DOCSLIB.ORG

Legalizing Othering: the United States of Islamophobia 4 the Judgment of Another US State’S Court As a Belonging Means Having a Meaningful Voice and Foreign Judgment

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Legalizing Othering: the United States of Islamophobia 4 the Judgment of Another US State’S Court As a Belonging Means Having a Meaningful Voice and Foreign Judgment Research Report September 2017 Legalizing Othering The United States of Islamophobia by Elsadig Elsheikh, Basima Sisemore, Natalia Ramirez Lee HAASINSTITUTE.BERKELEY.EDU This report is published by the Haas Institute for a Fair and Inclusive Society at UC Berkeley About the Authors Editors Contact Elsadig Elsheikh is the director Marc Abizeid, Rhonda Itaoui, 460 Stephens Hall of the Global Justice Program Stephen Menendian Berkeley, CA 94720-2330 at the Haas Institute where his Tel 510-642-3326 research focuses on the so- Infographs & Maps haasinstitute.berkeley.edu cio-political dynamics of neo- Samir Gambhir liberal globalization as related to development, food systems, Layout / Design global forced migration, human Rachelle Galloway-Popotas and indigenous peoples’ rights, state and citizenship, and struc- Reviewed by tural barriers to inclusivity. Hatem Bazian Basima Sisemore is a re- Report Citation searcher for the Global Justice Elsadig Elsheikh, Basima Sise- Program at the Haas Institute more, Natalia Ramirez Lee. “Le- for a Fair and Inclusive Soci- galizing Othering: The United ety. Her research addresses States of Islamophobia.” Haas Islamophobia, human rights, Institute for a Fair and Inclusive and exclusionary practices that Society, University of Califor- marginalize Muslims and other nia, Berkeley: Berkeley, CA. communities of color. Basima September 2017. haasinstitute. received her Master’s in Re- berkeley.edu/islamophobia search Architecture from Gold- smiths, University of London. Original report published in Natalia Ramirez Lee is a Co- September 2017; an updated blentz Civil Rights Fellow at the version was released January Haas Institute. She is currently 2018. a law student at Berkeley Law The full report and database and has participated in proj- are online at haasinstitute. ects related to discrimination berkeley.edu/islamophobia and equality law, international human rights and immigration. Contents Glossary of Key Terms 4 Strategies and Policies to 50 Combat Islamophobia Key Findings 7 Endnotes 53 Introduction 9 Methodology and Database 12 Methodology ..................................................... 12 Sidebars The United States of Islamophobia Database .................................. 14 Excerpt of the September 20, 2001 Address by President George W. Bush to Joint Session of Congress....................................... 17 The Impacts of Islamophobia 15 David Yerushalmi: on American Society The Creator of ALAC ...................................... 18 The Rise of Anti-Muslim Sentiment .............. 15 Park51 Community Center: The Myth and Controversy ............................. 19 The Rise of Xenophobia vis-à-vis Islamophobia ..................................... 19 The Rise of the Anti-Sharia Movement and the Creation of ALAC ............................. 21 Interview Excerpts The Context of Anti-Sharia Dalia Mogahed ................................................ 16 State Legislation .............................................. 23 Nour Bouhassoun ........................................... 20 Recurring Themes and Discriminatory Mark Potok ......................................................... 23 Effects of the Anti-Sharia Bills ...................... 24 Evelyn Nakano Glenn ...................................... 27 Karen Korematsu .............................................. 28 Islamophobia in the Era of Trump 26 Baher Azmy ....................................................... 31 Muslim Ban 1.0 ................................................ 26 Hatem Bazian ....................................................34 Muslim Ban 2.0 ................................................ 27 Hassan Shibly ................................................... 37 Laptop Ban ....................................................... 29 Saeed Khan .......................................................39 Abed Awad ....................................................... 41 Federal Measures 30 Stephen Piggott ............................................... 47 Federal Programs and Initiatives ..................30 Federal Legislation ........................................... 33 State Legislation 36 A Solution in Search of a Problem ...............36 Themes of Anti-Sharia Legislation ................38 Discriminatory Effects of Anti-Sharia Legislation ..........................................................40 Patterns and Trends Related to Anti-Sharia Legislation ....................................44 Glossary of Key Terms Act/Statute birth certificate, his place of birth, and US citi- A bill that is enacted into law by a state legislature zenship. Even when Obama’s campaign shared or the US Congress. his birth certificate on the “Fight the Smears” website to address any speculation surround- American Laws for American ing his birth, the birther movement continued to Courts (ALAC) model act spread unfounded claims about his birth certif- An "anti-Sharia law" model legislation drafted by icate. Donald Trump was a staunch supporter lawyer and anti-Muslim activist David Yerushalmi. of the birther movement and is credited with The ALAC model prohibits foreign law, and more reviving the baseless theory that Obama is not specifically Sharia law, from being considered or a US-born citizen prior to the 2012 and 2016 enforced in state courts as a basis for rulings. Ac- presidential election campaigns. Only on Sep- cording to the ACLU, ALAC and other similar laws tember 16, 2016, did then-presidential candidate that seek to single out Muslims by way of barring Donald Trump concede that Obama was indeed the application of Sharia in US courts are in vio- born in the United States. lation of the First Amendment, and undermine the power of courts to fairly consider cases. Constitutional Amendment A modification or change to a state or nation’s Anti-Sharia movement constitution. For each of the 50 states that com- A movement that came into inception in 2010 prise the United States, each has its own rules inspired by anti-Muslim activists such as David and procedures that determine how the constitu- Yerushalmi, Brigitte Gabriel, Frank Gaffney, among tion of that state can be amended. others, to embed a fear of "Sharia law" within American society, and to influence lawmakers to Enacted/Not Enacted introduce anti-Sharia bills that target Muslims A bill that is enacted into law means that the bill in state legislatures. The movement, through an- becomes law, or is now an Act, statute, or legis- ti-Sharia and anti-Syrian refugee advocacy work, lation. If a bill is not enacted, the bill is not signed is stirring up anti-Muslim sentiment across the US, into law. and by way of enacting ALAC or anti-Sharia bills, legalizes the othering of Muslims. Such laws strip Extremist/Extremism Muslims of their legal rights as afforded by the Individuals who hold political, social, and/or ideo- First Amendment, and further proliferate a culture logical views at the far ends of the political and of fear and intolerance towards Muslim Americans social spectrums and who utilize violence as a and Muslim communities. means to achieve their goals, in the process harm- ing or singling out other social groups in society. The Birther Movement In the context of Islamophobia, there exists a A conspiracy theory movement that emerged in belief that extremists and extremism are implicitly the run-up to the 2008 presidential election that attached to Muslims especially disproportionate fallaciously sought to undermine then-Senator to other religious or racial/ethnic groups. Barack Obama’s bid for presidency. The birther movement labeled Barack Obama as “foreign” in Foreign Law an effort to disqualify him from serving as presi- Laws of another jurisdiction, not strictly laws of dent, bringing into question the legitimacy of his another country, as a state court could refer to haasinstitute.berkeley.edu Legalizing Othering: The United States of Islamophobia 4 the judgment of another US state’s court as a Belonging means having a meaningful voice and foreign judgment. being afforded the opportunity to participate in the design of political, social, and cultural struc- First Amendment tures. More than just having access, belonging is An amendment to the US Constitution that details the right to contribute and make demands upon the limits placed on governmental power, estab- society and institutions. Belonging entails an un- lishing that it is illegal for Congress to enact a law wavering commitment to not simply tolerating and establishing an official religion of the country, or respecting difference, but ensuring that all people to prohibit the free exercise of religion, protecting are fully seen and included in society. the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, free- dom of the press, freedom of assembly, and the Senate Bill (SB)/House Bill (HB) right to petition the US government. A proposed piece of legislation or bill originating from the Senate, and a proposed piece of legis- Islamophobia lation or bill originating from the House of Repre- Islamophobia is the belief that Islam is a mono- sentatives. lithic religion whose followers, called Muslims, do not share common values with other major faiths; Sharia/Sharia law is inferior to Judaism and Christianity; is archaic, According to a large majority of Islamic law ex- barbaric, and irrational; is a religion of violence that perts, Sharia is a moral code or guiding principles supports terrorism; and is a violent political ideol- founded on the teachings of the Quran and the ogy. Islamophobia
Load more

Recommended publications
  • DS-5535, Supplemental Questions for Visa Applicants
    Page 1 of 22 Before the BUREAU OF CONSULAR AFFAIRS U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE Washington, DC 20520 ) 60-Day Notice of Proposed ) Information Collection: ) COMMENTS OF THE Supplemental Questions ) IDENTITY PROJECT for Visa Applicants (Form ) AND DS–5535; OMB Control ) RESTORE THE FOURTH Number 1405–0226), Docket ) Number DOS–2017–0032, ) FR Doc. 2017-16343 ) ) The Identity Project (IDP) <http://www.PapersPlease.org> Restore The Fourth, Inc. <https://www.restorethe4th.com> October 2, 2017 The Identity Project and Restore The Fourth Comments on Supplemental Questions https://papersplease.org for Visa Applicants (Form DS–5535) https://www.restorethe4th.com October 2, 2017 Page 2 of 22 I. INTRODUCTION The Identity Project and Restore The Fourth, Inc., submit these comments in response to the “60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Supplemental Questions for Visa Applicants” (Form DS–5535; OMB Control Number 1405–0226), Docket Number DOS–2017– 0032, FR Doc. 2017-16343, published at 82 Federal Register 36180-36182 (August 3, 2017). The proposed (and already ongoing) information collection does not comply with the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), the First and Fourth Amendments to the U.S. Constitution, or the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR). This vague and overbroad supplemental collection of information from a vaguely-defined subset of would-be visitors to the U.S. is inappropriate as a matter of policy, and contrary to U.S. national and international interests in democracy and human rights. In many cases, it would be impossible for prospective visitors to provide the requested information. Exceptions to this collection of information, like decisions to require it in the first place, would be discretionary with the Department of State.
    [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]
  • Walking the Talk: 2021 Blueprints for a Human Rights-Centered U.S
    Walking the Talk: 2021 Blueprints for a Human Rights-Centered U.S. Foreign Policy October 2020 Acknowledgments Human Rights First is a nonprofit, nonpartisan human rights advocacy and action organization based in Washington D.C., New York, and Los Angeles. © 2020 Human Rights First. All Rights Reserved. Walking the Talk: 2021 Blueprints for a Human Rights-Centered U.S. Foreign Policy was authored by Human Rights First’s staff and consultants. Senior Vice President for Policy Rob Berschinski served as lead author and editor-in-chief, assisted by Tolan Foreign Policy Legal Fellow Reece Pelley and intern Anna Van Niekerk. Contributing authors include: Eleanor Acer Scott Johnston Trevor Sutton Rob Berschinski David Mizner Raha Wala Cole Blum Reece Pelley Benjamin Haas Rita Siemion Significant assistance was provided by: Chris Anders Steven Feldstein Stephen Pomper Abigail Bellows Becky Gendelman Jennifer Quigley Brittany Benowitz Ryan Kaminski Scott Roehm Jim Bernfield Colleen Kelly Hina Shamsi Heather Brandon-Smith Kate Kizer Annie Shiel Christen Broecker Kennji Kizuka Mandy Smithberger Felice Gaer Dan Mahanty Sophia Swanson Bishop Garrison Kate Martin Yasmine Taeb Clark Gascoigne Jenny McAvoy Bailey Ulbricht Liza Goitein Sharon McBride Anna Van Niekerk Shannon Green Ian Moss Human Rights First challenges the United States of America to live up to its ideals. We believe American leadership is essential in the struggle for human dignity and the rule of law, and so we focus our advocacy on the U.S. government and other key actors able to leverage U.S. influence. When the U.S. government falters in its commitment to promote and protect human rights, we step in to demand reform, accountability, and justice.
    [Show full text]
  • Contracting Into Religious Law: Anti-Sharia Enactments and the Establishment and Free Exercise Clauses
    2013] 937 CONTRACTING INTO RELIGIOUS LAW: ANTI-SHARIA ENACTMENTS AND THE ESTABLISHMENT AND FREE EXERCISE CLAUSES Muhammad Elsayed INTRODUCTION Muneer Awad, an American Muslim resident of Oklahoma, wrote his last will and testament.1 However, unlike the wills of most Americans, his might not be probated by the courts of Oklahoma because it is based on his Muslim faith.2 Under Oklahoma’s “Save Our State Amendment,”3 state courts are prohibited from considering the legal precepts of foreign nations or religions.4 This amendment, which was overwhelmingly approved by voters in 2010,5 is part of a recent wave of anti-Sharia enactments6 targeting foreign and religious laws, many of which particularly target Islamic law (Sharia).7 While these enactments have yet to receive much judicial scrutiny be- cause of their novelty,8 they have created a firestorm of public controversy George Mason University School of Law, J.D. Candidate, May 2013; George Mason Universi- ty, B.S., Administration of Justice, May 2010. I would like to thank Professor Neomi Rao and Professor Laura Walker for helping me to write this Comment. 1 Abdus Sattar Ghazali, Federal Court Deals Blow to “Anti-Muslim” Bigots, AM. MUSLIM PERSP. (JAN. 11, 2012), http://www.amperspective.com/?page_id=2256. 2 Awad v. Ziriax, 754 F. Supp. 2d 1298, 1304,1308 (W.D. Okla. 2010) (granting preliminary injunction on the certification of Oklahoma’s referendum results that would bar courts from considering Sharia law), aff’d, 670 F.3d 1111 (10th Cir. 2012). 3 H.R.J. Res. 1056, 52d Leg., 2d Reg.
    [Show full text]
  • Inside Islam Screening Kit – Copyright 2009-2010 Unity Productions Foundation
    Inside Islam A UPF Documentary Film Based on the Gallup Poll of Worldwide Muslim Public Opinion Executive Producers: Michael Wolfe and Alex Kronemer Screening Kit Table of Contents Conducting A Screening in Your City Executive Summary 3 Models Examples to Follow 4 Criteria for Conducting a Screening 5 Recommendations 6 Sample Program 7 Budgeting Example Costs for Different Locations 8 Budget Breakdown 8 Raising Funds and Getting Sponsors Funds for the Screening 12 Getting Organizations on Board and Getting Sponsors 12 Slide for Sponsors in Slideshow 12 Ticket Sales Tips 13 UPF’s Role in the Screening What UPF Can Provide 13 Dates Available 13 Organizer Roles 14 FAQ’s 16 Review…Next Steps 17 Samples & Articles Publicity/Invitation 20 Sponsorship/Feedback Forms 22 Sample Press Release 24 Biographies of Possible Speakers from UPF 28 2 Inside Islam Screening Kit – Copyright 2009-2010 Unity Productions Foundation www.upf.tv 3 Inside Islam Screening Kit – Copyright 2009-2010 Unity Productions Foundation www.upf.tv Conducting a Screening in Your City Executive Summary This ‘Screening Kit’ will take you through the process of planning a screening for UPF’s Inside Islam film in ​ ​ your city. Simply put, a ‘screening’ is a showing of the film to a live audience, which typically takes place in a proper theater and often features a speaker associated with the film. Screenings also feature a reception before or afterward. Conducting a screening is a way of bringing the community together, and building bridges across racial and religious lines, thus promoting UPF’s mission. It’s also a celebration of a completed project and a way of rewarding you and the supporters in your area who have helped make this project a reality.
    [Show full text]
  • UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT of INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION in Re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMEN
    USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md-00527-RLM-MGG document 3279 filed 03/22/19 page 1 of 354 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF INDIANA SOUTH BEND DIVISION ) Case No. 3:05-MD-527 RLM In re FEDEX GROUND PACKAGE ) (MDL 1700) SYSTEM, INC., EMPLOYMENT ) PRACTICES LITIGATION ) ) ) THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: ) ) Carlene Craig, et. al. v. FedEx Case No. 3:05-cv-530 RLM ) Ground Package Systems, Inc., ) ) PROPOSED FINAL APPROVAL ORDER This matter came before the Court for hearing on March 11, 2019, to consider final approval of the proposed ERISA Class Action Settlement reached by and between Plaintiffs Leo Rittenhouse, Jeff Bramlage, Lawrence Liable, Kent Whistler, Mike Moore, Keith Berry, Matthew Cook, Heidi Law, Sylvia O’Brien, Neal Bergkamp, and Dominic Lupo1 (collectively, “the Named Plaintiffs”), on behalf of themselves and the Certified Class, and Defendant FedEx Ground Package System, Inc. (“FXG”) (collectively, “the Parties”), the terms of which Settlement are set forth in the Class Action Settlement Agreement (the “Settlement Agreement”) attached as Exhibit A to the Joint Declaration of Co-Lead Counsel in support of Preliminary Approval of the Kansas Class Action 1 Carlene Craig withdrew as a Named Plaintiff on November 29, 2006. See MDL Doc. No. 409. Named Plaintiffs Ronald Perry and Alan Pacheco are not movants for final approval and filed an objection [MDL Doc. Nos. 3251/3261]. USDC IN/ND case 3:05-md-00527-RLM-MGG document 3279 filed 03/22/19 page 2 of 354 Settlement [MDL Doc. No. 3154-1]. Also before the Court is ERISA Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees and for Payment of Service Awards to the Named Plaintiffs, filed with the Court on October 19, 2018 [MDL Doc.
    [Show full text]
  • Title:​ Never Forget: Ground Zero, Park51, and Constitutive Rhetorics
    Title:​ Never Forget: Ground Zero, Park51, and Constitutive Rhetorics Author:​ Tamara Issak Issue:​ 3 Publication Date:​ November 2020 Stable URL: http://constell8cr.com/issue-3/never-forget-ground-zero-park51-and-constitutive-rh etorics/ constellations a cultural rhetorics publishing space Never Forget: Ground Zero, Park51, and Constitutive Rhetorics Tamara Issak, St. John’s University Introduction It was the summer of 2010 when the story of Park51 exploded in the news. Day after day, media coverage focused on the proposal to create a center for Muslim and interfaith worship and recreational activities in Lower Manhattan. The space envisioned for Park51 was a vacant department store which was damaged on September 11, 2001. Eventually, it was sold to Sharif El-Gamal, a Manhattan realtor and developer, in July of 2009. El-Gamal intended to use this space to build a community center open to the general public, which would feature a performing arts center, swimming pool, fitness center, basketball court, an auditorium, a childcare center, and many other amenities along with a Muslim prayer space/mosque. Despite the approval for construction by a Manhattan community board, the site became a battleground and the project was hotly debated. It has been over ten years since the uproar over Park51, and it is important to revisit the event as it has continued significance and impact today. The main argument against the construction of the community center and mosque was its proximity to Ground Zero. Opponents to Park51 argued that the construction of a mosque so close to Ground Zero was offensive and insensitive because the 9/11 attackers were associated with Islam (see fig.
    [Show full text]
  • International Programs Whitney R
    Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute Report of Activities | 2013-2016 International Programs Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute Washington University School of Law Report of Activities | 2013-2016 Contents Leadership 1 Dean Nancy Staudt 2 Professor Leila Nadya Sadat 3 International Council 4 MISSION: Faculty Advisory Board 6 Through a combination of education and research, the Whitney R. Harris World Law Institute contributes to the betterment of global Research Activities 8 society. It does this by increasing global knowledge and understand- Overview 10 ing, promoting the rule of law, and addressing problems that require Crimes Against Humanity Initiative 11 international cooperation and international solutions. Other Conferences 14 Selected Lectures 18 The Institute enhances the intellectual vibrancy of the Law School Workshops & Roundtables 22 and the University, provides advice and assistance to other University departments and transnational components of the Law School, and Outreach & Publications 24 fosters collaboration among colleagues at home and abroad who are Overview 26 engaged in international or comparative work. Books & Journals 27 Washington University Global Studies Law Review 28 Blog: Lex lata, lex ferenda 28 Documentary Film 29 Never Again: Forging a Convention for Crimes Against Humanity International Programs & Global Learning Opportunities 30 Overview 32 JD Students 33 LLM & JSD Students 36 International Programs & Student Opportunities 39 Faculty & Staff 42 Overview 44 Faculty 45 Selected Visiting Faculty & Scholars 47 Staff 47 Looking Forward 48 Fall 2016 Events 50 Spring 2017 Events 51 LEADERSHIP Do not go where the path may lead, go “instead where“ there is no path and leave a trail. — Ralph Waldo Emerson Leadership Leila Nadya Sadat Nancy Staudt James Carr Professor of International Dean and Howard & Caroline Cayne Criminal Law and Director, Professor of Law Whitney R.
    [Show full text]
  • Pluralism in Peril: Challenges to an American Ideal
    PLURALISM IN PERIL: CHALLENGES TO AN AMERICAN IDEAL IDEAL AMERICAN AN TO CHALLENGES PERIL: IN PLURALISM PLURALISM IN PERIL: CHALLENGES TO AN AMERICAN IDEAL Report of the Inclusive America Project Report of the Inclusive America Project the Report Inclusive of January 2018 • Washington, D.C. Steven D. Martin – National Council of Churches THE ASPEN INSTITUTE JUSTICE AND SOCIETY PROGRAM 11-024 PLURALISM IN PERIL: CHALLENGES TO AN AMERICAN IDEAL Report of the Inclusive America Project January 2018 • Washington, D.C. Meryl Justin Chertoff Executive Editor Allison K. Ralph Editor The ideas and recommendations contained in this report should not be taken as representing the views or carrying the endorsement of the organization with which the author is affiliated. The organizations cited as examples in this report do not necessarily endorse the Inclusive America Project or its aims. For all inquiries related to the Inclusive America Project, please contact: Zeenat Rahman Project Director, Inclusive America Project [email protected] Copyright © 2018 by The Aspen Institute The Aspen Institute 2300 N Street, NW Suite 700 Washington, DC 20037 Published in the United States of America in 2018 by The Aspen Institute All rights reserved Printed in the United States of America 18/001 TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgments ..............................................v Executive Editor’s Note .........................................vii Letter to the Reader . ix Introduction ...................................................1 PART 1: EMERGING
    [Show full text]
  • Post-9/11 Brown and the Politics of Intercultural Improvisation A
    UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE “Sound Come-Unity”: Post-9/11 Brown and the Politics of Intercultural Improvisation A Dissertation submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Music by Dhirendra Mikhail Panikker September 2019 Dissertation Committee: Dr. Deborah Wong, Chairperson Dr. Robin D.G. Kelley Dr. René T.A. Lysloff Dr. Liz Przybylski Copyright by Dhirendra Mikhail Panikker 2019 The Dissertation of Dhirendra Mikhail Panikker is approved: Committee Chairperson University of California, Riverside Acknowledgments Writing can feel like a solitary pursuit. It is a form of intellectual labor that demands individual willpower and sheer mental grit. But like improvisation, it is also a fundamentally social act. Writing this dissertation has been a collaborative process emerging through countless interactions across musical, academic, and familial circles. This work exceeds my role as individual author. It is the creative product of many voices. First and foremost, I want to thank my advisor, Professor Deborah Wong. I can’t possibly express how much she has done for me. Deborah has helped deepen my critical and ethnographic chops through thoughtful guidance and collaborative study. She models the kind of engaged and political work we all should be doing as scholars. But it all of the unseen moments of selfless labor that defines her commitment as a mentor: countless letters of recommendations, conference paper coachings, last minute grant reminders. Deborah’s voice can be found across every page. I am indebted to the musicians without whom my dissertation would not be possible. Priya Gopal, Vijay Iyer, Amir ElSaffar, and Hafez Modirzadeh gave so much of their time and energy to this project.
    [Show full text]
  • Progressive Foreign Policy Debrief Intel for Advocacy
    Progressive Foreign Policy Debrief Intel for Advocacy TOPLINE TAKEAWAYS ● Trump’s War Cabinet is taking shape with John Bolton’s appointment as National Security Advisor. ● With Bolton on board, the world is counting on the Senate to block Trump’s War Cabinet by opposing Haspel and Pompeo. ● The Senate sent a strong bipartisan message to Saudi Arabia: Your war in Yemen must end. ● The Iraq war turned 15 this week. Have we learned nothing? IT’S TIME TO SOUND THE ALARM: TRUMP ROUNDS OUT WAR CABINET WITH JOHN BOLTON After weeks of speculation, Donald Trump finally asked John Bolton to be his National Security Advisor, revealing once and for all who he really is: a reckless and dangerous president bent on dragging the United States into more wars. Trump’s pick of Bolton is the latest in a long line of personnel decisions that all point in one direction, Donald Trump is assembling a war cabinet. Whether it is the ouster of pro-diplomacy voices like Rex Tillerson, the nominations of the hawkish Mike Pompeo and pro-torture Gina Haspel, and even the revoked nomination of Victor Cha over his opposition to Trump’s plan for preventative war with North Korea, these moves combine to paint a picture that diplomacy and the rule of law have no place in Donald Trump’s administration. Read our statement here, and share it on Twitter and Facebook. ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ ​ TOPLINE MESSAGES: ​ Bolton is a dangerous warmonger who will only serve to reinforce Donald Trump’s worst impulses. ● Bolton has actively and openly pushed for war with Iran, North Korea, and Syria.
    [Show full text]
  • Sixth Oic Observatory Report on Islamophobia
    Original: English SIXTH OIC OBSERVATORY REPORT ON ISLAMOPHOBIA October 2012 – September 2013 PRESENTED TO THE 40 TH COUNCIL OF FOREIGN MINISTERS Conakry, Republic of Guinea 9–11 December 2013 i OIC-CS-6th OBS-REP-Final-October-2013 TABLE OF CONTENTS FOREWORD by the OIC Secretary General 1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 3 INTRODUCTION 7 1: ISLAMOPHOBIA, INTOLERANCE AND DISCRIMINATION AGAINST MUSLIMS 10 2: MANIFESTATIONS OF ISLAMOPHOBIA 12 2.1. Islamophobia in USA 12 a) Islamophobia during the US Presidential Campaign 13 b) Islamophobic Ads by Pamela Geller 15 c) Islamophobia in the aftermath of the Boston Bombings 17 2.2. Islamophobia in Europe 19 a) Highlight of Islamophobic trends in Europe 20 b) Islamophobia in the Post- Woolwich murder attack 23 2.3. Islamophobia in the Media 25 3: SOME POSITIVE DEVELOPMENTS 27 4: OIC Initiatives and Activities to Counter Islamophobia 29 4.1. Brainstorming Session at the 39 th CFM 29 4.2. Panel of Eminent Persons for combating discrimination against Muslims 30 4.3. Istanbul Process Follow-up 31 4.4. Istanbul International Conference on Islamophobia 31 CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS 33 ANNEXES . 36 A: SOME ISLAMOPHOBIC INCIDENTS 36 I. Incidents Related to Mosques 36 II. Desecration of Muslim Graves 53 III. Political and Social Campaigns against Islam and Muslims 54 IV. Intolerance against Islam and its Sacred Symbols 63 ii OIC-CS-6th OBS-REP-Final-October-2013 V. Discrimination against Muslim Individuals in Educational Institutions, Workplaces, Airports, etc 71 VI. Incidents Related to Hijab (Veil) 79 B: CFM RES. NO 41/39-P ON AN OIC APPROACH FOR COMBATING DISCRIMINATION AND INTOLERANCE AGAINST MUSLIMS 84 C: STATEMENT BY H.E.
    [Show full text]