Md. Governor names four Circuit Court judges in Pr. George’s

From: washingtonpost.com

 

By Ruben Castaneda

 

Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley (D) this week appointed four people to serve as Circuit Court judges in Prince George’s County.

Three of the appointees have been serving as District Court judges.

The new Circuit Court judges are former District Court judges Krystal Q. Alves, Daneeka Varner Cotton, and Hassan A. El-Amin.

The governor also appointed John Paul Davey, an attorney who has practiced in Prince George’s for more than two decades, to the Circuit Court bench.


Alves was named to the District Court bench in 2005. She previously worked as an assistant state’s attorney in Prince George’s and also in the county’s Office of Law, which defends the county against civil lawsuits.

Cotton was appointed to the District Court bench in 2006. In the 1990s, she worked as an assistant state’s attorney in Prince George’s for several years, until she was appointed to the position of master in the family division of Circuit Court, a post she held until she was named to the District Court. She is the chairperson of the Domestic Violence Coordinating Council in Prince George’s County.

El-Amin was appointed to the District Court in 2000, becoming the first Muslim named to the bench in Maryland. In March 2009, El-Amin landed in controversy when he released an 18-year-old man charged with murder to the custody of the defendant’s mother. A spokesman for then-State’s Attorney Glenn F. Ivey criticized the judge’s decision. Murder defendants in Prince George’s are rarely released on bond, and when they are, it is often for a high amount, generally no less than $500,000.

In an interview with The Washington Post, El-Amin defended his decision, saying the defendant, Sean Sykes, was entitled to the presumption of innocence and that he did not consider him a danger to the community or a flight risk.

“Our whole bond system is problematical,” El-Amin said then. “It’s barely constitutional.”
Sykes eventually pleaded guilty to second-degree murder in connection with the stabbing of a man in Oxon Hill.

Davey has worked in private practice in Prince George’s for 21 years, officials said. From 1991 to 2003, Davey served as the county’s representative to the Washington Metropolitan Transit Authority.
Davey also worked as the county’s chief administrative officer from 1987 to 1991.

By Ruben Castaneda

Response to Muslim suit riles Ohio pork industry

From: woi-tv.com

 

By ANDREW WELSH-HUGGINS
AP Legal Affairs Writer

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - A decision by Ohio officials to remove all pork products from prison menus in response to a lawsuit by Muslim inmates is not sitting well with the state's pork producers and processors.

Both promise action of their own, including a possible counter lawsuit, to address what they consider an unfair and illogical decision.

"We really think it's not in the best interest, frankly, of the whole prison system," said Dick Isler, executive director of the Ohio Pork Producers Council. "It seems like we're letting a small group make the rules when it really isn't in the best interest of the rest of prisoners."

Pork is inexpensive and nutritious and compares well to other lean meats, he said.

Ironically, the inmates' lawsuit doesn't involve pork at all; it demands that non-pork meats like beef come from animals slaughtered according to Islamic law. But the prisons system responded by simply removing pork as an option altogether.

If Ohio would provide Muslim inmates with pre-packaged meals similar to those given to Jewish inmates, as the lawsuit requests, it wouldn't be necessary to remove pork from menus, said David Singleton, executive director of the Ohio Justice and Policy Center, which is suing on behalf of the two inmates.

Assistant prisons director Steven Huffman has spoken with Isler, but the system isn't changing its mind, spokeswoman JoEllen Smith said Wednesday.

She said she couldn't comment on the lawsuit specifically, but said removing pork assures that inmates' religious practices aren't jeopardized by pork coming into contact with other food during preparation.

Ohio joins California, Florida, Maryland and Massachusetts among states that don't serve pork in prisons. Massachusetts stopped serving pork more than a decade ago to satisfy religious preferences, said prisons spokeswoman Diane Wiffin.

Ohio first took pork off the menu in 2009 after, in a money-saving attempt, it closed the pig farm and processing facility it operated to provide meat for inmates.

Last year, after lobbying by pork producers, the system added pork rib patties back to the menu once a week, at a cost of about $27,000 a week. The pork was provided by a Michigan company, and so Ohio producers aren't affected, Smith said.

"This issue seems to be blown out of proportion based on a misunderstanding," she said.

Pork is big business in Ohio, the country's eighth-largest producer, with 3,700 farms raising 4 million pigs a year.

Kristin Mullins, who lobbies for Ohio pork processors, said the move last year actually saved Ohio money because pork was less expensive at the time than other meats.

"Let's service the entire prison population and not let one portion dictate what's being served," said Mullins, who also represents processors in Kentucky and Tennessee.

In a federal lawsuit, death row inmate Abdul Awkal complains that the state is restraining his religious freedoms by not providing meals prepared according to Islamic law, known as halal, while at the same time supplying Jewish prisoners with kosher meals. The Quran, the holy book of Islam, prohibits Muslims from eating pork.

Awkal, joined by a second inmate not on death row, says the vegetarian and non-pork options aren't good enough. The inmates say food must be prepared in specific fashion, such as ensuring that an animal is butchered by slitting its throat and draining its blood, to conform to Islamic beliefs.

Prison guidelines for Muslim inmates already provided that meals will be "free of all pork and products containing or derived from pork."

A judge has given lawyers and inmates for the state until next month to finish filing documents bolstering their arguments, ahead of an expected January trial.

Ohio says requiring halal meals could mean new dietary plans for as many as 2,000 inmates, while Awkal's lawyers believe the figure is lower because not all Muslims eat halal meals.

Awkal, 52, is scheduled to die in June for killing his estranged wife, Latife Awkal, and brother-in-law Mahmoud Abdul-Aziz in 1992, in a room in Cuyahoga County Domestic Relations Court. Joining Awkal in the lawsuit is Cornelius Causey, 35, serving 15 years to life for murder and aggravated robbery convictions out of Hamilton County.

In court documents, Ohio has argued that it provides both non-pork and vegetarian meals to Muslims and says the courts have sided with this practice. The state also says that providing halal meals could hurt Ohio financially, given the current budget situation.

California provides packaged kosher meals to Jewish inmates and halal meals prepared at prisons for Muslim prisoners.

Texas, which does serve pork to prisoners, offers Muslim inmates regular, meat-free or pork-free meals but not halal meals.

Toronto school defends Muslim prayers in cafeteria

By RON CSILLAG

Religion News Service


TORONTO – A majority-Muslim public school in Toronto is defending its policy of allowing an imam to lead Friday prayers in the cafeteria, saying students who leave school for prayers at a mosque typically don’t return to school.


Christian and other prayers are disallowed in the public school system.


For the past three years, some 300 Muslim students at Valley Park Middle School have been allowed to use the school cafeteria for their Friday prayers. Before the policy change, school officials say students would leave classes early and not return.


“I think it’s important to note the prayer isn’t conducted under the auspices of the board,” Jim Spyropoulos, a superintendent for inclusive schools with the Toronto District School Board, told the Globe and Mail newspaper. “This was the best solution that avoided compromising instructional time.”


The issue is “about religious accommodation,” Shari Schwartz-Maltz, a school district spokeswoman, told The Canadian Press.


Those explanations have not placated angry parents, who are lighting up radio call-in shows and blogging furiously — particularly since Christian and other prayers are disallowed in the public school system.
In an unlikely alliance, Canadian Hindu Advocacy, the Jewish Defense League and the Muslim Canadian Congress have voiced strong opposition to the arrangement.


Islamic groups are “imposing their view” to “spread their ideology,” Ron Banerjee, director of Canadian Hindu Advocacy, told the Globe and Mail.


The Muslim Canadian Congress has asked for the services to be halted or closely monitored to avert the spread of radicalism.


The board noted that there have been no complaints about the arrangement until it was highlighted recently by by a right-wing blogger.

Read more: http://blog.beliefnet.com/on_the_front_lines_of_the_culture_wars/2011/07/canadian-school-bars-christian-prayers-but-allows-muslim-prayertime-in-cafeteria.html#ixzz1S6UbPHzY

BURKE: Political correctness gone mad at Ground Zero

We can have a Ground Zero Mosque, but not a memorial that actually memorializes 9/11

By Michael Burke

-

The Washington Times

Illustration: WTC sphere

 

This Sept. 11, the 10th anniversary of the terrorist attacks upon America, New York Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg will dedicate the massive, $600 million National September 11 Memorial and Museum at the World Trade Center. What Americans have not been told is that this “memorial” will remake Ground Zero so that it does not acknowledge 9/11.

Instead of acting as a constant reminder of the attacks, a symbol for us and future generations of the evil that struck, the death and destruction it caused and the heroism and sacrifice in response, the memorial will wipe out all evidence and memory of the attacks.

Replacing all reminders of the attacks will be two immense “voids” with gigantic subterranean waterfalls designed to express exclusively, as per architect Michael Arad, the continuing “absence in our lives caused by these deaths.”

About 500 trees will be planted upon the site. They are, we are told by memorial officials, “traditional symbols of the rejuvenation of life.” They also will eradicate all trace and memory of what stood there for 30 years and its destruction on Sept. 11.

The cause of “these deaths,” how these people came to be absent - that is, 9/11 - has been deemed irrelevant and even contrary to your memorial “experience.”
The memorial is not about that; it’s about you.

Cities and towns across America have humbly requested a segment of the twisted steel of the WTC to feature in their own modest Sept. 11 memorials. The only memorial where one is not welcome is the “national” memorial at Ground Zero. Those iconic remnants, exactly because they are iconic, are considered far too gauche for the jury of intellectuals and artists who chose the design.

The National September 11 Memorial at the WTC will not include the iconic WTC “Sphere” - again, exactly because it is iconic. “The Sphere” stood in the center of the WTC plaza for 30 years as a symbol of world peace. On 9/11, though badly damaged (a piece of one of the planes tore through it) it survived the attacks in place and was embraced by many Americans as a symbol of the nation’s strength and resiliency.
That is why it cannot be returned.

It sits at Battery Park, about a half-mile from Ground Zero, where it was installed March 11, 2002, the six-month anniversary of the attacks, as a “temporary” memorial. Battery Park is undergoing its own renovations, and “The Sphere” will have to moved.

One 9/11 anniversary at Ground Zero, Mr. Arad told me that returning “The Sphere” would be “didactic.” That is, it would tell us what to think.

Somehow disposing of it is not telling us what to think.

This is like banishing the USS Arizona from the USS Arizona Memorial.

The 9/11 memorial will not identify Christine Lee Hanson, who died with her parents when United Airlines Flight 175 was slammed into the South Tower, as being “age 2.” This might convince you that the American victims were “innocent” and the foreign terrorists “guilty.”
That would be telling us what to think.

Story Continues →

Fordson teacher involved in suit fired

By Katie Hetrick
Press & Guide Newspapers

DEARBORN — Dearborn Public Schools has fired one of two former Fordson teachers suing the district for religious discrimination and harassment.

Bryan Purcell was terminated after he failed to show up for a personnel hearing on May 23. Details of why the math teacher was fired are protected under privacy laws, and public school board records do not give any clues, although minutes from the public portion of the meeting include an e-mail Purcell submitted to the board.

In the e-mail, he called the allegations a “mountain of fiction” and continued to assert that since Imad Fadlallah became principal at Fordson High School in 2005, FHS administrators have systematically tried to force non-Arab and non-Muslim faculty out of the school.

“This a pattern of harassment and the hostile work environment he created has continued under Youssef Mosallam, and in fact, the harassment has been stepped up,” Purcell said in the email.

Fadlallah retired last summer and was replaced by Mosallam as principal.

Purcell’s attorney, Debbie Schlussel, said Purcell would fight his dismissal under the state’s teacher Tenure Act.

“It is obvious that the dismissal is pretextual, discriminatory, and retaliatory, and we intend to fight it all the way,” Schlussel said via email.

Schlussel, an ultra conservative commentator who calls the city “Dearbornistan” on her website, also said the suit against the district is ongoing. She declined in the email to provide additional comment because the case is still pending in U.S. District Court in Detroit.

Schlussel filed the suit in September on behalf of Purcell and Georgene Stergalas, a marketing teacher. Both the Fordson High School teachers said school administrators had harassed them because they were neither Arab nor Muslim.

Both claimed in the suit that administrators tried to drive them out by reassigning them to less desirable courses, putting troublemaking students in their rooms, and scheduling them to teach two classes at the same time in different areas of the building, among several other allegations.

When the suit was filed, both teachers had taken medical leave because of the stress caused by the situation. Purcell had taught in Dearborn for 10 years and Stergalas for 16.

Stergalas is now teaching at Dearborn High, said Brian Mustonen, Dearborn Public School’s communications coordinator. He confirmed the suit is still making its way through the courts.

School administrators have said since the beginning that the suit has no merit. Previous claims against Fadlallah had been unsubstantiated, they noted.

However, the suit was similar to one filed in 2009 by ousted wrestling coach Gerald Marszalek. He claimed he was forced out of his coaching job after 35 years because Fadlallah did not like that a volunteer assistant wrestling coach was doing Christian outreach work outside of school.

That suit was eventually settled out of court, the district said.
From: http://www.pressandguide.com/articles/2011/07/12/news/doc4e1c8aabbf25e615913007.txt?viewmode=fullstory

Weightlifter wins her fight to wear the hijab in competition as international body bows to pressure for rule change

By Daily Mail Reporter
Kulsoom Abdullah has won her battle to wear the hijab while competing.
After a lengthy campaign to change the sport's rules surrounding what athletes can wear in competition, the International Weightlifting Federation (IWF) have now approved new guidelines to give women the option of covering their arms and legs.

 And under the new advice female competitors who wish to cover up can wear a one-piece full-body unitard signalling a massive victory for the Georgia Tech graduate.

Weighing in: Kulsoom Abdullah appeared on NBC News Atlanta to discuss the historic

victory to convince the International Weightlifting Federation to change it's dress code

The 35-year-old, who holds a PhD in computer engineering, has waged a personal crusade with both the U.S. Olympic Committee and USA Weighlifting to push reform of the uniform law.

 It was the USOC that urged the IWF to make the change during a meeting in Malaysia earlier this week.

 

According to the IWF the unitard will still allow technical officials to see and verify that lifts are being made.

Now Abdullah, who competes in the women's senior weightlifting division, can enter national competitions after she was barred because she insisted on covering most of her body, as her religion dictates.

Weighty issue: Kulsoom Abdullah sets up her weights, she has persuaded the

international weightlifting body to change its dress code for women

Weight lifted: Kulsoom Abdullah will now be able to compete after rules over what she

can wear in competition have been changed to allow her to cover up

She said: 'I’m really happy that it happened. I’m really thankful for the support that was out there in the public.

 'The one advantage to all of this is that it raised a lot of awareness. I hope it [the changes] will help with other sports that other [Muslim] women participate in.

 'I think it would just be nice that in any sport, if there's a lady who covers her arms and legs - they could still be involved.'

 The Atlanta woman had argued her case before the USOC and provided a video which showed alternative attire that a Muslim woman could wear.

 The IWF said issues similar to those raised by Abdullah had been circulating within the sport's governing body.

 IWF President Tamas Ajan said: 'This rule modification has been considered in the spirit of fairness, equality and inclusion.'

Abdullah said she will begin training and will register for an upcoming Iowa weightlifting competition she thought she would not be able to enter.

 Born in the U.S. to Pakistani parents, Abdullah competes in the 48kg (about 106 pounds) and 53kg (about 117 pounds) weight class.

 She began weightlifting as an exercise routine a few years ago and said: 'It was just something for fun. It gave me something to achieve as a goal.'

 She then teamed up with a trainer and set her sights on competing, training five to six days a week and entering competitions last year in Flowery Branch, Newnan, Gainesville, Savannah and South Carolina.
Abdullah, who moved to Atlanta from Florida in 1999, said she covered her body during local competitions and met no resistance from local weightlifting officials.

 A spokesman for the Washington-based Council on American-Islamic Relations added: 'We welcome this important decision in support of greater inclusion in athletic competition and urge the representatives of other international bodies to take similar steps.

 'We thank the United States Olympic Committee for helping to empower Muslim women athletes and for taking a stand in support of the American tradition of religious diversity.'

 Abdullah is among other female athletes who are Muslim and have been blocked from national and international competition because of their insistance on modest dress.

 Iran's women's soccer team was recently disqualified during an Olympic qualifying competition against Jordan after athletes wore a full-body outfit with a head scarf.
As a result, they will not be allowed to compete in London.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2010277/Muslim-weightlifter-Kulsoom-Abdullah-wins-fight-wear-hijab-competition.html#ixzz1R3tJllIS

48th Annual Muslim Brotherhood-linked ISNA Convention, July 1-4 USA

Islamists never miss an opportunity to exploit American holidays to promote and spread Islam and sharia law. Then again, Muslims don’t consider them American holidays. July 4, what Americans consider their Independence Day, is not what Muslims in America are taught by other Muslims to consider the day. As noted at an earlier year’s convention.

Tweet from ISNA conference

Last week Muslims from the extremist Hizb ut Tahrir met in Chicago to tell Muslims in America how they can establish a global caliphate ruled by Islamic sharia law. Illinois is also hosting this Islamist fest of the Islamic Society of North America – designated as an unindicted co-conspirator in the Hamas-funding Holy Land Foundation convictions.

July 1 – 4, 2011

Rosemont Convention Center
5555 N. River Road
Rosemont, IL 60018

As expected, the world’s leading Islamist instigators and apologists for Islam, sharia and jihad will be present. The convention , as well as the Muslim Brotherhood’s Muslim Student Association (MSA). When Congressmen (Ellison & Carson), police chiefs (Lee Baca), university professors, media personalities (Zogby), and State Dept. “outreach” partners have no qualms about meeting with terror-linked Muslim organizations it speaks volumes about the direction the United States is heading. Numerous speakers or their organizations have been banned from working with the FBI and U.S. military.

The FBI and CIA couldn’t wish for a gathering of so many Islamists in one place at one time, yet unfortunately rather than acting on the opportunity, they are more likely to be participating with a booth or as speakers. See the full list here.

read more: http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/07/01/48th-annual-muslim-brotherhood-linked-isna-convention-july-1-4-usa/

The real face of Hizb ut Tehrir

 

Interesting read on the same Muslim group that just held a conference in Chicago on Sunday, aggressively explaining to Muslims in the U.S. how they can support the establishment of a worldwide caliphate ruled by Islamic sharia law.

By Amir Mir, Asia Times Online :: The real face of Hizbul Tehrir

ISLAMABAD – The shadow of militant group Hizbul Tehrir (HuT) looms large in the interrogations of Pakistan army Brigadier Ali Khan and four majors who have revealed senior military officers planned to lead a coup against the government in Islamabad in an attempt to convert the country into a pure Islamic state by reviving the Khilafat (caliphate) system envisaged by the al-Qaeda-linked organization.

The officers are being interrogated in the garrison town of Rawalpindi by the Special Investigation Branch of the Military Intelligence (MI) after their arrest for suspected ties to militant organizations, reinforcing fears that the Pakistan’s armed forces have been infiltrated at all levels by al-Qaeda and Taliban-linked Islamic extremists.

The detained officers have conceded that they were in touch with

the HuT, which had incited them to launch a rebellion against the country’s military and political leadership over what they see as pro-American policies. Investigators have concluded that HuT has the same objectives as al-Qaeda – the enforcement of Islamic rule in accordance with sharia(Islamic laws) in Muslim-majority countries and the restoration of an Islamic caliphate.

A group of junior army officers linked to HuT had previously tried to stage a military coup against the regime of Pervez Musharraf regime in 2003 with the help of their moles in uniform. However, the plan was foiled and the plotters were court-martialed, followed by a government ban on the activities of the HuT in Pakistan. The authorities had also arrested Omar Khan, a British-born Pakistani who was identified as the person enlisting and indoctrinating the men in uniform on behalf of the HuT.

Islamic groups and parties have been striving since the inception of Pakistan to Islamize the country in accordance with the Objective Resolution, adopted by the Constituent Assembly in 1949, which stated that Muslims living in Pakistan would be enabled to mould their lives in line with the teachings of Islam. HuT is one such Islamic group and presents itself as a global revolutionary movement with branches in over 50 countries across the globe, including the United Kingdom and the United States.

Read it all via Asia Times Online and ask your elected officials why Hizb ut Tehrir is not banned in the U.S.

From: http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/06/28/the-real-face-of-hizb-ut-tehrir/

Qatari Investors: Huge Downtown Development Project Must Conform to Shariah

Posted by Lydia DePillis

 

The New York Times' profile of the CityCenterDC project has mostly nothing new in it if you've been following the huge downtown project at all. But it does include this fascinating nugget about the requirements of its Qatari investors:

Even before the Qatari investors became involved, Hines and Archstone determined that leasing to banks would not help them create lively shopping streets, Mr. Alsup said. But as it happened, their hesitancy on bank branches meshed with the policies of their financial partners, who adhere to the restrictions of Shariah, or Islamic law, including the ban on collecting interest. Restaurants will be able to serve liquor, but retailers whose primary business involves selling alcohol will not be allowed, Mr. Alsup said.

In their marketing materials, Hines and Archstone say they intend to provide “an authentic place for urban residents to socialize outside their homes.”

So, no bars or banks for the biggest downtown construction project in recent memory! As Bill Alsup alluded to, banks aren't all that great for a city streetscape, and it's admirable that they planned to forego such a dependable and high-rent-paying tenant. It's less advantageous, though, to not have business devoted primarily to selling alcohol. CityCenterDC is unlikely to be plagued by liquor stores, but it could definitely use a few places to be out at night drinking without getting a full dinner. Could Qatari money turn CityCenterDC into more of a black hole than the last piece of the puzzle in a living downtown?

(Also, I'm really sick of seeing the word "authentic" used in marketing and branding materials—and using it for a brand-new commercial development is particularly meaningless).

(Also I'm thinking about looking into this further—if you've heard any other examples of investors having moral or religious stipulations for the things they fund, drop me a line).

E-mail Lydia DePillis • Follow @housingcomplex on Twitter

 

From: http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/housingcomplex/2011/06/23/who-needs-liquor-laws-when-youve-got-qatar/comment-page-1/#comment-87287

Michigan Islamic Group Cleared To Take Over Elementary School

 

via Islamic Group Cleared To Take Over Empty Farmington School – Community News Story – WDIV Detroit.

SOUTHFIELD, Mich. — The Farmington School Board unanimously approved the sale of the former Eagle Elementary School to the Islamic Cultural Association on Wednesday despite anti-Muslim protests.

At the school board meeting, around 200 people attempted to block the deal expressing concerns that property values would decrease if Muslims congregated in the area.

The school, which was originally slated for demolition, is expected to become an Islamic cultural and activity center.

Judging by the photograph included with this story, residents have every right to be extremely concerned. The terrorist-linked Muslim group CAIR is involved in some way with the school, and that does not bode well for the area. Check back in five to ten years.
from: http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/06/16/michigan-islamic-group-cleared-to-take-over-elementary-school/

The Norquist Cell: Operation GroverKhan

Gary H. Johnson, Jr.

Grover Norquist has never publicly answered the charges laid at his door by Frank Gaffney.

Norquist sits on the Board of Directors of the American Conservative Union and the National Rifle Association (NRA). In addition, Norquist is also the president of Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), which sponsors the Conservative Political Action Conference (CPAC).   Grover Norquist is the Republican Establishment's kingmaker. 

read more: http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/publications/id.9717/pub_detail.asp

Islamoblob Expanding in California!

By admin

Like the Blob, Islam is expanding again, as it is devouring more of America. This time the expansion is taking place in California, and as usual the Mosque does not seemed to be concerned with Muslims assimilating.

Let’s take a look at this growing menace to America.

read more: http://loganswarning.com/2011/06/10/islamoblob-expanding-in-california/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Loganswarning+%28Loganswarning%29

The Show Trial of Geert Wilders – Part 1

The following was written by Babs Barron:

Definition - show trial - a trial held for show; the guilt of the accused person has been decided in advance.
Some background:
Geert Wilders is a Dutch politician who is outspoken about the influence of Islam in Dutch society, a point of view which has attracted much support there as well as opprobrium.

Wilders has campaigned to stop the "Islamisation" of Holland. He compares the Qu'ran with Mein Kampf in terms of the violence it advocates against Jews and other non-Muslims who refuse to convert to Islam, and has campaigned to have the book banned in Holland. Even more contentiously, he advocates ending immigration from Muslim countries, and supports banning the construction of new mosques. He was a speaker at the "Facing Jihad" Conference, in Jerusalem in 2008, which discussed the dangers of jihad, and has called for a hard line against what he called the "street terror" exerted by minorities in Dutch cities. His controversial 2008 film about his views on Islam, Fitna, received international attention and placed his life in danger from Islamists.
read more: http://www.citizenwarrior.com/2011/06/show-trial-of-geert-wilders-part-1.html

Shari’a and Violence in American Mosques

Posted by Jamie Glazov

Jamie Glazov is Frontpage Magazine's editor. He holds a Ph.D. in History with a specialty in Russian, U.S. and Canadian foreign policy. He is the author of the critically acclaimed and best-selling, United in Hate: The Left's Romance with Tyranny and Terror. His new book is Showdown With Evil. He can be reached at jamieglazov11@gmail.com.

 

Frontpage Interview’s guest today is David Yerushalmi, General Counsel to the Center for Security Policy, a Washington, D.C.-based national security think tank founded and headed by former Reagan administration official Frank Gaffney. He is considered an expert on Islamic law and its intersection with Islamic terrorism and national security. In this capacity, he has published widely on the subject, including the principle critical scholarship on sharia-compliant finance published in the Utah Law Review (2008, Issue 3). He has also designed and co-authored (with Mordechai Kedar) a ground-breaking peer reviewed empirical investigation on sharia-adherence and the promotion of violent, jihadist literature in U.S. mosques published in the Middle East Quarterly (Summer 2011).

FP: David Yerushalmi, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

I would like to talk to you today about your Mapping Sharia project. Now that it is published as a fully peer-reviewed study in the Middle East Quarterly, what can you tell us about the findings?

read more: http://frontpagemag.com/2011/06/10/sharia-and-violence-in-american-mosques/

The Sharia Threat to America (video)

http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/06/02/the-sharia-threat-to-america-video/

by creeping

via Stakelbeck on Terror: The Sharia Threat to America

Obama’s “Secular” Public Engagement Aide Attended Islamic Society of N. America Conference

 

By admin

Searching online tonight I found another article which shows us that Muslim organizations are hellbent on convincing Christians, Jews, and governmental officials that Islam is a harmless religion/ideology. That is no threat at all to other religions or the U.S. Constitution.
(Click on picture 2x to enlarge)

This past February 23rd, the Islamic Society of North America’s (ISNA) Office of Interfaith and Community Alliances held an Interfaith/Government Forum and Banquet.

In attendance were our Sharia loving Congressman Keith Ellison, James Winkler, the General Secretary of the United Methodist General Board of Church and Society (GBCS), and D. Paul Monteiro, Associate Director, White House Office of Public Engagement.

Monteiro serves as the liaison to Arab Americans, faith-based and secular belief communities and also assists in coordinating the White House Mentorship Program. He worked for then-Senator Obama in his Senate office in 2006 before joining the Obama for America campaign in Chicago as the national Deputy Director of Religious Affairs.

Did Mr. Monteiro not know about the ISNA, or did he just not care? Because if he would have done his homework, he would have known the following:

If the ISNA was secular they would not have had past speakers such as Keith Ellison, CAIR’s Ibrahim Hooper, and Brooklyn NY’s hate-filled Imam Siraj Wahhaj.

Monteiro would have also seen the following article on the ISNA’s website, which is pro-Sharia Law.

The Fiqh of Minorities
Fiqh of Minorities
By Taha Jabir Alalwani,
Web Summery by Omar Tarazi
Fiqh- (i.e. Islamic Jurisprudence) is defined by Ibn-Khaldun as the classification of actions/obligations as: obligatory, encouraged, permissible, discouraged, forbidden, based on the Qur’an, the Sunnah, and the decisions of prior jurists.

The Koran and Sunnah call for the domination of non-Muslims. Are non-Muslims actually supposed to respect this? Unlike many in our government, I don’t and won’t!

SNIP

The next two paragraphs clearly show us how Muslims intend to work our system from the inside, in order to get our government to suit Islam.

(60:8) Allah does not forbid you from dealing kindly and justly with those who did not fight and drive you out of your homes for your religion, For Allah loves those who are just. (60:9) Allah does however forbid you from those who fought you for your religion and drove you out of your homes and supported others against you so that you will be forced to submit, and turn to them for friendship and protection, and whoever submits to them (in these circumstances) has wronged himself.

These two verses lay the legal foundation for the relations between the Muslims and Non-Muslims, and they speak for themselves. At all times justice is obligatory on the Muslim, and kindness is also until it is used as an excuse for committing treason against Allah. Other than that we should treat everyone both Muslim and non with justice, respect, and kindness so that we will get closer to Allah and attract people to Islam. Therefore, even if a government or institution is not perfect in its Islamic practices, but does not commit open and severe oppression against the Muslims, Muslims are allowed to work within the system to try to improve it. This concept is not a new one to Fiqh because all the scholars and teachers after the end of the enlightened Caliphate and the beginning of royalty continued to teach and worked within the imperfect system to serve the greater Muslim Ummah despite the problems within the government.

Just like Hitler didn’t hide his agenda, neither do Muslims. Are you listening?!


http://loganswarning.com/2011/05/20/obamas-secular-public-engagement-aide-attended-islamic-society-of-n-america-conference/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+Loganswarning+%28Loganswarning%29&utm_content=Yahoo%21+Mail

DOJ, DHS video instructs law enforcement to obey sharia

By David Stein

“The First Three to Five Seconds: Arab and Muslim Cultural Awareness for Law Enforcement” is an outrageous example of the U.S. government appeasing the very worst elements of Islam, even at the expense of our own laws and values. This training film not only instructs law enforcement officers to obey Sharia gender rules when conducting investigations, it’s also a flagrant piece of pro-Islamic propaganda that presents Muslim gender discrimination as proof of Islam’s “strong connection to God.”

“The First Three to Five Seconds” was initially developed by the Department of Justice, and it’s now used by both the DOJ and the Department of Homeland Security to train all of their law enforcement personnel. “The First Three to Five Seconds” is described on the DHS website as a film that “introduces law enforcement officers to basic principles of the Arab American and Muslim American cultures.” However, the DHS description hardly does this instructional film justice.

To begin with, there is the outright pro-Islam propaganda. Naturally, all religions see their tenets and customs in a positive light. But it’s not the job of the United States government, in a taxpayer-funded film, to produce religious propaganda which claims that one particular religion’s tenets and customs somehow make that faith “closer to God.”

“The First Three to Five Seconds” opens with the Muslim call to prayer. The narrator proclaims, “In order to keep a strong connection with God, Islam prescribes that believers pray five times a day.” The narration continues, instructing law enforcement officers:

“If you visit a mosque, be aware that there are separate entrances to the prayer sections for females and males as an extension of modesty. To keep their minds on the worship of God, men and women pray in separate sections.”

Muslims might believe that praying five times a day strengthens their connection to God, they might believe that it is immodest for men and women to enter a mosque together, and they might believe that segregating men and women keeps their minds on the worship of God…but that’s opinion, not fact.
Some would argue that Islamic gender segregation is due to an intense, virulent, and pervasive anti-female bias within the faith – something negative, not positive. Yet “The First Three to Five Seconds” uses taxpayer money to promote a positive view of Muslim gender segregation. If a law enforcement agency wishes to instruct its officers in how Muslims pray, fine. Lay out the facts; leave the value judgments out.
Interestingly, the line about Muslims’ “strong connection to God,” while clearly spoken in the film, is absent in the DHS transcript.

Where “The First Three to Five Seconds” hits absolute rock bottom is in its instructions to law enforcement officers, should they have to visit a Muslim home during the course of an investigation. Startlingly, the film tells officers not to enter a Muslim home if there is an adult female occupant who is not in the presence of a Muslim male! The film provides a dramatization in which a male officer knocks on the door of a home. An adult female in a hijab answers meekly, informing the policeman that her husband is not home, so she cannot speak to the officer or allow him inside. The narrator says, “This might seem suspicious,” but, he reassures the viewers, it is indeed “inappropriate” to enter a Muslim house in a situation like that. The officer is shown turning around and leaving.

The narrator states that no officer should enter a Muslim home if they are the opposite sex of the person who is home alone, meaning that a female officer should not enter a home, in the course of a police investigation, if the sole occupant is a Muslim male.

This is nothing more than the U.S. government advocating gender discrimination, pure and simple. Sharia may demand the segregation of the sexes, but U.S. law forbids preventing someone from doing their job solely on account of their gender.

This is the Justice Department violating U.S. law. Think about it; the DOJ and the DHS are telling law enforcement officers that they may NOT carry out an investigation if doing so requires them to be in a house alone with a Muslim of the opposite sex. This is not only an insult to law enforcement…it’s a grotesque negation of core American (and Western) values.

On a personal note, I worked on a project for the Department of Defense Equal Opportunity Management Institute (DEOMI) back in 1996 (the DEOMI, just like the DOJ and DHS, uses “The First Three to Five Seconds” as a training tool). I was working on a research project about white supremacist hate groups, which the DEOMI had initiated in response to the racially-motivated killing of a black couple by two white supremacist GIs from Fort Bragg in December ‘95. I can only imagine the response from DEOMI brass had I suggested that a good way to deal with white supremacists is to instruct black law enforcement officers to never enter a white man’s home (because, after all, that way we can show the white supremacists that we respect their beliefs, and therefore they’ll become better citizens)!

Obviously, had I ever made such an idiotic suggestion, I would have immediately been bounced out on my rear-end (quite justifiably). Yet now, look what we’re doing. We’re telling law enforcement officers to not do their jobs in the name of appeasing Muslim gender discrimination. 

Another disturbing thing about the instructions given in the film is that women are treated like children. It’s incredibly demeaning. When the Muslim woman meekly tells the officer to go away because her “man” isn’t there, and he complies, it’s no different than if a child had opened the door. Just as children need adult supervision, Muslim women, apparently, need “male supervision.” If their “man” isn’t home, law enforcement must abandon the investigation until the woman can be properly “overseen” (in fact, in most cases, police officers are allowed, in the course of an investigation, to speak to a child without an adult being present. So these DOJ and DHS instructions actually treat Muslim women worse than children).
It’s appalling.

It should be noted that “The First Three to Five Seconds” was produced during the Bush Administration. That’s an important point, lest anyone believe that the current desire to kowtow to Islam was born with the Obama presidency. It was not. There have been people in our government, working in various agencies, who have, for years, wanted to appease the worst and most un-American elements in the Muslim community. That mindset existed before Obama was elected president, and vigilance against it must remain, even should Obama be defeated.

Three brief endnotes: The production company hired by the DOJ to produce “The First Three to Five Seconds” was Art Palette Productions, which also produces videos for the SEIU.

In the closing credits, one of the organizations thanked for its assistance in the making of the film is the Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center, the Hamas-connected mosque at which current al-Qaeda commander Anwar al-Awlaki served as Imam.

The main consultant on the film was Professor Jack Shaheen, a tireless activist in the cause of suppressing honest discussion about Arab and Muslim terror. Shaheen is the man who shamelessly proclaimed, following the Fort Hood shooting rampage by Nidal Hasan, that Hasan’s “faith and ethnic background had absolutely nothing to do” with his crimes. I have written more about Prof. Shaheen here.

“The First Three to Five Seconds” can be viewed in full below. Or, to view it on the DHS website, click here. On the DHS site, the film is split into two parts. The first part slams the U.S. for “negative stereotypes” of Muslims in the media. It also covers issues involving the Sikh community. All of the material covered in this article is in part two.

After the viewing, the DHS will present you with a questionnaire, to find out if you have properly absorbed the message of the film. You’ll then be asked to submit the completed form to the DHS. As your tax money paid for the film, by all means, feel free to let them know what you thought of it (but be mindful that the Obama Administration is fond of collecting “enemy” emails).


http://www.countercontempt.com/archives/1904

New Study Finds Shariah Law Involved in Court Cases in 23 States

Washington, DC, May 17, 2011 - The Center for Security Policy today released an in-depth study-- Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases. The study evaluates 50 appellate court cases from 23 states that involve conflicts between Shariah (Islamic law) and American state law. The analysis finds that Shariah has been applied or formally recognized in state court decisions, in conflict with the Constitution and state public policy.

Some commentators have tried to minimize this problem, claiming, as an editorial in yesterday’s Los Angeles Times put it that, “…There is scant evidence that American judges are resolving cases on the basis of shariah.” To the contrary, our study identified 50 significant cases just from the small sample of appellate court published cases.

Others have asserted with certainty that state court judges will always reject any foreign law, including Shariah law, when it conflicts with the Constitution or state public policy. The Center’s analysis, however, found 15 trial court cases, and 12 appellate court cases, where Shariah was found to be applicable in these particular cases.

The facts are the facts: some judges are making decisions deferring to Shariah law even when those decisions conflict with constitutional protections.

On the releasing the study, the Center for Security Policy’s President, Frank J. Gaffney, Jr., observed:

"These cases are the stories of Muslim American families, mostly Muslim women and children, who were asking American courts to preserve their rights to equal protection and due process. These families came to America for freedom from the discriminatory and cruel laws of Shariah. When our courts then apply Shariah law in the lives of these families, and deny them equal protection, they are betraying the principles on which America was founded."

Key Findings:

At the trial court level, 22 decisions were found that refused to apply Shariah; 15 were found to have utilized or recognized Shariah; 9 were indeterminate; and in 4 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision at this level, but was applicable at the appellate level. At the appellate Court level: 23 decisions were found that refused to apply Shariah; 12 were found to have utilized or recognized Shariah; 8 were indeterminate; and in 7 cases Shariah was not applicable to the decision, but had been applicable at the trial court level. The 50 cases were classified into seven distinct “Categories” of dispute: 21 cases dealt with “Shariah Marriage Law”; 17 cases involved “Child Custody”; 5 dealt with “Shariah Contract Law”; 3 dealt with general “Shariah Doctrine”; 2 were concerned with “Shariah Property Law”; 1 dealt with “Due Process/Equal Protection” and 1 dealt with the combined “Shariah Marriage Law/Child Custody.” The 50 cases were based in 23 different states: 6 cases were found in New Jersey; 5 in California; 4 each in Florida, Massachusetts and Washington; 3 each in Maryland, Texas and Virginia; 2 each in Louisiana and Nebraska; and 1 each in Arizona, Arkansas, Delaware, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Maine, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, New Hampshire, Ohio and South Carolina.

Shariah Law and American State Courts: An Assessment of State Appellate Court Cases includes summaries of a sample of twenty cases, as well as the full published texts for all fifty cases.

Mr. Gaffney added:

“This study represents a timely contribution to the debate developing around the country: To what extent is the Islamic politico-military-legal doctrine of Shariah being insinuated into the United States? The analysis complements and powerfully reinforces the warnings contained in the Center’s bestselling 2010 “Team B II” Report, Shariah: The Threat to America. It confirms that Shariah’s adherents are making a concerted effort to bring their anti-constitutional code to this country.

“Together with follow-on analyses now in preparation, we hope to equip those who share the Center’s commitment to the Constitution of the United States, to the liberties it guarantees and to the democratic government it mandates to thwart those like the Muslim Brotherhood who would supplant freedom with Shariah law. Clearly, we must work to keep America Shariah-free, or risk inexorably losing the country we love.”

Judge decides Muslim cap is religious

 

MCDONOUGH, Ga., May 10 (UPI) -- A Georgia judge who kept a Muslim man out of a courtroom three times for insisting on wearing a cap as a religious sign of humility has changed his mind.

Henry County Judge James Chafin said in an order that he discovered by doing his own research that Troy "Tariq" Montgomery has valid reasons to wear the kufi, a tight-fitting cap similar to the Jewish yarmulke, The Atlanta Journal-Constitution reported Monday. Montgomery is trying to challenge a speeding ticket and has a new court date next week.

"The court finds through its own research that there is a basis in the Koran for both men and women to cover their heads as a religious observance," Chafin wrote.

"Accordingly, the court will permit the defendant to wear his hat in the courtroom as a valid religious observance."

Georgia adopted a policy in 2009 of allowing religious headgear to be worn in government buildings after a Muslim woman was arrested for refusing to remove her hijab or headscarf in a courtroom. Chafin had demanded Montgomery or his lawyer show proof the kufi is a religious item.

Montgomery, 46, said in a statement issued by his attorney he hopes no one else has to defend wearing Islamic attire in court.

"I also want to make it clear that I do not just wear a 'hat' as the judge referred to in his order, but a kufi, which is a religious head covering worn for the purpose of identifying my religious affiliation," he said.

Read more: http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2011/05/10/Judge-decides-Muslim-cap-is-religious/UPI-81011305062014/#ixzz1M48Xsb5T

Denmark: Non-Muslim convicted for comments on Islam…in his own home

Posted on May 5, 2011 by creeping

 

The International Free Press Society has the bad news for Lars Hedegaard and all freedom lovers, SHAME ON DENMARK! Lars Hedegaard found guilty of hate speech.

Lars Hedegaard was today found guilty of hate speech under Article 266b of the Danish penal code.  The background is a good 35 minutes long interview to the site snaphanen.dk which Hedegaard gave in December 2009.

Here Hedegaard said, among other things, that “girls in Muslim families are raped by their uncles, their cousins or their dad.”

Lars Hedegaard has previously expressed regret if his statements gave the impression that he would accuse all Muslims of abusing their children.

The day after the interview he stressed that his opinions were about Islam and not Muslims.

In January Hedegaard was acquitted of racist statements in the lower court of Frederiksberg. The court believed that his statements were insulting, but the case was dismissed because he did not know that the interview, which took place during a Christmas lunch, would be published.

read more: http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2011/05/05/denmark-non-muslim-convicted-for-comments-on-islam-in-his-own-home/