Islam is a religion of peace and harmony. Islam emphasis on equality and justice. In Islam you will see non Muslims have same rights that Muslims have under the Islamic laws. This can only be found in Islam as Islam doesn’t restrict people of other religion to practice their religion in Islamic states. It is said in the holy Quran in Surat Al-Mumtahanah that Allah orders to be kind and just to those who don’t fight Islam nor drive Muslims out of their homes: for Allah loves those who are just.

The Islamic sharia doesn’t allow Muslim society to stop people of other religions to practice their belief and religion. In another verse of Quran, you can clearly understand the stance of Islam about other religions.

“There is no coercion in religion “{Al-Baqarah: 256}

It has been clearly written in Quran that it is the responsibility of the Muslim state to provide non Muslims with an environment, where they can practice their religion without any fear. It is strictly prohibited in Islam to force non-Muslims to convert to Islam. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) said: “Whoever kills a contracting (a non Muslim protected by the state) he will not smell the paradise”.

We can see the example of Fateh-e-Makkah, when prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and his troops won the battle; the prophet entered in the city of Makkah and ordered the Muslims not to kill any innocent people (men, women and kids). He further ordered the Muslims to allow non Muslims to practice their religion freely. This act of kindness impressed a lot of non Muslims, and they converted to Islam.

Now, we can see the impact of the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in the modern society. People who are living in Muslim societies are free to practice their religion. When talking about Pakistan, India and Bangladesh people have their own churches and temples everywhere. The governments have provided them with security. Islamic sharia and federal courts are there to help the people who feel any injustice. In Pakistan, as an example, there are many institutes and schools that offer separate education to Hindu’s and Christian kids. They are not forced to read Islamic studies, and they can choose subjects of their own religion if they don’t want to read Islam as a subject. This reflects that non Muslims enjoy full rights.

Islam has guaranteed for non Muslims to get funds for their religious affairs. It is strictly prohibited in Islam to seize the funds of non Muslims. Moreover, the non-Muslims have full rights to claim funds from Bait-ul-Mall. Moreover, it is the duty of the Muslim state to provide people with all sorts of protection and security being a Muslim or not.

In short, it is the responsibility of Islamic state to respect every single person and provide them with justice and equality.

About the author

Passionate about writing, Muslim academy is perfect platform to get knowledge and Experience. Looking Forward for your feedback on my work.

View the Original article

It is very common to hear about humanity and other slogans for the human rights but have you ever observed anyone raising the slogan for the rights of dumb creatures? It is really heartbreaking that humans are filching the rights of animals directly or indirectly. If you start exploring the statistics, then you will find a number of cases where animals had died just because of some wrong steps or actions taken by humans. Here in this article, we will be discussing the rules, ethics and rights described by three major religions regarding pets and animals.

What Islam says about Animals/pets:

Islam, as believed to be the rightful religion for the whole universe has properly declared the rights of animals. You can find clear instructions and obligations about “how to treat animals/pets?” not only written in the holy Quran but also in Haith. It is believed that all these animal creatures praise Allah Almighty, but it their language is not understandable by humans. Islam has allowed all the Muslims to eat the meat of halal animals, but yet you can find some great examples where Sufis have followed vegetarianism. If a Muslim has to hunt or slaughter an animal then there are special instructions to ensure that this animal does not bear much pain. Islam discourages hunting animals as an entertainment as Prophet Muhammad (P.B.U.H) said that anyone who shoots a living creature for sport is cursed. Also he said, “There is no man who kills a sparrow or anything smaller without its deserving it, but Allah will question him/her about it on the Day of Judgment”. If a person is keeping a pet under his custody, then it is necessary that he should take care of it. You will be asked about the rights of these animals under your custody.

What Hinduism says about Animals/pets:

The preachers and followers of Hinduism also give a special respect and value to the rights of animals. According to Hinduism, they believe animals are the vehicles of many Gods and Goddesses. According to many Hinduism schools of thoughts, they regard animals, humans and other living beings to be the manifestation of God. They don’t regard animals as inferior creatures. Regarding hunting of animals, Hinduism has given rights to the followers to enjoy hunting and fights of animals as sports. Most of the Hindus don’t like to eat animal protein as they are vegetarians. Moreover, they have also restricted the job of butchery for low caste people.

What Christianity says about Animals/pets:

In general, Christians believe that animals have been put on the earth for their use. They can use these creatures in whatever way they like. Most of the believers of Christianity have the view that animals don’t have any soul, and that they can treat them as badly as they wish. The modern trend has changed, and most of the Christians in modern society feel bad about animal mistreatment. The traditional Christians had the view point that God has created these creatures just for the human beings and animals are inferior to human beings. They only treated or visualized animals in relation to humans. These three reasons kept them blind to believe that any mistreatment to the animals cannot be called as a bad deed. Now the modern Christians have changed their point of view, and you can see many such organizations and people who work for the rights of animals and pets.

About the author

I am running a freelance company to provide development, designing, seo and writing services.

View the Original article

Philip Claeys and friend in LondonBelgian politicians have submitted a proposal to impeach or limit the influence of Muslim extremists in power. MPs fear that Muslim politicians do not shake hands with women and are creating an isolated community.

Alain Destexhe, a liberal member of the Federation Wallonia-Brussels, and Deputy Mayor of Koekelberg Philippe Pivin submitted the proposal in front of the Belgian Parliament on Wednesday to exclude extremist parties from a range of local functions. The proposal is currently open for signatures by other members of Parliament.

"The people of the Islamic party do not want to be mixed with others in public transport and other communal places," local media quoted Alain Destexhe as saying. "They advocate getting married and wearing a veil at 12 years old, based on Islamic law."

The two liberal politicians said that the European Court of Human Rights had explicitly stated that Sharia law is not compatible with the rights and freedoms written in the European Convention on Human Rights (ECHR), which is why the power of Muslim extremists must be minimized.

The proposal argues that if elected, ultra-conservative Muslim beliefs are inconsistent with the ECHR's laws against racism and xenophobia, as well as those aimed at punishing the denial or minimization of the Holocaust. Those who hold such views should be impeached, and prevented from presiding over local councils or managing communal bodies, the proposal said.

Destexhe referred specifically to the newly established Islam Party in Belgium, which won two seats in municipal elections in October 2012 and vowed to implement Islamic Sharia law in Belgium.

"The Islam-elected party has refused to shake hands with Molenbeek [municipality in Brussels-Capital Region] Mayor Francoise Schepmans [after being elected]. I feel that some people do not understand how similar this is to the behavior of the extreme right, and how they are creating their own isolated community," Destexhe explained.

The two Muslim candidates, Lhoucine Aït Jeddig and Redouane Ahrouch, are both from Brussels' two heavily Muslim municipalities, Molenbeek-Saint-Jean and Anderlecht, respectively.

"We are elected Islamists but above all we are Muslims," Ahrouch told reporters after being elected in October. "Islam is compatible with the laws of the Belgian people. As elected Muslims, we embrace the Koran and the tradition of the Prophet Mohammed. We believe Islam is a universal religion. Our presence on the town council will give us the opportunity to express ourselves."

Ahrouch is known for refusing to shake hands or make eye contact with women in public.

The Islam Party announced a plan to put forward candidates for regional and parliamentary elections in Belgium, as well as the European Parliament, prompting fear and speculation among many Belgian politicians.

"It is very worrying to see what is happening. We see people with the Islamic background forming their own political party and demanding the introduction of Sharia law and Islamic state in Belgium," politician and member of the European Parliament for Flanders Philip Claeys told RT after the Islam Party was formed. "Until now Muslim people mainly supported socialist parties and other leftist parties. But now they feel confident enough to make their party."

Claeys believes it is a "big problem" when people who move to Belgium do not respect the separation of Church and State, or favor of equality of men and women and the rule of law: "We should put a stop to this mass immigration of people coming from outside Europe, mainly Islamic countries, of people who cannot and will not adapt to our way of living in Western Europe."

RT, 28 February 2013

"Islam is compatible with the laws of the Belgian people. As elected Muslims, we embrace the Koran and the tradition of the Prophet Mohammed. We believe Islam is a universal religion. Our presence on the town council will give us the opportunity to express ourselves." Scary, huh? Clearly these people are dangerous extremists.

Unlike Philip Claeys, of course – who (although RT omits to mention this fact) is a leading figure in Vlaams Belang, a far-right party with a long history of whipping up hatred against Muslims. It was Claeys who hosted the notorious counter-jihad conference at the European Parliament last July, where English Defence League leader Stephen Lennon was a star speaker. Claeys is also on friendly terms with his fellow MEP, British National Party leader Nick Griffin.

View the Original article

Far right demonstrates outside High CourtA high court judge has banned protests by groups such as the English Defence League being held within 500 metres of the home of the radical Islamist cleric Abu Qatada.

Mr Justice Silber said the injunction issued on Monday was necessary because the protests, which have been held on a weekly basis, had terrified the cleric's family, particularly his children, the youngest of whom is aged 11.

Abu Qatada, who was once described by a Spanish judge as Osama bin Laden's right-hand man in Europe, is currently out on bail under a 16-hour daily curfew. The home secretary, Theresa May, is appealing against a ruling by British judges that he cannot be sent back to Jordan while there is a risk he faces a trial based on evidence obtained through torture.

The high court injunction issued on Monday will ban the English National Resistance, the English Defence League, Britain First, the South East Alliance, the English Volunteer Force and others from staging demonstrations within 500 metres of Abu Qatada's London home.

"There was powerful evidence from the claimants of weekly demonstrations with much shouting of abuse such as 'Abu Qatada off our streets', 'all Muslims are terrorists', 'murdering scumbag', 'go back to Jordan', 'just murder him' and 'forget all this just kill him', Silber said in his ruling. He said some of the chanting and shouting had lasted up to six hours.

Abu Qatada's wife and five children, who brought the case, said the protests had terrified them. The 11-year-old said: "I feel they are a threat to us and I feel scared in the house. I also feel scared when walking outside even on a normal day (when there is no demonstration)."

The cleric's second eldest child, aged 21, said: "When the demonstrations occur, usually on Saturdays, the whole family has to stay in the house. When they first arrive it is very startling and then it is frightening … the demonstrators frighten and panic me and have the effect of worsening a medical condition that I suffer from."

The groups staging the protests vowed on their websites never to stop the demonstrations, and to expose his every address. "We intend to make his life a misery," they said.

The judge said the order would extend a temporary ban issued on 1 February to prevent a demonstration taking place outside the house the next day. Silber stressed that it was perfectly legitimate to protest against Abu Qatada's presence in Britain and the provision of a taxpayer-funded house for the cleric and his family to live in. Abu Qatada himself was not involved in the case.

A second injunction granted on Monday prevents the publication of the names of the children, their pictures and the schools they attend, to prevent further harassment.

Guardian, 25 February 2013

View the Original article

Salon reported earlier this week that disgraced former FBI agent and anti-Islam activist John Guandolo had claimed that John Brennan, President Obama's nominee for CIA director, is "unfit for duty" because he is a secret Muslim.

Guandolo stated that "Brennan did convert to Islam when he served in an official capacity on behalf of the United States when he served in Saudi Arabia" and it "was the culmination of a counterintelligence operation against him to recruit him" by foreign operatives.

You might have thought that Guandolo's accusation was so off-the-wall that even his fellow Islamophobes would distance themselves from this paranoid nonsense. But no. In a follow-up article Salon reports that Guandolo's theory has been enthusiastically adopted by sections of the US right.

View the Original article

White supremacists are urging Australian "patriots" to gather at public meetings by the controversial Dutch MP Geert Wilders, ready for trouble and a no-holds barred fight.

Tensions have been mounting over the impending visit of the far right-wing politician who has been accused of Islamophobia and racism.

One group, Australian New Nation, has been encouraging followers to react to any threat or sign of violence from Muslim protesters who might attend.

On its website, the group has posted an audio from "Radio Free Australia, the voice of white revolution in Australia" warning them to "expect an Islamic rent-a-crowd outside screaming and foaming at the mouth like the evil bastards they are".

"We encourage all patriots to exercise their legal right of self defence if any ragheads try to prevent them accessing the venue, or threaten, or use violence against their person once they try to strike the first blow, everything that follows is self defence on your part," it said.

The vitriolic broadcast, which lasts almost 10 minutes, goes on to say, "go . . . and be prepared to defend yourself and if they take a swing at you, they push at you, they spit on you, don't hold back. You have a legal right of self defence do what should be done to this rag-head camel f--- . . . Islamic filth who have no place in civilised society.

Social media sites protesting against Mr Wilders's visits to Sydney, Melbourne and Perth have also been the target of hate messages.

The Age, 2 February 2013

In response the Q Society, the "counterjihad" group at whose invitation Wilders is visiting Australia, have issued a press release trying to distance themselves from threats of violence.

"Any anti-Islam protests or demonstrations are not associated with Q Society in any way...," they state piously. "Q Society and Geert Wilders distance themselves from any white supremacism and racism in all forms; as we distance ourselves from all groups advocating violence."

The Q Society has invited a raving anti-Muslim bigot to visit Australia in order to incite fear and hatred of Islam, but apparently they have no responsibility whatsoever for any anti-Muslim violence that his visit may inspire.

View the Original article

A British university has established a dedicated centre to study the extremist far right, with a particular focus on the increase in violent anti-Islamic sentiment and the possibility of a lone, Anders Behring Breivik style attack.

The Centre for Fascist, Anti-Fascist and Post-Fascist Studies at Teesside University will be formally launched later this month at an event marking National Holocaust Memorial Day. Beginning with two academics, Professor Nigel Copsey and Dr Matthew Feldman, the centre will specialise in both the history of far-right radicalism in this country, and current trends and dangers.

The two main UK public fronts for far-right sentiment, the British National party and the street-based, anti-Islam English Defence League, are both in apparent decline. The BNP has lost almost all its council seats, and last autumn one of its two MEPs, Andrew Brons, publicly quit, saying the party had shed 90% of its membership. The leader of the EDL, meanwhile, was jailed this month for travelling to the US using someone else's passport.

Feldman, a historian by background, said organisations such as the EDL, which began in Luton in response to anti-armed forces demonstrations by hardline Islamist groups, tended to fizzle out: "You can only mobilise people to come out on a Saturday and shout slogans for a couple of years. Then people will say, I've been to five of these demonstrations, they're getting smaller, my chance of getting arrested is getting bigger. Then you get fragmentation."

However, he argued, this should not obscure a more gradual shift from race-based far-right activism towards "cultural nationalism", notably against Islam. He said: "For the first time since, I believe, the National Front in the late 70s and early 80s, the far right is really going for popular support. It's moving out into the mainstream, with some success."

Guardian, 13 January 2013

See also "Teesside University to open study centre of far right", BBC News, 11 January 2013

And "Britain's first research unit into study of extremist politics launched by Teesside University", Northern Echo, 11 January 2013

View the Original article

The face of the master race?A mental health nurse has set up a new far right political party. Dr Andrew Emerson has joined other former BNP members to create Patria, which means homeland in Latin, which calls for Britain to withdraw from the EU, to repeal the Human Rights Act, to end all immigration and to repatriate non-British residents.

The group – which includes Ian Johnson from the New Forest who stood as a BNP candidate for Havant in the 2005 – will be fielding candidates in local and general elections. They left the far right BNP after becoming disillusioned with the way it was run.

Dr Emerson said: "Racism is a made up word. It's code for anti-white, anti-English. The people who accuse us of being racist can't explain what they mean by the word. What they mean is they’re against the English people standing up for themselves and their own rights in their own country. No other country in the world would allow the kind of immigration that we have seen over the last 10 to 15 years."

Liberal Democrat Faith Ponsonby represents Battins ward on Havant Borough Council and is a member of Havant Multicultural Forum. She said: "As far as human rights and immigration are concerned, we've always been a country which has welcomed refugees, from political and religious persecution. I'm actually descended from the Huguenots who came to this country in the 18th century from France.

"We welcome people who have been persecuted and this country has benefited from them. We have benefited from the skills they have brought here and what they have achieved. Personally I love the buzz of walking round places like London where there are different people from different countries who want to live here and contribute to our economy.

"I know people are concerned about immigration and people taking from the country but I feel that the benefits from multiculturalism are huge."

Dr Emerson, of Chichester, and Mr Johnson have stood as BNP MEP candidates.

Portsmouth News, 10 January 2013

Patria held its inaugural meeting in Dorset on 10 December. One attendee reported that the meeting "was kept deliberately small", which is another way of saying that very few people turned up. Details of the organisation's founding members can be found here.

Since then, Patria's leading team has shrunk somewhat. Both its chairman Richard Franklin and deputy chairman/press officer Colin Poulter have disappeared from the "Who we are" section of the Patria website. In Poulter's case, it appears that objections were raised to his alleged membership of the Church of Scientology.

View the Original article

Susi Meret shows how a housing association's decision not to buy a Christmas tree this year was exploited by the far-right Danish People's Party with the assistance of the mainstream media. Conservative and liberal figures helped to reinforce the narrative that Danish culture is under attack from Muslims.

"The most worrying aspect of this controversy was the total lack of response from the other side...", Meret writes. "Those who violently oppose non-western immigration could make their point – extensively. And the voices that should have contradicted them were nowhere to be heard."

Open Democracy, 3 November 2012

View the Original article

Volen Siderov, leader of the fascist party Ataka, addresses supporters in PazardzhikHundreds of nationalists rallied in a southern Bulgarian town on Monday in support of the prosecution of 13 religious leaders accused of spreading radical Islam in a case causing communal strains in the Balkan country.

The trial, just months after a suicide bomber killed five Israeli tourists and a Bulgarian driver at the Black Sea port of Burgas, has tested a delicate ethnic balance between the country's minority Muslims and its Orthodox Christian majority.

Prosecutors in the southern town of Pazardzhik have charged 12 Bulgarian citizens, most of them Muslim prayer leaders, and one woman for preaching radical Islam between 2008 and 2010. Three of them are also charged with inciting religious hatred.

Protesters, led by far-right parties Attack and VMRO, waved banners reading "Our religion is Bulgaria" and "Tough sentences for fanatics", and said the march aimed to counter gatherings of Muslims in front of the courthouse in support of the accused.

The suspects, who deny any wrongdoing, face up to five years in prison if convicted. They are accused of working with an unregistered branch of Al Waqf-Al Islami, an Islamic foundation set up in the Netherlands and funded mainly by "Salafi circles" from Saudi Arabia, the court said, referring to an ultra-conservative brand of Islam.

About 100 Muslims also rallied near the court under heavy police protection in support of the accused, saying the 13 had preached only traditional Islam. Bulgaria's Mufti Office has also declared its support for the accused.

The trial has the potential to threaten a culture of tolerance in Bulgaria, where Muslims make up about 12 percent of the 7.3 million population, analysts said.

Bulgaria is the only European Union (EU) country where Muslims are not recent immigrants but a centuries-old local community, mostly ethnic Turkish descendants of Ottoman rule that ended in 1878.

"Trials like this could dramatically raise tension in the places where Bulgarian Muslims live," said Antonina Zhelyazkova, head of the Sofia-based International Center for Minority Studies.

The trial has revived memories of the 1980s when hundreds of Muslims were forced to change their names to Bulgarian ones and over 300,000 left the country as a result of a campaign by late communist dictator Todor Zhivkov to revive mainstream Bulgarian culture.

Nationalist parties are also trying to use the trial to gain popularity before a general election next year, analysts said.

Reuters, 29 October 2012

See also "Divided Bulgarian xenophobes stage anti-Muslim protests", Novinite, 29 October 2012

Update:  See "Bulgarian Imams' trial resumes", Press TV, 29 October 2012

View the Original article

A German dental practice which refused to hire a young Muslim woman because she insisted on wearing a headscarf at work broke the law, it was reported on Thursday. The court ruling is the first of its kind for the country.

A young Berlin woman applied last summer for a traineeship to become a dental assistant. Despite being qualified and getting along with staff, she was told that she could not have the position unless she removed her headscarf, the Tagesspiegel newspaper said.

This was religious discrimination, the city's labour court ruled. A headscarf was not an "arbitrary piece of clothing" but an expression of her beliefs and wearing it was part of her right to religious freedom. Refusing to employ because of her headscarf was in breach of the Equal Treatment Act, the judge said.

The court also rejected the suggestion that headscarves could pose a hygiene risk to patients. There was no more chance of transferring bacteria with a scarf than there was via human hair, the judge said.

The Spandau-based dental surgery argued that they had a right to religious neutrality in the clinic. But the judge said that as "it was in no way a religious institution," this was not valid.

Other women who had appealed for the right to wear a headscarf at work have lost in the past, generally because they had taken church-related employers to court.

The woman applied for the position in the summer of 2011. When she was rejected she decided, with help from the Turkish Association of Berlin and Brandenburg, to take the practice to court.

The Local, 18 October 2012

See also "German court rules in favor of headscarf freedom", Today's Zaman, 18 October 2012

View the Original article

Nationalist organizations have criticized Moscow Chief Mufti Albir Krganov's initiative to build more mosques in Russia to accommodate the needs of the large inflow of immigrants from Muslim countries.

"This approach is not totally correct," chairman of the Russkiye movement's supervisory board Alexander Belov [pictured] told Interfax on Tuesday.

"It is necessary to decide once and for all – whether Russia will turn into an Islamic state or will remain a secular state, where foreign immigrants come, find jobs and leave after their work is over," he said.

"If immigrants live no one knows where but want to build a mosque in my yard, this approach is certainly wrong," Belov said.

Interfax, 16 October 2012

Russkiye is a coalition of various fascist and anti-migrant groups. According to a recent Friedrich Ebert Stiftung report by Alexander Verkhovsky, The Ultra-Right in Russia in 2012, the movement "combines legalistic sounding rhetoric against 'migrants', a term used to refer to all 'ethnically foreign' groups" with "undisguised neo-Nazism".

View the Original article

The Reverend Alan Clifford of Norwich Reformed Church first came to prominence back in 2004 when the local paper published a front-page article under the headline "I Think Islam Is Evil, Says Pastor", with the subheading "Church leader backs BNP view on faith".

The story concerned a letter Clifford had written to the Norwich Evening News declaring his support for the views on Islam expressed by Nick Griffin. The British National Party leader had been exposed in a BBC TV documentary which showed him telling a party meeting that Islam is a "wicked, vicious faith" and accusing Muslims of raping white girls as "part of their plan for conquering countries". In his letter Clifford said that Islam was indeed an "evil religion" and that Griffin had been correct to describe it as "a monster in our midst".

Clifford again attracted publicity earlier this year when Norwich council withdrew permission for Norwich Reformed Church to hold its stall at a site on Hay Hill owned by the local authority, and also banned them from holding further meetings on its premises. The council's action was prompted by a complaint that the church was distributing anti-Muslim hate literature from its stall.

Specifically, the objection was to a leaflet by Clifford titled "Why Not Islam". This accuses religious and political leaders of being "gripped by cowardice in the face the Muslim menace", condemns governments for "ignorantly distinguishing between militant and moderate Islam", and warns that "seemingly-benign Muslim communities will always be breeding grounds from which their more militant members can recruit jihadists".

Clifford was immediately hailed as a hero by the BNP and the English Defence League, both of which fully supported his views on Islam and denounced Norwich council for attempting to suppress them. The EDL provided a link to "Why Not Islam" on its Facebook page, while the BNP reproduced the full text on its website. The EDL also announced that it would hold a national demonstration in solidarity with Clifford, which is now set for 10 November. Clifford, for his part, has stated that the EDL have "rightly" endorsed his views on Islam.

It should be obvious that the right to free speech does not include the right to incite hatred against minority ethno-religious communities, and anti-racists and anti-fascists would be the first to support Norwich council's firm action on this issue.

Or so you might think. However, Hope not hate Norfolk have come out strongly against the council's decision. An article posted on their website by one Barbara Suzuki on behalf of the "HNH Norfolk Team" poses the questions: "Did Norwich City Council act too quickly against a soft target? Did the NCC consider the wider issues? Is this an attack on Free Speech?"

According to HNH Norfolk, Norwich council was indeed at fault in withdrawing permission for Clifford and his friends to distribute anti-Muslim hate literature on local authority property: "Not only has the NCC been ridiculed and criticised, it has also handed on a silver platter an excuse for a rag-tag rabble like the EDL to propose a march on the City on November 10."

So Norwich Council is apparently to blame for provoking the EDL by launching an unwarranted attack on the Rev Clifford's right to free speech. Moreover, as evidence of the "ridicule and criticism" to which Norwich council has been subjected, Suzuki provides us with a link to the right-wing Cranmer blog.

As for Clifford's hate-filled publication, HNH Norfolk can't understand what all the fuss is about. "Why anyone would want to make a complaint about it beats me", Suzuki writes. "There is literally no limit to the number of things that give offence to someone or other, and are we then to complain to the council about each and every one of them? Is this the way grown-ups in a secular democracy behave?"

The explanation for this disgraceful position can be found on Suzuki's Facebook page, which shows that she is an active supporter of the National Secular Society, an organisation that staunchly defends the right of racists to attack Islam – not least because a number of prominent NSS members share their views.

The NSS has long promoted the so-called "comedian" Pat Condell, who is given to posting YouTube rants against "Muslim immigrant rapists". NSS president Terry Sanderson once applauded a Sunday Telegraph columnist who denounced a ban on incitement to religious hatred on the grounds that it was being proposed "at the behest of Muslim foreigners who have forced themselves on us". Sanderson himself has expressed his concern that "immigrants are importing their own brands of religion into Britain" which are "primitive, hysterical, fanatical and alien".

So it's not exactly surprising that Suzuki should uphold Alan Clifford's democratic right to incite hatred against Muslims. What is disturbing, however, is that she has been allowed to publish these views on the website of a leading anti-racist and anti-fascist organisation which receives generous financial backing from the trade unions.

Meanwhile, in east London, the Jewish community has reacted angrily to the appearance of a clearly racist mural featuring antisemitic caricatures of scheming Jewish bankers. Quite rightly, Tower Hamlets mayor Lutfur Rahman has strongly supported the Jewish community on this issue, issuing a forthright condemnation of the mural and demanding its removal. As the mayor has stated: "Where freedom of expression runs the risk of inciting racial hatred then it is right that such expression should be curtailed."

It's just as well for the Jewish community that the antisemitic mural appeared in Tower Hamlets rather than Norwich, otherwise they would no doubt have faced a campaign by Hope not hate Norfolk to defend the democratic right of antisemites to incite hatred against Jews.

View the Original article

The cancellation of Saturday's planned rally in Melbourne against Islamophobia didn't prevent people turning up to denounce Islam. The small anti-Islam protest brought together atheists brandishing signs reading "(Like all religions) Islam is false" and fascist thugs wearing SS insignia. The latter included Nationalist Alternative, a neo-Nazi group who reject opportunist attempts to win popular support by targeting Islam alone and uphold the right of white Australians to abuse and insult Muslims and Jews equally.

For a useful overview of the outbreak of Islamophobia in Australia that followed clashes between protestors and police at a demonstration against the Innocence of Muslims film in Sydney on 15 September, see "We must reject the anti-Muslim hysteria", Green Left Weekly, 23 September 2012

View the Original article

A former sales assistant at Dunnes Stores has claimed she wanted to work her rostered hours but could not do so as she was not permitted to wear a hijab at work.

Loreta Tavoraite (35) of Parknamore, Ballincollig, Co Cork, has brought a case for unfair dismissal against Dunnes Stores (head office) at South Great Georges Street, Dublin. Ms Tavoraite, who is originally from Lithuania, began working at Dunnes Stores, Ballincollig, Co Cork on July 26th, 2007.

The Employment Appeals Tribunal heard that Ms Tavoraite subsequently converted to Islam and wanted to wear a hijab, a headscarf which covers the hair, but which leaves the face exposed, at work. Staff at Dunnes Stores wear a standard uniform of a blouse, trousers or a skirt, and a type of cardigan, and no alteration to the style of the uniform is allowed, the tribunal heard.

In October 2010 Ms Tavoraite met with store manager at the Ballincollig store Bill Farrell and the human resources manager about wearing the hijab. She explained that her religion involved covering her head with a hat or scarf while in public, including at work, but that she had been told that she could not wear the scarf to work.

Mr Farrell told Ms Tavoraite that her religion was her own business and her business only. He said the uniform was their image as a company and she had to wear the standard uniform as required by the company.

There were numerous subsequent meetings, including disciplinary meetings, and correspondence between management at Dunnes Stores and Ms Tavoraite in an effort to resolve the impasse and Ms Tavoraite was repeatedly told by the company that they wanted her to return to work. Ms Tavoraite never returned to work.

At a meeting in early November she was informed that a basic part of her contract was that she would attend work and that if she did not come to work they would have to consider her contract and that it might be terminated. She was dismissed from her position on November 6th, 2010. Ms Tavoraite's solicitor Patrick Horan said his client would say that she wanted to work her hours, "but was told you can't come to work wearing a hijab ... so she couldn't come into work".

The solicitor said: "As far as she was concerned, being a devout Muslim you must wear a hijab. It's an obligation," said Mr Horan. "Her view was: I'm ready to work. I want to work, but because of my religion I have to wear a hijab."

Mr Farrell said Ms Tavoraite was a valued employee and he had said he wanted her to come back to work at numerous meetings. He told the tribunal that when an employee is wearing something which is not part of the uniform they are not allowed to work. "It has to be controlled, otherwise it's a free for all," he said.

Asked by Mr Horan what would happen if a member of staff came into work wearing a chain and cross, Mr Farrell said he had never come across it.

Ms Tavoraite will give evidence when the tribunal resumes the hearing in November.

Irish Times, 12 September 2012

View the Original article

For at least four decades a small number of specialist academics have pointed to a failure by governments in Europe to take the threat of far right terrorism and political violence sufficiently seriously. This selective blindness has become all the more striking during the decade of the war on terror when the same governments have paid endless attention to the threat of another kind of home grown terrorism and political violence.

Indeed, unintentionally but not unforeseeably, much government rhetoric aimed at home grown 'radical Islamists' in European countries has helped feed far right propaganda that demonises the same targets. This is not to argue that extremist Muslim threats of terrorism and political violence do not exist and do not deserve to be treated seriously. To the contrary, I argue that governments should be alert to both threats and should respond to them in the same way. To be blind to one and overzealous to the other is to risk fuelling both.

Bob Lambert argues for a reorientation of counter-terrorist strategy.

Open Democracy, 23 July 2012

View the Original article

A federal judge in Manhattan ruled on Friday that the Metropolitan Transportation Authority violated the First Amendment rights of a pro-Israel group when it rejected an advertisement the group wanted to place on city buses on grounds that they contained demeaning language.

The group, the American Freedom Defense Initiative, had proposed an ad that said, "In any war between the civilized man and the savage, support the civilized man." Then, between two Stars of David, the ad said: "Support Israel. Defeat Jihad."

The transportation authority said the ad violated its prohibition on ads that demeaned individuals or groups on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin and five other specific categories. The group was given the opportunity to revise the ad, but it refused, and claimed in a lawsuit that the agency's "no demeaning" language restriction was unconstitutional.

The judge, Paul A. Engelmayer of Federal District Court, ruled that the rejected ad was "not only protected speech – it is core political speech," expressing a "pro-Israel perspective on the Israeli/Palestinian conflict" and implicitly calling "for a pro-Israel U.S. foreign policy with regard to that conflict." As such, the judge held, the ad "is afforded the highest level of protection under the First Amendment."

Pamela Geller, executive director of the group that sought to place the ad, called the decision "a victory for freedom-loving people."

Judge Engelmayer said he would delay the effect of his order for 30 days, to allow the transportation authority to consider its appellate options and alternatives to the current rule.

New York Times, 20 July 2012

A victory for "freedom-loving people"? More like a victory for mindless bigots. The judge conceded that the MTA had "reasonably read" Geller's ad as referring to Muslims as "savages". But he ruled that it was a violation of the First Amendment for the authority to prevent the public expression of such views. Perhaps some neo-Nazi group will now take advantage of this ruling to buy adverts describing African Americans or Jews as savages. Would that be a victory for freedom-loving people too?

View the Original article

Rank-and-file Republicans, including some in the party's suburban Nashville stronghold, have condemned Gov. Bill Haslam for policies that include the hiring of gay individuals, Democrats and a Muslim-American lawyer.

At least two western Tennessee chapters of the Tennessee Republican Party – and possibly as many as eight statewide – have passed resolutions saying Haslam has shown "a consistent lack of conservative values" and calling on state party leaders to sanction the governor.

Meanwhile, the Williamson County Republican Party has passed a more narrow resolution that criticizes the governor for hiring a Tennessee-born Muslim to a trade position. The effort highlights the continued concern about Sharia, or Islamic law, among grass-roots Republicans throughout Tennessee.

The Tennessean, 17 July 2012

The Williamson County resolution (reproduced here) is apparently based on a model resolution promoted by this Islamophobic anti-Haslam website.

The Williamson County Republicans have links to the Tennessee Freedom Coalition, which organised Dutch anti-Muslim bigot Geert Wilders' visit to the state last year. A meet and greet with Wilders was held at the Williamson County Republican Party headquarters in Franklin.

Update:  TPM has received an email from Kevin Kookogey, chairman of the Williamson County Republicans, who states:

"To date, the Haslam Administration has displayed an unfortunate ignorance to the threat of Shariah. They seem willing to accept the claims and defense of the Muslim Brotherhood at face value, refusing to even consider that, perhaps, those bent on destroying Western Civilization might just be infiltrating our institutions.... It is not like this has never happened before. The Muslim Brotherhood is following the blueprint of the Communists, who infiltrated the highest levels of government and society in the 1950's. Shariah, however, is an even greater threat, because it has cloaked itself under the auspices of a religion, thus confusing the uninformed."

View the Original article

The mosque in Torrejón de Ardoz doesn't look much like a mosque. It occupies the ground floor of a drab block of flats near the main square in this town of 120,000 inhabitants just east of Madrid. But for the last decade and a half, it has been the only place of worship for Muslims here.

"This mosque is too small for us and we need a new site that is bigger and more apt for our needs," says Farid Bahoudi, the spokesman for Torrejón's Islamic community, pointing to the old building. He says there are now about 10,000 Muslims in the town, mostly from north Africa.

But local Muslims' attempts to find a more suitable site for their mosque have sparked a dispute that has pitted politicians on the far right against activists from the radical left and highlighted the issue of race relations in crisis-ridden Spain.

"We've tried to overcome ignorance to show people the truth about who we are and show them the reality of Islam and the reality of coexistence," says Bahoudi. "But instead of wanting to integrate with us, the locals here would rather we moved elsewhere."

In February of this year, the municipality gave permission for the new, bigger mosque to be built on a site near the centre of town, where two empty houses stand in a small side street. The local Muslims immediately bought the land, for nearly €500,000, with donations from members of their community.

"How would you like it if two or three hundred 'Moors' came wandering in and out of your street to pray each day?" says one man who lives on the same street as the proposed site for the new mosque and who prefers not to give his name.

About 2,000 locals who feel a similar way have put their signatures to a petition against the new mosque project.

On June 27th, apparently prompted by this swell of resistance, the municipal authorities performed a U-turn, approving a proposal that changed the planned site for the new mosque to an industrial park outside Torrejón.

Farid Bahoudi and the Islamic community are deeply upset at the decision, which they feel will marginalise the town's Muslims. Like many other Muslims here, Bahoudi is Spanish, having grown up in Ceuta in north Africa, a city that belongs to Spain.

Torrejón's dispute has taken on a national tinge in recent days, with the intervention of a far-right politician from Catalonia, several hundred miles to the northeast. Josep Anglada, leader of the Platform for Catalonia anti-immigration party, visited Torrejón at the end of June, and staged a rally against the mosque and the "Islamisation" of Spain.

"We don't want any mosques in Torrejón or anywhere else in Spain," he said. "The mosque will bring degradation, violence, hate and fanaticism."

According to Leandro Ortega, a young leftist activist who took part in a counter-rally against intolerance and Anglada's meddling in Torrejón, the politician is a "fascist".

Irish Times, 10 July 2012

View the Original article

The utterly useless Simon CookThe far right English Defence League has been given a clear message by city council leader Simon Cook – "We don't want you in Bristol."

The EDL, which describes itself as an anti-Islamist group, is planning to press ahead on Saturday with its controversial march through the city.

Meanwhile, a group of trade unions, community groups and anti-racist organisations called We Are Bristol will stage a counter demonstration opposite the Bristol Hippodrome at the same time.

Labour councillor Mike Wollacott (Brislington East) wrote to Mr Cook, inviting him to attend the anti-EDL demo. But Mr Cook has turned down the invitation, saying he thought it would send out the wrong message.

Mr Cook added: "We have made absolutely clear that we do not agree with their extremist views and do not want them in Bristol. They are not a proscribed organisation and have a right to march.

"Council officers have worked closely with the police to ensure that the march goes off peacefully. At all times, the police have made it very clear that they do not believe that banning the march would be in the public interest.

"I and other members of the cabinet will respond to the EDL presence in our city by showing solidarity with Pride on the Saturday and the multi-faith event on the Sunday. I do not believe however, that attending a counter demonstration would send out the right message: it would simply give the EDL the oxygen of publicity."

The EDL march and counter demo clashes with the climax of the week-long Pride Festival which celebrates the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender community.

Paul Stephenson, who received an OBE earlier this year for his work with race relations in the city, has urged council leaders to review their decision not to ban the march. A petition was handed in last week asking cabinet councillors to call on Home Secretary Theresa May to stop the march. Cabinet Councillor Gary Hopkins said there was not the slightest chance of winning a ban without a police recommendation.

Policing the EDL march is expected to cost £500,000 and involve about 1,000 police officers.

March organiser Mickey Bayliss expects about 500 EDL members to take part in the march which starts at Redcliffe Wharf at 1pm.

Mr Stephenson, Bristol's first black social worker, founded the West Indian Development Council to campaign against racism in Bristol, and in particular the ban on the employment of black people to work on Bristol buses. Within six months, the ban was lifted.

He told the Post: "I was surprised and deeply disappointed that the city council decided not to ban the proposed march. The decision by the council to allow this march to take place on the spurious grounds of freedom of speech flies in the face of the EDL's members' bid to stir up racial hatred, bigotry and intolerance.

"Despite the assertions the EDL make in denying they support a racist philosophy aimed at attacking Bristol's Muslim communities, they use them as a scapegoat for high youth unemployment and dismantling the welfare state. At a time of economic collapse both locally, nationally and globally, Bristol's citizens do not wish to see racial and religious bigotry promoted on its streets in the name of freedom of expression."

Mr Stephenson said that this year's St Paul's Carnival, which was an expression of peace, love and friendship had to be cancelled because of lack of financial support. Yet the EDL march, which was going to cost so much of council taxpayers' money to police, was going ahead.

Bristol Post, 9 July 2012

View the Original article