According to the Independent newspaper, Faiza Shaheen was interviewed by South Yorkshire police under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act which left her shaken and angry that she had been discriminated because of her faith.

The Independent lists ‘Syria Speaks’ as,

“The award-winning book by Malu Halasa is a collection of essays, short stories, poems, songs, cartoons and photographs from Syrian authors and artists.

Basis of Interview Under Schedule 7 of the Terrorism Act

It seems, according to the Independent, that the evidence for a Schedule 7 Stop was a book that Ms Shaheen was reading and possibly, the fact that she was travelling to Turkey and was Asian and Muslim. Some of these factors may have triggered a Thomson Airways cabin crew member to report in Ms Shaheen.

This case brings up a number of issues. The first is that young Muslims may re-confirm feelings that they are going to be increasingly targeted because of the ignorance of some. Terrorists and extremists will hardly be reading books on planes that raise their profile in the eyes of cabin crew staff.

Secondly, some will think that if Ms Shaheen, who is not visibly Muslim, can be stopped and left feeling that she has been targeted, then what of others reading the wrong type of book and who are visibly Muslim. Thirdly, such actions further corrode trust in the counter-terrorism agenda for young Muslims, who as suggested before, will re-affirm feelings of victimisation.

Which brings us onto the following. We are very glad that newspapers like the Independent highlight such cases since people need to get a sense of perspective. Asian Muslim men or women reading books about the Middle East should not be seen as people who are somehow suspect and potentially vulnerable to extremism. Also, we hope that the Thomson Airways cabin crew staff member will realise that common sense is an important part of life. Reading a book does not indicate extremism even with the words ‘Syria’ and ‘frontline’ within the title. What makes up good counter-terrorism work is common sense, looking at the wider picture and good solid intelligence. Referring people to counter-terrorism teams on the basis of books that they read on planes, is not only Orwellian, it is totally counter-productive.

The post Muslim NHS Worker Detained for Reading the Wrong Kind of Book appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Recently, this case came to light and there was the case of Ajmal Masroor whose business visa was revoked just before be boarded a flight to the United States. Also, in the last few days, Stella Creasey MP revealed how the UK Government kept no records of citizens barred from boarding flights to the United States. Indeed a response by the Immigration Minister, James Brokenshire, in a letter to Stella Creasey MP stated:

“You asked for the statistical information relating to the numbers, religion, ethnicity and cultural background of British citizens refused entry to other countries and notified of that at UK airports. We do not hold this information, as these matters are from the government making the decision, the carrier and the individual concerned.”

We have been notified by a carrier that there are secondary security checks that are carried out at the departure gate before someone travels to the United States. Prior to each flight departing, Homeland Security in the United States contacts carriers with the names of customers that they would like to have secondary security checks conducted on. What is the reasoning, why specific people are chosen or whether racial or religious profiling is taking place, we will never know. The stock response to any query may well be that the process is security or intelligence driven and there is no real way of addressing that and has to be taken at face value by civil society groups.

What is interesting to note is that the security list is updated in real-time right up to the flight’s departure. This means that Homeland Security will be talking to airline and airport staff about individuals of concern whilst the individual may have checked in and is walking around in the lounges or in the airport shopping malls. The lists of names is therefore updated after the customer has even boarded and this means that if a specific name flags up, airport staff will have to approach the customer onboard and ask him or her to follow them back to the gate for a secondary check.

The carrier also made clear to us that the security list provided by Homeland Security is random and beyond the control of airline carriers. In effect, neither the airline carriers, nor Her Majesty’s Government have any control over the process. It therefore seems that US Homeland security and border controls start within the United Kingdom and within our airport terminals. We are the frontline for Homeland Security.

Furthermore, it is interesting to note is that Homeland Security also ask relevant carriers to ensure that a selection of people check in at the airport rather than online and these individuals will then have a secondary search at the gate. How these people are chosen remains a mystery and within the domain of Homeland Security.

If you have been stopped from travelling to the United States or were held under Schedule 7 and refused from travelling to the United States, we would be grateful if you could fill in this questionnaire. This initiative is being led by Stella Creasey MP who is looking into such cases.

The post No Fly’s: Community Awareness of the Practical Processes appeared first on TELL MAMA.

They have reported incidents to us sincerely believing that they have been targeted due to their faith. In these cases, it is extremely difficult to prove this, yet we advocate, where possible for victims who approach us on the basis of needing assistance. This advocacy work involves helping them to draft letters and this assistance is based on their perception that they have been singled out on the basis of anti-Muslim bigotry.

This does not make our work easier and we record anti-Muslim hate incidents when there is corroborating secondary evidence apart from the victim’s say so. This is to ensure that our work is evidence led and evidence based. This is exceptionally important to state and our work is not just based on the say so of individuals.

Saying that, we acknowledge the fear that counter-terrorism issues are causing to some sections of Muslim communities. Today for example, we were sent this and it is experiences like this, that are causing fear in some sections of Muslim communities. Now that this video is out on social media, we hope that there is some response by the relevant law enforcement or security agency to the statements made by this individual. Whatever the facts, the repeated stop and search of individuals HAS impacts on community perceptions.

Furthermore, the claim by this individual that he asked security officials to arrest him if they had evidence, underscores a simple fact. The repeated stop and search of individuals corrodes trust on a wider level and if security officials have evidence of wrong-doing, they should charge and be done with. If they do not have evidence, the repeated stop and search of individuals simply breaks trust in communities and further weakens the bond between the State and individuals. This weakening of the link and bond between specific communities and the State is the last thing that should be happening when there are issues that we need to tackle collectively in order to ensure our collective securities.

The post Either Charge or Understand that Continued Stops & Interrogations Lose Trust Within Muslim Communities appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Your article effectively touched on the everyday Islamophobia. Has the incident made your more cautious when flying?

Before the incident I was genuinely convinced that security officials at airports are professionals who think and act objectively. I now doubt this ideal. I am more cautious of the fact that, even in a professional environment, there are individuals who seek to criminalise an entire group of people based on the actions of a minority.

Has it made you think about any other incident of everyday Islamophobia you may have experienced?

There have been a number of instances in which members of the general public behaved in a hateful manner towards me for no reason. But since those incidents didn’t happen in a professional environment, I never saw them as Islamophobic attacks. I often dismissed the individuals as either unfriendly people who are unkind to everyone or as people who had a problem with me for a reason other than my faith.

The Heathrow experience reminded me of one particular incident of very obvious Islamophobia in Switzerland. A middle-aged man sitting opposite me on the tram turned to a young girl next to him and said, in a matter-of-fact way: “she is one of the people who bomb buildings”. Even though this was hurtful, the incident didn’t affect me since it was merely the opinion of someone who isn’t in a position of power.

You end your article nicely about tolerance and the need to recognise Islamophobia in the day-to-day. How important was it for you to speak out and write about this incident?

It is necessary that security officials be given an insight to how damaging it can be alienate youngsters in their own home. I fully understand that this is a case of one intolerant individual, but I can see how someone else may perceive such an individual to be a representation of an entire system.

I found writing to be an outlet for the frustration I felt towards that particular officer. Security services must realise that someone who is subjected to unnecessary humiliation will seek to find a way to deal with the pain. And unfortunately, not everyone does that through writing.

I am by no means suggesting that security services become less thorough in their checks. However, it is important that they remember they’re dealing with human beings who have real feelings. If someone were stopped, it may be better if officers didn’t subject the person to humiliating treatment. Once security officers realise they’ve made a mistake, perhaps an apology or a simple “thank you for your time” might be appropriate.

The article had a lot of online success. What was some of the feedback like? Did people share similar stories or sentiments with you?

There was a divide in the response to the article. A number of commentators criticised me for “complaining” and accused me of being “too sensitive”, which, ironically, proves my point. Unjust treatment towards Muslims has become so common that something must be seriously wrong with anyone who speaks out against it. It baffles me that people are surprised to see that young people are sensitive. We, as young people, are on a continuous search for identity and meaning, and our daily experiences play a big role in finding this.

A few men have told me that I “deserve” it for wearing the hijab, which I found shocking. There’s a big problem when grown men think it’s acceptable to use a woman’s clothing to justify mistreatment. It seems that we live in a time when moral lines are blurred, depending on who is at the receiving end.

On the other end of the spectrum, I’ve had a number of supportive comments. Many young Muslims have reached out to me about similar incidents at airports. Young girls who wear the hijab have spoken to me about feeling like easy targets for Islamophobia. The girls were glad to see a woman with a hijab challenging this issue. The one thing that almost everyone who spoke to me had in common was that they thought this type of unfair treatment was “normal for a Muslim”.

What would your message to be other young Muslims who might not speak out?

The only way we can stop everyday Islamophobia is by speaking out against it. There will be a lot of criticism but remember that there has never been a person standing up against intolerance who wasn’t criticised. Speak to your teachers, counsellors, university lecturers and advisers, or get in touch with organisations like Tell MAMA, who I’m sure will be very happy to guide you.

It’s important that we realise our responsibility to change the negative perception of Muslims. Most people’s knowledge of Islam is based on what is portrayed in the media. We often complain about the media’s misrepresentation of Islam, but we can’t expect mainstream media to ignore the minority of loud voices among a majority of quiet Muslims. Passive condemnation is simply not good enough. We must be active in taking control of our own narrative and reclaim our Muslim identity. If you allow someone else to speak for you then, frankly, you can’t really complain when that someone distorts your story.

We should also encourage dialogue with other faiths. By doing so we can understand the perspective of others, while diminishing negative stereotypes of Muslims. Many interfaith organisations, such as the Joseph Interfaith Foundation, organise seminars to tackle issues surrounding Islamophobia and anti-Semitism. Different faith groups will achieve much more by talking to each other, instead of talking about the other.

I hope my article will remind people that Muslim voices are valued in Britain. All we need to do is be active. The fact that I, a Muslim woman, have been given a platform in a national paper speaks volumes about the opportunities open to us.

The post Hannah Yusuf Speaks Out on Islamophobia After Her Recent Article appeared first on TELL MAMA.