Participants in the report talk about the disturbing nature of verbal and physical violence that they have suffered. A convert to Islam, Sophie (who wears the Hijab) stated, “a guy walked past, he spat at me and called me a ‘Muzzi’. Also, I’ve been called dirty Paki, (I am white), as a group of guys walked past and shouted ‘speak English in our country.’ I was looking at a map and did not say anything.”

Some participants also warned about the risks of radicalisation, especially for young people as a result of suffering online and/or offline anti-Muslim hate crimes. One respondent, Hamza, noted that “anti-Muslim hate crime has affected Muslims. This is why Muslims are going to Syria. This is why they support ISIS. When people experience Islamophobic abuse, they will be easily radicalised. They feel weak, lonely, isolated, and rejected from British society. This is when these hate preachers pick them up and brainwash them. If you are constantly victimised, you are weak.”

This report also highlights an impact on Muslim communities which is rarely discussed and which includes changes in dress style so that attention is not drawn to the visibility of their faith. The report highlights the issue of Muslims managing their Muslim identity on-line and off-line with the aim of reducing future abuse. It states that, “the reality of anti-Muslim hate crime creates ‘invisible’ boundaries, across which members of the Muslim community are not ‘welcome’ to step. The enactment of both virtual and physical boundaries impacts upon ‘emotional geographies’ in relation to the way in which Muslims perceive the spaces and places around and outside their communities of abode. Rather than risk the threat of being attacked, either off-line or on-line, many actual and potential victims opt to change their lifestyles and retreat to ‘their own’ communities.

The post REPORT: “We Fear for Our Lives”: Offline and Online Experiences of Anti-Muslim Hostility appeared first on TELL MAMA.

This text gives an incredibly accurate picture of the obstacles put in our way by groups and individuals just to serve Muslim communities in supporting them when targeted for anti-Muslim hatred.

Under the heading of ‘Working With Partners‘ the following text highlights the provocation that we have come under because of agitators for simply doing our job.

Excerpt of Text

“Effective engagement with Muslim communities has presented some distinct challenges in recent years for a whole range of reasons including but not limited to;

— The diverse nature of Muslim communities in terms of language, culture, ethnic origins and social factors.
— The lack of a single hierarchical structure that is present in some religious groups.
— The tensions that exist in some small parts of different Muslim sectarian groups.
— The comparatively lower levels of confidence in the police from some Muslims
— That newly arrived communities will have less knowledge of our commitments to protect them from targeted abuse and are less likely to report crimes to authorities.

 I believe that these factors mean that AMHC (anti-Muslim hate crime) is less likely to be reported to the police than would be the case in some other religious groups.

For these stated reasons we have prioritised efforts to improve reporting of AMHC in recent years. In around 2010-12, we began efforts to help community group(s) to replicate some of the services of the Community Security Trust, a charity that I consider to be one of the world leaders in this area and which is funded by community donations.

We had conversations with many groups and individuals who felt that, with support, they could develop such a service. Almost all of these groups could not establish a service and some found it difficult to meet our minimum expectations for a partner body.

The one group who were able to meet our standards was Tell MAMA. We have worked hard to support Tell MAMA in subsequent years and they have become one of our most trusted partners, offering an excellent service to victims. This trust and confidence led to me signing a national Information Sharing Agreement (ISA) with it’s Chief Executive, Fiyaz Mughal OBE in 2015. At my last briefing, 18 forces had done so with others in negotiation.

 The challenges faced in the establishment and development of Tell MAMA have been significant and they have come under severe criticism from a small number of individuals and groups from the Muslim community and grossly offensive attacks from some racist and anti-Muslim groups. I believe some of the former comes from opposition to Tell MAMA’s human rights approach, that respects all citizens rights, regardless of the characteristic that is being attacked. This has particularly been a focus when they have stood against antisemitism, LGBT hostility and the protection of minority Muslim groups. I believe this to be a fundamental strength of Tell MAMA and their willingness to show leadership and support equality for all is one of their strengths and one of those standards that we considered to be a pre-requisite of a true partnership.

One practical example of the value of our ISA with Tell MAMA came in the days following the attempted murder at Leytonstone Tube Station in December, 2015. Within three days we had shared information with Tell MAMA and began to get a clear picture of the nature of ‘retribution’ hate crimes against Muslim victims. Early analysis showed, by way of example, that the majority of victims were females wearing a niqab or similar veils and that around a third of attacks took place on public transport. This was invaluable information of use to police and partners to inform deployment decisions.

This type of analysis of hate crimes in the aftermath of local, national and international events is an important part of our response to community tensions. We have detected spikes in attacks on Muslims after a broad range of incidents such as the tragic murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby in 2013 and these ‘spikes’ have often lead to the deployment of Critical Incident Management measures by ourselves and our partners.

The post Threats and Challenges We Face Highlighted by the National Police Chiefs Council appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The jailing of four men for throwing a severed pig’s head into the grounds of a mosque generated a manufactured outrage online.

Thomas Ashton, 21, Andrew Warner, 31, Travis Crabtree, 25, and Steven White, 28, all admitted a charge of religiously aggravated intentional harassment, alarm or distress.

Ashton received a 10 month prison sentence, Warner seven months, White eight months and Crabtree 14 months.

In certain circles, the victims of this hate crime receive little empathy. For the perpetrators, the prison sentence was scoffed at, and falsely compared to the £50 fine an extremist member of the banned Muslims Against Crusades received for burning a poppy in 2011.

Others focus upon the ‘prank’ angle that was used by the defence during the trial at Preston Crown Court. An angle given prominence in the Daily Mail. But a closer reading of the news reports dismisses that argument.

So what are some of the factors that potentially influenced the outcome?

The incident took place two days after Lee Rigby’s murder (at a time when mosques in other parts of the UK were attacked). In all likelihood, Blackpool’s Muslim communities already felt on edge.

Judge Graham Knowles acknowledged this factor as he told the court: “All four defendants must have been perfectly aware, in broad terms, of that death and the motivation the murderers gave for that death and the heightened state of tension in the country in general.”

Police later found a taunting and mocking message on White’s Facebook that read: “They will be fuming.” When White was arrested, a video was found on his iPhone that showed a car being driven by Warner.

The recording captured comments about Muslims and the prosecution argued that the four were aware of the significance of the pig’s head.

Ashton and Crabtree drove to the butcher’s shop to purchase the pig’s head. The other men joined the group once they became aware of the plan.

Two of the group then entered the grounds of the mosque and dumped the pig’s head (wrapped in a plastic bag) with their hoods up.

Worshippers (including women and children) saw the pig’s head as they arrived for prayers and felt upset and offended. A volunteer was only made aware of the incident after receiving a Facebook message that something suspicious was left outside the mosque.

Ashfaq Patel, the Imam at Blackpool Central Mosque, requested clemency, but it did not sway Judge Knowles, who described it as a “poisonous” crime.

He later added: “People are and must be free to worship as they please and without this kind of foul attack on them and that which they hold sacred. What you four did must be denounced.”

The post Why Were 4 Men Jailed for Throwing a Pig’s Head into Blackpool Mosque? appeared first on TELL MAMA.

We decided to investigate this further and judge whether the proliferation of anti-Muslim attacks in the summer of 2013 was a temporary spike. To do this, we submitted a Freedom of Information Request to the Metropolitan Police requesting a detailed breakdown of every anti-Muslim hate crime from April 2012 to August 2014 by borough (which is available as a PDF and an Excel spreadsheet). Looking at the data, we find an even more disturbing story, illustrated in the infographic below.

Before the Woolwich incident, from April 2012 to April 2013, there was an average of 28 anti-Muslim hate crimes per month. In April 2013, there were 22 anti-Muslim hate crimes in London, but in May (when Lee Rigby is murdered) that number soars to 109 crimes. As the infographic shows, this spike lasts until about July 2013. By August, it appears that anti-Muslim hate crime is back to a normal level.

However, if we measure anti-Muslim hate crimes from August 2013 to September 2014 the average number of hate crimes sits at 45 per month, a 60% rise compared to the average prior to the Woolwich incident, suggesting a long-term increase in the average level of anti-Muslim hate crimes in London.

By early 2014 Muslims are back on the front page, with the ‘Trojan Horse’ scandal in Birmingham framed as a ‘jihadist plot’ to take over schools. In the summer and early autumn, the Gaza-Israel conflict and ISIS are in the news, correlating with an increase in anti-Muslim attacks. In fact, some anecdotal evidence from Tell MAMA’s verbal abuse cases suggests that perceptions about ISIS motivate anti-Muslim hate nationally and in London. Coverage of child sexual exploitation in Rotherham, twisted by the far-right into a ‘Muslim’ issue, further contributes to anti-Muslim discourse in late 2014.

The data from the Metropolitan Police shows that the spike in anti-Muslim attacks in the summer of 2013 led to a sustained increase in the base level of crimes into 2014. If we look at the last two years, we find that between October 2013 and September 2014, there is a 6.5% increase in the total number of anti-Muslim hate crimes over the previous year (October 2012 – September 2013). It is clear that anti-Muslim hate did not simply taper off and fall back to a low level after 2014. Instead, it got worse in 2014.

The post Anti-Muslim hate crimes, 2012-2014 in London: An Analysis of the Situation appeared first on TELL MAMA.

We asked the journalists involved in the BBC report, which has circulated quite widely online, and found that the data was not the latest available. In our August briefing, we learned that overall, between the year from August 2012 to August 2013 and the year from August 2013 to August 2014, anti-Muslim hate crimes decreased 5.9% (from 512 in the first year to 482 in the last year).

While the BBC figure uses a different measure, relying on the financial year to date, claiming a 65% rise is quite a discrepancy. Despite the immense spike of anti-Muslim hate crime in the summer of 2013 in response to the brutal murder of Drummer Lee Rigby, the Metropolitan Police shows a very small drop in the incidence of anti-Muslim hate crime.

As the organisation responsible for monitoring anti-Muslim hate crime in the UK, we decided to dig a little deeper by looking at the changes in hate crime in specific boroughs rather than looking at London as a whole. There are sharp increases in some of these boroughs: North London boroughs Enfield, Haringey, Barnet, Camden, and Hackney have seen sharp increases of anti-Muslim hate crime year-over-year. These increases are dramatic despite modest decreases in some areas including Southeast London boroughs and Waltham Forest.

It is problematic to claim that ‘anti-Muslim hate crime’ has increased or decreased across London as the data demonstrates that these changes are anything but uniform across London’s geography. Rather, it is critical to look at the specificities of anti-Muslim hate crime in each borough. While the Metropolitan Police reports a 5.9% decrease in anti-Muslim hate crime, a look at a map of the differences between boroughs demonstrates the importance of drilling into the unique situation of each borough: we see localised hotspots that demand closer scrutiny and police efforts to counter anti-Muslim hate.

Get the raw data from the MPS, or download our spreadsheet with the data from June to August 2014.

The post Latest figures on anti-Muslim Hate Crimes from the Metropolitan Police Service appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The latest disappointment comes from Australia. With 800 police officers, Australian officials raided the homes of numerous Muslims, detaining 15 people and only charging one person over fears of a ‘beheading’ plot (for which no hard evidence has been presented). Whether or not the evidence for the plot is accurate is beside the point: what matters is 800 police officers served 25 warrants and only charged one person. This sends a clear message­: Muslims have been, and continue to be ‘suspects’.

The dangerous backlash to these raids has been a spike in anti-Muslim hate crime, many reported by a new group on Facebook called the Islamophobia Register of Australia. A mosque has been desecrated, boys playing football were threatened by an older man, and a young woman was bashed and thrown from a train. All of these incidents happened after the raids. We see similar patterns in Britain; the brutal murder of Drummer Lee Rigby is used as the glue that holds Britain First together, a far-right political group with a strong anti-Muslim agenda.

Ineffective policing – especially the kind that requires 800 officers to serve 25 warrants and leads only to one arrest, or the desperately low hit rates of Section 44 and Schedule 7 searches, arrests, and detentions – is much more than a waste of resources. This is ineffective policing because it in fact increases the incidence of crime by generating a national discourse in which Islamophobic comments are rendered legitimate and justifiable: Almir Colan, of the Islamic Council of Victoria, said to Guardian Australia that ‘we want the prime minister to lower the rhetoric and concentrate on responsible, productive language.’In fact, some of the PM Tony Abbot’s backbenchers have called for a burqa ban in Australia, though he distanced himself from any such policy. Part of the problem is the media itself; in both the UK and Australia, ISIS makes for juicy headlines that inspire fear across populations. The far-right, such as Britain First in the UK and the Australian Defence League, rely on news coverage to justify their claims about Muslims. Just as Britain First supporters speaking about Rotherham replaced the label ‘Asian’ with ‘Muslim’ when describing grooming gangs, ISIS is seen by organisations such as the Australian Defence League as a problem with the nature of Muslims. Holding that argument, then, means that ‘all Muslims’ should no longer be welcome in Australia. Such a situation is ripe for hate crime.

In the UK, police forces and the government are taking far-right hate much more seriously than they did even a few years ago, working far-right groups into the general counter-terrorism strategy. Many police forces are working more diligently on prosecuting anti-Muslim hate crime. At the same time, there is an informational exchange between the likes of right-wing parties in Australia with those in the UK, with sources such as UKIP and the EDL influencing the Australian right and both are plugged in to transatlantic anti-Muslim ideologues such as Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer (both of whom influenced the terrorist Anders Breivik).

The far-right and racists are exploiting the suffering of untold numbers of people at the hands of ISIS to terrorise and demonise – albeit in a less violent way – the Muslim community in Australia. While it is certain that the police should be able to raid suspected criminals’ homes or workplaces to prevent an attack, it has to be done responsibly and within the limits of the law. Is deploying 800 officers to serve just 25 warrants for a potential murder representative of a reasonable use of force? The use of such force exacerbates tensions between governments and the Muslim community. This kind of action decreases trust in police institutions and ultimately makes it harder to detect and prevent crime when communities live in fear of institutions.

Given the highly politicised nature of anti-Muslim hate and anxieties about ISIS, it is just as important for the police to tread with care and not to use heavy-handed tactics. If that racist had bashed that young woman harder, or threw her off the train at a different time or angle, there could have been a homicide possibly motivated by the environment created by these raids. After the killing of Lee Rigby, there were 35 mosque attacks with the real potential of a threat to the safety of worshippers. Those 800 cops were out raiding and detaining also to prevent one planned murder. How many cops in Australia are dedicated stopping racists from attacking innocents is another legitimate question to ask.

The post Raids, ISIS, and Anti-Muslim Hate in Australia: Building an Environment for Hate Crimes appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Many people have asked us why we have raised the spectre of antisemitism and why we re-iterate the fact that the campaign against antisemitism must be redoubled when our core remit is anti-Muslim hate. Well the answer can be articulately found in a recent phrase that the Chief Rabbi, Ephraim Mervis, used in a Telegraph article. Whilst we fundamentally believe in human rights and the rule of law, this means that the foreign policies and actions of any nation should be and must be scrutinised. Yet, what the Chief Rabbi is suggesting is that antisemitism (based on a backlash post the Gaza crisis), is an indicator of the levels of tolerance, or one could say, the lack of tolerance in society. The phrase, ‘canary in a coalmine‘ as used by the Chief Rabbi, therefore has a wider meaning for all communities.

The Chief Rabbi is absolutely right when he states that Jews in the UK cannot and should not be held accountable for the actions of Netanyahu and his cabinet and holding a whole community to account is antisemitic. This is based on the simple premise that holding a whole community to a standard because of their identity is prejudicial and this also goes for those who believe that all British Muslims should be held to account for the actions of ISIS or those gangs of young men in Rotherham, Peterborough or Oxford who groomed young girls. It is simply ludicrous and prejudicial to do so, but this does not detract from self-reflection by some within communities.

Yet, what the Chief Rabbi is getting at, is that antisemitism is a warning signal, an indicator that there are groups of people who are willing to target others, graffiti synagogues or make flippant prejudicial comments to Jewish community members going about their daily business. It is precisely this kind of activity that we have also picked up against Muslim communities, particularly post the murder of Lee Rigby and recently after the Rotherham grooming crisis broke in the press. Examples of such incidents can be found here, here and here.

Time and time again, we come across prejudice, hate and bigotry targeted against Muslim communities and where all of the data shows that visible Muslim women going about their daily business, are at a higher risk of anti-Muslim abuse. Thankfully, whilst the abuse is not life threatening it does leave its impacts on those women who are targeted and examples of incidents and attacks are listed here, here and here.

CST July 2014 Report

Which brings us onto the following depressing fact which needs to be raised. The CST have just released their July figures on antisemitic hate crimes and the figures make for grim reading, particularly when victim feedback on the profiles of their perpetrators indicate that a high proportion of the 107 cases where the profiles of the perpetrator are known, are of a Muslim background. (Victims reported perpetrator profiles in 107 out of the 302 cases in July 2014).

We have said time and time again that all of us have a duty to scrutinise and hold powerful bodies to account and that holding the Israeli Government, or any other government to account for their actions, is within the rights of all of us as citizens. Indeed, it is our duty as citizens so that there is a check and balance to executive bodies, wherever they may be. However, daubing swastikas on a synagogue in Sussex, developing graphics with hashtags #Hitlerwasright and calling Jews terms that are associated with vermin are not acceptable, should be countered and are deeply offensive and prejudicial. They are simply not acceptable in our society.

This should be nothing new and we have been at the front-line of what is challenging and complex work in tackling the cesspit in which anti-Muslim hate festers. We have seen Muslims called the following terms and prejudice extended, (after the murder of Lee Rigby), to attacks on 35 mosques in the space of 12 weeks. We have seen prejudice targeted at mothers, young women, school children, men, other Muslims and much of it maligns, belittles and caricatures British Muslims as ‘the other.’ This ‘othering’ in society means that the rights of individuals in that community are at very real risk of abuse.

Antisemitism must be challenged just as much as tackling anti-Muslim hatred should. Targeting Jewish communities because of their identity, is just as bad as targeting the local mosque and builds a fear and sense of insecurity in Jewish communities that some Muslims also felt since the backlash post the murder of Lee Rigby. Yet, we cannot and must not forget one key factor. Jewish communities, so persecuted for thousands of years, quickly feel and sense societal ills around hate, intolerance and bigotry.

Zero Tolerance

If we are to tackle such bigotry and hatred and to ensure that we all live our lives free from prejudice and hate, it is imperative that we inform and educate our own communities in ensuring that they do not pick up and use rhetoric that is antisemitic in nature. Education, building a sense of empathy and developing an understanding of how language and rhetoric impact on other communities is paramount, as we expect others not to use language that is anti-Muslim in nature. It is as simple as that.

The July Community Security Trust figures should therefore be a wake up call for serious reflection. We can all campaign, demonstrate and rail against policies that kill 2000 men, women and children in Gaza and against those who fire rockets and mortars into Israel, but that does not mean that we have the right to promote antisemitism or anti-Muslim hate against Jewish or Muslim communities in the UK. The CST figures mean a lot of community education work is needed in the future. Of that, there is no doubt.

The post Levels of Antisemitism Are a Weather Vane On Hate Crimes Against Faith & Race Groups appeared first on TELL MAMA.

 Once again, we are seeing such discussions take place and some examples are listed below. We ask that mosques continue to remain vigilant on their security and maintain CCTV coverage within and around the perimeter of the mosque. We have also developed this simple leaflet for support and do maintain contact with your local Safer Neighbourhood Teams.

The post Threats to Mosques Continue on Far Right Sites appeared first on TELL MAMA.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW REPORT

The Centre for Fascist, Anti-fascist and Post-fascist Studies at Teesside University, independently analysed Tell Mama’s anti-Muslim incident data for 2013/2014.

Some of the key findings include:

– Tell Mama recorded 734 self-reported anti-Muslim incidents between May 2013 and February 2014 (599 online and 135 offline) – a near 20 per cent increase on the same period last year.

– More than half of anti-Muslim incidents are committed against women (54 per cent); women were often targets because they wore traditional Islamic dress.

– The under-reporting of incidents remains a serious problem (nearly 5 out of six victims of offline and online abuse did not go to the police.)

– Three months after Lee Rigby’s murder, Tell Mama recorded 34 anti-Muslim attacks on properties (most notably mosques), incidents ranged from arson to graffiti.

– In May and June of 2013, there were 354 verified anti-Muslim incidents (281 online and 73 offline.)

– Two-fifths of all anti-Muslim incidents recorded by Tell Mama reported a link to far-right groups (e.g. BNP/EDL.)

Improving Data Collection

In the past year alone, we took great care in improving the robustness of our data collection, following recommendations from stakeholders in the Department of Communities and Local Government (DCLG) and Community Security Trust (CST).

The CST’s wealth of experience in recording anti-Semitic abuse is a model that continues to inspire the Tell Mama project.

So what are the improvements?

– Before any data is categorised, senior members of Tell Mama staff independently verify that incidents are indeed anti-Muslim in nature.

– Caseworkers now require secondary validation (e.g. an additional witness in the case of offline violence or link to abusive online content.)

– Islam is not immune from criticism and these changes will ensure better support for genuine victims of abuse.

– Any ‘scraped data’ that is not self-reported (from third-party sources, newspapers or other online sources) is discounted.

– Improvements in flagging up repeat reports minimises double counting.

– Sub-coding of incidents (e.g. for online abuse) include ‘drop-down’ options for ‘anti-Muslim literature,’ ‘life-threatening abuse’ and ‘non-life-threatening abuse.’

– Offline incidents are categorised as ‘property damage’, ‘assault’, ‘threat’, ‘extreme violence’ and ‘anti-Muslim literature.’ That way, a distinction between online and offline abuse is clear.

Cases now face a secondary random check from a senior member of the Faith Matters staff. A failure to meet the above criteria results in removal, triggering a full audit of the preceding week of reports.

But we should not downplay the seriousness of online abuse, and the hurt it causes victims, as often, it is not solved by simply walking away from the computer.

For example, in the aftermath of Lee Rigby’s murder, a far-right supporter went to prison after posting online threats against Muslims. Others got in legal hot water after posting online threats about burning down mosques.

Bucking the Hate Crime Trend

Of the 734 self-reported incidents, 135 were offline in nature. Whilst most of the offline incidents were non-violent in nature (ranging from property damage to abuse), the 23 cases of assault and 13 cases of extreme violence are very alarming given the short data cycle. For example, the CST had no self-reported incidents of extreme violence last year.

The alleged perpetrators of offline abuse were overwhelmingly young (60 per cent were between 10 and 30 years old.) A fifth of alleged perpetrators were female.

Both stats broadly follow the CPS statistics on racial and religiously motivated hate crimes in 2012/13. Yet, the most alarming difference is the volume of women (54 per cent) self-reporting hate crimes.

The religiosity of female British Muslims makes them a target for abuse – nearly a quarter of female victims wear various Islamic clothing (e.g. hijab, abaya and niqab.)

Attacks against visibly dressed Muslim females may not accurately explain away the trend of hate crimes being opportunistic and situational. The data suggests that the alleged perpetrators of anti-Muslim hate crimes at a street-based level, are young white males targeting Muslim women, and that is a cause for concern.

More than that, the Tell Mama data bucks the trend of hate crime reporting, which the government figures show as falling.

The ‘Post-Woolwich’ Spike

Following the murder of Lee Rigby, there was a dramatic increase in anti-Muslim incidents during the week following his death when compared to the previous week, but the volume of incidents did reduce months later.

Various police forces noted a rise in anti-Muslim hate crimes during this period:

– Anti-Semitic and anti-Muslim hate crimes rose by a third (to 206 and 523 respectively) across all 32 reporting boroughs of London. A fifth of anti-Muslim incidents took place in May alone.

– The Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) noted 71 incidents of anti-Muslim abuse five days after Rigby’s murder.

– Greater Manchester Police (GMP) recorded an increase of religious hate crime, which rose from 31 recorded incidents in April to 47 in May, it did not return to its average spike (of 25 incidents) until July 2013.

– The Birmingham Mail reported that religious hate crimes increased by 63 per cent (to 82 offences) in the West Midlands.

The Role of the Far-Right

– Two-fifths of all anti-Muslim incidents recorded by Tell Mama reported a link to far-right groups (e.g. BNP, EDL, etc.)

– Nearly half of online abuse is linked to the far-right, thanks to their use of the EDL’s NFSE (No f*cking surrender ever) slogan, avatars with neo-Nazi connotations, and hashtags linked to far-right groups.

– The neo-Nazi terrorist Pavlo Lapshyn, attempted to bomb several mosques, and murdered Mohammed Saleem.

– Another neo-Nazi, Ian Forman, plotted to bomb two Merseyside mosques in the aftermath of Rigby’s murder.

To quote from the report’s conclusion, “Various indicators suggest that anti-Muslim hate crimes notably rose in Britain between 1 May 2013 and February 2014.”

The post ‘Anti-Muslim Overview, Analysis & Cumulative Extremism’, July 2014 appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Mohammed Saleem, was, for all intents and purposes, a grandfather who doted over his grandchildren and a man who his daughters say, encouraged them to excel in all they did. According to one of his daughters, Islam for Mr Saleem meant enlightenment, education and gaining knowledge and his legacy is alive and well in his family who tirelessly fought for justice and to bring the killer of their father to book.

We have been honoured to get to know one of the daughters of Mr Saleem, albeit briefly, and what we have found has been a formidable, proud and tenacious campaigner for justice. Family members have discussed the traumas that they went through as police did not initially have any leads, (and this went on for some time), and family members also had to manage their information needs whilst being pushed and pulled between Counter Terrorism (CT) and the West Midlands Police. Yet, what has been the most touching has been the story of the life of Mohammed Saleem, a quiet, religious man who found solace and peace in his faith later in life. His family say that his wisdom and his love for people shone through and it is something that has touched us. We are therefore honoured to remember the life of Mohammed Saleem at our forthcoming annual dinner this coming Thursday. Within Islam, we say, ‘To God we belong, and to Him we will return.’

Drummer Lee Rigby

Let us also not forget that dark day on the 22nd of May 2013 when a young man walking the streets of Woolwich, lost his life in a pre-meditated murder by two extremists. The death of Lee sent a shudder through our nation not only in the callousness of it, but that it had been conducted by two people who lived in the UK. They had also carried out the murder in broad daylight and in the streets of the capital.

Let us also not forget that the anti-Muslim backlash after the murder could have been far worse if the family of Lee Rigby had not asked for calm and that no-one be harmed in the name of Lee. This single dignified act by a family in mourning, we believe, probably saved the lives of others as the English Defence League and extremists attacked mosques and Islamic institutions. In total, 8 weeks after the murder of Lee Rigby, over 30 mosques across England and Wales had been attacked.

We must also not forget the actions of the police in taking charge of the situation after the killing of Lee and ensuring that there was a heavy police presence in areas where there was the potential of flashpoints. Yet, in all of this, we must remember the family of Lee who live with the legacy of a loved one they cannot touch, and we must remember that extremism still remains a threat to us all, our cohesion and our long-term futures.

This Thursday, we will remember Lee and ensure that we hold a minute’s silence for Lee and for Mohammed Saleem. They may have been two people on parallel paths, yet in death, they bring us together. There can be no fitting a memorial than this.

The post The Life of the Late Mohammed Saleem & Remembering Lee Rigby appeared first on TELL MAMA.

As previously noted on this blog, recent Metropolitan Police Service data for the past 12 months reveals a significant, long-term increase in anti-Muslim hate crime in the Greater London area – a trend that has, unfortunately, been long–demonstrated by MPS data. Looking back at the MPS data is particularly useful once it has had a chance to ‘settle’, and most investigations and classifications have concluded – as such, the 12 month retrospective is particularly important. Over the next few weeks and months, the year-old month-by-month data will begin to include the results of the anti-Muslim backlash that followed the murder of Lee Rigby, allowing the public to accurately track the emergence, scale, and distribution of the ‘retributive’ violence and intimidation that followed the murder. As such, it’s worth revisiting what the data tells us about the year as a whole.

In total, reported anti-Muslim hate crimes increased by 65.7% between April 2013 and March 2014, reflecting a significant and arguably sustained growth in anti-Muslim prejudice across the city. Increased levels of hate crime were reported in all but 7 boroughs, often to quite significant degrees. The greatest increase in absolute terms (i.e. number of attacks) was in Lambeth, which had 11 reported Islamophobic hate crimes in 2012/13, and 34 in 2013/14, while the greatest increase as a percentage of the original took place in Wandsworth, which saw a 450% increase in the number of attacks (from ‘only’ 4 in 2012/13 to 22 in the following year).  These sorts of increases were not uncommon across the city.

One problem with many such analyses is that they take a relatively small span of time, and then use it to produce a misleadingly high increase in reported incidents. If, for example, in the first short interval a given event is reported once, and in the second interval it is reported twice, then this would indicate a 100% increase in events – but, given the small values at stake, this is not very significant. This does not seem to be the case here – given that increases of hate crime were reported in the significant majority of boroughs over a long period of time and often represent significant increases on baselines. This suggests that the data provided by the MPS is meaningful evidence of a long-term, statistically significant increase in anti-Muslim hate crime.

The increase in reporting of anti-Muslim hate crime is particularly notable when compared to increases in other forms of hate/bias crime. Reported antisemitic crime increased by 6% (from 180 to 191); while there were some dramatic increases in reported crimes (e.g. in Haringey, from 5 to 16, and Hackney, from 32 to 45), there were also some dramatic decreases in reports (e.g. in Westminster, from 20 to 7, and Redbridge, from 16 to 10). Similar trends, with similar increases and decreases occurred in the field of reported homophobic hate crime, which saw a 6% increase (from 1,098 to 1,162), and racial and religious hate crime, which saw a 3% increase (from 9,418 to 9,706). It is unclear whether or not the MPS include Islamophobic crime in this last figure, and Tell MAMA has found that anti-Muslim crimes are sometimes categorised as racist/religious with a specific ‘Islamophobia’ marker. If this is the case, then non-anti-Muslim racist/religious hate crimes saw an overall decrease between 2012/13 and 2013/14.

The point of looking at this comparative data is not to compare different communities’ experience of hate crime, or suggest who ‘has it worst’, but rather to rule out the idea that a dramatic increase in reported anti-Muslim hate crime is part of a police-wide trend. Such a trend might be ascribed either to a greater incidence of hate crime – fuelled by socioeconomic hardship, blaming ‘migrants’ for fewer opportunities and inter-communal tension – or a higher reporting rate, (caused either by greater trust in the police amongst minority groups, or by more effective police outreach). While these factors may explain the small increases seen above, it is nonetheless clear that the increase in anti-Muslim crime is distinctive. This may in turn be ascribed to greater trust in the police and civil society outreach work – indeed, both the MPS and NGOs (non-governmental organisations) like Tell MAMA have been carrying out significant outreach work to encourage reporting. However, it is likely to be in large part due to a greater-incidence of hate crime and tension against Muslims in London. This might be explained by anti-Muslim tensions and sentiments stirred up by the aftermath of the murder of Lee Rigby, amongst other events.

Another point to note is that, when comparing the MPS data with the results of the ONS 2011 census data,  areas of high Muslim population tend not to be associated with significant increases in anti-Muslim hate crime. Indeed, several areas of London traditionally associated with larger Muslim populations saw relatively small increases, or even decreases in hate crime over this time. Newham and Waltham Forest, the boroughs with the second and third highest Muslim populations, saw decreases in reported hate crime during this period, albeit both from high initial levels that one might expect given the greater Muslim population there. The explanation for this is unclear (though, based on Tell MAMA’s previous research following the murder of Lee Rigby, it is a trend repeated country-wide), but it does seem clear that small Muslim populations are just as vulnerable to this trend as larger, more visible ones.

The post Mapping of MET/MPS Islamophobia Figures since 2012 – TELL MAMA appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Speaking during a constant round of (48) media appearances in the immediate aftermath of the Rigby murder, I said in one interview that we had faced a “wave of attacks”. In the interviews we also repeatedly asked for calm, urged the public to report in hate incidents and stated that the United Kingdom was one of the safest places in Europe to be. The last thing we needed, was a further instigation of what was then, a very fast moving and sensitive environment with the English Defence League and its sympathisers looking for further confrontations.

Some asked: ‘How can you claim there is an unprecedented cycle of attacks, if your project is only a year old?’ Others told us that: ‘Most of these incidents were online, so they don’t really count’. Others suggested that we were not telling the truth and that Muslims lie to achieve the spread of Islam with a heavy dose of the prejudicial term ‘taqiyya’ thrown in.

Well, don’t just take our word for it – here are 10 incontrovertible facts about anti-Muslim hatred:

1. In December, the Press Association revealed that UK anti-Muslim hate crime ‘soars’ across police forces in England & Wales, with 500 “Islamophobic crimes” recorded by the MET police alone (the figures could be much higher: nearly half of the 43 forces failed to reveal how many hate crimes had targeted Muslims).
2. The MET Police figures remain stubbornly high – up +60% year-on-year (to February 2014) – and which have increased every month since Woolwich, not just in its immediate aftermath,
3. We have recorded more than 1,000 cases ourselves since May 2013, which includes both online and offline incidents,
4. There have been at least 35 attacks against mosques since Woolwich,
5. Ukrainian neo-Nazi Pavlo Lapshyn let off bombs outside three mosques in the West Midlands during June and July 2013, motivated by “racial and religious hatred” according to his trial judge. Lapshyn also murdered 82-year-old grandfather, Mohammed Saleem, in April 2013, stabbing him in the back and stamping on his head,
6. Two ex-soldiers who firebombed a mosque four days after the murder of Fusilier Lee Rigby were recently jailed for six years.
7. Arsonists burned down a mosque in Muswell Hill, North London, in June 2013 and attempted to burn down an Islamic school in Chislehurst with the pupils still inside, leading the MET Police Commissioner, Sir Bernard Hogan-Howe and Commander Simon Letchford to speak of an “eightfold” increase in Islamophobic attacks & leading to 24-hour protection for key Islamic sites
8. The far-right EDL grew to over 150,000 Facebook ‘likes’ following Woolwich, starting a mini-riot the night of the killing and with supporters writing social media statements such as – “get as many of the rag-head dogs as yous can lads!! much support and best wishes from ulster.. NO SURRENDER!! – Kill any muslim u see!!!! – cause carnage on them mother fuckers!!!!!!!!!!!” Several EDL sympathisers were jailed after calling for attacks against mosques
9. Policing EDL street demonstrations has cost the country more than £10m.
10. There is serious under-reporting of hate crimes – evidence from the British Crime Survey (2009/10; 2010/11) suggests that over 50 per cent of hate crime incidents go unreported and “therefore the majority of victims suffer in silence”

We have three staff working full-time and flat out chronicling incidents and attempting to provide support for victims. We take little joy from the fact that anti-Muslim hate needs tackling and we take little joy from the fact that the murder of Lee Rigby led to serious issues around cohesion in our country. If there was one thing that we have worked towards, it is trying to get Muslims to take control when they are subjected to anti-Muslim hate and to demonstrate to them that they are part of the mainstream and that there are ways to seek redress rather than building on a sense of grievances.

Our work has ensured that TELL MAMA and myself have been attacked from all angles: by far-right activists, by Muslim haters, by hostile voices even within the Muslim community itself.

When we appointed both gay rights campaigner, Peter Tatchell, and prominent Jewish leader, Richard Benson, as patron and co-chair respectively, we received further opprobrium from those who said that Muslims can’t unite with the LGBT community, that homosexuality is unacceptable or that Muslims must oppose ‘Zionists’.

We have also been attacked by some in the media, who claim we have exaggerated our claims. We simply don’t accept that analysis and we realize that more work needs to be done to develop the platform of work on anti-Muslim prejudice, yet we have always striven to document the facts and reduce conjecture, whilst caught within finite resources and covering the whole country.

We are, and have been, on a journey. Not an easy one at that. We are making progress: we now have academic verification of our work from analysts at Teesside University, for example, and we have worked with experts at Birmingham University to produce reports on the impact of anti-Muslim incidents upon women. We have further reports in the pipeline.

Let us not downplay the very real fear and harm generated by anti-Muslim hatred, whether it be on social media or in the streets. And let all those who ‘hate hatred’ unite with us to fight for a better Britain – for all our communities.

The post THE INCONTROVERTIBLE FACTS ABOUT ANTI-MUSLIM HATRED SINCE WOOLWICH – RESPONSE BY FIYAZ MUGHAL appeared first on TELL MAMA.

The post Metropolitan Police Service Islamophobia Hate Crime Figures to February 2014 appeared first on TELL MAMA.

We request that if this graphic is used, that you reference it to us at TELL MAMA. Thank you.

Fig 1. Attacks on Mosques Reported Into TELL MAMA Between 1st January 2012 – 31st of August 2013

The post Timeline Map of Mosque Incidents & Attacks Between 2012-2013 appeared first on TELL MAMA.

We received a call at around 5 pm on Friday the 31st of May by Andrew Gilligan, the Telegraph journalist and the Mayor’s cycle ambassador. He asked the Director of TELL MAMA a number of questions and was provided with a range of responses, some of which were simply not included in the article.

We will go through the key elements of the article and provide some context and explanations which are sadly missing from Gilligan’s article. Also, it should be noted that throughout the last week and a half, the Director of TELL MAMA and Faith Matters – Fiyaz Mughal, was one of the first people to condemn the brutal murder of drummer Lee Rigby and to state that a ‘no holds approach’ be taken against those who seek to murder people on the streets of our country. Those comments have been reported on widely in various media sources.

What are Third Party Hate Crime Reporting Projects?

Hate crime third party reporting projects take in reports from people who perceive statements to be made prejudicially on the basis of say, their race or faith. The McPherson recommendations after the brutal racist killing of Stephen Lawrence led to the setting up of third party hate crime reporting projects, where reports of hate incidents could be made to independent organisations and who would then pass that information to police on a named or anonymous basis so that the incidents could be formally logged. It has also formed the basis of tension monitoring assessments that the police conduct. That has therefore formed the basis of the work of third party hate crime reporting projects, yet we within TELL MAMA believed that a more rigorous approach was needed, given that many would simply try and deny or erode data on anti-Muslim prejudice. Some we also believed, would try and underplay anti-Muslim prejudice in our country, others would attack the data recording and others would suggest that this was part of an ‘Islamophobia industry.’ Well, it seems that Andrew has certainly attempted to take positions along some of these lines.

So, on the basis of McPherson’s recommendations, many third party hate crime reporting organisations usually receive reports of verbal abuse and increasingly, around on-line abuse. Thankfully, many do not receive reports of very violent attacks which they suggest, should immediately be reported to the police through 999. Like other projects, the TELL MAMA national project makes this clear across the face of its web-site. Indeed, it is the first thing that is stated on the site. So the attempt by Gilligan to underplay the impact of the incidents and suggest that many were non-violent, tells us that his initial assumptions are faulty and that he reads incidents as violence incidents. Nevertheless they are recordable hate incidents and which any third party hate crime project would record. Furthermore, attacks against mosques, including broken glass and graffiti against graveyard buildings, have been recorded and which Gilligan states as being, ‘relatively minor.’ No mention is made here of the community impacts and the re-enforcement of perceptions within the minds of Muslims who worship in the mosque and the impact on whole communities who use the place of worship. Gilligan simply glibly moves on after the statement.

Verification of Data from Reports

Gilligan then goes onto infer that statements on the number of incidents were made prior to all the cases being fully verified. What he fails to mention is that during the conversation, two clear elements were explained to him. To ensure due diligence and to counter charges of accepting cases without checks and balances, caseworkers drill down within conversations to find out whether victims were targeted with anti-Muslim statements, whether oral or written and whether off-line or on-line. The context of the incident, witness details and further material are extracted to provide a detailed picture to show whether the incident was indeed anti-Muslim in nature. At this stage, if there is no corroborating information, caseworkers in conjunction with a Senior Supervisor make a decision based on the available evidence, as to whether it is an Islamophobic incident. Gilligan was clearly informed that in 2012, 50 plus cases at this stage were not marked as Islamophobic in nature since there was little corroborating evidence and the descriptions provided by the victim simply did not pan out and show targeted anti-Muslim prejudice. Gilligan then talks of an ‘Islamophobia industry’. If TELL MAMA wanted to build such an industry, would it not be easier to simply include as many of these cases as possible? He also simply fails to mention the reclassification of those cases and which was clearly mentioned to him in the telephone conversation.

So, let us further expand on the verification of cases. We welcome the fact that Gilligan mentioned the statement that 35 of the 212 post Woolwich incidents needed verification. What he fails to mention again and which was stated to him clearly in the phone conversation, was that a second stage verification is undertaken by the Director of TELL MAMA, where relatives and witnesses of the victim and other points of potential contact are liaised with. This second stage check and balance ensures that further validation takes place and with 4 staff working in the office at any one point on this project,  case-workers were simply stretched given the volume of incidents reported in post the killing of drummer Lee Rigby. By Friday the 31^st of May, over 170 cases has been recorded and had been through the two step verification process with only 3 cases being re-classified as not being anti-Muslim in nature. With such limited resources and with stringent verification processes in play, the thrust of Gilligan’s argument is to cast an aspersion on the figures, yet he was categorically told that at the second stage process there was a negligible number of cases which were re-classified. He also failed to mention this in his article.

Using Police Data Alone as a Benchmark

Most of Gilligan’s article then attempts to use police data and figures on Islamophobic hate incidents and he uses them as a benchmark. What he fails to grasp is that the MET and other forces across the country clearly state that hate crime reporting is under-reported and forces are open and vocal about this. Indeed, TELL MAMA and the MET are in the process of signing a data sharing Memorandum of Understanding on the number of cases that the MET and TELL MAMA receive and this is built on the practice of the CST, (the Community Security Trust), which ensures that anti-Semitic hate incidents are recorded appropriately on behalf of Jewish communities in the UK. What Gilligan also fails to mention is that the value of third party hate crime reporting projects is due to the fact that victims may feel that they do not want to waste police team and so report to projects like TELL MAMA. Also many Muslims post Prevent, (the Preventing Extremism agenda), are fearful of engaging with police and many have reported to us that their cases have been re-classified with race hate incident flags rather than with Islamophobia flags. Internally, officers within ACPO, (the Association of Chief Police officers), admit that classification and recording of faith hate incidents is a potential issue and TELL MAMA data is showing that race and faith hate language is on many occasions, intricately linked. So Gilligan’s reliance on police data is inaccurate and simply shows a lack of understanding of what is happening at a community level.

Cycle of Anti-Muslim Activity

Referring to the statement made that there is ‘no end’ to the cycle of anti-Muslim activity, a full and detailed description was provided to the reporter and which has widely been reported in media sources throughout the crisis. Before the brutal murder of drummer Lee Rigby, we received on average, between 4 – 8 cases a day of Islamophobic incidences. The Woolwich murder caused a major spike in Islamophobic hate incident recordings which has started to drop and this would be expected. Yet the background noise of Islamophobic hate incidents rumbles on and this was made clear to Gilligan. What we need to keep a watching brief on is whether the baseline daily figures start to rise and whether there are cumulative effects caused by incidents such as Woolwich. This will take time to assess in the future.

Moving onto the online world, Gilligan regards on-line hate incidents as being minor or peripheral in nature and he refers to them as such within the article. He does not describe the impact they have on people, the emotional disturbance that they may cause and the distress that they clearly cause to many victims. Here for example, is what is reported into us and which Gilligan attempts to downplay.

This material is pervasive in the on-line world and if we attempted to trawl through such postings, we would simply be inundated. Furthermore, we made clear to Gilligan on the phone that whilst people from overseas countries fed in incidents to us, (which amounted to no more than 10-20 cases last year, out of approximately 650 incidents), we are able to filter these out when exporting the data into an Excel file for evaluations to be made. Once again, he failed to state this in the article.

Countering Far Right & Islamist Based Extremism

Yet, there are more worrying elements in his article. He states that ‘part of its motivation appears to be an attempt to draw some of the sting from Islamist terrorism by equating it to the work of anti-Muslim extremist groups such as the English Defence League.”

At no point would we argue that the Islamist threat should be downgraded or attention be diverted from it. Indeed, the Director of TELL MAMA has been involved in working through Prevent for over 6 years and was initially appointed after 7/7 in 2005 onto the Task Force set up by the then Prime Minister, Tony Blair. His engagement has been consistent in working on projects to counter violence and extremism coming from the small number of individuals within Muslim communities. Additionally, Gilligan was also told in the course of the conversation about the recent work that TELL MAMA did with a Shia member of the public who had been assaulted by a group around Anjum Choudhary, (the ex-leader of Al Muhajiroun), on Friday the 10^th of May on Edgware Road in Central London. That work involved trying to ensure that legal and criminal action was taken against members of Anjum Choudhary’s gang. Yet, once again, this was not mentioned in the article.

We also made clear that TELL MAMA and Faith Matters would continue to tackle extremists whether from the Far Right and from Islamist circles and that anyone fomenting hate within communities, would be seen as a threat to the peace and cohesion in our country; for Gilligan, the laser type approach on the Islamist threat which seems to be all encompassing, may also means that organisations which raise other societal threats, are seen negatively, possibly as if they ‘take away’ from the main focus which, it seems, Gilligan strongly believes is a pervasive Islamist threat. Yet the question is, why would he raise this point about TELL MAMA when many other organisations work on countering hate from both such elements within our country? Examples of such organisations involve Hope Not Hate. So why focus on TELL MAMA?

Definitions of Islamophobia

Definitions of Islamophobic incidents were also discussed and we made clear that the body of work on Islamophobia or anti-Muslim prejudice was still developing and that the phenomena was only categorised since 1997, when the Runnymede Trust published its groundbreaking report. We therefore took in reports based on perceived prejudice which we then verified and which may not be crimes and others which may have criminally infringed on existing public order offences for example. What we made clear to Gilligan, since he mentioned the work of the CST (Community Security Trust) and its classification of Anti-Semitism, was that we were some way away in setting a definition since the body of work was growing and it was one area where the All Party Parliamentary Group on Islamophobia would also be involved in. We also mentioned the fact that the work of the CST had spanned over 30 years and it had taken a long period of time to develop a robust, all encompassing and tangible definition, something that could not be expected of a project within a year of its launch.

Safety of Communities in the UK

Finally, we made clear to Gilligan that the United Kingdom was still the safest place to live in and that it was one of the best countries for faith communities to be in. We re-iterated this twice, yet he chose to make no mention of this. We also mentioned the fact that thankfully, there is something inherent within the British public which detests violence and this may be why we had not seen an orgy of violence after the murder in Woolwich. We have also gone on various news sources and stated that insults, abuse and attacks against Muslims and mosques simply play into the narrative of the two murderers of drummer Lee Rigby who wanted to start ‘a war.’ Once again, these comments are strangely missing from the article.

Don’t mention Islamophobia

There is one comment that we want to make and something that was mentioned to us by Gilligan. He asked us whether reporting anti-Muslim incidents played into an Islamist victim mentality. We have also heard this argument from others. In other words, do we keep issues private so that extremist narratives of victimisation are not re-enforced? Well Andrew. Just one thing to say on that. We must not forget the killing of Lee and the brutal manner in which it was carried out by two extremists purporting to come from Muslim communities. But we cannot hide from society and the wider public, the phenomenon of anti-Muslim prejudice which is unfortunately alive and well in our country and which needs to be tackled. You can either chose to acknowledge that or focus on one area at the expense of another, hence the reductionism. It is as simple as that.

The post Gilligan & the Reductionists appeared first on TELL MAMA.