shows that US funding is extremely important to The introduction briefly outlines the contents of the European counter-jihad movement. each chapter that follows. Critically, it explains why each of the three country case studies examines counter-extremism policies first Chapter 3: United Kingdom and then the counter-jihad movement in each The first country case study begins by examining national context. This structure serves to highlight the UK government’s counter-extremism
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Download the Classification Decision for the Great
    NOTICE OF DECISION UNDER SECTION 38(1) TO: Chief Censor Title of publication: The Great Replacement Other known title: The Great Replacement Manifesto OFLC ref: 1900149.000 Medium: Text File Maker: Not stated Country of origin: Aotearoa New Zealand Language: English Classification: Objectionable. Excisions: None Descriptive Note: None Display conditions: None REASONS FOR THE DECISION The Office of Film and Literature Classification (Classification Office) examined the publication and recorded the contents in an examination transcript. A written consideration of the legal criteria was undertaken. This document provides the reasons for the decision. Submission procedure: The Chief Censor called in this publication for classification on Sunday March 17th under s13(3) of the Films, Videos, and Publications Classification Act 1993 (FVPC Act). Under s23(1) of the FVPC Act the Classification Office is required to examine and classify the publication. OFLC Ref: 1900149.000 Page 1 of 13 s38(1) Notice of Decision Under s23(2) of the FVPC Act the Classification Office must determine whether the publication is to be classified as unrestricted, objectionable, or objectionable except in particular circumstances. Section 23(3) permits the Classification Office to restrict a publication that would otherwise be classified as objectionable so that it can be made available to particular persons or classes of persons for educational, professional, scientific, literary, artistic, or technical purposes. Synopsis of written submission(s): No submissions were required or sought in relation to the classification of the text. Submissions are not required in cases where the Chief Censor has exercised his authority to call in a publication for examination under section 13(3) of the FVPC Act.
    [Show full text]
  • Chapter 4 the Right-Wing Media Enablers of Anti-Islam Propaganda
    Chapter 4 The right-wing media enablers of anti-Islam propaganda Spreading anti-Muslim hate in America depends on a well-developed right-wing media echo chamber to amplify a few marginal voices. The think tank misinforma- tion experts and grassroots and religious-right organizations profiled in this report boast a symbiotic relationship with a loosely aligned, ideologically-akin group of right-wing blogs, magazines, radio stations, newspapers, and television news shows to spread their anti-Islam messages and myths. The media outlets, in turn, give members of this network the exposure needed to amplify their message, reach larger audiences, drive fundraising numbers, and grow their membership base. Some well-established conservative media outlets are a key part of this echo cham- ber, mixing coverage of alarmist threats posed by the mere existence of Muslims in America with other news stories. Chief among the media partners are the Fox News empire,1 the influential conservative magazine National Review and its website,2 a host of right-wing radio hosts, The Washington Times newspaper and website,3 and the Christian Broadcasting Network and website.4 They tout Frank Gaffney, David Yerushalmi, Daniel Pipes, Robert Spencer, Steven Emerson, and others as experts, and invite supposedly moderate Muslim and Arabs to endorse bigoted views. In so doing, these media organizations amplify harm- ful, anti-Muslim views to wide audiences. (See box on page 86) In this chapter we profile some of the right-wing media enablers, beginning with the websites, then hate radio, then the television outlets. The websites A network of right-wing websites and blogs are frequently the primary movers of anti-Muslim messages and myths.
    [Show full text]
  • Islamophobia and Religious Intolerance: Threats to Global Peace and Harmonious Co-Existence
    Qudus International Journal of Islamic Studies (QIJIS) Volume 8, Number 2, 2020 DOI : 10.21043/qijis.v8i2.6811 ISLAMOPHOBIA AND RELIGIOUS INTOLERANCE: THREATS TO GLOBAL PEACE AND HARMONIOUS CO-EXISTENCE Kazeem Oluwaseun DAUDA National Open University of Nigeria (NOUN), Jabi-Abuja, Nigeria Consultant, FARKAZ Technologies & Education Consulting Int’l, Ijebu-Ode [email protected] Abstract Recent events show that there are heightened fear, hostilities, prejudices and discriminations associated with religion in virtually every part of the world. It becomes almost impossible to watch news daily without scenes of religious intolerance and violence with dire consequences for societal peace. This paper examines the trends, causes and implications of Islamophobia and religious intolerance for global peace and harmonious co-existence. It relies on content analysis of secondary sources of data. It notes that fear and hatred associated with Islām and persecution of Muslims is the fallout of religious intolerance as reflected in most melee and growingverbal attacks, trends anti-Muslim of far-right hatred,or right-wing racism, extremists xenophobia,. It revealsanti-Sharī’ah that Islamophobia policies, high-profile and religious terrorist intolerance attacks, have and loss of lives, wanton destruction of property, violation led to proliferation of attacks on Muslims, incessant of Muslims’ fundamental rights and freedom, rising fear of insecurity, and distrust between Muslims and QIJIS, Vol. 8, No. 2, 2020 257 Kazeem Oluwaseun DAUDA The paper concludes that escalating Islamophobic attacks and religious intolerance globally hadnon-Muslims. constituted a serious threat to world peace and harmonious co-existence. Relevant resolutions in curbing rising trends of Islamophobia and religious intolerance are suggested.
    [Show full text]
  • 990-PF and Its Separate Instructions Is at Www Ins Gov/Form990pf for Calendar Year 2016 Or Tax Year Heamnina
    0 0 Return of Private Foundation OMB No ,5950052 Form 990 -PF or Section 4947( a)(1) Trust Treated as Private Foundation O ^+ Department of the Treasury ► Do not enter social security numbers on this form as it may be made public V Internal Revenue Seri ► Information about Form 990-PF and its separate instructions is at www ins gov/form990pf For calendar year 2016 or tax year heamnina . 2016 . and endma .20 Name of foundation A Employer Identification number THE LYNDE AND HARRY BRADLEY FOUNDATION INC 39 6037928 Number and street (or P O box number it mail is not delivered to street address ) Room /suite B Telephone number (see instructions) 1241 N FRANKLIN PL (414) 291 9915 City or town state or province country and ZIP or foreign postal code C If exemption application is pending check here q MILWAUKEE WI 53202-2901 q q q G Check all that apply Initial return Initial return of a former public charity D 1 Foreign organizations check here ► q Final return q Amended return 2 Foreign orgaandniz ations meeting the 65% test Name q E] Address change 7] change check here nd attach computation ► H Check type of organization q Section 501 (c)(3) exempt private foundation E If private foundation status was terminated under s ec ti o n 507(b)(1)(A) check here El Section 4947(a)(1) nonexempt chartable trust E] Other taxable private foundation q Fair market value of all assets at J Accounting method 2 Cash Accrual F lithe foundation , s,n a 60-month termination q end of year (from Part 11, col (c), q Other (specify) under section 5o7(bRl)IB) check here ► line 16) ► $ 849 426 516 (Part / column (d) must be on cash basis) Analysis of Revenue and Expenses (d ) Disbursements (a) Revenue and net for chartable expenses per (b ) Net investment (c) Adjusted amounts in columns (b), (c) and (d) may not necessarily equal income income purposes books the amounts in column (a) (see Instructions)) (cash basis only) 1 Contributions, gifts, grants etc , received (attach schedule) (489,697) 1 - 1 1 2 if the fotndaton is not required to attach Sch B -`a:, i f•,x.
    [Show full text]
  • Anti-Muslim Hatred and Discrimination Submission from Dia Kayyali Associate Director of Advocacy at Mnemonic, Independent Consul
    Anti-Muslim Hatred and Discrimination Submission from Dia Kayyali Associate Director of Advocacy at Mnemonic, independent consultant on technology and human rights, and co-chair of the Christchurch Call Advisory Network1 [email protected] Summary: This submission focuses on the online aspect of anti-Muslim hatred and discrimination (Islamophobia). Content that incites violence against Muslims is too often left up on major social media platforms, while important content produced by Muslims is often removed. This leads to diminishing opportunities for justice in conflict zones such as Syria, while facilitating increased violence against Muslim communities around the world. Furthermore, online content is never solely online. Rather, it is intimately linked to violence and discrimination against Muslims in a harmful feedback loop. How the online feeds into the offline and back again, creating a vicious cycle The online component of Islamophobia has deadly consequences for Muslims around the world. At the same time, predominantly Muslim communities see content they post online regularly removed by major social media companies. Islamophobia, like other social ills, is stuck in a dangerous feedback loop. Offline discrimination and violence lead to online hate speech and dangerous speech. This content then worsens discrimination, and sometimes directly incites offline violence and other negative consequences. The cycle is self-perpetuating, and it is deadly. Muslim lives have already been lost as a result, and Islamophobia threatens other essential human rights including freedoms of expression and religion. Who is Muslim? Islamophobia doesn’t just impact Muslims. As outlined in this submission, it also impacts people who are secular or practice other religions but are in Muslim majority countries or communities.
    [Show full text]
  • In Their Own Words: Voices of Jihad
    THE ARTS This PDF document was made available from www.rand.org as CHILD POLICY a public service of the RAND Corporation. CIVIL JUSTICE EDUCATION Jump down to document ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENT 6 HEALTH AND HEALTH CARE INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS The RAND Corporation is a nonprofit research NATIONAL SECURITY POPULATION AND AGING organization providing objective analysis and PUBLIC SAFETY effective solutions that address the challenges facing SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY the public and private sectors around the world. SUBSTANCE ABUSE TERRORISM AND HOMELAND SECURITY Support RAND TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE Purchase this document WORKFORCE AND WORKPLACE Browse Books & Publications Make a charitable contribution For More Information Visit RAND at www.rand.org Learn more about the RAND Corporation View document details Limited Electronic Distribution Rights This document and trademark(s) contained herein are protected by law as indicated in a notice appearing later in this work. This electronic representation of RAND intellectual property is provided for non-commercial use only. Unauthorized posting of RAND PDFs to a non-RAND Web site is prohibited. RAND PDFs are protected under copyright law. Permission is required from RAND to reproduce, or reuse in another form, any of our research documents for commercial use. For information on reprint and linking permissions, please see RAND Permissions. This product is part of the RAND Corporation monograph series. RAND monographs present major research findings that address the challenges facing the public and private sectors. All RAND monographs undergo rigorous peer review to ensure high standards for research quality and objectivity. in their own words Voices of Jihad compilation and commentary David Aaron Approved for public release; distribution unlimited C O R P O R A T I O N This book results from the RAND Corporation's continuing program of self-initiated research.
    [Show full text]
  • France 2016 International Religious Freedom Report
    FRANCE 2016 INTERNATIONAL RELIGIOUS FREEDOM REPORT Executive Summary The constitution and the law protect the right of individuals to choose, change, and practice their religion. The government investigated and prosecuted numerous crimes and other actions against religious groups, including anti-Semitic and anti- Muslim violence, hate speech, and vandalism. The government continued to enforce laws prohibiting face coverings in public spaces and government buildings and the wearing of “conspicuous” religious symbols at public schools, which included a ban on headscarves and Sikh turbans. The highest administrative court rejected the city of Villeneuve-Loubet’s ban on “clothes demonstrating an obvious religious affiliation worn by swimmers on public beaches.” The ban was directed at full-body swimming suits worn by some Muslim women. ISIS claimed responsibility for a terrorist attack in Nice during the July 14 French independence day celebration that killed 84 people without regard for their religious belief. President Francois Hollande condemned the attack as an act of radical Islamic terrorism. Prime Minister (PM) Manuel Valls cautioned against scapegoating Muslims or Islam for the attack by a radical extremist group. The government extended a state of emergency until July 2017. The government condemned anti- Semitic, anti-Muslim, and anti-Catholic acts and continued efforts to promote interfaith understanding through public awareness campaigns and by encouraging dialogues in schools, among local officials, police, and citizen groups. Jehovah’s Witnesses reported 19 instances in which authorities interfered with public proselytizing by their community. There were continued reports of attacks against Christians, Jews, and Muslims. The government, as well as Muslim and Jewish groups, reported the number of anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim incidents decreased by 59 percent and 58 percent respectively from the previous year to 335 anti-Semitic acts and 189 anti-Muslim acts.
    [Show full text]
  • Democracy and Dissent: Strauss, Arendt, and Voegelin in America
    Denver Law Review Volume 89 Issue 3 Special Issue - Constitutionalism and Article 6 Revolutions December 2020 Democracy and Dissent: Strauss, Arendt, and Voegelin in America Stephen M. Feldman Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.du.edu/dlr Recommended Citation Stephen M. Feldman, Democracy and Dissent: Strauss, Arendt, and Voegelin in America, 89 Denv. U. L. Rev. 671 (2012). This Article is brought to you for free and open access by Digital Commons @ DU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Denver Law Review by an authorized editor of Digital Commons @ DU. For more information, please contact [email protected],[email protected]. DEMOCRACY AND DISSENT: STRAUSS, ARENDT, AND VOEGELIN IN AMERICA STEPHEN M. FELDMANt During the 1930s, American democratic government underwent a paradigmatic transformation.' From the framing through the 1920s, the United States operated as a republican democracy. Citizens and elected officials were supposed to be virtuous: in the political realm, they were to pursue the common good or public welfare rather than their own "par- tial or private interests."2 Intellectually, republican democracy had premodern roots stretching back to antiquity. 3 As such, republican demo- cratic theorists often conceptualized the common good in objectivist terms, as if there existed a distinct good that could be clearly ascer- tained.4 Equally important, for at least a century, republican democracy seemed to fit the agrarian, rural, and relatively homogenous American society. Thomas Jefferson, for one, insisted that the agrarian economy and widespread rural land ownership promoted a virtuous commitment to the common good.5 And given that, in the nation's early decades, an overwhelming number of Americans were Protestants who traced their ancestry to Western or Northern Europe, the people seemed sufficiently homogeneous to join together in the pursuit of the common good.6 Of course, some Americans did not fit the mold.
    [Show full text]
  • Democratic Vanguardism
    Democratic Vanguardism Modernity, Intervention, and the making of the Bush Doctrine Michael Harland A Thesis Submitted in Fulfillment of The Degree of Doctor of Philosophy in History Department of History University of Canterbury 2013 For Francine Contents Acknowledgements 1 Abstract 3 Introduction 4 1. America at the Vanguard: Democracy Promotion and the Bush Doctrine 16 2. Assessing History’s End: Thymos and the Post-Historic Life 37 3. The Exceptional Nation: Power, Principle and American Foreign Policy 55 4. The “Crisis” of Liberal Modernity: Neoconservatism, Relativism and Republican Virtue 84 5. An “Intoxicating Moment:” The Rise of Democratic Globalism 123 6. The Perfect Storm: September 11 and the coming of the Bush Doctrine 159 Conclusion 199 Bibliography 221 1 Acknowledgements Over the three years I spent researching and writing this thesis, I have received valuable advice and support from a number of individuals and organisations. My supervisors, Peter Field and Jeremy Moses, were exemplary. As my senior supervisor, Peter provided a model of a consummate historian – lively, probing, and passionate about the past. His detailed reading of my work helped to hone the thesis significantly. Peter also allowed me to use his office while he was on sabbatical in 2009. With a library of over six hundred books, the space proved of great use to an aspiring scholar. Jeremy Moses, meanwhile, served as the co-supervisor for this thesis. His research on the connections between liberal internationalist theory and armed intervention provided much stimulus for this study. Our discussions on the present trajectory of American foreign policy reminded me of the continuing pertinence of my dissertation topic.
    [Show full text]
  • Alternative North Americas: What Canada and The
    ALTERNATIVE NORTH AMERICAS What Canada and the United States Can Learn from Each Other David T. Jones ALTERNATIVE NORTH AMERICAS Woodrow Wilson International Center for Scholars One Woodrow Wilson Plaza 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue NW Washington, D.C. 20004 Copyright © 2014 by David T. Jones All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reproduced, scanned, or distributed in any printed or electronic form without permission. Please do not participate in or encourage piracy of copyrighted materials in violation of author’s rights. Published online. ISBN: 978-1-938027-36-9 DEDICATION Once more for Teresa The be and end of it all A Journey of Ten Thousand Years Begins with a Single Day (Forever Tandem) TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction .................................................................................................................1 Chapter 1 Borders—Open Borders and Closing Threats .......................................... 12 Chapter 2 Unsettled Boundaries—That Not Yet Settled Border ................................ 24 Chapter 3 Arctic Sovereignty—Arctic Antics ............................................................. 45 Chapter 4 Immigrants and Refugees .........................................................................54 Chapter 5 Crime and (Lack of) Punishment .............................................................. 78 Chapter 6 Human Rights and Wrongs .................................................................... 102 Chapter 7 Language and Discord ..........................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities
    Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities A Practical Guide Understanding Anti-Muslim Hate Crimes Addressing the Security Needs of Muslim Communities A Practical Guide Published by the OSCE Office for Democratic Institutions and Human Rights (ODIHR) Ul. Miodowa 10 00-251 Warsaw Poland www.osce.org/odihr © OSCE/ODIHR 2020 All rights reserved. The contents of this publication may be freely used and copied for educational and other non-commercial purposes, provided that any such reproduction is accompanied by an acknowledgement of the OSCE/ ODIHR as the source. ISBN 978-83-66089-93-8 Designed by Homework Printed in Poland by Centrum Poligrafii Contents Foreword v Executive Summary vii Introduction 1 PART ONE: Understanding the challenge 7 I. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: context 8 II. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: key features 12 III. Hate crimes against Muslims in the OSCE region: impact 21 PART TWO: International standards on intolerance against Muslims 29 I. Commitments and other international obligations 30 II. Key principles 37 1. Rights based 37 2. Victim focused 38 3. Non-discriminatory 41 4. Participatory 41 5. Shared 42 6. Collaborative 43 7. Empathetic 43 8. Gender sensitive 43 9. Transparent 44 10. Holistic 45 PART THREE: Responding to anti-Muslim hate crimes and the security challenges of Muslim communities 47 Practical steps 48 1. Acknowledging the problem 48 2. Raising awareness 51 3. Recognizing and recording the anti-Muslim bias motivation of hate crimes 53 4. Providing evidence of the security needs of Muslim communities by working with them to collect hate crime data 58 5.
    [Show full text]
  • Monetized Hate: Decoding the Network
    MONETIZED HATE: DECODING THE NETWORK THE NETWORK REVISITED The present scourge of anti-Arab and anti-Muslim bigotry in our country is rooted in a calculated, insidious effort to contaminate our public discourse. This effort dates back to the early 2000s, when a small, interlaced network of analysts and activists exploited a nationwide climate of fear in the aftermath of 9/11. To be sure, the systemic mistreatment of our Arab American and American Muslim communities did not begin with the new millennium. However, the success of this so-called network to mainstream hateful rhetoric and advance discriminatory policies is considerable, and thus deserves outsize attention. In 2011, The Center for American Progress (CAP) published “Fear, Inc. The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America.”1 The report found that a nationwide rise in anti-Muslim bigotry was traceable to a handful of “misinformation experts.” These individuals and their organizations relied on a syndicate of activists, media partners, and grassroots organizing to radiate bias presented as fact. They also relied on significant financial support from a select group of charitable foundations. This network of donors, analysts, and activists not only distorted millions of Americans’ understanding of Islam and Muslims, it also drove inequitable policies. One example highlighted in the report was that of so-called “anti-Sharia bills”2 introduced in numerous state legislatures. Most of these bills drew from model legislation drafted by David Yerushalmi,3 an SPLC-designated anti-Muslim extremist. CAP released a follow-up in 2015 entitled “Fear Inc., 2.0. The Islamophobia Network’s Effects to Manufactured Hate in America.” 4 While the revelations of CAP’s initial report led charitable organizations, politicians, and the media to sever ties with many of the network’s key members, the 2015 edition also found that individuals within the network had successfully advanced a range of anti-Muslim policies at the local, state, and federal level.
    [Show full text]