In early February, a story emerged out of Stone Park, Illinois, that a new strip club is being built next to a convent of Roman Catholic nuns. The strip club – to be named “Get It” and to offer forms of adult entertainment – is still under [...]]]> by Peter Dziedzic

In early February, a story emerged out of Stone Park, Illinois, that a new strip club is being built next to a convent of Roman Catholic nuns. The strip club – to be named “Get It” and to offer forms of adult entertainment – is still under construction, but is will be situated adjacent to a convent that includes a complex for elderly sisters and another building for younger women considering the Roman Catholic sisterhood with the Missionary Sisters of Saint Charles Borromeo-Scalabrinians.

While the nuns have reported moral objections to the site, the club owner, Mr. Bob Itzkow, has obtained legal rights to the property from the city. The nuns claim that they were not properly notified of the project. Itzkow claims that the club will be beneficial to the community and says that, while he will take steps to limit the amount of noise and light coming from the club, he is ready to legally defend his project against lawsuits.

There is no question that the construction of the strip club is civically legal, but other questions remain. Is there an ethical obligation for Mr. Itzkow to relocate? Does the moral character of the Stone Park community need to first be taken into consideration, and is this project even a moral threat to the community? Is the project an infringement upon the religious rights of the Catholic sisters? While these are very broad questions and demand deep prayer, thought, or reflection, I want to focus on the last question. What are the religious rights of the Catholic sisters in this situation, and are they being infringed upon?

While it may be true that the nuns were not properly notified, and thus, could not voice their concerns before construction, the owner has a strip club does have a right to construct on that property. The nuns do not have control over the zoning of their neighborhood, and just as they have a secular, legal right to maintain certain practices and habits on their property, so do other individuals enjoy the same right. While I do not support that societal affects that often accompany the promulgation of such establishments as strip clubs, casinos, and night clubs, I have to support the rights of Mr. Itzkow in this situation.

This, however, does not absolve the fact that Itzkow did not take into consideration the religious and moral values of their adjacent neighbors, and this is a sad and unfortunate reality that has popped up in other communities across the country. While Itzkow has indeed said he will accommodate for the sisters, this did not go far enough – he should have discussed the plans and implications of the project with the sisters before hand. While there is no legal infringement on the rights of the community of sisters, aspects of their identity were not acknowledged or responsibly considered in the process. This speaks to a profound lack of religious literacy or consideration that exists in our society.

This lack of religious literacy and consideration does not promote proper community- building, something that many American communities have been suffering from. Instead of engaging our neighbors, we sometimes ensure our own success and viability through avoidance. Incidents such as the situation in Stone Park reveal the sad state that results in a decline in communal identity. While religious freedoms were not directly impeded upon, what is to be done when there is a clash of values in a community, especially in an inherently and profoundly pluralistic society such as the United States? There are two options – domination or dialogue. Obviously, both realities exist side-by-side, and
the narrative of the United States is still being written. Will the act of domination and silencing control the narrative of a society that’s lost a sense of communal identity, or will processes of consideration, discussion, and compassion define our legacy? The situation in Stone Park reveals the unfortunate state of affairs that arises when the former is pursued. Get It is under construction, and the nuns are still grappling with their options, but the discourse will sadly be dominated by mistrust among neighbors.

I am not eager to shame the NYPD.  In fact, it pains me greatly to do so.  When we at Religious Freedom USA came together to [...]]]> Religious Freedom USA’s Co-Director Frank Fredericks represented RFUSA at a press conference of religious leaders speaking out against the NYPD’s practice of surveillance on Muslims.  Frank shared the  following:

I am not eager to shame the NYPD.  In fact, it pains me greatly to do so.  When we at Religious Freedom USA came together to support Park51 at the Liberty Walk on Sept 11, 2010, I met with many of New York’s finest, including survivors and familymembers of 9/11.  The NYPD Office of Community Affairs was not only helpful in maintaining a safe environment, but they went beyond the call of duty, always with a smile.

That’s why when I heard of the monitoring of Muslims across and beyond New York City, I was both shocked and dismayed.  These actions are more than just illegal.  They are both horribly unethical and utterly ineffective.  It is unethical to treat an entire religious community as possible perpetrators because of the way they pray.  This is America, and I know we’re better than that.  This is ineffective because any counter-terrorism specialist will tell you, Muslim Americans are a crucial asset in countering extremism.  Islam isn’t the problem, but it can be part of the solution.

I believe that the NYPD acted in fear, not malice.  Like many Americans caught in the throes of Islamophobia, they are afraid.  This fear has led some of our fellow Americans to attack mosques and mistreat Muslims.

As an evangelical Christian, I also reflect on what the Bible says about fear.  Fear brings out the worst in mankind.  It can inspire us to punish the innocent and permit us to justify injustice.

But I know that fear is not of God.  2 Timothy 2:10 Tells us: “For God did not give us a spirit of fear, but a spirit of power, of love and of self-discipline.”  Notice those last three.  Power, Love, Self-Discipline.  NYPD has the power, and I don’t doubt their love for this city.  But do they have self-discipline?  Not only is it necessary, but it’s required by law.

The NYPD is not evil. There are good policies and bad policies, just and unjust, and most importantly, legal and illegal.  While I know some of my friends in faith here today are calling for Commissioner Kelly to step down from his position.  I would like to ask him to do the opposite.  

Commissioner Kelly, Step up!  Step up to religious freedom, both in writ and in practice.  Step up to the standards established in NYPD Order 11 banning racial profiling.  Step Up your strategy of countering extremism with methods that actual make New Yorkers safer.  Step up to the religious leaders who reached out to you with open arms, only to be met with scrutinizing eyes.

Step up your game Commissioner Kelly!  

History has never been kind to those who fixated on fear, and acted in bigotry but called it good policy.  We call on you to do the right thing Commissioner Kelly, which starts with ending these unjust policies, and ends with building institutional transparency, leading to better policing.  

Profiling of Muslims  on 10th Anniversary of Anti Profiling Law

Who: Diverse Religious & Community Leaders

Where: Christ Chapel, Riverside Church, 490 Riverside Drive New York, 10027

When: 12 noon Tuesday March 13, 2012

National and New York Religious leaders Denounce NYPD

Profiling of Muslims  on 10^th Anniversary of Anti Profiling Law

Who: Diverse Religious & Community Leaders

Where: Christ Chapel, Riverside Church, 490 Riverside Drive New York, 10027

When: 12 noon Tuesday March 13, 2012

Representing a cross section of diverse New York, a coalition of diverse faith leaders gathers today at Riverside Church to express very serious concerns about revelations about extensive NYPD monitoring of the local Muslim community.  We coordinate this gathering with the release of the National Interfaith Letter to Mayor Bloomberg issued today by over 25 national religious groups and leaders.

Today Rabbis, Ministers, Priests and other religious leaders join an array of faith-based and civil liberty organizations, Muslim groups, legal advocates, and concerned citizens of all faiths deeply distressed and appalled that the NYPD has crossed the line from providing proactive safety measures to spying on its own citizens. Even law enforcement has weighed in against this controversial program from around the country. Warrantless spying is clearly not just a “Muslim issue.”

Today, March 13 marks the 10th anniversary of NYPD Order 11  explicitly forbidding racial profiling. Though we appreciate that NYPD Commissioner Kelly has stated his opposition to profiling (“profiling is nuts” http://ow.ly/9xnCT) his department’s current demographic data collection policies religiously profile the entire Muslim community regardless of lack of criminal intent.

To avoid a lasting crisis of trust resulting from Stop and Frisk, Muslim community surveillance and other controversial policies, we also urge the NYPD to accept an independent Inspector General or another form of accountability that will install checks and balances in a vast department along with greater transparency. This is simply a question of good government and common sense.

“When it comes to making sure that their own communities and houses of worship are free from violent extremism, it is safe to say no one is more interested than Muslim American communities themselves. Thus, it is difficult to understand why the NYPD would choose such an alienating approach to these communities rather than working more cooperatively with their members.” Rev. Bob Chase, Intersections

“As a Rabbi, I can attest only too well to the divisive and disheartening effect of policies that cast a very wide net of suspicion over a religious community. I urge the NYPD to pursue its goals of “Courtesy, professionalism, and respect” in partnership with local communities, including critics.” Rabbi Burton L. Visotzky, Milstein Center for Interreligious Dialogue, JTS

“We must add our concern as well about the inflammatory video The Third Jihad seen by almost 1,500 police officers. For the last 13 years the Interfaith Center of NY has been working to make our shared city a better and safer place for all people; and in that spirit we call again on the NYPD to further develop its accountability, transparency and unbiased education about the diverse communities it serves.”  Rev. Chloe Breyer, Executive Director, Interfaith Center of New York

As New York religious community leaders we warmly commend Mayor Bloomberg’s past support for religious freedom and protecting the rights of all New Yorkers; however, it is necessary to fully support the constitutionally-protected right to worship– without scrutiny– for every religious community.

To address the Islamophobia in training issues, we urge both an investigation which would result in the purging of harmful and offensive materials, such as The Third Jihad, and the correction of misinformation to officers who have been exposed to these materials.  Recently, we have seen efforts by other agencies, like the Federal Bureau of Investigation, to purge its own trainings of such harmful materials. Let’s learn the lessons of the last 10 years and keep government and law enforcement accountable in their public service.

For More information: Adem Carroll (646) 251 0402, iamourhaj@aol.com or

Tinoa Rodgers, Director of Communications Riverside Church (212) 870 6765

Originally posted on: http://maclc1.wordpress.com/interfaith-voices-on-nypd-surveillance-accountability-issues/

Over the last month, multiple scandals have leaked that show the extent to which the NYPD has violated the civil liberties of thousands of New York Muslims under the banner of counterterrorism efforts. Protecting the homeland must remain central in all of our policing and intelligence-gathering efforts, but it should not, and [...]]]> by Daniel Tutt, Bio

Over the last month, multiple scandals have leaked that show the extent to which the NYPD has violated the civil liberties of thousands of New York Muslims under the banner of counterterrorism efforts. Protecting the homeland must remain central in all of our policing and intelligence-gathering efforts, but it should not, and does not have to result in the alienation of hundreds of thousands of New York Muslims. Equally important, counterterrorism efforts must operate on sound and factual analysis of the threat posed by the Muslim community, and collaboration with Muslim community leaders and citizens should be a top priority.

The damage that these scandals have caused in severing the lines of trust between law enforcement and the Muslim community may be irreparable in the short term, but it is not too late for the NYPD to begin assessing the policies that led us to where we are today.

In a recently exposed white paper published by the NYPD entitled, “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat,” we find the basis of an entire philosophy of counterterrorism that operates on several myths that must be addressed.

Let’s examine each of these myths in turn.

1. Extremist Muslims have permeated New York Muslim communities. The white paper states:

“New York City has a diverse Muslim population of between 600,000 and 750,000 within a population of about 8 ½ million–about 40% of whom are foreign-born. Unfortunately, extremists who have and continue to sow the seeds of radicalization have permeated the City’s Muslim communities.”

To suggest that the Muslim community of New York is being overran with violent extremism is far from the truth. The New York Muslim community makes up an estimated 1 million people throughout the entire state. The community has incredible racial, socioeconomic, and ethnic diversity, and is very well integrated into the larger society.

The threat this community poses is similar to the threat that American Muslims pose nationwide: very little to none. Since 9/11, over 40% of the cases where criminal charges were brought upon an American Muslim for suspicion in a terrorism related case, the Muslim community was responsible for turning that individual, or individuals, over to the authorities. Muslims see counterterrorism as their duty according to recent public opinion polls, and they are more concerned about preventing terrorism then are the rest of the non-Muslim American public per capita. Don’t we want to increase this trend of Muslims serving on the front line of counterterrorism efforts? Increasing it has the dual benefit of making Muslims an integral part of the solution, and making them feel like a valued collaborator in the war on terrorism.

According to the Muslim Public Affairs Council’s comprehensive terrorism database, of the 49 Muslim domestic and foreign based plots against the U.S. since 9/11 – there were over 105 terrorist plots from non-Muslim groups and individuals – nearly 1 in 3 of these plots were turned over to the authorities by the American Muslim community.

2. A Muslim’s level of religiosity is a sign of radicalization and support for terrorism. The second myth that the document supports is the so called “conveyor belt theory” of terrorism, which argues that terrorism is based on a continuum of religiosity, where the more religious a Muslim gets, the greater likeliness they may adopt violent extremism. This is a major misnomer that has unfortunately been taught to hundreds of thousands of police and intelligence agents nationwide as exposed in a recent investigative report by Political Research Associates entitled Manufacturing the Muslim Menace.

The white paper describes the ideology that supports terrorism as “jihadi-Salafi Islam” but never defines these terms, especially what they mean for Muslims. Instead, they exaggerate what a “Salafi Muslim” is, and neglect to point out that the majority of Salafi Muslims in western Europe and in America are not in favor of using violence and are generally peaceful. It also refuses to look at competing studies of radicalization. For example, Quintan Wiktorowicz, National Security Agency Director learned in an extensive empirical research project he headed up on radicalization of Muslim youth, that there is no correlation between religiosity and a willingness to become radicalized. In other words, the more religious Muslims became, the less likely they would be to join radical movements.

Wiktorowicz insight supports what Policy Analyst Alejandro Beutel has recently discovered in his careful analysis of Osama bin-Laden’s recruitment rhetoric. In a careful analysis of the content of each lecture that bin-Laden gave, MPAC discovered that al-Qaeda’s recruiting “pitch” was overwhelmingly political/policy-oriented, not religious.

Let’s be realistic. The threat from al-Qaeda is concerning. Despite the controversial nature of his assassination, Anwar Awlaki’s death and disappearance from the scene is a welcoming sign in the ongoing recruitment that Al-Qaeda is attempting, mainly online, to American Muslims. The fact that we no longer have a charismatic, English speaking figurehead of al-Qaeda to brainwash American Muslims to commit acts of violence is a great thing. Awlaki’s model seemed to be fairly effective in turning about two-dozen American Muslims towards a commitment to violent radicalization against the west andAmerica in particular. Importantly, this was happening in anonymous chat rooms online, not in mosques, or mainstream religious institutions in America.

3. Profiling Muslims is possible and necessary. The third myth that the white paper supports is that Muslims must be profiled; suggesting not only is it necessary, but that it is possible. Here is an excerpt from the paper:

“Radicalization makes little noise. It borders on areas protected by the First and Fourth Amendments. It takes place over a long period of time. It therefore does not lend itself to a traditional criminal investigations approach.”

When we analyze the homegrown cases of Muslim terrorists since 9/11, we find vastly different ethnic origin, age, ideological affiliation, and motivations. While the policy grievance remains consistent in each case, the idea of profiling based on religiosity or the outward expression of religiosity is just plain wrong and nonsensical. Like we saw from Wiktorowicz’s research, religious Muslims should be seen as allies, as there is no empirical relationship between religiosity and support for terrorism.

4. Muslim community leaders and citizens do not need to be consulted in counterterrorism efforts. Nowhere in the 90 plus page report do we find details or best practices for policymakers and intelligence officers in building partnerships with New York Muslims.

In an ironic way, the controversies coming out of the NYPD, while they hurt the relationship between Muslims and law enforcement, they help engage Muslims in the political process and in speaking up for their rights. The New York Muslim community is fed up, and many point to the rising trend of Islamophobia as the cause for this wanton disregard for Muslim civil liberties.

One of the key recommendations that Charles Kurzman, a leading expert on Muslim radicalization of the Triangle Center for Terrorism Research proposes is that Muslim Americans be given the means to express themselves politically in American society. The fight against Islamophobia as a healthy way for Muslim Americans to stand up for their rights and in the process demand equal respect. Like the civil rights movement for Black Americans, many politically engaged Muslims feel that the fight against bigotry and misunderstanding of their faith will result in a greater level of integration into the American experience.

From 2005 to 2011 we have witnessed an increase in the so-called “lone wolf” phenomenon of extremism – an isolated individual becomes indoctrinated by a charismatic pseudo religious leader and seeks to act out violence against the American populace. Thankfully, this threat is relatively minor, and unfortunately often caused by FBI entrapment.

What we have not yet seen is the climate of growing Islamophobia serving as the cause for a lone wolf attack on America, or even the turn to radicalization itself. Since it is always best to be ahead of the storm, we must encourage large-scale movements against Islamophobia because they help to further a healthy civic alternative to American Muslims that are somewhat prone to lunatic false prophets on YouTube like Anwar Awlaki. It is through fighting Islamophobia and standing up for civil rights that we can create a vehicle whereby Muslims can vent their anger and develop a new language that ties the values of Islam to a unique American and democratic narrative. This sort of action has already begun, and when scandals emerge like these, Muslim Americans should be vocal and demand justice.

Posted on Huffington Post Religion 02/24/2012