Latest news with #Islamophobia
CBC
11 hours ago
- General
- CBC
Muslim groups calls for 'action' after London woman spit on in alleged hate crime
London police are investigating after a man threatened to set a woman's house on fire in an incident they are calling hate-motivated. Just after 8 a.m. on May 29, a man approached an elderly woman outside her residence near the intersection of Marconi Boulevard and Trafalgar Street in the city's east end. He began yelling at her, threatened to burn down her home and attempted to spit on her, police said, before walking away southbound on Marconi Boulevard. "The actual nature of the threats made were deemed to be hate-motivated," said Sgt. Sandasha Bough, adding that police will not share specific details until charges are laid. In a social media post, the National Council of Canadian Muslims (NCCM) said a Muslim woman was the person targeted in the attack, and was told to "go back to your country" among other hateful comments. 'The [Muslim] community is exhausted from having this conversation and having to repeat ourselves every time an incident like this occurs," said NCCM legal director Nusaiba Al-Azem, who received a report on the incident and has been in touch with the family since Thursday. "The family's feelings are very similar to the same feelings that I hear from the broader community," she said. The incident has been passed on to the London police's hate crime unit, who are still investigating. There were no reported injuries, police said. It does not appear that the man and woman knew each other previously, Bough said, and there is no immediate threat to the public "This was a random incident, or so it appears at this time," she said. Muslim community reflects as June marks anniversary of other hate-motivated attacks Still, members of London's Muslim community say they are uneasy, knowing that this is the latest in several hate-motivated incidents against the Muslim community. "I think people are concerned and a little frustrated as well," said Selma Tobah, a mentor with the Youth Coalition Combating Islamophobia. "We're seeing that people are willing to put their threats into action." On Friday, it will be four years since a hate-motivated truck attack killed four members of a Muslim family in London, and Tobah said its impact is still felt by the community. "June 6 is a time where the broader London community remembers and reflects on what happened to Our London Family, but it really never leaves the forefront of the minds of Muslims in London," Tobah said. "We carry that incident with us in our day-to-day." "I know folks who don't run outside anymore, people who are careful about where in the city they go for a walk and how they cross the street," she added. June 11 will mark one year since a possible hate-motivated attack happened at another Muslim family's home in northwest London, where their front porch was set on fire. "We're talking about the same incident to a Muslim family in the same city at the same time of year," Al-Azem said. "It's hard not to feel like there's a pattern or maybe some kind of issue that is not being addressed. Both Tobah and Al-Azem said that while there has been more awareness around Islamophobia in London over the past four years, they would still like to see more political will to seriously punish hate-motivated attacks. "Instead of action, sometimes it feels like we get a lot of performance or we get a lot of words," Al-Azem said. "The fear is that there's a signal sent when you don't punish crime like this and when you don't bring somebody to justice," she said. "It will embolden others to behave the same way, and I fear that's what's happening in London." The male suspect in Thursday's incident is still at large, and police are asking for the public's assistance in identifying him. He is described as white, approximately 5'8" with a slim build and believed to be between the ages 27-32. He was last seen wearing a grey ballcap, work boots with red laces, and a yellow and black hoodie with "LOONEY" written across the chest in red.
The Hindu
2 days ago
- Politics
- The Hindu
The man who stood up to Trump
In May last year, as Alan Garber stepped up to the podium on Harvard Alumni Day, a woman suddenly emerged from the crowd and poured gold glitter all over his head. She then began demanding the release of monkeys from the university's laboratories. With his face still covered in shimmering flecks, Mr. Garber calmly assured the attendees that he was unharmed and then declared, 'I hope that Harvard will always continue to be a place where… free speech continues to thrive.' Unbeknownst to him at the time, the physician and economist would soon become a central figure in the pushback against the Trump administration's escalating assault on academic freedom across American university campuses. The latest salvo in this ongoing conflict came when the Department of Homeland Security revoked Harvard's certification to enrol international students. The move prompted an immediate lawsuit from the university and a swift restraining order from a federal judge. Though the decision is interim, it brought palpable relief to students as the university held its commencement on May 29. In his address, Mr. Garber did not refer to the standoff directly, but his words struck a defiant note: Harvard, he said, welcomes students from around the world 'just as it should be'. Mr. Garber's association with Harvard spans over half a century, beginning in 1973 when he enrolled as an undergraduate. He went on to earn three degrees from the Ivy League institution — a bachelor's, a master's, and a doctorate, all in economics. He later pursued a medical degree from Stanford University, where he eventually built a distinguished academic career spanning over 25 years. Presidency forged in crisis In 2011, then-Harvard president Drew Gilpin Faust invited him to serve as provost, the university's chief academic officer. Reflecting on the decision in an interview with The New York Times, she recalled being impressed by his calm demeanour and ability to build consensus in moments of conflict. Over the next 12 years, Mr. Garber solidified his reputation as a formidable senior administrator while maintaining a low public profile. By 2023, he was preparing to step away from administrative duties and return to teaching. However, fate had other plans. That year, Claudine Gay made history as Harvard's first Black female president. But her tenure came to an abrupt end just six months later, following allegations of plagiarism and mounting criticism over her handling of alleged anti-Semitism on campus. Soon thereafter, Mr. Garber found himself suddenly thrust into the spotlight, tasked with steering the university through one of its most turbulent chapters. In his first interview as interim president with The Harvard Crimson, he candidly acknowledged that he was assuming office at a 'painful and disorienting time for Harvard'. One of his first administrative decisions was to establish twin presidential task forces to address anti-Semitism and Islamophobia on campus. His appointment of Derek J. Penslar, a professor of Jewish history, as co-chair of the anti-Semitism task force drew immediate criticism, largely due to Mr. Penslar's prior writings that were critical of the Israeli government. Just over a month later, Mr. Garber made another contentious decision by appointing John F. Manning, a conservative law professor, as interim provost. This move stirred quiet discontent among the university's predominantly liberal faculty. Around the same time, Harvard adopted a new policy of not issuing official statements unrelated to its 'core functions', following the recommendations of a faculty committee. Its largest academic division also announced that it would no longer require job applicants to submit written statements affirming their commitment to diversity. What ultimately solidified Mr. Garber's reputation as a resolute leader unafraid to make unpopular decisions for the university's betterment was his handling of the pro-Palestinian encampment protests that spread across campuses. While many peer institutions responded with police crackdowns, he opted for restraint and dialogue. The encampment at Harvard concluded peacefully after he agreed to expedite petitions for reinstating suspended students and facilitated a meeting between protesters and the university's governing bodies to discuss divestment. To the Harvard Corporation, his measured response exemplified the leadership the university needed. Consequently, on August 2, 2024, Mr. Garber was appointed president through the 2026–27 academic year. During his 2024 campaign, Mr. Trump pledged to reclaim American universities from 'radical Left and Marxist maniacs', indicating that reining in academia would be a priority in his second term. Initially, Mr. Garber avoided confrontation with the new administration. When the White House announced in March that it was reviewing $9 billion in grants and contracts over Harvard's alleged failure to protect students from anti-Semitic discrimination, his response was measured rather than defiant. He expressed a willingness to work with the federal task force in outlining the university's efforts to combat anti-Semitism. In a rare personal disclosure, he revealed that he had encountered anti-Semitism himself, even while serving as president. However, the administration's next move marked a sharp escalation. On April 11, an email from federal officials laid out sweeping demands: federal oversight of faculty hiring, mandatory reporting of misconduct by international students, and the appointment of an external overseer to enforce 'viewpoint diversity' within academic departments. Three days later, Harvard released a searing letter penned by Mr. Garber. 'No government — regardless of which party is in power — should dictate what private universities can teach, whom they can admit and hire, and which areas of study and inquiry they can pursue,' he wrote. Legal fight with government In the days that followed, federal officials announced the suspension of $2.2 billion in grants and $60 million in contracts awarded to the university, alongside threats to revoke its tax-exempt status. Harvard responded by suing the Trump administration, accusing it of exerting financial coercion to interfere with academic governance. The 51-page lawsuit also accused the administration of violating the First Amendment by restricting what Harvard's faculty could teach students. Harvard has already announced cuts to degree-granting programmes and halted faculty recruitment. It is also staring down a catastrophic Republican-backed endowment tax Bill. Although most of the administration's sanctions are being challenged in court, the litigation will take months if not years. Even if the courts ultimately side with Harvard, appeals are almost certain, and some hits to funding may be irreversible. Mr. Garber, too, has been compelled to concede ground. Last month, he announced that Harvard would undertake reforms to 'focus on individuals and their unique characteristics rather than their race'. Soon after, the university cancelled graduation ceremonies for affinity groups. His strategy reflects a delicate balancing act — shielding the institution from political assault while undertaking reforms that may ensure its survival.
Arab News
2 days ago
- General
- Arab News
Pakistan voices concern over rise in Islamophobic incidents in India
ISLAMABAD: Pakistan expresses grave concern over a rise in Islamophobic incidents across India, the Pakistani foreign office said on Saturday, following reports of attacks against Muslims. The reports of increasing attacks against Muslims and Kashmiris in India emerged after an April 22 attack on Hindu tourists in Indian-administered Kashmir's Pahalgam town that killed 26 people. New Delhi blamed the assault on Pakistan, a charge denied by Islamabad. The attack triggered a four-day standoff between the neighbors this month that killed 70 people on both sides before a truce was announced on May 10. At least 184 anti-Muslim hate incidents, including murders, assaults, threats and vandalism, have been recorded countrywide in India, Indian media outlets quoted New Delhi-based Association for Protection of Civil Rights as saying this month. 'Pakistan calls upon the Government of India to uphold the rights and safety of all its citizens, regardless of faith,' Pakistani foreign office spokesman Shafqat Ali Khan said, adding that such incidents violate international human rights obligations and vitiate the prospects for communal harmony and regional stability. Bitter rivals India and Pakistan have fought three wars, including two over the disputed region of Kashmir, since gaining independence from British rule in 1947. Both claim the Himalayan territory in its entirety but rule it in part. While a conflict between the neighbors feeding minority hatred on either side is not a new phenomenon, critics and rights bodies say Hindu right-wing groups have become emboldened in recent years due to a 'culture of impunity.' 'Prime Minister [Narendra] Modi likes to boast of India's democratic traditions, but it's become increasingly hard for him to hide his government's deepening crackdown on minorities and critics,' Meenakshi Ganguly, the deputy Asia director at Human Rights Watch, said in January this year. 'A decade of discriminatory policies and repression has weakened the rule of law and has restricted the economic and social rights of marginalized communities.'
Arab News
3 days ago
- General
- Arab News
‘Deeply dangerous' Islamophobia being promoted in UK: Baroness Warsi
LONDON: Baroness Warsi, a Muslim former minister in the UK, has warned that 'deeply dangerous' Islamophobic narratives are being promoted in British public discourse, The Independent reported. The House of Lords member, who was speaking at the Hay Festival — a prominent literary and arts event — compared rising Islamophobia in Britain to the treatment of Jews in 1930s Europe. In conversation with British-Israeli journalist Rachel Shabi, she described feeling 'heartbroken' at the way Muslim communities are increasingly portrayed in the UK. 'It doesn't matter how many times you serve and how many times you do what you do for our country,' she said. 'You still don't belong. You still don't matter. You still can't be trusted.' Warsi, who was discussing her new book 'Muslims Don't Matter,' described growing up in a working-class family of Pakistani origin in Yorkshire. The former co-chair of the Conservative Party said she had recently discussed with her husband whether it was necessary to prepare 'exit routes' from Britain. 'I turned to him and I said are we going to be like those Jewish families in Europe in the 1920s and 1930s, who were always sitting back, looking at the writing on the wall and thinking, 'No, we're going to be all right. We're very successful. We live in the right part of town. We're part of the establishment.' And then it will be too late. Should we be doing what everybody else around us seems to be doing right now, which is putting in place plan Bs and exit routes?' Warsi warned that negative narratives surrounding British Muslims are being driven by politicians and the media. 'The good news is this isn't bottom up,' she said. 'This isn't ordinary people sat there thinking, 'Oh, I really have an issue with Muslims and I'm now going to have quite hateful views about them.' 'This is people in power and people with big platforms constantly telling us, 'We can't trust Muslims. They're all dangerous, they're violent, the men are sexually predatory, the women are traditionally submissive.'' She added: 'It's these tropes which we're constantly being told about Muslim communities which, in the end, poisons the public discourse to a point where we start seeing this community in the worst possible light.' Warsi ended the discussion with an appeal for solidarity, and called on the British public to reject divisive narratives. 'It's time for us to organize and it's time for us to fight back, because all of our rights in the end will suffer,' she said.
Yahoo
4 days ago
- Politics
- Yahoo
Arizona teachers face personal liability under antisemitism bill covering Israel criticism
Photo by Andrii Koval | Getty Images Republicans and a small group of Democrats in the Arizona Legislature want to let parents sue teachers for teaching antisemitism, but the measure they passed Wednesday uses a controversial definition of the word that encompasses some criticisms of Israel. Legislators who supported the bill said it was necessary to address increased antisemitism on school campuses. But those who opposed it said that it infringed on First Amendment free speech rights and would create a chilling effect for teachers wishing to educate students about the war in Gaza and the complicated history leading up to it. SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX House Bill 2867 would ban Arizona's public K-12 teachers and university professors from teaching antisemitism in their classrooms, schools from providing antisemitic professional development. And it would bar teachers, administrators and volunteers from taking money intended to teach students antisemitism. Sponsored by Rep. Michael Way, R-Queen Creek, the bill would also allow students or their parents to bring a civil lawsuit against teachers who they claim violated the law. The legislation would require them to be held personally liable for damages, exempting antisemitism from laws that generally shield teachers from being sued for what they teach in the classroom. Multiple Democratic legislators argued that this would put teachers at risk of losing their assets, including their homes, to defend themselves against allegations that they taught antisemitism. And it could make them targets of people wishing to use the law maliciously. Instances of antisemitism and Islamophobia in the United States both skyrocketed after Hamas's brutal Oct. 7 attack on Israel that left more than 1,200 dead and 240 kidnapped and prompted a violent response from Israel. That retaliation has now lasted more than two years and has resulted in the deaths of more than 53,939 Gazans, including at least 16,500 children, according to the Gaza Health Ministry. Reported incidents of antisemitism in Arizona increased eightfold from 2019 to 2023, according to the Anti-Defamation League, but decreased from 2023 to 2024. While the number of overall instances of antisemitism decreased, instances of assault and vandalism increased. But the ADL has been criticized for changes it made in 2023 to its annual antisemitism tracking that classify all pro-Palestine activity as antisemitism. In 2024 the Council on American-Islamic Relations received more than 8,600 complaints of Islamophobia across the country, the most since it began reporting them 20 years ago. Nationally, in 2024 the ADL reported more than 9,300 instances of antisemitism, a 5% increase from the previous year. It is part of a broader effort to falsely and slanderously associate advocating for Palestinian human rights with antisemitism, which is a dangerous and offensive conflation. – Sen. Analise Ortiz, D-Phoenix 'Listening today, it seems to me that some people don't even want to admit that it exists,' said Sen. Hildy Angius, R-Bullhead City, before voting in favor of the bill on May 28. 'And it does exist, and it's getting worse and worse and worse.' Angius, who is Jewish, said that President Donald Trump's support for Israel has given her hope. Trump has long been criticized for associating with antisemites and trafficking in antisemitic rhetoric, including declaring that all Jewish people must be loyal first to Israel. His administration has hired a number of people who have close ties to antisemitic extremists, and Trump dined with Holocaust denier and white nationalist Nick Fuentes in 2022. Nearly every Democrat who spoke against the bill, including two who are married to Jewish men, condemned antisemitism, but said that Way's proposal was a flawed way to combat it. One of those Democrats, Sen. Mitzi Epstein of Tempe, proposed an amendment to ban the teaching of various other types of discrimination, remove personal civil liability for teachers and apply the law to both public and private schools. 'This would stop any kind of discrimination from being taught, and that, I think, is very important rather than to single out one kind of discrimination,' Epstein, a former school board member, said. She added that, because the state now provides significant funding for private K-12 schools through the universal voucher program, taxpayers have an interest in ensuring those schools don't teach discrimination, just like public schools. Her proposal was voted down along party lines. It's not clear that the bill even solves a real problem. Epstein said that she had for over a month asked House Bill 2867's supporters for examples of K-12 teachers in Arizona schools providing antisemitic instruction, but none were ever provided. 'I've not heard of any specifically,' said J.D. Mesnard, R-Chandler, who nonetheless backed the bill. 'It's a fair question to ask.' Epstein repeatedly objected to comments from Republican Sen. John Kavanagh, of Fountain Hills, when he implied that Democrats who voted against the bill must support some of the examples of antisemitism outlined in the definition of the word used in the bill. Senate President Pro Tem T.J. Shope threatened to kick Epstein out of the room for her repeated interruptions because he said she didn't properly cite a Senate rule that Kavanagh had broken. 'I'm curious which of these six (examples of antisemitism) those voting against this bill people think (teachers) should be able to do,' Kavanagh said. Way's bill uses the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance 'working definition' of antisemitism, which includes 11 examples. In 2022, Arizona added the IHRA's definition into state law. The examples that Kavanagh listed included advocating for Jewish genocide, Holocaust denial and making dehumanizing or demonizing comments about Jews or the collective power of Jewish people. But Kavanagh left out examples in the definition that helped to spur 100 human rights groups, including numerous Jewish organizations and groups located in Israel, to ask the United Nations not to use that same definition. Those examples included 'claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavour,' which the groups said had been used to label anyone who criticizes Israel as antisemitic. Even Ken Stern, who helped to draft the definition 20 years ago when he was the American Jewish Committee's antisemitism expert, now advocates against its use in legal matters, arguing that it has been used as 'a blunt instrument to label anyone an antisemite.' Listening today, it seems to me that some people don't even want to admit that it exists. And it does exist, and it's getting worse and worse and worse. – Sen. Hildy Angius, R-Bullhead City Democratic Sen. Analise Ortiz, of Phoenix, said that HB2867 'shamefully' uses antisemitism to attack the free speech of teachers, administrators and students. 'It is part of a broader effort to falsely and slanderously associate advocating for Palestinian human rights with antisemitism, which is a dangerous and offensive conflation,' Ortiz said. She added that the bill 'discriminates based on viewpoint, favoring speech supportive of Israel's actions over speech that is critical of Israel's actions,' which Ortiz said violates the First Amendment right to free speech. Ortiz questioned whether lawmakers really wanted to pass a bill that would likely land the state in the middle of a lawsuit questioning its constitutionality. Mesnard said that amendments to the bill had quelled any First Amendment issues — but he also claimed that teaching did not count as protected speech, a notion that Democrats disagreed with. During a Feb. 18 House Education Committee hearing on the bill, Rowan Imran, a member of the Arizona Palestine Solidarity Alliance, said that her family lives in the West Bank where they must navigate military checkpoints, tear gas and road closures just to get to work or access medical care. 'This bill explicitly states that discussions about Israel are protected, while discussions about Israeli policies oppressing Palestinians could be criminalized,' Imran said. 'Why? Why are we prioritizing the protection of discussions about a foreign nation in American classrooms while silencing the lived realities of Palestinian Americans?' Imran questioned whether her children would be accused of antisemitism at school if they talked about the experiences of their grandfather in the West Bank or if they talked about the existence of Palestine. During the same committee hearing, Rabbi Pinchas Allouche, who founded Congregation Beth Tefillah in Scottsdale, argued that chants of 'Free Palestine' and 'From the river to the sea' and 'any attack on Israel's very right to exist are nothing but pure, evil, disgusting and intolerable antisemitism.' During a December 2023 meeting of the Arizona House Committee on Anti Semitism in Education, Allouche urged members to pass legislation that would grossly violate First Amendment rights by banning antisemitism and Jewish hatred from every platform, including from campuses, newspapers and social media — even in private conversations. The meeting was held after Jewish students faced increased antisemitism on college campuses in Arizona, following the Oct. 7, 2023, massacre and its aftermath. But the instances of harassment that students spoke about during the hearing were at the hands of other students, not teachers. The students who were harassed also said administrators' response to their reports of antisemitism were disappointing. Michael Goldstein, a retired attorney from Ohio who has a history of writing legislation there and in Tennessee, brought the bill proposal to Way, saying that he aimed to combat the Muslim Brotherhood's goal of indoctrinating U.S. students in the teachings of Islam and antisemitism. The Muslim Brotherhood has little to no presence in America, and there is no evidence of widespread systematic indoctrination programs in U.S. schools. House Bill 2867 was approved by the state Senate May 28 by a vote of 16-12, with Republican Sen. Jake Hoffman, R-Queen Creek, the lone Republican who voted against the bill alongside Democrats. The bill already made it through the House on March 3 by a vote of 38-20 with a handful of Democrats joining Republicans in support, including sisters Alma and Consuelo Hernandez, who are both Jewish and have a history of support for Israel and advocacy for expanding laws to combat antisemitism. The bill now goes back to the House of Representatives for a final vote on amendments made in the Senate. If it passes that chamber again, it will go to Gov. Katie Hobbs. SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
