Latest news with #CouncilonAmerican-IslamicRelations
Time of India
2 days ago
- Politics
- Time of India
US' student visa pause makes no sense and does real harm
International students in the U.S. are facing heightened uncertainty after Secretary of State Marco Rubio ordered a pause on student visa interviews while new, unspecified social media vetting guidelines are developed. The move builds on Trump-era policies that scrutinize applicants' online activity, initially for security threats, and now potentially for signs of antisemitism—raising concerns over free speech and vague enforcement. Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads Tired of too many ads? Remove Ads This is a season of anxiety for international students in the US, who find themselves demonized by the Trump administration as it devises new ways to limit their latest tactic came in a diplomatic cable from Secretary of State Marco Rubio to US embassies and consulates abroad, ordering a halt to the student visa interviews necessary to enter the reason? An as-yet-undevised policy to further scrutinize the social media histories of students in a search for … what exactly? No one seems quite was President Donald Trump who, in his first term, initiated screenings of student visa applicants' social media histories, looking primarily for terrorists or terrorist sympathizers. The policy became one of the few that was maintained by President Joe Biden when he succeeded April of this year, Homeland Security said it also would begin monitoring international students' social media for evidence of antisemitism. That raised alarms among free-speech advocates because of the administration's tendency to conflate opposition to the Israeli government's policies or the war in Gaza with antisemitism. At the time, Edward Ahmed Mitchell, national deputy director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said in a statement that the administration was 'pursuing witch hunts into American colleges.'Now comes another amorphous, arbitrary standard that, even before implementation, is sending shock waves through an already traumatized international student 'pause' on new student visa interviews will last until his department issues 'guidance on expanded social media vetting for all such applicants,' according to the cable. It does not specify what might disqualify an applicant or what the State Department will be looking for. It does not even say when the guidelines will be available nor when new interviews will resume, although on Thursday the department announced a pilot program to vet Harvard University's visa applicants for antisemitism. That cable advised those doing the vetting to consider 'whether the lack of any online presence, or having social media accounts restricted to 'private' or with limited visibility, may be reflective of evasiveness.'That is an unconscionable level of opacity for students whose biggest sin is wanting to come to the US to further their education and who have a limited window in which to pursue such that the last administration-announced 'pause' was to the US Refugee Admissions Program back in January. That was four months ago. It's still in Rubio's decision even includes J-1 visa applicants for the State Department's own Exchange Visitor Program. Often those relate to cultural visits, summer work or other education-related that program also includes physicians and International Medical Graduates, who often serve in teaching hospitals and medically underserved rural areas or other hard-to-staff roles. These J-1 applicants already run a substantial gauntlet of vetting just to reach the interview there is the conundrum of how the State Department will implement this enhanced vetting even as it plans huge cuts to its footprint and earlier this year signed an executive order axing budgets at embassies and consulates. In April, CNN reported that according to internal State Department documents, up to 30 embassies and consulates overseas could be closed and others could see kinds of cuts are at odds with the plan to increase the vetting of international students, who already go through exhaustive checks in their attempts to enter the Governor Tony Evers is right when he says that 'all this is just going to scare people away from the United States, people that might come here, get an education, stay here, make some really important progress in some area … It's just all wrong-headed.'Wisconsin alone had more than 15,000 international students in the 2023-24 school year, according to a study by NAFSA , the National Association of International Educators. That stimulated the state economy by an estimated $541 million. Multiply that by every state and it's easy to see the damage from restricting foreign students won't only be felt by colleges and Aw, executive director of NAFSA, said in a statement that international students 'already represent the most tracked and vetted category of nonimmigrants in the United States,' calling the pause unnecessary and the additional scrutiny 'a poor use of taxpayer dollars.'And the State Department is unlikely to draw the line at students. Rubio could also easily crack down on business visas, tourist visas, H-1B work visas and the fear fostered by the Trump administration's policies, the intellectual richness of an American education remains a potent draw. And while Trump may be happy to set the bar close to zero for foreign students, few outside his MAGA base would agree. The benefits the students bring are indisputable, both in talent and economic swelling numbers of international students over the last few decades affirm this nation's primacy, spreading American values through 'soft' diplomatic power. America First cannot become America Alone, isolated and parochial. Whether they remain here or return to their native countries, we should hope these international students remember their time here fondly — not with fear.
Yahoo
27-05-2025
- General
- Yahoo
Mosques to hold community gathering after vandals spray paint Star of David on building
AUSTIN (KXAN) — A press conference scheduled for Tuesday will feature representatives of three local mosques that were recently vandalized with spray painted Stars of David on the building, according to a press release from the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR-Austin. The vandalism at Nueces Mosque, which was caught on a security camera, shows a white person in shorts, t-shirt and a head wrap walk onto the porch before using a blue spray paint on the building. The Islamic Ahlul Bayt Association and Austin Diyanet Center also 'experienced coward vandalism over the night,' according to the release. Previous: Police investigating vandalism incidents at Austin mosques CAIR Austin Operations Manager Shaimaa Zayan said in the release that hate comes 'from isolation and misinformation.' 'Acts of vandalism against houses of worship are not only attacks on physical spaces but also on the values of tolerance, diversity, and mutual respect,' Zayan said. 'On behalf of the Austin Muslim community, we warmly invite all Austinites—of all faiths and no faith—to attend the upcoming community gathering at Nueces Mosque.' The gathering will held at Nueces Mosque Thursday from 6-8 p.m. She also called for contributions to the mosques' fundraiser campaign to improve security at the places of worship. The Austin Police Department said it is investigating the vandalism incidents. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Boston Globe
23-05-2025
- Politics
- Boston Globe
Pro-Palestinian movement faces an uncertain path after D.C. attack
Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up The killings also risked painting all pro-Palestinian activists, the vast majority of whom do not engage in violence, with the same brush, which could lead to further repression of their movement. The tragedy occurred just as the movement has been trying to sustain attention in the United States on a blockade by Israel that has put Gaza residents at risk of widespread starvation. Advertisement Oren Segal, senior vice president of counterextremism and intelligence at the Anti-Defamation League, said that while attending a rally or being a member of pro-Palestinian groups does not predict violence, the broader ecosystem being created, particularly online, by groups strongly opposed to Israel, 'created an environment that made the tragedy last night more likely.' Advertisement 'What people are hearing is a regular drumbeat: Israel is evil, supporters of Israel are evil, and we need to do anything by any means to fight back,' he said. 'And many of them are conflating Jews with the policies of Israel, too.' But the pro-Palestinian movement has asserted that it can criticize Israel and the war in Gaza without being antisemitic, and multiple organizations rushed to condemn the killings Thursday. The Council on American-Islamic Relations, the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, called the violence 'completely unacceptable,' and said that it does not represent the millions of Americans peacefully supporting an end to US support for Israel's war in Gaza. 'Such violence only undermines the pursuit of justice,' the organization said in a statement. 'Peaceful protest, civil disobedience, and political engagement are the only appropriate and acceptable tools' to achieve that change. Jewish Voice for Peace, an anti-Zionist group that regularly protests against the war in Gaza, also condemned the killings. 'We are grounded first and foremost in the belief that all human life is precious, which is precisely why we are struggling for a world in which all people can live in safety and dignity,' it wrote in a statement. The pro-Palestinian movement that burst into the public consciousness after the Hamas attack on Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, has deep roots and has gone through multiple transformations. But it has long included a wide spectrum of activists, with a variety of views on the role violent resistance should play in achieving a Palestinian state. Advertisement In the United States, protesters who chant 'Free, free Palestine' are almost always using tactics of nonviolent resistance. But the groups that organize behind Free Palestine banners also vary in their philosophies. Some advocate complete nonviolence in their broader approach, akin to anti-war protesters. Others back the right of Palestinians to engage in armed resistance against Israel, which they consider a right under international law, because they consider Israel the occupier of Palestinian lands. Such groups frequently quote a 1990 UN resolution that recognizes the right of occupied people to fight against 'colonial domination, apartheid, and foreign occupation by all available means, including armed struggle.' Even among groups that back the right of Palestinians to resist with force, however, there are variations. Some chapters of Students for Justice in Palestine, for example, the most organized pro-Palestinian group on many college campuses, have embraced the Thawabit, a set of principles written by the Palestine Liberation Organization in 1977, that is considered central to the Palestinian national cause. Among them is the right of resistance, including through armed struggle. But Students for Justice in Palestine does not support of the use of violence in the United States, and instead focuses on civil disobedience and nonviolent tactics, like the Boycott Divestment and Sanctions movement, to pressure Israel. Other groups push the line further, openly glorifying armed resistance by organizations that the United States considers terrorist organizations. As repression of protests on college campuses grew last year, a smaller group of students adopted some of the rhetoric of the hard-line groups, while more moderate students peeled away. Among at least some of those hard-line groups, there was a hint of acceptance about the killing of the embassy workers Thursday, even as Rodriguez was being charged with first-degree murder and other crimes. Advertisement Charlotte Kates, the international coordinator of the Samidoun Network, which the US Treasury Department last year designated a sham charity that serves as an international fundraiser for the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine terrorist organization, wrote on Telegram that in the face of the stifling of nonviolent protest, it is only to be expected that some people will escalate in an attempt to stop the deaths in Gaza. This article originally appeared in
Miami Herald
20-05-2025
- Politics
- Miami Herald
Islamophobia is surging in Florida — and it must be addressed
Florida is facing an alarming rise in Islamophobia — one that is reaching unprecedented levels nationwide, according to the findings of the 2025 CAIR Civil Rights Report: Unconstitutional Crackdowns. The Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), the nation's largest Muslim civil rights and advocacy organization, which has a strong presence in Florida, reports it received 8,658 civil rights complaints in 2024 — the highest number ever recorded since it began reporting in 1996. That marks a 7.4% increase from the previous year. Here in Florida, the numbers are even more troubling. Civil rights complaints have risen by 22%, nearly three times the national rate. Even more disturbing: for the first time in CAIR-Florida's 24-year history, the leading cause of complaints is viewpoint discrimination. Many of these complaints, which spiked following the Oct. 7, 2023, Hamas attacks on Israel and Israel's subsequent bombing of Gaza, reflect a dangerous trend: individuals who criticize Israeli government policies, express solidarity with Palestinians or condemn alleged war crimes in Gaza are being accused of antisemitism or even terrorism. These accusations are not only defamatory — they're dangerous. In Florida, the consequences have been severe. Peaceful student protesters have faced disciplinary action. Dozens of physicians have lost their jobs. Attorneys have been dismissed from law firms. Others have been doxxed — had their private information maliciously shared online to intimidate or silence them. We must recognize the human toll. Like many Israeli-American families who split time between homes in the U.S. and Israel, hundreds of Palestinian-American families in Florida live between here and Palestine. The ongoing war in Gaza has left many of them grieving the loss of fathers, mothers, siblings, nephews and nieces. Others have watched loved ones maimed. But in today's climate of censorship and retaliation, their grief is often unheard. Many fear for their safety, livelihoods and businesses if they speak out. This is not a Muslim issue. It is a civil rights issue. And it affects peace advocates and civil liberties organizations of all backgrounds. I, Wilfredo Amr Ruiz, write this not only as a Muslim civil rights leader, but also as a proud U.S. military veteran. I served in the Navy's Judge Advocate General Corps and later in the Chaplain Corps. There, I wore the same uniform as Christian priests, Jewish rabbis, Muslim imams and others who served our diverse military community. We stood together to defend the U.S. Constitution — all of it. We believe that criticism of a government's policies — including those of the state of Israel — is not antisemitism. Conflating the two does a disservice to the Jewish community, whose legitimate experiences with antisemitism risk being diluted when political critique is mislabeled as hate. Then, on Feb. 15, our community was shaken when an Israeli man allegedly opened fire on a father and son on Miami Beach simply because he believed them to be Palestinian, police said. Mordechai Brafman, 27, was charged with attempted murder and faces hate crime charges punishable by life in prison. To this day, there has been no public statement from Miami Beach or state leaders reassuring Palestinian or Arab residents of their safety. It's as if simply uttering the words 'Palestinian' or 'Arab' has become taboo. Every year, we honor the legacy of Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. We commemorate the very rights now under attack — the right to protest, to oppose war, to call for peace, to boycott and to dissent. These are constitutional rights. Sacred rights. And they will not be silenced easily. Despite the current challenges, there is hope. Across Florida and beyond, people of all backgrounds are rising in solidarity. They are standing tall — peacefully and unapologetically — to defend justice and civil liberties for all. They know that silence is not an option. Wilfredo Amr Ruiz is CAIR-Florida's communications director. Samir Kakli is the director of the South Florida Muslim Federation.
Yahoo
19-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Shutting Down Salman Rushdie Is Not Going to Help
Free speech is forever a matter of perspective. Unless you are an absolutist—and very few true absolutists exist—everyone draws their red lines somewhere, whether it's at racist epithets or yelling 'Fire!' in a crowded theater when nothing is actually burning. But the concept becomes completely meaningless unless it allows for the hearing of ideas that one group or another is bound to find abhorrent. Salman Rushdie, the author who was nearly murdered three years ago because of a novel he wrote, once articulated what he thought supporting free speech meant: 'The defense of free expression begins at the point at which somebody says something you don't like.' Rushdie called this view 'old-fashioned,' and, in 2025, it might very well be: Just last week, he was pressured to cancel an appearance because of something he said that a group of students did not like. In an interview with a German podcaster a year ago, Rushdie expressed surprise that young people on college campuses protesting on behalf of Palestinians were not being more circumspect about the fundamentalism and murderousness of Hamas, who started the current Gaza war. 'I feel that there's not a lot of deep thought happening,' he said about the demonstrations. 'There's an emotional reaction to the death in Gaza, and that's absolutely right. But when it slides over towards anti-Semitism and sometimes to actual support of Hamas, then it's very problematic.' This past weekend, Rushdie was supposed to be the keynote speaker at Claremont McKenna College's commencement ceremony. The school's Muslim student association loudly protested his being 'platformed,' and they were backed up by the Los Angeles branch of the Council on American-Islamic Relations. On Wednesday, presumably because of this pressure, Rushdie pulled out. At the news, the exultant head of the Muslim student association responded, 'I'm surprised, relieved and happy.' On that podcast last year, Rushdie, who had lived for decades in hiding from the forces of extremism, was trying to offer a warning based on this experience, to make sure the protests avoided supporting 'a fascist terrorist group'—an organization that spares no thought for free expression. I'd like to give the students the benefit of the doubt and assume they didn't see the irony in choosing to respond by seeking to foreclose his speech. [Read: Salman Rushdie strikes back] That these young people seem to have a mixed-up sense of free speech is not surprising; their elders are not doing much better. The Trump administration has sought to deport legal residents over their free speech. And this government intimidation has reached such a point that universities now seem to be engaging in what the historian Timothy Snyder has called 'anticipatory obedience.' In another news story from commencement season, a student named Logan Rozos, who was graduating from NYU's Gallatin School, took his opportunity at the mic to denounce 'the atrocities currently happening in Palestine' and 'complicity in this genocide.' NYU responded with a fury redolent of an X post from White House Communications Director Steven Cheung. 'He lied about the speech he was going to deliver and violated the commitment he made to comply with our rules,' a university spokesperson said about Rozos. NYU apologized to the audience who 'was subjected to these remarks' and said that Rozos would not be receiving his diploma. I find it impossible to read this as anything other than NYU, already under investigation by the administration for its DEI practices, overreacting out of fear. A student hijacking a commencement ceremony is not exactly a new practice. Last year there was a spate of such protests, including at Duke, where students walked out of a speech by Jerry Seinfeld over his views on Israel. But NYU's response in this case was particularly harsh; the university made a point of calling out Rozos for his 'personal and one-sided political views' and disciplining him in a way that is sure to chill even the most anodyne of pro-Palestinian activism. That the incidents at NYU and Claremont McKenna are both related to Gaza makes sense. Free speech is easy to condone when it involves issues of at least broad general agreement. But the question of how to talk about Israel's actions, Hamas's actions, the October 7 attacks, and the shockingly large number of Palestinian deaths that followed yields no easy answers. It is precisely on such difficult topics that a defense of free speech breaks down. Take Rushdie's comments. I don't think most of the protests on college campuses are in support of Hamas (and many students, I'd venture to guess, understand neither the group's ideology nor the complexity of Palestinian politics); they just want the killing they are seeing on TikTok to stop. And Rushdie cares about this killing too; he just doesn't get why the students aren't doing more to disassociate themselves from a group opposed to their progressive ideals. For their part, the students don't see why this is so important, at least not in the way someone like Rushdie, who was the subject of an Iranian fatwa calling for his death (which nearly succeeded), would. [Yair Rosenberg: Trump's Jewish cover story] This mess of misunderstanding and miscommunication has been fueled by the words and actions of the Trump administration. By characterizing practically all pro-Palestinian sentiment as a form of anti-Semitism, Trump has given others permission to declare that even the most basic expressions of humanitarian concern fall outside the bounds of free speech. And this has only encouraged those who do care about what is happening in Gaza to respond, as the Claremont McKenna students did, by enforcing their own borders, declaring certain ideas—and words—beyond the pale. The result is a culture in which people come to believe that they have no good reason to express themselves outside a narrow range of topics. The conversation around Israel and Palestine has been impoverished by this spiral. Positions have calcified and made it nearly impossible to talk about what is happening and why. Do you believe a genocide is taking place or don't you? Answer either way and someone will challenge your right to speak. Free speech is supposed to break through this kind of categorical thinking. It's also the force that ensures openness and helps prevent a culture from going stagnant. Without the jostling of ideas, a society is doomed to chase its tail, fighting over what freedom of speech actually means, all the while closing down opportunities for actual speaking. Article originally published at The Atlantic
