In examining the human rights challenges of the both anti-Islam movement and religious extremists who rationalize anti-human rights views based on their interpretation of Islam, we must first recognize the impact of intolerance and name-calling in this debate. If we allow such debates to be controlled by those who use name-calling and demonizing, then we have lost any possibility for meaningful thought on these challenges to human rights.
We cannot rebuild broken bridges of trust, critically examine challenges to human rights, and discuss difficult topics on which many will disagree, if we start out with wild name-calling and demonizing of others. While there are many important issues to address, I have listed this first because it is the barrier to even beginning such a dialogue. It has to stop, and the people who can make it stop is ourselves, by holding all of us (including ourselves) accountable for ending the name-calling and demonizing that has become so pervasive in society today on such difficult topics.
The challenges to a political approach to addressing important issues is that politics is not about compassion, but is about popularity. So to entertain and gain popularity, politically-focused activists and writers often employ the “outrage tactics” of wild hyperbole, “outrage tactics” that calls other people names, and tactics that demonize and defame others as a way to “define” their political opponents.
Gaining respect starts by giving respect. To discuss difficult issues, we need to first put down our weapons of verbal and written name-calling, defamation, and demonizing of others. Our disagreements don’t have to be disagreeable. That is a choice that we all have.
First of all, I know that I too have made mistakes, and I have said things that I regret in my life, as we all have done. For that, I apologize.
But I can’t imagine writing about someone that I disagree with as a “clinical paranoid,” a “shrieking harpy,” “nutty,” a “stunning ignoramus,” a “lunatic,” among many other comments that I have seen over the past several months demonizing anti-Islam activist leader Pamela Geller, Executive Director of the Stop Islamization of America (SIOA) group, a group that I and R.E.A.L. have opposed for over a year. I can disagree with the SIOA, oppose their views, condemn extremism, and even challenge Ms. Geller’s views and actions, without the demonizing name-calling.
Today, the relative anonymity of the Internet has allowed people to more readily become crueler and to make more outrageous statements of hate. (I can’t believe that half of things that people write they would say to someone’s face.) People believe that they can use the Internet to spread hate, call other people foul or outrageous names, or publish the most bizarre and twisted images to defame and spread hatred against others – all without consequence. In fact, there are consequences. We see the consequences in our society today, in the pileups of hate, lies, and demonization that has littered the traffic of ideas on any topic. In addition, the use of profanity and vulgarity has become a staple of too many individuals’ regular lexicon, which they use without thinking.
There is no defense for this from any corner. No human being deserves this, and of course, that is the problem – people choose to forget that others are also human beings. It is wrong, and it must stop. The people who are going to make this stop is ourselves, by sending a clear and incontrovertible message that we do not accept such attacks on others and on other identity groups.
In this debate, while many may not agree, we need to be willing to respect one another simply as human beings. We need to be able to extend our hands even to those that we completely disagree with, simply because they are our fellow human beings. They too are the ones whose human rights we are struggling to defend. Our struggle for human rights begins with less finger-pointing at individuals and more outstretched hands to all of our fellow human beings, without exception. We cannot gain trust without respect. We cannot gain respect if we allow our dialogue to be littered with the debris of name-calling and demonizing to others that grows so high that we no longer can remember what the issues are we arguing about.
In the case of human rights, our focus is on human beings, which is every one of us. None of us are “animals,” “monsters,” or dehumanized creatures – no matter how angry or frustrated we are with each other and what other people may have done. Even criminals are human beings. Every one of us – from the most right to the most wrong – is a fellow human being who deserves human dignity. If we go down the path of rejecting human dignity, then it doesn’t matter who wins the debate, because we all lose. Debasing some of us, debases all of us as human beings.
We cannot claim to support or defend human rights, if we seek to de-humanize others as human beings. But we have another choice. We can recognize that as human beings, we make human mistakes. Let’s also not believe that any of us are beyond reproach in seeking to redirect our behavior to show respect to others. I know that I am not, and I don’t doubt that there are many readers of this whose hearts may also share such burdens.
We can regret our rash choice of words and demonizing others. Moreover, we can begin to repair the damaged bridges of human trust with simply two words “I apologize.” It may not be enough, but it is a start.
Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) supports the U.S. Constitution and federal law, and urges other Americans to sign our petition calling for the Justice Department and Preside Obama to enforce the law and defend our Constitution.
Under the RLUIPA federal law, the U.S. Attorney General is authorized “to institute or intervene in any proceeding” to enforce this federal law, to ensure that people of all religions are not discriminated in local land use law in regards to their Constitutional First Amendment protection for places of worship and other religious uses of real property. (Per a DOJ analysis of its investigations on RLUIPA law, the majority of their efforts are in support of Christian groups and churches, but also notes that 8 RLUIPA investigations have had to be opened in support of Muslim groups since May 2010.)
The DOJ court filing is in response to efforts, previously reported by R.E.A.L., by James Estes, Kevin Fisher, Henry Golczynski, and Lisa Moore to file a lawsuit in Rutherford County court to try to stop the lawful construction of a mosque expansion of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro (ICM) . The existing Islamic Center of Murfreesboro has been in Murfreesboro, Tennessee for 30 years without problem, prior to the recent surge in anti-Islam movement activities, across the United States led by anti-Islam activists.
According to the Department of Justice Press Release on the Amicus Curiae filing, “The brief was filed in a state court action in which a group of Murfreesboro landowners are attempting to stop construction of the mosque. Rutherford County, Tenn., is the defendant in the civil case, and had granted permission for the construction of the mosque. The county is opposing the landowners’ attempt to stop construction. The department’s brief argues that Islam is a religion entitled to protection under the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, and points out that, ‘consistent among all three branches of government, the United States has recognized Islam as a major world religion.’ It also argues that mosques are places of religious worship, and that Rutherford County properly determined that it must treat the mosque project as it would other proposals for construction of places of worship.”
The DOJ press release also states: ” ‘A mosque is quite plainly a place of worship, and the county rightly recognized that it had an obligation to treat mosques the same as churches, synagogue, or any other religious assemblies. This is not only common sense; it is required by federal law. The Justice Department is committed to protecting rights of Americans of all faiths to build places of worship and to worship in peace,’ said Thomas E. Perez, Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights.”
According to the 50-page DOJ Amicus Curiae filing, “Plaintiffs have put into controversy whether Islam is a religion and whether a mosque is entitled to treatment as a place of religious assembly for legal purposes. The United States submits this brief to assist this court in resolving these issues. As set forth more fully below, under the United States Constitution and other federal laws, it is uncontroverted that Islam is a religion, and a mosque is a place of religious assembly.”
“The United States has an interest in these proceedings because the pleadings and testimony implicate federal civil rights statutes by putting at issue whether Islam is a religion and whether operating a mosque is a religious use of property.”
“Islam is a religion entitled to First Amendment Protection. Every court addressing the question has treated Islam as a religion for purposes of the First Amendment and other federal laws. No court has held otherwise. Islam falls plainly within the understanding of a religion for constitution and other federal legal purposes, and qualifies as a religion under the various tests courts have developed for analyzing claims that certain apparently secular activities merit protection as religious conduct.” [In the filing, the DOJ references Supreme Court decisions, presidential proclamations and comments, Congressional actions, and statements of America's founding fathers, as well as citing extensive legal precedent and decisions on related issues.]
“This understanding is not new. Over two-hundred years ago, Thomas Jefferson, in commenting on the Virginia Statue of Religious Freedom – a bill he not only authored, but also counted as one of his greatest achievements – wrote that the law was understood ‘to comprehend, within the mantle of its protection, the Jew and the Gentile, the Christian and the Mahometan, the Hindoo, and Infidel of every denomination.”
The DOJ also makes clear in its 50-page filing that court proceedings questioning whether Islam is a religion would challenge the DOJ’s civil rights enforcement authority under the RLUIPA federal law, as well as DOJ law enforcement authority for Church Arson Protection Act (“which specifically included mosques within the definition of covered ‘religious real property’”).
The DOJ filing also states that “the plaintiffs in this case would have the Court conclude that Islam is a political system, or an ideology, not a system of belief that qualifies as a religion entitled to the protection of federal law. See Amended Complaint at 8 (Sept. 22, 2010) (alleging that the County failed to investigate whether the ICM intended to promote the ‘political practice of ‘Jihad’ or ‘establish a caliphate’). However, if Rutherford County had adopted this approach, or were the County to adopt this approach in the future, the County would risk violating RLUIPA. As noted above, RLUIPA prohibits local government from using land-use regulations to discriminate against religious institutions, to treat them on less than equal terms than similarly situated secular land uses, or to substantially burden religious exercise. 42 U.S.C. 2000cc, et seq.”
The DOJ filing states “‘Religious assemb[lies] or institution[s]‘ protected by RLUIPA include mosques or Islamic center of the type that ICM propose to construct in Rutherford County… [citing numerous legal precedents and the Constitution's First Amendment]…There is, therefore, no question that the ICM’s proposed Rutherford County Islamic center and mosque constitutes a religious assembly under RLUIPA. Failing to treat mosques as a category equally with churches as a category in application of its zoning laws would be a facial violation of Section 2(b)(2) of RLUIPA. The Plaintiffs claim the County should have investigated the substantive beliefs of the ICM before approving its plans to construct an Islamic center and mosque. See Amended Complaint at 8,11 (Sept. 22, 2010). They maintain that the failure to undertake such an investigation creates a risk that the ICM’s Islamic activities and beliefs will promote ‘Jihad and terrorism.’ See id. There is no suggestion that the County has a practice of undertaking such investigations with respect to applications by other religious assemblies or institutions. The County thus acted properly in affording ICM the same treatment that it would have given any religious assembly or institution. For the foregoing reasons, the United States respectfully requests that this Court conclude (1) that Islam is a religion entitled to protection under the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment, and (2) that the ICM’s proposed Islamic center and mosque is a place of religious assembly engaged in religious exercise within the meaning of the RLUIPA.”
The Murfreesboro Post has been covering the court debate, stating “Plaintiffs in the lawsuit contend through witness testimony that the proposed Islamic Center of Murfreesboro (ICM) does not meet the standard of a religious meeting place. Plaintiffs argued in court area Muslims want to institute Sharia Law in Murfreesboro and say Demosi and county officials should have investigated the political agenda of Muslim members before approving mosque site plans.” The court proceedings have also been covered by the Murfreesboro area Daily News Journal (DNJ) and by WSMV.
Arson and vandalism against Islamic mosques and property has repeatedly occurred in the Nashville area and cities in Tennessee.
Murfreesboro, the site of a contentious protests, arson, vandalism, and court cases to prevent the building of a mosque expansion, is 35 miles from Nashville.
Photo Below: Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office and ATF employees investigate apparent arson at the future site of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro Saturday. (Photo: John A. Gillis/Daily News Journal)
The Murfreesboro, Tennessee mosque construction site has been repeatedlyvandalized, while protests to the mosque construction continue.
Before construction, Islamic Center of Murfreesboro signs vandalized in January 2010 and June 2010.
Tennessee has been the target of anti-Islamic activism, including the firebombing of the Islamic Center of Columbia in Maury county, Tennessee; one of those responsible for the mosque firebombing, Jonathan Edward Stone, was sentenced to prison in April 2010. Columbia is 40 miles southwest of Nashville, and 49 miles away from Murfreesboro. The Columbia mosque was burned down by Molotov cocktails by terrorists, at least two of the men arrested were linked to the racist “Christian Identity” movement.
Photos Below: Islamic Center of Columbia in Maury, Tennessee Firebombed – Less Than An Hour From Murfreesboro (Photos: TIRCC)
Photos Below: Al-Farooq Mosque, in Nashville, Tennessee Vandalized in February 2010 (Photos: TIRCC)
Image Below: Tennessee Anti-Mosque Campaign by “Former Muslims United” (Photo: YouTube)
Leader Nonie Darwish Says “This is just the beginning of a national campaign”
Photo Below: Tennessee Tea Party Politicians Against Islam and Mosque: Congressional Candidate Lou Ann Zelenik, Congressional Candidate George Erdel, Gubernatorial Candidate Ron Ramsey (left to right)
Photo Below: Tennessee Tea Party Event in May 2010 – Stop Islamization of America’s Pamela Geller Speaks Against Islam to Tea Party Participants (Photo: YouTube)
=======================================
Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) supports freedom of religion, freedom of worship, and freedom of conscience for all people, as supported by America’s Constitution and our Universal Human Rights. We respect freedom of expression for all as well, which extends to all, whether we like it or agree with it or not. But our group condemns the efforts to deny religious freedom by groups using intimidation tactics, bullying, and other efforts to undermine the legal rights of all to religious freedom in America.
We urge all Americans to look into their hearts, and reject hatred in their hearts, reject contempt in their hearts, and join us in respecting our fellow human beings so that we can learn to understand one another and trust one another again. We urge all Americans to be responsible for equality and liberty. We believe all Americans can recognize this as inherent in our national identity and national conscience.
But freedom of religion and worship is not just a worthy and noble goal to pursue to show pluralism and respect to others.
It is a United States Constitutional mandate and federal law. The United States of America as a people and as a government has a Constitution and has federal law, which codifies American commitment to equality and liberty.
The Religious Land Use Act federal law exists to ensure equal protection of people of all religions across America to prevent local groups that seek to bully or use zoning laws to discriminate against others from practicing their freedom of worship and building a house of worship. The law does not exist just for those we like or those like the majority. The law does not exist just for those we agree with or even find agreeable. The law exists for all Americans – without caveat, without reservation, without exception. The law is the law.
We support equal law for all Americans. We urge the federal government to enforce this federal law and to take aggressive action against all those who seek to defy the law, in any way.
We urge others to SUPPORT OUR CALL for the United States President Obama and the United States Department of Justice to support our Constitution and federal law. Sign our petition on behalf of this and show your support as Americans for their actions and defense of the law of the land – for all people, without exception.
Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) supports freedom of religion, freedom of worship, and freedom of conscience for all people, as supported by America’s Constitution and our Universal Human Rights. We respect freedom of expression for all as well, which extends to all, whether we like it or agree with it or not. But our group condemns the efforts to deny religious freedom by groups using intimidation tactics, bullying, and other efforts to undermine the legal rights of all to religious freedom in America.
We urge all Americans to look into their hearts, and reject hatred in their hearts, reject contempt in their hearts, and join us in respecting our fellow human beings so that we can learn to understand one another and trust one another again. We urge all Americans to be responsible for equality and liberty. We believe all Americans can recognize this as inherent in our national identity and national conscience.
R.E.A.L. urges Christians who believe in the Christian commandment to “love one another,” to reject the anti-Islam demonizing message from the Terry Jones group Dove World Outreach Center’s (DWOC) that seeks to demonize all practices of Islam as a monolithic view, and demonize all Muslims. We have no doubt the DWOC believes that they are doing what they think is the right thing. But we plead with them to reconsider the disrespect, the pain, and anger their actions are causing, and we ask them to question if their actions comply with the Christian commandment to “love one another.”
Jones told WJAX that “he was invited to speak at churches around the country.” Jones also told WJAX that he is planning to relocate the Dove World Outreach Center from Gainesville, Florida to Tampa Florida.
Photo Below: Terry Jones’ Pistol on Desk During Interview about “Stand-Up America” Tour (Photo: WJAX Online Video Snip)
On Friday November 5, 2010, DWOC’s Terry Jones seeks to hold an anti-Islam event at the Nashville Convention Center, where the Tennessean reports that Jones plans to promote his book “Islam is of the Devil.” In Reverend Jones’ promotion of the November 5 Tennessee event, he states that “It’s time to take back what is rightfully ours!” and “we cannot afford to continue to hide behind the walls of the church!!!” He doesn’t state what Americans have lost that is “rightfully ours,” but he promotes his book “Islam is of the Devil.”
Arson and vandalism against Islamic mosques and property has repeatedly occurred in the Nashville area and cities in Tennessee.
Murfreesboro, the site of a contentious protests, arson, vandalism, and court cases to prevent the building of a mosque expansion, is 35 miles from Nashville.
Photo Below: Rutherford County Sheriff’s Office and ATF employees investigate apparent arson at the future site of the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro Saturday. (Photo: John A. Gillis/Daily News Journal)
The Murfreesboro, Tennessee mosque construction site has been repeatedlyvandalized, while protests to the mosque construction continue.
Before construction, Islamic Center of Murfreesboro signs vandalized in January 2010 and June 2010.
Tennessee has been the target of anti-Islamic activism, including the firebombing of the Islamic Center of Columbia in Maury county, Tennessee; one of those responsible for the mosque firebombing, Jonathan Edward Stone, was sentenced to prison in April 2010. Columbia is 40 miles southwest of Nashville, and 49 miles away from Murfreesboro. The Columbia mosque was burned down by Molotov cocktails by terrorists, at least two of the men arrested were linked to the racist “Christian Identity” movement.
Photos Below: Islamic Center of Columbia in Maury, Tennessee Firebombed – Less Than An Hour From Murfreesboro (Photos: TIRCC)
Photos Below: Al-Farooq Mosque, in Nashville, Tennessee Vandalized in February 2010 (Photos: TIRCC)
Image Below: Tennessee Anti-Mosque Campaign by “Former Muslims United” (Photo: YouTube)
Leader Nonie Darwish Says “This is just the beginning of a national campaign”
Photo Below: Tennessee Tea Party Politicians Against Islam and Mosque: Congressional Candidate Lou Ann Zelenik, Congressional Candidate George Erdel, Gubernatorial Candidate Ron Ramsey (left to right)
Photo Below: Tennessee Tea Party Event in May 2010 – Stop Islamization of America’s Pamela Geller Speaks Against Islam to Tea Party Participants (Photo: YouTube)
Further Background on Anti-Islam Campaigns of Reverend Terry Jones and Dove World Outreach Center (DWOC)
DWOC church member Fran Ingram has been a blog writer, and coordinator with other groups for the DWOC group. Fran Ingram states that she is a “fan” of various anti-Islam groups including the English Defence League, the American Defense League, and various stop Islamization movements, as well as SIOA leader Pamela Geller.
R.E.A.L. subsequently learned that the DWOC’s involvement at SIOA leader Pamela Geller’s rally in Columbus, OH, was not condemned by Ms. Geller, but she posted photos of DWOC members with shirts “Islam of the Devil” at her event.
Photo Below: Dove World Outreach at November 2009 Columbus Protest Led by Current Executive Director of the SIOA (Photo 2: AtlasShrugs)
Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) supports our universal human rights of religious freedom, freedom of conscience, and freedom of worship for all people. R.E.A.L. respects all identity groups and the right to diverse religions, as part of our family of humanity. R.E.A.L. rejects hatred and rejects the activities of those who seek to promote hatred towards identity groups and specific religions.
To those who believe that they can challenge extremism with extremism of their own, R.E.A.L. recognizes that human rights is based on promotion of our SHARED human rights and human dignity, never with extremism, never with hate, never with threats, and never with violence.
We urge all those who hate to release the burden of hate from their hearts, and respect their fellow human beings and our universal human rights.
Photo Below: EDL Anti-Islam Protest in Leicester and Smoke Bombs Thrown at Police (Photo: YouTube)
Some have joined the EDL due to their fears and concerns about other extremists in the United Kingdom rationalizing anti-human rights views, violent plots, and terrorist acts based on their interpretation of Islam. But the EDL does not merely challenge such extremists or terrorists – its has an anti-Islam campaign. Such anti-Islam extremism has come to attract those who believe that EDL extremism of their own, even violence, is justified. Others supporting the EDL seek to look the other way, excuse their violence, or rationalize their violence as the ends justifies the means. R.E.A.L. urges all people to re-examine the power of hate in their lives, and choose love, not hate.
Photo Below: EDL Leader “Tommy Robinson” Defends UK’s Christian Culture with the “F-Word,” Attacking Muslims (Photo: YouTube)
The British Home Secretary permitted the EDL to have a “static protest” on October 9, but the protest soon grew into marauding riots against Leicester business, against the British police, against the news media, and against women and children. The EDL views that such “protests” are to defend “Christian culture,” according to their leader Tommy Robinson.
Photo Below: EDL Rioters Run Amok in Street, EDL Protesters Gathering, and EDL Smoke Bombs Against British Police (Photos: YouTube)
Photo Below: EDL Protesters Pushing Riot Police; Leicester Stores with Boarded-Up Windows in Background (Photo: Fil Kaler/YouTube)
Photo Below: Police Officer Attacked During EDL Riots in Leicester (Photo: Sky News)
Sky News reported the violent EDL rioters attacked Sky News reporters who fled to a Sky News van that the EDL protester then attacked. Sky News is a media outlet of conservative media conglomerate News Corp along with the American-based media outlet FOX News. Sky News reported “Four members of the Sky News team were forced to lock themselves inside a satellite truck as demonstrators banged their fists on the windscreen during the disorder.”
Photo Below: UK’s Sky News Reports of EDL Rioters Attacking the News Media and a Police Car (Photo: YouTube/Sky News)
The Sky News reporter Robin Powell stated the police “completely lost control” as 200 EDL rioters “ran amok” down the street and the “Sky News truck was attacked,” “we had to lock ourselves in the truck, and these protesters then proceeded to smash up some of our equipment…” Sky News stated “Powell said around 200 EDL protesters broke through a police cordon at the end of the demonstration and attacked the Sky News truck and a police car.” Robin Powell also reported that “Protesters started to charge against the cordon and it was clear the police were not going to be able to hold them back… Around 200 youths were running amok in the centre of Leicester, smashing a police car.”
EDL rioters also terrorized women and children inside fast-food outlet Big John’s restaurant, according to the Leicester News: “Before they were rounded up by police a group of EDL supporters attacked the Big John’s fast food restaurant, in Humberstone Road. Usman Ali, area manager for the chain, said: ‘They smashed four windows and came inside the shop and frightened our customers.’ Witness Imtiaz Noor Mohammed, 21, of North Evington, said: ‘I was with friends getting something to eat.’ ‘People saw them coming and someone locked the door. They smashed some windows and one of the EDL people kicked the door open and stood there threatening people.’”
Photo Below: Images of EDL Rioters Smashing Windows and Terrorizing Restaurant Patrons (Photos: YouTube)
The EDL rioters smashing restaurant windows, slamming open the restaurant door, and threatening patrons was partially captured on video, with police officers rushing to the scene to protect innocent restaurant customers from the EDL rioters. In the video, a British police officer warns the restaurant patrons to “stay away from the windows” as EDL rioters had attacked the windows; the EDL rioters begin to flee as the police begin to take control of the area.
Throughout Leicester, the EDL rioters sought to engage in fights with counterprotesters, but police officers intervened to prevent further violence. The EDL rioters have posted numerous videos online, proud of their fights, calling themselves the “famous English Defence League.”
Many of the Leicester area stores boarded-up their window for fear of damage during the EDL riots. But such efforts were not enough for some businesses, where EDL rioters smashed by attacking second story windows. The Leicester Mercury also reported that EDL rioters smashed second-story windows at the International Arts Center, by throwing “bottles and other items.”
Photo Below: Terrorized Britons Board-Up Windows Against Attack from EDL Rioters (Photos: YouTube)
UK and the Growing Threat of Anti-Islam Extremist Violence by the EDL
In April 2010, the Daily Mail reported on the EDL riots against a planned mosque in Dudley, violently breaking through police barriers, resulting in the panic attack of an elderly woman who had been shopping in the area. 2,000 members of the EDL were involved in a violent protest in Dudley, UK against the plans to build a mosque there, and during the protest the Daily Mail reported on EDL clashes with riot police.
Photo Below: Anti-Islam EDL Breaks Down Police Barriers in Anti-Mosque Riot (Photo: PA Wire/David Jones)
The Daily Mail reported that “The EDL protesters managed to break out of the car park by pulling down fences and barging their way past riot police officers. About half the group then ran off through the town. Lines of riot police officers fought running battles with protesters as they tried to contain the mob who pulled down barriers blocking off roads. Nick Mainwood, 42, from Oldbury, West Midlands, said he tried to help an elderly woman who suffered a panic attack during the protest.”
In July 2010, the Birmingham Mail reported on EDL supporters “throwing bricks and metal security fences at riot police.”
Photo Below: Anti-Islam EDL in Protest Where Police Officer Struck with Bricks (Photo: Birmingham Mail)
The Birmingham Mail reported that “Around 500 EDL supporters gathered on Stafford Street waving England flags and shouting anti-Islamist chants. Violence flared as police attempted to get the protesters back on to buses at the end of the demonstration as they threw bricks and metal security fences at riot police. Several shops and cars in the town were damaged and police said they would trawl through hours of CCTV footage to find the offenders.” “A witness told the Birmingham Mail the car had been surrounded by EDL supporters and the driver hit the accelerator to escape.”
In July 2010, the UK Sun reported on EDL members that had been arrested and questioned on plot against a mosque, but were then released due to insufficient evidence. The Sun reported that “Armed police opened fire on a van as they swooped on a far-right group suspected of plotting to blow up a mosque. Cops used special tyre deflation rounds to disable a Ford Escort van driven by English Defence League official John Broomfield. Officers smashed a window and hauled the suspect out while he was stuck in traffic near the picturesque tourist spot of Corfe Castle, Dorset. Police then raided Mr Broomfield’s home in nearby Swanage and seized computer equipment, mobile phones and passports. Five more English Defence League members and another person were also arrested in simultaneous raids at several addresses. The suspects were questioned about an alleged conspiracy to bomb a mosque in Bournemouth. All were later released without charge.”
Photo Below: Anti-Islam EDL in Violent Protest in August 2010
The EDL and the United States
But the EDL is largely unknown in the United States, and U.S. anti-Islam and some conservative groups have promoted the EDL, defended the EDL, invited the EDL to join U.S. anti-mosque protests, and seek to collaborate with the EDL.
The SIOA leader in America has promoted the EDL for years on her blog “Atlas Shrugs,” which can be seen by a Google search of that blog for EDL or for English Defence League.
Furthermore, the SIOA leader has regularly urged others to join the EDL group, and SIOA supporters have spoken of a planned “American version of the EDL” to be created.
The SIOA leader also invited EDL members to join the SIOA group on September 11, 2010 in New York City in the SIOA’s protest against the Park Place Islamic Center. On August 30, 2010, Newsweek wrote an article that questioned the SIOA leader’s invitation to the EDL group associated with such numerous riots and violence, entitled “N.Y. Anti-Mosque Leader Defends Group That Clashed With British Police.”
With the limited reporting on the EDL in the United States news media, few were aware of the EDL’s violence against police, and those EDL members that attended the 9/11 SIOA protest appeared to be on their best behavior. The EDL leader “Tommy Robinson” was not allowed into the country by U.S. Homeland Security.
Photos Below: EDL Members that Get into the USA Join the SIOA’s NYC Protest Against Islamic Center (Photo: YouTube)
Photo Below: On 9/11/2010 in NYC, While EDL Member Poses Near Police in New York City Who Have No Idea Who They Are, EDL Rioters Are Attacking Police Car in United Kingdom (Photo: YouTube)
On 9/11, while EDL members were in NYC joining the protesters against the Park Place Islamic Center, in the UK, BBC reported on an EDL demonstration on 9/11 in UK where “up to 50 supporters threw bottles at a police car at about 1315 BST, a Greater Manchester Police spokesman said, “leading to “eight arrests at English Defence League event in Oldham.
Photo Below: On 9/11/2010 in the UK, EDL Supporters Have Very Different Tone With British Police Outside the US Embassy in London (Photo: YouTube)
AFP reported that the EDL was “recently linked to the burning of a Koran in northern England to mark the anniversary of the September 11 attacks.” In September 2010, the Guardian reported of the arrest of six men in Gateshead, UK regarding burning of a Qur’an, at bar associated with EDL regulars. The Daily Mail reported that “All six of those held claim to be members of the English Defence League, a far-Right group opposed to the spread of Islamism.” (They were released without charge.)
The American Defense League is in contact with supporters of the EDL and they are promoting one another. Other copy-cat groups are being created in Canada and Sweden, among other regions.
The American Defense League promoted the EDL’s October 9 protest in Leicester, which led to riots and attacks on the police, the news media, and women and children.
Regarding the EDL, the Hudson Institute’s A. Millar views the EDL with pride, concluding “with members of the EDL holding their flags with pride, putting their arms around men and women of every age and ethnicity, it seemed that the nationalism of the EDL was a cousin of American nationalism, in which everyone can be proud of his nation, and of being a citizen, under the flag of the nation.”
Image Below: Screen Shot from EDL Web Site on Rabbi Shifren
On October 14, 2010, the Associated Press reported that “Roberta Moore, an English Defense League activist who has formed a “Jewish division” of the group. She said the rabbi will speak at an Oct. 24 rally in London. ‘He plans to speak about the dangers of Islamification both in this country and in America,’ Moore told The Associated Press. ‘He will talk about the issues we have with immigration and the danger of Sharia law coming to the UK. We have the same objectives as the groups in the USA, and we want to exchange information and work with them.’”
Rabbi Shifren told AP: “I see England going down and I want to cry out and do everything I can to prevent that, to work with the EDL”
AP also reported that “Matthew Goodwin, a University of Nottingham professor and author of a new book about extremist groups in Britain, said the links being developed with American activists are potentially important. ‘We’re seeing groups across Europe trying to form a transnational challenge to Islam,’ he said.”
The October 10, 2010 Guardian article on the topic reported on the EDL “The league has also developed links with Pamela Geller, who was influential in the protests against plans to build an Islamic cultural centre near Ground Zero. Geller, darling of the Tea Party’s growing anti-Islamic wing, is advocating an alliance with the EDL. The executive director of the Stop Islamisation of America organisation, she recently met EDL leaders in New York and has defended the group’s actions, despite a recent violent march in Bradford. Geller, who denies being anti-Muslim, said in one of her blogs: ‘I share the EDL’s goals… We need to encourage rational, reasonable groups that oppose the Islamisation of the west.’”
On October 14, 2010, the AP also reported on SIOA’s Pamela Geller’s support for the EDL, but stated that she claims not to have met with EDL members, reporting: “Geller said she supports the English group’s approach but has not met with its leaders or agreed to any joint projects.”
Responsible for Equality And Liberty (R.E.A.L.) supports our universal human rights of religious freedom, freedom of conscience, and freedom of worship for all people. R.E.A.L. respects all identity groups and the right to diverse religions, as part of our family of humanity. R.E.A.L. rejects hatred and rejects the activities of those who seek to promote hatred towards identity groups and specific religions.
R.E.A.L. rejects those who call for violence and who support violent protest organizations.
To those who believe that they can challenge extremism with extremism of their own, R.E.A.L. recognizes that human rights is based on promotion of our SHARED human rights and human dignity, never with extremism, never with hate, never with threats, and never with violence.
We urge all those who hate to release the burden of hate from their hearts, and respect their fellow human beings and our universal human rights.
R.E.A.L. questions both the timing and the appropriate nature of debating whether or not any religion is a “religion of peace,” conducted totally by non-religious scholars, as we have recently seen in New York City, and when broadcast nationally, including broadcast over the National Public Radio.
In both the October 2010 and the April 2008 Intelligence Squared U.S.(IQ2US) debates on Islam, the majority of the audience voted against the “pro-Islam” views after the debates. The IQ2US American audiences “decided” that Islam is not “a religion of peace” and that Islam is “dominated by radicals” – a religion that is a minority religion in America.
In the latest debate, the speakers on the debate’s “motion” whether or not “Islam is a religion of peace” were American Zeba Khan (for), Briton Maajid Nawaz (for), Dutch Aayan Hirsi Ali (against), and Briton Douglas Murray (against). The two debaters “for” the Islam motion are Muslims and and the two debaters “against” the Islam motion are atheists. None of the debaters are religious scholars. Before the debate, 41 percent were in favor of the motion “Islam Is a Religion of Peace,” with 25 percent against and 34 percent undecided. After the debate, 55 percent were against the motion that “Islam Is a Religion of Peace,” with 36 percent supporting the motion and 9 percent undecided. The October 6 Intelligence Squared U.S.(IQ2US) debate had the resulting effect of turning more Americans against Islam.
While Zeba Khan’s comments as a Muslim-American were moving and compassionate (she was the only American on the debating panel), and Maajid Nawaz had interesting points, the question that R.E.A.L. explores is why such a debate was held, and especially why such a debate was held now. [Full disclosure: R.E.A.L.'s Jeffrey Imm has disagreed with Maajid Nawaz on past issues, but not here.]
Why would anyone in America hold such a “debate” – especially now – after the tsunami of anti-Islam hatred that has swept across America? If such a debate as to whether any religion was “one of peace” was ever “valuable,” as if any religion was monolithic and only had one type of adherent (violent or non-violent), how could such a debate improve things in America and in the world now?
Photo Below: Images of Anti-Islam Campaign Across America
Certainly, it should give pause to Americans that the recent IQ2US debate found media coverage among Pakistan’s mainstream press. One can only wonder how a debate effectively on the legitimacy of Islam as a religion was received in other areas of the world as yet another negative view of America’s religious freedom. How can Americans be surprised at hostility by Muslims in other parts of the world, when we see no problem with such “debates”?
Photo Below: Attacks on American Mosques and Mosque Properties
On October 3, 2010, ABC also held a television debate “Should Americans Fear Islam?” which clearly showed that anti-Islam extremists and Islamist extremists shared the same views on Islam, with an SIOA leader demonstrating the same extreme view on Islam as Al-Muhajiroun’s Anjem Choudary. But the IQ2US debate went beyond ABC’s debate by dueling extremists, 9/11 families, and others.
The IQ2US debate on whether “Islam is a religion of peace” was a direct challenge by the group to the legitimacy of the religion of Islam itself. Would such a debate be more acceptable in an America (where Muslims’ religious freedom have been frequently threatened), if the debate had religious scholars instead of laypersons? While there would be more educated and perhaps legitimately qualified speakers on such a topic, R.E.A.L. questions the topic itself. Isn’t the purpose of such a topic to “de-legitimize” a religion? And what are Americans doing seeking to de-legitimize religions in a nation founded on religious freedom?
Anti-Islam debater Douglas Murray bemoaned that the IQ2US debate did not have Islamic imams speaking on behalf of Islam. Imagine how many leaders of other American minority religions would be standing in line for a broadcast as to whether their faith was a “religion of peace.”
But groups around the nation have decided that Islam as a religion is fair game for any type of debate without criticism by others’ freedom of speech. To those who respect religious freedom in the United States, we need to use our freedom of speech to challenge this continuing practice by those who believe it is respectable, acceptable public dialogue to unilaterally condemn another religion, regardless of our own religious beliefs (if any). The larger principle of our support for religious freedom compels us to question those who would unilaterally demonize all adherents to a religion, when practitioners of such a religion are facing discriminatory action by those who seek to deny their freedom of religion and worship.
Image below: Screen Shot of Washington DC Examiner Newspaper Calling Muslims “Bigots”
Religious minorities of all types should be particularly sensitive and appalled at such debates. Ask yourself – how would you feel if your religion ______ “is a religion of peace?” was the butt of a public debate, not in some dark Internet alley, but broadcast by the National Public Radio and hosted by a major U.S. university? How would you feel?
How can we have freedom of religion in the United States if we have no social conscience that is willing to use our freedom of speech to condemn groups that openly promote attacks on other religions as monolithic views without diversity?
During the IQ2US debate on whether “Islam is a religion of peace,” Dutch Aayan Hirsi Aliasserted her view that no monotheistic religion was a religion of peace, a comment that she repeated several times throughout the debate. Yet at the beginning of the debate she contradicted herself by saying that “Why are we not having a motion on is Christianity a religion of peace, is Judaism a religion of peace, et cetera? Because those would be academic motions. Unfortunately, the motion, ‘Islam is a religion of peace’ is not academic.” But then she stated “”you know that no monotheistic religion can be a religion of peace” and then again later “No monotheistic religion is a religion of peace.”
While there was virtually no public response (let alone criticism) of the IQ2US debate on whether “Islam is a religion of peace,” one can only imagine the American public outcry if the IQ2US debate was whether the U.S. majority religion “Christianity is a religion of peace” or if it was another minority religion, such as “Judaism is a religion of peace.” But unnoticed by most of the crowd eager to heap scorn on Islam were the comments by Aayan Hirsi Ali that effectively denied that both of these were also not a “religion of peace,” while at the beginning of her comments she viewed that viewing such religions as a “religion of peace” “would be academic motions.”
In fact, such debates attacking other minority religions in America, such as Judaism, also take place and not just in the fringe groups and dark Internet alleys such as the white nationalist Stormfront organization led by former American Nazi Party member Don Black.
I know because I stood up to an attack on a minority religion myself in Ohio at yet another university.
As the Cleveland Jewish News recounted in 2004, I then started contacting member of the Presbyterian Church USA (PCUSA) via letter and email, and sent some books to educate them about the anti-Semitic apocryphal Protocols of the Elders of Zion. I flew up to Columbus, Ohio and then drove to Wooster College to join a representative of the Simon Wiesenthal Foundation who spoke to Wooster attendees on this issue. I personally spoke to Christians there as a fellow Christian to urge them to respect other religions. But the candid fact is that, among the Christians I spoke to at Wooster College, I heard few regrets, shame, and willingness to recognize promoting the “Protocols” as intolerance. I never saw a public apology by the PCUSA on this issue, and I left the Presbyterian church, although I am still a Christian. I received one reply from a pastor I wrote in early 2004 on this subject who asked me if I was a “Jew-lover.” Indeed, I am. Just as I love people of all faiths and identity groups as my brothers and sisters in humanity.
So I have seen how such university debates on minority religions can turn into something very ugly and disturbing. Americans should ask themselves, their universities, their institutions, their non-profit organizations, and certainly their public broadcasting, why should Americans be questioning the legitimacy of any other religion? In a nation founded on and grounded in religious freedom, isn’t questioning the legitimacy of another religion – simply un-American?
But to those of us who respect human rights and freedom, we have no choice. Hate is not an option for those who defend human rights. Our efforts to struggle for human rights is in support of all human beings, including those we disagree with, and who may even be opposed to our efforts. Universal human rights are their rights too.
Whether at New York University, Wooster University, or anywhere in America, efforts to disparage and demonize religions may be exercise of our free speech, just as flag-burning is also considered free speech. But to patriotic Americans who love America not just for the geography and people of our nation, but also who love what America represents as an idea of equality, liberty, freedom for all – we must exercise our own free speech to condemn efforts to demonize any identity group in America.
We urge all to be Responsible for Equality And Liberty. Choose Love, Not Hate – Love Wins.
Jefferson’s Letter to the Danbury Baptists
The Final Letter, as Sent
To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.
Gentlemen
The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.
Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.
I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.
We also recognize that such freedoms require support for pluralism of diverse identity groups, races, genders, ethnic groups, and religions in a diverse society. We view that those who seek to deny such pluralism undermine the fabric of tolerance that is so important for the effectiveness of democracy and freedom anywhere in the world.
We urge those who promote hate and intolerance to unburden the hate from their hearts.
On October 3, 2010, ABC television in the United States had a panel debate on Islam among a broad range of individuals: Muslims, non-Muslims, those who lost family members on 9/11, and anti-Islam activists. The video links capture part of the national debate in a broader sense, and also demonstrates how the extremists on both sides tend to agree.
Responsible for Equality and Liberty (R.E.A.L.) supports our universal human rights to freedom of religion, freedom of worship, and freedom of conscience for all people of all faiths, including the freedom of religion supported under Article 1 of the United States Constitution. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states that “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.”
We are deeply concerned about the escalation of intolerance and hate that we seeing growing around the world, including in America today.
We urge those who promote hate and intolerance to unburden the hate from their hearts.
