“Bet you don’t have other people reporting to you,” is the usual Twitter commentary that some people say, who do not know about our values. Or the alternative is,

“What about Christians and Christianophobia? What do you do about that, bet you don’t do anything?”

We just highlighted a brief response to a piece in the Spectator which was an opinion article by Margaret Thatcher’s biographer, Charles Moore. The article was peppered with, well….opinions and whilst we disagreed with his opinions, Moore nonetheless raised the issue of hate incidents against Sikhs. This is something that we both agree upon.

Ideally, we believe that there should be a hate crime monitoring flag for all faiths and with Sikhs for example, able to be categorised as a separate flag for recording and monitoring within police forces. It also needs to be recognised that some Sikhs are targeted since people see them as being Muslim and hence there is an element of anti-Muslim bigotry associated with the hate incidents. This reflects on the motivation and the belief of the perpetrator. Yet, it also reasonable to assume that Sikhs are seen in the eyes of some perpetrators, as being ‘the other.’ These are just some of the motivations that may be at play regarding hate incidents against Sikhs.

Following on from this, it is irrelevant whether the number of hate incidents against Sikhs is small in number. That is the assumption that is made and may well be true. Some suggest that there may be anything between 1-200 cases nationally, but this is a guestimate and further re-enforces the need for hate crime reporting flags for a variety of faiths.

Interestingly, over the last year, we have had 3 cases of Sikhs who were perceived to be Muslim and who suffered a hate incident. Whilst our focus is on supporting victims of anti-Muslim hate, our service is also based on the ethos of assisting individuals who may have suffered hate incidents and crimes and we assisted the individuals in their respective cases. We will not turn away individuals who approach us with evidence of having suffered a hate incident and these cases in particular, were moving since the Sikh victims felt a sense of empathy with Muslim communities, yet they also wanted recognition that they had been targeted and felt that a part of their identity had been abused.

Over the last year, we also supported calls for the investigation into a case of a Christian convert who had converted from Islam, who had been attacked. He suggested that he had been targeted because of his conversion and we publicly made clear through various press sources, that such hate incidents needed to be tagged as a hate incident based on his new faith. So much for not dealing with Christianophobia!

Finally, we have come across articles that push the line that Muslims are getting some form of ‘special treatment’ because they ‘shout about Islamophobia’. Let us make clear that none of us enjoy the threats, abuse and intimidation that we receive and we have lost count of these that have been targeted at our project and staff for simply trying to help victims of anti-Muslim hatred.

Nor do we enjoy the on-line intimidation and harassment, which also includes scurrilous comments and articles based on opinion or conjecture. We have chosen to do this work to try and help victims of hate, prejudice and intolerance and this year, we will be publishing a clearer and more accurate picture of the state of anti-Muslim prejudice in the United  Kingdom. With well over 1000 cases in 2015 to Tell MAMA, if anyone can hand on heart think that anti-Muslim prejudice or Islamophobia does not warrant support and action, then there is much work to be done in the future. Some people may come to this view from a genuine lack of awareness, others from a mendacious position which means that we will not see eye to eye. Only the future will tell.

The post Sikhs Are Not Forgotten & Should Not Be in Hate Crime Work appeared first on TELL MAMA.

“Bet you don’t have other people reporting to you,” is the usual Twitter commentary that some people say, who do not know about our values. Or the alternative is,

“What about Christians and Christianophobia? What do you do about that, bet you don’t do anything?”

We just highlighted a brief response to a piece in the Spectator which was an opinion article by Margaret Thatcher’s biographer, Charles Moore. The article was peppered with, well….opinions and whilst we disagreed with his opinions, Moore nonetheless raised the issue of hate incidents against Sikhs. This is something that we both agree upon.

Ideally, we believe that there should be a hate crime monitoring flag for all faiths and with Sikhs for example, able to be categorised as a separate flag for recording and monitoring within police forces. It also needs to be recognised that some Sikhs are targeted since people see them as being Muslim and hence there is an element of anti-Muslim bigotry associated with the hate incidents. This reflects on the motivation and the belief of the perpetrator. Yet, it also resonable to assume that Sikhs are seen in the eyes of some perpetrators, as being ‘the other.’ These are just some of the motivations that may be at play regarding hate incidents against Sikhs.

Following on from this, it is irrelevant whether the number of hate incidents against Sikhs is small in number. That is the assumption that is made and may well be true. Some suggest that there may be anything between 1-200 cases nationally, but this is a guestimate and further re-enforces the need for hate crime reporting flags for a variety of faiths.

Interestingly, over the last year, we have had 3 cases of Sikhs who were perceived to be Muslim and who suffered a hate incident. Whilst our focus is on supporting victims of anti-Muslim hate, our service is also based on the ethos of assisting individuals who may have suffered hate incidents and crimes and we assisted the individuals in their respective cases. We will not turn away individuals who approach us with evidence of having suffered a hate incident and these cases in particular, were moving since the Sikh victims felt a sense of empathy with Muslim communities, yet they also wanted recognition that they had been targeted and felt that a part of their identity had been abused.

Over the last year, we also supported calls for the investigation into a case of a Christian convert who had converted from Islam, who had been attacked. He suggested that he had been targeted because of his conversion and we publicly made clear through various press sources, that such hate incidents needed to be tagged as a hate incident based on his new faith. So much for not dealing with Christianophobia!

Finally, we have come across articles that push the line that Muslims are getting some form of ‘special treatment’ because they ‘shout about Islamophobia’. Let us make clear that none of us enjoy the threats, abuse and intimidation that we receive and we have lost count of these that have been targeted at our project and staff for simply trying to help victims of anti-Muslim hatred.

Nor do we enjoy the online intimidation and harassment, which also includes scurrilous comments and articles based on opinion or conjecture. We have chosen to do this work to try and help victims of hate, prejudice and intolerance and this year, we will be publishing a clearer and more accurate picture of the state of anti-Muslim prejudice in the United  Kingdom. With well over 1000 cases in 2015 to Tell MAMA, if anyone can hand on heart think that anti-Muslim prejudice or Islamophobia does not warrant support and action, then there is much work to be done in the future. Some people may come to this view from a genuine lack of awareness, others from a mendacious position which means that we will not see eye to eye. Only the future will tell.

The post Sikhs Are Not Forgotten & Should Be in Hate Crime Work appeared first on TELL MAMA.

“Bet you don’t have other people reporting to you,” is the usual Twitter commentary that some people say, who do not know about our values. Or the alternative is,

“What about Christians and Christianophobia? What do you do about that, bet you don’t do anything?”

We just highlighted a brief response to a piece in the Spectator which was an opinion article by Margaret Thatcher’s biographer, Charles Moore. The article was peppered with, well….opinions and whilst we disagreed with his opinions, Moore nonetheless raised the issue of hate incidents against Sikhs. This is something that we both agree upon.

Ideally, we believe that there should be a hate crime monitoring flag for all faiths and with Sikhs for example, able to be categorised as a separate flag for recording and monitoring within police forces. It also needs to be recognised that some Sikhs are targeted since people see them as being Muslim and hence there is an element of anti-Muslim bigotry associated with the hate incidents. This reflects on the motivation and the belief of the perpetrator. Yet, it also resonable to assume that Sikhs are seen in the eyes of some perpetrators, as being ‘the other.’ These are just some of the motivations that may be at play regarding hate incidents against Sikhs.

Following on from this, it is irrelevant whether the number of hate incidents against Sikhs is small in number. That is the assumption that is made and may well be true. Some suggest that there may be anything between 1-200 cases nationally, but this is a guestimate and further re-enforces the need for hate crime reporting flags for a variety of faiths.

Interestingly, over the last year, we have had 3 cases of Sikhs who were perceived to be Muslim and who suffered a hate incident. Whilst our focus is on supporting victims of anti-Muslim hate, our service is also based on the ethos of assisting individuals who may have suffered hate incidents and crimes and we assisted the individuals in their respective cases. We will not turn away individuals who approach us with evidence of having suffered a hate incident and these cases in particular, were moving since the Sikh victims felt a sense of empathy with Muslim communities, yet they also wanted recognition that they had been targeted and felt that a part of their identity had been abused.

Over the last year, we also supported calls for the investigation into a case of a Christian convert who had converted from Islam, who had been attacked. He suggested that he had been targeted because of his conversion and we publicly made clear through various press sources, that such hate incidents needed to be tagged as a hate incident based on his new faith. So much for not dealing with Christianophobia!

Finally, we have come across articles that push the line that Muslims are getting some form of ‘special treatment’ because they ‘shout about Islamophobia’. Let us make clear that none of us enjoy the threats, abuse and intimidation that we receive and we have lost count of these that have been targeted at our project and staff for simply trying to help victims of anti-Muslim hatred.

Nor do we enjoy the online intimidation and harassment, which also includes scurrilous comments and articles based on opinion or conjecture. We have chosen to do this work to try and help victims of hate, prejudice and intolerance and this year, we will be publishing a clearer and more accurate picture of the state of anti-Muslim prejudice in the United  Kingdom. With well over 1000 cases in 2015 to Tell MAMA, if anyone can hand on heart think that anti-Muslim prejudice or Islamophobia does not warrant support and action, then there is much work to be done in the future. Some people may come to this view from a genuine lack of awareness, others from a mendacious position which means that we will not see eye to eye. Only the future will tell.

The post Sikhs Are Not Forgotten & Should Be in Hate Crime Work appeared first on TELL MAMA.

“Bet you don’t have other people reporting to you,” is the usual Twitter commentary that some people say, who do not know about our values. Or the alternative is,

“What about Christians and Christianophobia? What do you do about that, bet you don’t do anything?”

We just highlighted a brief response to a piece in the Spectator which was an opinion article by Margaret Thatcher’s biographer, Charles Moore. The article was peppered with, well….opinions and whilst we disagreed with his opinions, Moore nonetheless raised the issue of hate incidents against Sikhs. This is something that we both agree upon.

Ideally, we believe that there should be a hate crime monitoring flag for all faiths and with Sikhs for example, able to be categorised as a separate flag for recording and monitoring within police forces. It also needs to be recognised that some Sikhs are targeted since people see them as being Muslim and hence there is an element of anti-Muslim bigotry associated with the hate incidents. This reflects on the motivation and the belief of the perpetrator. Yet, it also resonable to assume that Sikhs are seen in the eyes of some perpetrators, as being ‘the other.’ These are just some of the motivations that may be at play regarding hate incidents against Sikhs.

Following on from this, it is irrelevant whether the number of hate incidents against Sikhs is small in number. That is the assumption that is made and may well be true. Some suggest that there may be anything between 1-200 cases nationally, but this is a guestimate and further re-enforces the need for hate crime reporting flags for a variety of faiths.

Interestingly, over the last year, we have had 3 cases of Sikhs who were perceived to be Muslim and who suffered a hate incident. Whilst our focus is on supporting victims of anti-Muslim hate, our service is also based on the ethos of assisting individuals who may have suffered hate incidents and crimes and we assisted the individuals in their respective cases. We will not turn away individuals who approach us with evidence of having suffered a hate incident and these cases in particular, were moving since the Sikh victims felt a sense of empathy with Muslim communities, yet they also wanted recognition that they had been targeted and felt that a part of their identity had been abused.

Over the last year, we also supported calls for the investigation into a case of a Christian convert who had converted from Islam, who had been attacked. He suggested that he had been targeted because of his conversion and we publicly made clear through various press sources, that such hate incidents needed to be tagged as a hate incident based on his new faith. So much for not dealing with Christianophobia!

Finally, we have come across articles that push the line that Muslims are getting some form of ‘special treatment’ because they ‘shout about Islamophobia’. Let us make clear that none of us enjoy the threats, abuse and intimidation that we receive and we have lost count of these that have been targeted at our project and staff for simply trying to help victims of anti-Muslim hatred.

Nor do we enjoy the online intimidation and harassment, which also includes scurrilous comments and articles based on opinion or conjecture. We have chosen to do this work to try and help victims of hate, prejudice and intolerance and this year, we will be publishing a clearer and more accurate picture of the state of anti-Muslim prejudice in the United  Kingdom. With well over 1000 cases in 2015 to Tell MAMA, if anyone can hand on heart think that anti-Muslim prejudice or Islamophobia does not warrant support and action, then there is much work to be done in the future. Some people may come to this view from a genuine lack of awareness, others from a mendacious position which means that we will not see eye to eye. Only the future will tell.

The post Sikhs Are Not Forgotten & Should Be in Hate Crime Work appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Charles Moore opined recently that the ‘perception’ of Islamophobic hate crimes ‘tends to extend well beyond reality’. His evidence? An FOI revealed that 28 per cent of Islamophobic hate crime victims in London in 2015 were non-Muslim. BBC London covered this story last month.

Moore laments the ‘absurd’ criteria of the Macpherson Report when it comes to defining hate crimes. That report came in the wake of the unprovoked racist murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. It made 70 recommendations – 67 made changes to the law and practice within two years of publication.

One relevant recommendation made police focus on victim perception when investigating hate crimes. A guidance document commissioned by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) in 2005 stated that:

A victim of a hate incident does not have to be a member of a minority group or someone who is generally considered to be vulnerable. For example, a heterosexual man who is verbally abused leaving a gay bar may well perceive that it is motivated by homophobia although he himself is not gay. Therefore effectively anyone can be the victim of a hate incident, including people working inside the police service.

A person does not need to be Muslim if they experience or witness something they perceive as Islamophobic. The same is true of any hate directed at protected categories – be it race, sexual orientation, faith or disability. Victim perception defines how police determine hate crimes and incidents.

This is not about inflating figures for financial gain. If anything, the reverse is true. Knowing that non-Muslims suffer Islamophobic abuse suggests a deeper problem. Some look at those who wear Islamic clothing and express their negative perceptions of Islam and Muslims in paroxysms of abuse. Others perceive the religious observance of Sikh men with the same misplaced anger.

This misperception suggests that racialisation extends to non-Muslim communities. In a post-9/11 world, racist violence against assumed Muslims continues to have stark consequences. Not just for victims and their loved ones. But wider faith communities who face such prejudices. This information should strengthen our collective resolve to overcome anti-Muslim hate.

Moore ends with the offensive suggestion that Christianophobia and Sikhophobia crime flags ‘would lead to the arrest of a lot of Muslims’. He writes with a measure of certainty yet offers no evidence.

In contrast, police forces nationwide will now adopt an Islamophobic crime flag in the months ahead. That came from evidence-based lobbying. A point somehow lost on Charles Moore.

The post Why Charles Moore is wrong about the levels of anti-Muslim hate crime appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Charles Moore opined recently that the ‘perception’ of Islamophobic hate crimes ‘tends to extend well beyond reality’. His evidence? An FOI revealed that 28 per cent of Islamophobic hate crime victims in London in 2015 were non-Muslim. BBC London covered this story last month.

Moore laments the ‘absurd’ criteria of the Macpherson Report when it comes to defining hate crimes. That report came in the wake of the unprovoked racist murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. It made 70 recommendations – 67 made changes to the law and practice within two years of publication.

One relevant recommendation made police focus on victim perception when investigating hate crimes. A guidance document commissioned by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) in 2005 stated that:

A victim of a hate incident does not have to be a member of a minority group or someone who is generally considered to be vulnerable. For example, a heterosexual man who is verbally abused leaving a gay bar may well perceive that it is motivated by homophobia although he himself is not gay. Therefore effectively anyone can be the victim of a hate incident, including people working inside the police service.

A person does not need to be Muslim if they experience or witness something they perceive as Islamophobic. The same is true of any hate directed at protected categories – be it race, sexual orientation, faith or disability. Victim perception defines how police determine hate crimes and incidents.

This is not about inflating figures for financial gain. If anything, the reverse is true. Knowing that non-Muslims suffer Islamophobic abuse suggests a deeper problem. Some look at those who wear Islamic clothing and express their negative perceptions of Islam and Muslims in paroxysms of abuse. Others perceive the religious observance of Sikh men with the same misplaced anger.

This misperception suggests that racialisation extends to non-Muslim communities. In a post-9/11 world, racist violence against assumed Muslims continues to have stark consequences. Not just for victims and their loved ones. But wider faith communities who face such prejudices. This information should strengthen our collective resolve to overcome anti-Muslim hate.

Moore ends with the offensive suggestion that Christianophobia and Sikhophobia crime flags ‘would lead to the arrest of a lot of Muslims’. He writes with a measure of certainty yet offers no evidence.

In contrast, police forces nationwide will now adopt an Islamophobic crime flag in the months ahead. That came from evidence-based lobbying. A point somehow lost on Charles Moore.

The post Why Charles Moore is wrong about the levels of anti-Muslim hate crime appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Charles Moore opined recently that the ‘perception’ of Islamophobic hate crimes ‘tends to extend well beyond reality’. His evidence? An FOI revealed that 28 per cent of Islamophobic hate crime victims in London in 2015 were non-Muslim. BBC London covered this story last month.

Moore laments the ‘absurd’ criteria of the Macpherson Report when it comes to defining hate crimes. That report came in the wake of the unprovoked racist murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. It made 70 recommendations – 67 made changes to the law and practice within two years of publication.

One relevant recommendation made police focus on victim perception when investigating hate crimes. A guidance document commissioned by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) in 2005 stated that:

A victim of a hate incident does not have to be a member of a minority group or someone who is generally considered to be vulnerable. For example, a heterosexual man who is verbally abused leaving a gay bar may well perceive that it is motivated by homophobia although he himself is not gay. Therefore effectively anyone can be the victim of a hate incident, including people working inside the police service.

A person does not need to be Muslim if they experience or witness something they perceive as Islamophobic. The same is true of any hate directed at protected categories – be it race, sexual orientation, faith or disability. Victim perception defines how police determine hate crimes and incidents.

This is not about inflating figures for financial gain. If anything, the reverse is true. Knowing that non-Muslims suffer Islamophobic abuse suggests a deeper problem. Some look at those who wear Islamic clothing and express their negative perceptions of Islam and Muslims in paroxysms of abuse. Others perceive the religious observance of Sikh men with the same misplaced anger.

This misperception suggests that racialisation extends to non-Muslim communities. In a post-9/11 world, racist violence against assumed Muslims continues to have stark consequences. Not just for victims and their loved ones. But wider faith communities who face such prejudices. This information should strengthen our collective resolve to overcome anti-Muslim hate.

Moore ends with the offensive suggestion that Christianophobia and Sikhophobia crime flags ‘would lead to the arrest of a lot of Muslims’. He writes with a measure of certainty yet offers no evidence.

In contrast, police forces nationwide will now adopt an Islamophobic crime flag in the months ahead. That came from evidence-based lobbying. A point somehow lost on Charles Moore.

The post Why Charles Moore is wrong about the levels of anti-Muslim hate crime appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Charles Moore opined recently that the ‘perception’ of Islamophobic hate crimes ‘tends to extend well beyond reality’. His evidence? An FOI revealed that 28 per cent of Islamophobic hate crime victims in London in 2015 were non-Muslim. BBC London covered this story last month.

Moore laments the ‘absurd’ criteria of the Macpherson Report when it comes to defining hate crimes. That report came in the wake of the unprovoked racist murder of Stephen Lawrence in 1993. It made 70 recommendations – 67 made changes to the law and practice within two years of publication.

One relevant recommendation made police focus on victim perception when investigating hate crimes. A guidance document commissioned by the Association of Chief Police Officers (ACPO) in 2005 stated that:

A victim of a hate incident does not have to be a member of a minority group or someone who is generally considered to be vulnerable. For example, a heterosexual man who is verbally abused leaving a gay bar may well perceive that it is motivated by homophobia although he himself is not gay. Therefore effectively anyone can be the victim of a hate incident, including people working inside the police service.

A person does not need to be Muslim if they experience or witness something they perceive as Islamophobic. The same is true of any hate directed at protected categories – be it race, sexual orientation, faith or disability. Victim perception defines how police determine hate crimes and incidents.

This is not about inflating figures for financial gain. If anything, the reverse is true. Knowing that non-Muslims suffer Islamophobic abuse suggests a deeper problem. Some look at those who wear Islamic clothing and express their negative perceptions of Islam and Muslims in paroxysms of abuse. Others perceive the religious observance of Sikh men with the same misplaced anger.

This misperception suggests that racialisation extends to non-Muslim communities. In a post-9/11 world, racist violence against assumed Muslims continues to have stark consequences. Not just for victims and their loved ones. But wider faith communities who face such prejudices. This information should strengthen our collective resolve to overcome anti-Muslim hate.

Moore ends with the offensive suggestion that Christianophobia and Sikhophobia crime flags ‘would lead to the arrest of a lot of Muslims’. He writes with a measure of certainty yet offers no evidence.

In contrast, police forces nationwide will now adopt an Islamophobic crime flag in the months ahead. That came from evidence-based lobbying. A point somehow lost on Charles Moore.

The post Why Charles Moore is wrong about the levels of anti-Muslim hate crime appeared first on TELL MAMA.

Do media outlets and leftists care more about Islamophobia than antisemitism? Brendan O’Neill made the case in a recent Spectator column; yet the article is a rather lazy and divisive argument.

There is a fundamental problem with O’Neill’s point that media outlets ignored the larger increase in antisemitic hate crime in London. He ignored the AFP’s headline ‘Islamophobic, anti-Semitic hate crimes soar in London’ on September 7.

To explore that problem requires an understanding of police data; both data sets are rolling figures for July 2014 to July 2015. Had you looked at the rolling figures from June 2014 to June 2015, antisemitic hate crimes had risen by 134.4 per cent. Crimes listed as Islamophobic were up from 460 incidents to 806. A trend The Evening Standard highlighted under the umbrella of rising the broader rise in race hate crimes.

In July, the Community Security Trust (CST) noted the bleak increase in antisemitism during the first six months of 2015. It recorded 473 incidents – an increase of 53 per cent from the same period in 2014. That alarming rise generated coverage in the Independent, BBC, Guardian, ITV and other outlets. Stories shared thousands of times across social media platforms.

A month later and Owen Jones opined that ‘Antisemitism has no place on the left. It is time to confront it.‘ That article had over 12,000 shares – not all positive – but it created a measure of welcome debate. Perhaps Jones is the outlier; sections of the left do feed into antisemitism as others do not; but the point remains that there is clear concern for antisemitism from sections of the news media and left.

O’Neill also omitted to mention the large anti-Muslim backlash following the Paris atrocities. Within three days, there had been 15 recorded incidents in France. Instead, he speaks of it in ‘possibilities’ and ‘potentials’. Like in Britain, attacks against religious minorities in France remain a problem.

He also writes that ‘you have to scour the media to find mentions of attacks on synagogues’. Back in March, an appalling attack on Stamford Hill synagogue made headlines in various media outlets. Yes, that is one high-profile example, but the point remains.

Nor is it helpful for O’Neill to dismiss the ‘bovine’ nature of attacks against mosques. An attack against any religious institution is abhorrent – no matter how small or ‘insignificant’. Often, it falls to local press, the CST, or Tell MAMA to highlight incidents against Jewish and Islamic institutions. To follow O’Neill’s argument, a measure of Islamophobic crimes only appear in local press; some are then picked up in the national press.

Another issue to consider is the level of police effectiveness. The Met has 900 specialist officers in its Community Safety units specialising in religious and ethnic hate crime. It remains one of the few force areas to deploy both antisemitic and Islamophobic crime flags.

In response to the rise, a Scotland Yard spokesman said: “We know communities feel anxious in light of recent world events. So Neighbourhood policing teams are showing more presence on school routes, on holy days and prayer times to give reassurance.”

Islamophobic and antisemitic hate crimes continue to rise. It will not decrease through divisive comparisons of newspaper headlines and crime stats. Turning hate crimes into a competition is a self-defeating distraction from the chronic problems. Without debate, self-reflection, and re-assurance, how do we reverse this trend? Britain in many ways is a safe place for Muslims and Jews to practise their faith free from obstruction and threat of violence. It will take a collective effort to remind both communities that their hopes and concerns do matter.

The post Spectator is Simply Wrong on This. Anti-Muslim Hate (vs) Anti-Semitism is Not a Competition appeared first on TELL MAMA.