Thread by @mlsrumors

Good morning good people. Today's thread looks at the bigger picture of MLS using the ban against displays of storied anti-fascism symbol as a way to chip away at something that apparently makes some in power there uncomfortable: banners and signs against racism and fascism

If MLS was going to pick a fight over a symbol they made a poor choice. The three arrows in the Iron Front logo attacking the threats of fascism, communism & monarchism are fights most Americans celebrate and honor today. naumburg-geschichte.de/bilder/1932/wa…

We celebrate the 4th of July because of the successful fight against a monarchy, the result of which became the United States itself. Memorial and Veterans day honor among other, those who fought against fascism in WWII and Armed Services day was created during the Cold War.

The anti-fascist movement has been around at least since the late 1920s. For the entirety of MLS's existence until now, the Iron Front symbol was welcome. And as we have shown even promoted (and still present) on MLS's own website: mlssoccer.com/post/2017/08/1…

As we've shown previously, there has been a pattern of MLS harassing supporters with messages of anti-racism or anti-fascism: threadreaderapp.com/thread/1134602…

We saw the league try to ban the words "anti-racism/anti-fascism" from displays when they kicked two Seattle supporters out of the stadium in Vancouver and threatened them with arrest.

Seattle's owners and front office rebuked the reason the league gave and rightly reminded them that being against racism and fascism were not political stances but rather expressions of the human rights values of the club.

Having not gotten what MLS wanted in Seattle they turned the fight to Portland to chip away at liberty. This is the insidious way in which fascism works. Give an inch, take a mile. It only wins by compliance , subjugation and submission to fear.

On KOPB radio a member of the Timbers front office stated MLS originally wanted to ban displays with "anti-racism/anti-fascism" not just the Iron Front logo which symbolizes the three fights against threats to democracy. spreaker.com/user/oregonpub…

Additionally, yesterday a Timbers Front office employee under the condition of anonymity reached out to us & stated the Timbers fought the league on all of this actually felt they won by getting the league to back off removing "anti-racism/anti-fascism" banners from being banned.

In our private conversation with this person we re-affirmed what the TA stated here: timbersarmy.org/TimbersArmyBlo… and added that taking away a symbol which historically represents the fight against what has been documented as a rising visibility of fascist groups sets a bad precedent.

We asked if we could, through the Timbers front office submit a list of questions to be answered and this person responded that yes, we could. In the interest of transparency we will publish those questions here at the same time as we submit them.

We will submit these questions publicly as we feel this discussion should not be occurring behind closed doors.

@TimbersFC 1. Is it true that initially the league asked you to ban any display of anti-racism/anti-fascism banners? If so what was their exact justification of that?

@TimbersFC 2. You've stated the men who brought the Trump flag in were given a 3 game ban & their flag confiscated. Were they made to leave the stadium on Saturday? We have eyewitness reports they were simply sent to another, nicer section (Tanner Ridge) & joked with PTFC staff.

@TimbersFC 3. When exactly was PTFC informed about the Iron Front symbol specifically being banned by the league front office?

@TimbersFC 4. What was MLS's exact wording and justification for that ban of the Iron Front symbol?

@TimbersFC 5. Was there an effort on the part of the Timbers to educate the league front office as to the history of the Iron Front symbol and it's three arrows representing fighting against fascism, communism and monarchism, three fights which American history celebrates?

@TimbersFC 6. What if any, other symbols did the league specifically mention in during your discussions would be banned?

@TimbersFC 7. When MLS informed you about the ban of the Iron Front symbol were you also told personal displays of it were fine but large scale displays were not? If so what was the reason they gave for this difference in treatment of large vs small expressions of human rights?

8. @TimbersFC Who at MLS originally proposed this ban on the Iron Front symbol and when did that happen? Did the Board of Governors vote on this or was there some other committee which put forth this ban? Was it before or after the new MLS Code of Conduct was issued?

9. @TimbersFC In your statement on the new policy of the Iron Front ban you also extended that policy to games involving the NWSL Portland Thorns. Why if this comes from the MLS would you do that? Did the NWSL also also ban it from matches?

10. @TimbersFC Seattle in 2017 faced a similar situation & its owners backed their supporters in opposing the league's actions. Similarly, did PTFC state to MLS that it views displays of the Iron Front symbol as upholding the human rights values of the club. If not, why not?

11. @TimbersFC What would be the repercussions to the club if Portland, like the Seattle Sounders owners stood up for its supporters and refuted the leagues current justification for the ban of large displays featuring the Iron Front symbol?

12. @TimbersFC Do you know why the league still has a picture of a display featuring the banned Iron Front symbol taken at a Timbers match in a story promoting Timbers Army's anti-racism/anti-fascism stance? mlssoccer.com/post/2017/08/1…

We hope to get clear answers to those questions from @MLS & @TimbersFC We think more transparency on both of their parts would go a long way. But the elephant in the room is still the Iron Front symbol ban and until its lifted we'll continue supporting those fighting for that.