Judge OKs ‘flag of Islam on American soil’ Decision approves government funding for Shariah indoctrination

Posted: January 19, 2011

By Bob Unruh
© 2011 WND

Attorneys for a Marine Corps veteran of the Iraq War say they have filed a petition to the 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals after a federal district judge ruled it is OK for the U.S. government to fund commercial enterprises that promote the indoctrination of Islamic law, or Shariah, in the United States.

The decision came from Judge Lawrence Zatkoff, who changed his perspective on the issue and said just last week that he would dismiss a constitutional challenge brought by Kevin Murray against the U.S. government’s bailout of AIG, the insurance giant.

AIG used more than “$100 million in federal tax money to support Islamic religious indoctrination through the funding and promotion of Shariah-compliant financing. … SCF is financing that follows the dictates of Islamic law,” said the Thomas More Law Center, or TMLC.

TMLC is representing Murray in his challenge to the use of federal tax money to promote Islam in the U.S.

The non-profit legal advocacy group’s president, Richard Thompson, warned of the precedent.

“Judge Zatkoff’s ruling allows for oil-rich Muslim countries to plant the flag of Islam on American soil,” he said. “His ruling ignored the uncontested opinions of several Shariah experts and AIG’s own website, which trumpeted Shariah-compliant financing as promoting the law of the prophet Mohammed and as an ethical product and a new way of life.”

TMLC and co-counsel David Yerushalmi immediately filed a notice of appeal to the 6th Circuit.

“[Zatkoff’s] ruling ignored AIG’s use of a foreign Islamic advisory board to control investing in accordance with Islamic law,” Thompson continued. “This astonishing decision allows the federal government as well as AIG and other Wall Street bankers to explicitly promote Shariah law – the 1,200-year-old body of Islamic canon law based on the Quran, which demands the destruction of Western civilization and the United States.”

Thompson warned it is the same law “championed by Osama bin Laden and the Taliban; it is the same law that prompted the 9/11 Islamic terrorist attacks; and it is the same law that is responsible for the murder of thousands of Christians throughout the world. The law center will do everything it can to stop Shariah law from rearing its ugly head in America.”

The lawsuit, Murray v. Geithner et al., was brought because Murray, as a taxpayer, alleges he is being forced to contribute to the propagation of Islamic beliefs and practices predicated upon Islamic law, which he says is hostile to his Christian religion.

Among those who submitted statements in the case were two noted experts in Islamic law and terrorism, Stephen C. Coughlin and Robert Spencer.

Coughlin, a lawyer and decorated Army Reserve officer, is a leading Pentagon expert on the link between Islamic law and jihad. He explained that by engaging in Shariah-compliant financing, AIG and the federal government – which owns 79.9 percent of AIG – are engaging in the religious practice of Islam.

Islam teaches hostility and discrimination against Jews, Christians and anyone who doesn’t accept the Quran as the “word of Allah,” he said, explaining that the indoctrination stems from the same law that motivated the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks that killed nearly 3,000 Americans.

As WND reported, Spencer, director of Jihad Watch, a program of the David Horowitz Freedom Center, has studied Islamic theology and history for 30 years. He is author of “Stealth Jihad: How Radical Islam is Subverting America without Guns or Bombs,” “The Politically Incorrect Guide to Islam and the Crusades” and eight other books on Islam. He has led seminars on Islam and jihad for the U.S. Central Command, the U.S. Command and General Staff College, the Joint Terrorism Task Force and the U.S. intelligence community.

Spencer explained that by offering Shariah-compliant financing, AIG is promoting religious behavior that teaches hatred and discrimination against Jews, Christians and other non-Muslims.

TMLC said it is challenging the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008 that allows $70 billion in taxpayer money to fund and financially support the federal government’s majority ownership interest in AIG, which is considered the market leader in SCF.

The company uses its assets to subject certain financial activities to the dictates of Islam.

“In this case, the United States government has a majority interest in AIG. AIG utilizes consolidated financing whereby all funds flow through a single port to support all of its activities, including Shariah-compliant financing,” TMLC explained.

“Pursuant to the EESA, the government has injected AIG with tens of billions of dollars, without restricting or tracking how this considerable sum of money is spent. At least two of AIG’s subsidiary companies practice Shariah-compliant financing, one of which was unveiled after the influx of government cash. … Finally, after the government acquired a majority interest in AIG and contributed substantial funds to AIG for operational purposes, the government co-sponsored a forum entitled ‘Islamic Finance 101.’

“These facts, taken together, raise a question of whether the government’s involvement with AIG has created the effect of promoting religion and sufficiently raise plaintiff’s claim beyond the speculative level,” TMLC said.

During the discovery portion of the case, TMLC said it obtained “thousands” of documents supporting its claim.

“The circumstances of this case are historic, and the pressure upon the government to navigate this financial crisis is unfathomable. Times of crisis, however, do not justify departure from the Constitution,” the organization said.
posted 9 Jan 11 by WND.com

Will Shari’a-compliant APPLE remove its Jew-baiting application for iPhone?

Posted: September 18, 2011 | Author: barenakedislam

APPLE iPhone was quick to reject the ‘iSLAM MUHAMMAD’ app because it quoted disturbing passages from the Qur’an which Apple says would offend a large segment of the population – Muslims. But will it remove an app already being sold called ‘A JEW OR NOT A JEW?’

MSNBC  (H/T Susan K) A French anti-racism group has threatened to sue Apple over an iPhone application called “A Jew or Not a Jew?” that allows users to consult a database of celebrities and public figures to determine whether they are Jewish or not.

SOS Racisme said the application, sold for $1.07 on the Apple Store France, violates France’s strict

Islamic iPHONE

laws banning the compiling of people’s personal details without their consent. Under the French penal code, stocking personal details including race, sexuality, political leanings or religious affiliation is punishable by five-year prison sentences and fines of up to $411,870.

Such laws were enacted in the decades following the Holocaust, which saw some 76,000 Jews deported from Nazi-occupied France to concentration camps. Fewer than 3,000 returned alive.

In a statement, SOS Racisme called on Apple to remove the app the from its online store and be more vigilant about the applications it sells.

Apple France and its European headquarters did not immediately return several calls for comment.

A phone call from the creator of the iSLAM MUHAMMAD app to Apple asking them to explain why they rejected his application:

Posted on 18 Sep 11 by BNI

Pro-sharia group receives $25M annually, more than all anti-jihad groups it fears…combined

Posted on September 3, 2011 by creeping

And that’s just the known funding for one pro-sharia group trying to silence Americans. It doesn’t include the billions given by Saudi’s and others to Hamas-linked CAIR, Harvard, Georgetown, Yale, and others.

via Poisonous Prose: Part One (of Two) » Publications » Family Security Matters.

However, CAP alone receives $25 million per annum, so in just two years it is in receipt of far more money than all of the “Islamophobic” groups it collectively names and condemns have made in a decade. As a 501 (3)(c) organization, CAP’s existence seems to be entirely connected to attempting to swing elections in the Democrat Party’s favor, which would appear to be a contravention of IRS guidelines.

…

The CAP report co-authored and promoted by Wajahat Ali in the Guardian is entitled “FEAR Inc., The Roots of the Islamophobia Network in America.”

CAP’s Wajahat Ali on Al Jazeera

Courtesy of Media Matters – another well-funded leftist, anti-American group – via Saudi-influenced Fox, we learn that the Center for American “Progress” may actually rake in $38 Million annually. That’s almost as much as their Islamophic dream team reportedly garnered, $42M, in more than a decade. Where does CAP’s progressive funding come from? Daniel Greenfield reminds us:

The Center for American Progress’ campaign for donor transparency, however, stops at its own doors. While its own budget is many times that of the organizations that its report targets — the CAP’s policy is to keep the identities of its own donors secret.

Posted on 3 Sep by creeping sharia

Who’s kidding whom? Mayor ‘Dhimmi’ Bloomberg’s refusal to include clergy at the 9/11 Tenth Anniversary Ceremony is the same reason he wants to jam the Ground Zero Victory Mosque down our throats

Posted: August 25, 2011 | Author: barenakedislam

 

BNI has covered Mayor Dhimmi* Bloomberg’s Shari’a Finance business dealings in the Middle East several times (see links at end) but the depths to which he will sink to appease his Muslim benefactors apparently know no boundaries.

*DHIMMI from the word ‘dhimmitude’ comes from an Arabic word meaning “protected” and is the Islamic system of governing populations conquered by jihad wars, encompassing all of the demographic, ethnic, and religious aspects of the political system. Dhimmi was the name applied by the Arab-Muslim conquerors to indigenous non-Muslim populations who surrendered by a treaty (dhimma) to Muslim domination.

NY POST  At first glance it seems a bit more than odd that the mayor is denying religious leaders a role at the ceremony to mark the 10th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. But an aide argues that a speaking role for clergy would raise logistical problems: The ceremony — which already runs a long time — would grow even more drawn out. (NO, the only problem would be whether or not to include a Muslim cleric in the ceremony, which Bloomberg would no doubt endorse but would enrage a  majority of New Yorkers, not to mention most of America)

Bloomberg has always focused the event on the families of those who perished, with the reading of each name predominant. Even brief words from clergy, the aide says, could detract from that. Besides, he wondered, which religion — or religions — would get to be represented? Wouldn’t those denied a spot be offended?
And therein lies the real problem. (No, he is only worried about offending muslims)

Given the circumstances, the presence of clergy of one faith tradition — Islam — almost certainly would spark controversy, which the city would clearly like to avoid. (BINGO!)

It’s an undeniable fact that the 9/11 attacks were planned and carried out by Muslims in service of the many violent teachings of Islam. They were motivated, too, by hatred of those who embrace other religions, or none at all — as Americans are wont to do. So if the attacks weren’t secular events, wouldn’t an official secularization of the 10th anniversary ceremony be a moral victory for the perpetrators?

Just as first responders and the military figured prominently in America’s response, so did clergy. That’s undeniable. It makes scant sense for a 10th-year anniversary ceremony to obscure those facts by excluding them. (How the first responders are offensive to Muslims I haven’t quite wrapped my head around yet, but I’m sure there is a connection)

Some updated information on Mayor Dhimmi Bloomberg’s expanding Muslim/Middle East business ties:

Clarion Advisory – New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg is on record excoriating opponents of a new Islamic mosque scheduled to begin construction on September 11, 2011 in lower Manhattan.  The proposed mosque’s site is two blocks from the former World Trade Center’s Twin Towers destroyed ten years previously on September 11, 2001 by Islamic jihadists.

Bloomberg’s demands of religious tolerance from his city’s citizens is inconsistent in a city with 100 mosques already in operation but with a school system that will not acknowledge Christianity or Christmas, or even allow the repairs necessary for the Greek Orthodox Church, St. Nicholas, to go forward nearly a decade after it was crushed by falling debris from the Twin Towers themselves.

Paralleling Mayor Bloomberg’s veiled insults towards those acutely aware of the historical Islamic conquest of non-Muslim lands by their building of mosques on top of or dominating a conquered people’s holy sites, is the concurrent Bloomberg LLC’s expansion of its Dubai financial center into a regional hub for the UAE.

Founded in 1981 by Michael Bloomberg, who privately owns 85% of the limited liability corporation Bloomberg LLC is a dominant player in global financial software, data gathering and news, commanding one third of its market niche estimated at $16 billion dollars.

Bloomberg LLC sells its terminals from seven regional hubs: London, Sao Paolo, New York, San Francisco, Tokyo, Hong Kong and Sydney but the Dubai regional center will allow Bloomberg access to Islamic sharia based banking and monetary systems by developing a sharia compliant finance portal.

According to the regional head of Bloomberg LLC’s Middle East and South Asia centers, Max Linnington, “The region for us has seen explosive growth.  For example, last year in the UAE, we grew our core business by 61 per cent. And already this year, we exceeded what we achieved in all of last year in the UAE. So we are selling a lot of Bloomberg terminals, basically.”

Linnington went on to add, “Particularly since the meltdown of the western capitalist system, there has been an increasingly large focus on the virtues of Islamic finance. Today, there is no one single provider of information that caters to the Islamic finance market. So by Bloomberg being here, we are in the process of building out an Islamic finance product. We are very confident that we can build a product that meets the needs of the market right now.”

Bloomberg LLC has news bureaus throughout the Gulf Corporation Counsel (GCC) and is opening offices in Saudi Arabia and Qatar.  Its new Dubai regional hub will cover financial news, analysis and data gathering throughout the Middle East and extend Eastwards across Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Indian subcontinent and Nepal.

Sharia banking does not pay interest but donates a percentage to Islamic interests around the globe, mostly centering on Islamic expansionism through building mosques, madrassas, Western law suits (lawfare) or more violently through Islamic jihadist terrorism.

It should not come as a surprise that a co-founder of the Hamas organization, Mahmoud al-Zahar, came out and said the following about the controversial Cordoba mosque, whose imam, Feisal Abdul Rauf, refuses to identify Hamas as a terrorist organization, ”We have to build everywhere.  In every area we have, [as] Muslim[s], we have to pray, and this mosque is the only site of prayer.  We have to build the mosque, as you are allowed to build the church and Israelis are building their holy places.”

Considering that there are so few Muslims in Lower Manhattan and that they already have 100 mosques in New York City from which to choose, Al-Zahar’s reasoning is as specious as Mayor Bloomberg’s especially since the definition of what is considered “holy” needs to be examined.

For Americans in general and New Yorkers in particular, the site of the Twin towers and the memory of the nearly three thousand, who died in the worst domestic attack on US soil, is a holy site.  For Muslims worldwide that attack and destruction represents the triumph of Islam, which makes Ground Zero “holy” in their eyes but a definite historical and psychological assault on US citizens.

By siding with Islamic expansionism through mosque building, New York Mayor, Michael Bloomberg’s insulting tirade against the Cordoba mosque’s detractors, calls into question his ethics in catering financially to an avowed enemy of Western civilization and democratic principles.

Posted on 25 Aug 11 by BNI

Lessons on Jihad From the Movie, “What About Bob?”

Friday

I WAS THINKING of writing an article about the infuriating cleverness of orthodox Muslims, and I was wondering what I could use to illustrate what they’re doing. And then it came to me in a flash: The movie, What About Bob?

In the movie, Bill Murray plays a psychiatric patient who drives his psychiatrist crazy (Dr. Leo Marvin, played by Richard Dreyfus).

I just watched it again and the parallels to orthodox Islam’s dealings with the West are amazing. Bob uses the same techniques on Dr. Marvin that orthodox Muslims use against the United States and Europe, and with similar results: Bob successfully fools everyone except Dr. Marvin, and Dr. Marvin becomes infuriated and helpless, but unable to stop it.

Bob is able to cleverly insert himself into Dr. Marvin’s life without his consent, and able to turn Dr. Marvin’s friends and family against him.

As I watched, I kept stopping to write notes every time I saw a parallel. Here are my notes:

1. Bob’s stand is: I am suffering. Islam’s stand is: We are an oppressed people, we are under attack, we are the underdog, and we are suffering. Bob manages to make normal events in life cause him to suffer. Orthodox Muslims take anything their enemies do and turns it into “oppression.” And if their enemies do nothing offensive, they create opportunities to be affronted.

Read any mainstream Muslim publication, like the Muslim Public Affairs Committee newsletter, and you will see a strong theme running through almost every article: Muslims are oppressed and persecuted (and therefore must “defend” themselves).

I subscribe to several pro-Muslim e-mail newsletters, and this is an extremely common theme. Every little “hate-crime” they can come up with proves that Muslims are an oppressed minority. I recently read this: In the year 2007, the number of hate-crimes in the U.S. committed against someone because of their religion was 1400. Here’s how the hate-crimes break down by religion:

Anti-Jewish 969

Anti-Other Religion 130

Anti-Islamic 115

Anti-Multiple Religions 62
Anti-Catholic 61
Anti-Protestant 57
Anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc. 6

(Source: FBI Hate-Crime Statistics)

Over the course of a year, and with 300 million people in this country, that’s a pretty low incidence of hate-crimes against Muslims. But their perpetual position is that they are an oppressed minority. Here’s why.

2. Bob uses every technique he can find to keep pushing for what he wants. And he uses the one tool that gives him the most leverage with normal people: Pity. Evoke genuine pity, and you can pretty much gain any concession you want. Read more about this.

The stealth jihad uses this principle constantly. Jihadis try to portray themselves — just as their leader Mohammad did — as innocent victims of wrongdoing. Then, having aroused pity, they seek a concession of some kind.

They continue gaining concessions and giving none. Islam is a ratchet: It only goes one way.

3. Bob uses deceit masterfully. Bob hires a hooker to portray Dr. Marvin’s sister to get through on the phone (when Dr. Marvin is on vacation and is not taking calls). Bob impersonates a detective and lies to the operator to get information about where Dr. Marvin is vacationing.

Islam has a principle called taqiyya, which means “religious deception.” They can and do lie to non-Muslims and they have Allah’s permission to do so as long as it serves the cause of Islam.

In the movie, Obsession: Radical Islam’s War Against the West, there are several good examples, captured on film, of a Muslim leader speaking to Western media, saying one thing, and then it shows the same leader speaking to their fellow Muslims saying just the opposite. You see them speaking peace and tolerance to Westerners and two days later vigorously preaching jihad against the West to their fellow Muslims. This is taqiyya.

Probably the single most important reason orthodox Muslims have gotten away with so much is because they use deceit masterfully.

4. Bob pushes for concessions because he is special, unique, weird. And Bob captures everyone’s attention and doesn’t let them go about their normal lives.

Muslims do the same thing. In Norway, for example, Muslims were agitating for a law that would make it illegal to serve alcohol in discos on certain nights (because they are uncomfortable around alcohol). Hege Storhaug, the co-founder of Human Rights Service, rejects such a proposal. “All the time they have special rules,” says Storhaug, “and we reject special requirements. We get a split-up society and Islam gets more presence in the public sphere. People force religious opinions on others. In the most extreme consequence it leads to the Islamization of society…All the time it’s Muslims who come with special requirements. We never hear a peep from Catholics, Jews, Hindus, etc.”

One way to try to gain a concession is to simply ask. Another way (and far more effective) is to ask while providing a good reason why an exception should be made for you that would not be made for others. Bob had “special needs” because he was agoraphobic or afraid of sailing or deathly afraid of germs, and people went out of their way to accommodate him, conceding things to him they would never concede to a normal person.

Islam does the same thing. And they often succeed (read more about what kinds of concessions they have gained). They press for concessions because they are oppressed or because they are unique (they have particular needs because of their unique religion), or because they’ve been wronged or persecuted or whatever.

5. Bob seems really nice to everyone but his enemy. People usually recognize Bob is unusual, but they think he is innocent. But Dr. Marvin sees what he’s doing and how deliberately and insidiously he’s doing it.

By the skillful use of taqiyya, Muslims — even Muslims we know to be bloodthirsty killers — are considered “really nice people” by those who don’t know better. (Read a good example of that here.)

Islamic countries are often very friendly to Western countries while at the same time whipping up national hatred against those same Western countries on Islamic television stations, and funding global jihad against those same countries.

6. Bob uses public embarrassment to force concessions. When he arrives in the small town where the well-respected Dr. Marvin spends his summer vacation, Bob starts yelling at the top of his lungs in the middle of the street, “Dr. Marvin! Doctor Leo Marvin!” He keeps yelling until he has everyone’s attention and Dr. Marvin can’t simply ignore him and get away, which is what he was planning on doing.

Orthodox Muslims try to embarrass organizations into doing what they want. They will go to court even though they know they will lose, they will get the press involved. They’ll do whatever it takes to embarrass people or companies or governments into conceding. Radio stations have fired good people because the station didn’t want to deal with the public embarrassment of a lawsuit. Politicians restrain themselves and go out of their way not to say anything honest that might be offensive to the super-sensitive Muslim-advocacy organizations, because those organizations will do what they can to embarrass the politicians.

Orthodox Muslims have wormed their way into training programs for police and intelligence agencies and intimidated them into not saying anything that might lead to public embarrassment, demonstrating again and again that the Muslim organizations will use public embarrassment to silence critics of Islam.

7. Bob uses Dr. Marvin’s enemies against him. There is a husband and wife in town who are angry because the rich city doctor came and bought their dream home out from under them. Bob gets these people to help him, and they do it to help ruin Dr. Marvin’s life.

Orthodox Muslims are actively converting and recruiting disgruntled convicts in prison — people who are already enemies of the society. Iran sends soldiers into Iraq in order to kill U.S. soldiers, but Iran also supplies Russia and China with oil, so if the U.S. wants to do something about Iran, we will have our two biggest enemies to contend with. In essence, Iran uses our enemies against us.

Closer to home, those of us who are in the process of alerting our fellow citizens to the danger of Islam’s prime directive have enemies among our own fellow non-Muslim citizens. The blind multiculturalists in the media actively fight against us, trying to discredit anyone who criticizes Islam, and the orthodox Muslims use those enemies against us.

I get a newsletter from CAIR (Council on American-Islamic Relations) that brags in almost every issue about how they are bringing this suit against this person or sending press releases out about this or that grievance, and you can see from their wording that they are hitting every hot-button they can think of to gain sympathy from our fellow non-Muslim “enemies.”

8. Bob exploits all of Dr. Marvin’s weaknesses — his egotism, his desire to win his family’s love and approval, his failures and embarrassments, his family’s kindness and innocence, his family’s resentment against Dr. Marvin’s pomposity — Bob exploits it all to get what he wants.

Orthodox Muslims exploit Westerners’ weaknesses, too. One of our “weaknesses” is our reverence for life. Jihadis will hide behind civilians during a battle, knowing Western soldiers will not open fire.

Here’s another example of this principle, from DhimmiWatch:

“Palestinian jihad fighters have even used Christian sites and people as shields against the Israelis. In Spring 2002 they appropriated Bethlehem’s Manger Square as a base of operations, knowing that Israeli forces would not attack them there and would face international opprobrium if they did. This activity precipitated the siege of the Church of the Nativity in April and May of that year. After launching attacks against the Israelis from Manger Square, a group of jihadists fled into the church, where they remained for 39 days — secure in the knowledge that Israel would not attack a Christian holy site. Meanwhile, they desecrated the church.”

Orthodox Muslims are masters of exploiting their enemy’s weaknesses. They immigrate into free countries and then use the democratic process and rights of free speech to agitate against those freedoms and seek to subvert the democracy, as illustrated in the ironic picture here.

They also exploit the multicultural beliefs of the resident population in order to wage jihad by gaining concessions.

9. Bob is absolutely relentless. He doesn’t let up ever. Neither do orthodox Muslims. They keep infiltrating, they keep immigrating, they keep agitating, they keep killing, they keep intimidating, and they will never stop on their own. They’ve been doing it for 1400 years, and they are determined to keep it up until the whole world acknowledges there is no god but Allah and Mohammad is His Messenger.

10. Bob makes sure every response Dr. Marvin makes will backfire. He ensures that no matter what Dr. Marvin does to return to his normal life or solve his problem, it will not work. In the documentary, Target America, you can see each successive American president through the seventies, eighties, and nineties try many different ways of dealing with orthodox Muslims, and every attempt backfired.

The orthodox Muslims made sure they set up a situation where no matter what the U.S. did, it would go badly.

The same infuriating frustration Dr. Marvin feels is what I saw on the faces of all the presidents in Target America as they tried and failed to deal successfully with hijackings and captured hostages and bombings.

11. No matter what he does, Bob makes Dr. Marvin look like the mean one and Bob look like the innocent, underdog victim of Dr. Marvin’s apparently bad-tempered selfishness. Osama bin Laden’s plan was to run planes into the Twin Towers in the hopes that the U.S. would overreact, counting on the fact that the violent overreaction would cause Muslims around the world to unite against the West.

Many people think that’s exactly what happened. Muslims flew planes into the Twin Towers, killing thousands of office workers, and in the end, the U.S. looks like the mean one to a lot of people, and Muslims look like the underdog victims who only need potable water and a little compassion from big, bad America.

12. Bob causes Dr. Marvin’s wife and kids to sympathize with Bob and to resent and reject Dr. Marvin. They all try to look out for poor Bob. They push for Bob to get what he wants. This is analogous to orthodox Muslims causing multiculturalist Westerners to sympathize with Muslims and turn against their fellow countrymen who are trying to protect us all from further harm.

So we have one group of people in the U.S. who want to make sure we’re no longer vulnerable to attack by orthodox Muslims. And we have another segment of the U.S. who wants “stop the hate,” wants to “give peace a chance,” and wants to stop “racial profiling.”

In other words, orthodox Muslims have successfully turned some of our own people against each other. They have manipulated the situation so some non-Muslims are pushing for the orthodox Muslims to get what they want.

This is not just happening in America, it is happening in free countries all over the world.

13. Bob keeps provoking a hostile overreaction from Dr. Marvin and then appears to be the innocent victim of Dr. Marvin’s cruel insensitivity, and then he leverages that to gain concessions. If Dr. Marvin doesn’t respond, Bob escalates or persists in his provocation until Dr. Marvin can’t take it any more and bursts out in anger.

One memorable example from the movie is the dinner scene. Bob moaned with pleasure while he was eating. He kept moaning and saying, “This is so delicious!” And he kept it up until Dr. Marvin suddenly yells at him to shut up. All of Dr. Marvin’s family looks at him with anger and embarrassment. Bob looks like the innocent victim of Dr. Marvin’s irrational rage.

Here’s a good example from William Bennett’s Why We Fight: Moral Clarity and the War on Terrorism:

“From the beginning, the Palestinian strategy was, and still is, to provoke outrages to which Israel has had no choice but to respond with stringent countermeasures, thereby supplying endless footage of Palestinian casualties and eliciting fresh pressure by the West to accommodate ever-escalating Palestinian demands. Israel’s commitment to peace stimulated in the Palestinians not a spirit of reciprocal amicableness but an appetite for more…”

14. Bob knows full well what he’s doing, but successfully appears innocent to everyone but Dr. Marvin, who sees right through him but can’t get anyone else to see it. Those of us who have been trying to alert our fellow Westerners to Islam’s relentless encroachment are having a very difficult time.

Islam appears innocent to many people, and to them, we are suspect. We must be racists or bigots or Islamophobes. This assessment effectively shuts their ears to accurate information about something real enough to cause over seventeen thousand deadly attacks since 9/11.

15. Dr. Marvin clearly expects the problem (Bob) to go away, but he will never go. He keeps insinuating himself more and more thoroughly into Dr. Marvin’s life. Almost every non-Muslim I talk to about Islam’s relentless encroachment expects someone to take care of it and expects the problem to go away. But it isn’t going away. It’s getting worse. Islamic supremacists are insinuating themselves more and more thoroughly into Western societies.

16. Bob is skillful, but conceals it. Dr. Marvin comes up with a brilliant scheme to admit Bob into a mental institution, but the institution can only legally hold Bob for 24 hours before they let him go. They can keep him there only if the staff agrees Bob needs to be institutionalized. Dr. Marvin is sure everyone will see Bob is crazy, but they don’t. Within a few hours, they release Bob. Bob completely charmed the staff, telling jokes and cracking everyone up.

Like Bob, Islam is skillful, but conceals it. The more I learn about the clever infiltration of the Muslim Brotherhood into mainstream American life, the more impressed I am at the long-range planning and the skillful, sophisticated understanding of the American mind. (Read more about that here.)

One branch of the Muslim Brotherhood is CAIR, the Council on American-Islamic Relations. They have successfully fooled most people in America that they represent moderate, peace-loving Muslim Americans. Read about what they are really up to.

17. Bob is in it for the long haul. Eventually, Dr. Marvin loses his mind, goes off the deep end, and he becomes violent and irrational, mainly because nobody else sees what Bob is really doing except Dr. Marvin.

Orthodox Muslims find every crack in the wall they can find and work their way in. And they twist every event and utterance to their purpose. They will not stop, they will not tire, and they have nothing else to live for. This is it. This is the meaning of their existence: Islam must win. Islam must dominate all other cultures, all other religions, all other governments. Allah wills it.

They have infiltrated our schools by giving donations to colleges and then using their seat on the board to exert influence (creating a campus culture of Islam-loving, America-hating students). Orthodox Muslims offered the British government and banks on Wall Street money to help them through the 2008-2009 financial crisis, but with strings attached — the money is “Shari’a compliant” which means, among other things, that there is a built-in written agreement that a certain portion of the money goes to particular charities — charities that support jihad against the West.

Orthodox Muslims have created “legitimate,” mainstream organizations that lobby Washington and “represent the Muslim community” to governments and to the media, and yet have a secret agenda, revealed at the recent Holy Land Foundation Trial, of conquering America from within.

The list goes on and on. They are in it for the long haul, and they absolutely will not stop, ever. They won’t grow tired or give up. If they are going to be stopped, we must stop them. And we had better do it with more success than Dr. Marvin had with Bob.

To get rid of Bob, out of mad frustration, Dr. Marvin tries to blow him up, but Bob ends up “accidentally” blowing Dr. Marvin’s vacation home to smithereens, and then marries Dr. Marvin’s sister!

Bob won. Dr. Marvin lost. We’ve got to do better.

Would you like to entertain yourself while watching a demonstration of Jihadi techniques? Watch What About Bob?

And while you’re watching, see if you can come up with ideas we can use. What would you do if you were Dr. Marvin?

Come back here and leave your ideas in the comments. This is serious business and we need all the smart ideas we can get.

Posted in:  Citizen Warrior

 

Sharia Law and Polygamy in America

The column below (highlights added) by Andrew Bostom zeroes in on one aspect of the threat of sharia to the West: Islamic polygamy. An NPR article in 2008 cited sources estimating that as many as 100,000 Muslims live in polygamous families in the U.S.

Note that the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America has issued fatwas sanctioning polygamy, in keeping with sharia law. One ruling declares American law prohibiting polygamy “against Islamic law.”

---

http://www.andrewbostom.org/blog/2011/07/21/australia-sharia-sanctioned-polygamy-and-child-marriage/

Australia: Sharia-Sanctioned Polygamy and Child Marriage
Posted By Andrew Bostom On July 21, 2011

^[1]

Despite an overall apologetic tone borne of transparent obeisance to cultural relativism, two legal academics, Dr Ann Black and Dr Kerrie Sadiq from The University of Queensland TC Beirne School of Law are “suggesting ^[2]” in their research publication, “Good & Bad Sharia: Australia’s mixed response to Islamic Law” (due to be published in the University of New South Wales Law Journal on Monday July 25, 2011) that,

Australia is right to act with caution in dealing with Sharia law.

Why are even these obviously ^[2] devout votaries of the academic social religion of cultural relativism concerned about the practice of Sharia in Australia at all, or what they term, with revealing euphemism, “legal pluralism?”

One reason was extracted from the forthcoming paper of Drs. Black and Sadiq, and cited by The Australian’s legal affairs editor, Chris Merrit ^[3]:

Valid Muslim polygynist marriages, lawfully entered into overseas, are recognized, with second and third wives and their children able to claim welfare and other benefits.

Merrit’s background article on Black and Sadiq’s findings also noted ^[3] how this practice of Muslim polygamy in Australia involved “marriages where one party is under the lawful marriage age.” And Merrit provided this additional context ^[3]:

The findings come soon after Ikebal Patel, president of the Australian Federation of Islamic Councils, triggered a backlash inside the Islamic community when he called for Australia to compromise with Islam and embrace legal pluralism …The latest research has found that while polygamy is unlawful, mainstream law accommodates men who arrive in Australia with multiple wives and gives some legal standing to multiple partnerships that originate in Australia.

More alarming “context” not addressed by the report of Drs. Black and Sadiq, and in fact dismissed by Dr. Black ^[2] in these words, “The ‘foreignness’ of Sharia law is increased by media reports which highlight ‘differences’ and feed into fears about the Muslim presence in Australia,” was provided by The Australian Daily Telegraph ^[4]:

On Sunday, a recent convert to Islam in Sydney was allegedly lashed 40 times with electrical cable by men from his mosque, in a terrifying home invasion, as punishment for drinking alcohol – forbidden under Shariah law. Two people have been arrested in connection with the attack.

The staid report by two Australian cultural relativist academics should (but won’t) make our mainstream media talking heads curious about how mainstream Islamic opinion views polygamy in the United States. For example, what have the esteemed mainstream Islamic clerics of the Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America (AMJA) opined regarding polygamy? The AMJA ^[5] mission statement maintains:

[The AMJA was] founded to provide guidance for Muslims living in North America. … AMJA is a religious organization that does not exploit religion to achieve any political ends, but instead provides practical solutions within the guidelines of Islam and the nation’s laws to the various challenges experienced by Muslim communities.

A report in The Muslim Observer ^[6] published October 21, 2010, highlighting AMJA’s “seventh annual American conference of imams,” confirms that the organization is accepted ^[6] as such by the mainstream American Muslim community. AMJA and its recent “training” conference for American imams were described ^[6] in these banal terms:

The organization AMJA (Assembly of Muslim Jurists of America) has a list of scholars associated with it which stretches from Al-Azhar University to Virginia’s Open University, and back across the ocean to the professors at Saudi universities. Its website, amjaonline.com, provides fatawa on many issues and promises 24-hour access to scholars who can give legal opinions on the issues people face. AMJA focuses on providing fatwas to Americans, and believes it is able to provide culturally appropriate fatwas although many of their scholars are not American–because they have some American scholars and because of the technological ties that bind AMJA’s American scholars with those abroad. AMJA just had, in Houston, its seventh annual American conference of imams, and two local Michigan imams attended, namely Imam Musa of Bloomfield’s Muslim Unity Center, and Imam Ali of MCWS. Mr. Sadiqul Hassan of AMJA explained that “the event was the 7th annual imam workshop.” Mr. Hassan said that AMJA is “a fiqh council basically,” with “scholars who live abroad and inside the U.S.; we have experts in different fields to educate about life in the U.S. — fatwa are based on life in the U.S.”

Not only does AMJA extol polygamy in accordance with the Sharia, AMJA endorses its extra-legal (i.e., vis a vis US law) application here in America, as can be readily gleaned from these two “fatwas” or Islamic legal rulings:

Fatwa 2134[7] Dr. Main Khalid Al-Qudah Date 2006-10-27

>Polygamy in Islam is permissible for different reasons, like:
1- The sexual energy of men is more than that of women in general. So, in some cases, one wife is not enough to fulfill the conjugal desire of her husband
2- Pregnancy and delivery negatively affect the shape and physical attraction that women have.
3- Worldwide, the percentage of females is always more than that of males, eventually, there must be a solution, either to permit adultery and prostitution, or to allow polygamy
4- One husband could take care of more than one wife at the same time; socially, financially, and even sexually as I mentioned above. However, the opposite is not right because of the physical and psychological capability that Allah the all mighty gave men.

Fatwa 3370[8] Scholar Dr. Hatem al-Haj Date 2007-08-08

Comment from Muslim questioner: We know that polygamy is against USA law. But I heard from my friend that as long as you don`t register your marriage to the registrar, it is okay to have more than one wife here in the states, i.e., all the wives are living here. The argument that he made was that the law that prohibits marrying more than one is against the shaariah so, it is okay for us to break it…There are some scholars in the USA are practicing polygamy without the knowledge of the authorities using that argument….

Dr. Hatem al-Haj’s response: Polygamy is halal in Islam and may be highly recommended when the number of females is bigger than that of males to afford all females a decent life that suffices their physiologic, emotional and other needs. The US law about polygamy is against the Islamic law, for no one can make prohibited that which Allah specifically made allowable.

The news items, blogs, educational materials and other information in our emails and on our website are only intended to provide information, news and commentary on events and issues related to the threat of radical Islam. Much of this information is based upon media sources, such as the AP wire services, newspapers, magazines, books, online news blog and news services, and radio and television, which we deem to be reliable. However, we have undertaken no independent investigation to verify the accuracy of the information reported by these media sources. We therefore disclaim all liability for false or inaccurate information from these media sources. We also disclaim all liability for the third-party information that may be accessed through the material referenced in our emails or posted on our website.

Hijabi’s legal jihad nets $20K from Abercrombie & Fitch

Posted on July 22, 2011 by creeping

via Jury awards $20,000 in Muslim woman’s employment lawsuit

A federal jury awarded $20,000 in compensatory damages Wednesday to a Tulsa woman who was not hired to work at a local Abercrombie Kids store because she wears a headscarf, but jurors opted not to award her any punitive damages.

$20K takes the distress away…

U.S. District Judge Gregory Frizzell turned down the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission’s request for an injunction against the company.

Still, Samantha Elauf, 20, said she was “very excited” by the outcome and that she is glad she made her situation public.

The EEOC sued Abercrombie & Fitch on Elauf’s behalf in September 2009, alleging that the company practiced religious discrimination when it chose not to hire her to work at an Abercrombie Kids store at Woodland Hills Mall in June 2008.

She had worn a hijab – or religiously mandated headscarf – to her job interview.

Frizzell ruled last month that the company failed to establish that granting Elauf an exception to its “Look Policy” would have caused it undue hardship.

Because the judge had already found Abercrombie liable, the only issue before the jury was what – if any – damages should be awarded.

EEOC regional attorney Barbara Seely told the jury during her closing argument that Elauf – who was born in the United States – had never been discriminated against before, hasn’t gotten over how she was treated, and will always remember it.

Elauf had testified Tuesday that she felt insulted and disrespected after she discovered that she was not hired because of the scarf.

Seely told the jury that the company wanted its sales associates – or models, as Abercrombie calls them – to look like “cookie-cutter kids.”

Abercrombie attorney Mark Knueve said during his closing argument that diversity is very important to the company and that the organization doesn’t discriminate.

He did say, though, that the company considers its Look Policy a central part of its success, comparing it to Coca-Cola’s secret formula.

Part of the policy prohibits head wear, although the jury heard about several exceptions that had been made during the past few years.

Knueve told the jurors that Elauf should not receive damages, noting that she gained other employment within a few days of not being hired to work at Abercrombie Kids.

While the jury was engaged in what turned out to be more than four hours of deliberations, Frizzell heard testimony and arguments about whether he should issue an injunction against Abercrombie.

Such an injunction would have required the company to notify applicants who wear headscarves to interviews that they may request to be allowed to wear one as a religious accommodation and to provide training to its retail store managers that such notifications must be made.

The injunction also would have required the company to train managers about the company’s obligation to provide religious accommodation to applicants and employees and how to recognize when an applicant might need such an accommodation.

Frizzell noted that Abercrombie has changed its interview procedure so that applicants are now told that the company does not permit its models to sport headwear on the job and are asked if they have any questions about that policy.

Elauf testified Tuesday that she did not ask during her interview for any sort of accommodation that would have allowed her to wear a scarf while on the job, saying she didn’t know it was necessary to bring up the topic.

The EEOC, not Elauf, is the plaintiff in the case, but Seely told the court at a pretrial hearing that any damages would go to Elauf and not to the agency. Frizzell told the jury Wednesday that Elauf has no legal fees to pay connected to the case.

Compensatory damages were sought for the emotional distress Elauf endured because of the discrimination, Seely told the jury.

Knueve did not give a definitive answer when asked whether Abercrombie intends to appeal.

Barring a successful appeal by the company, Elauf plans to save the $20,000 and apply it toward the costs of opening her own clothing store someday, she said.

When asked how it will compare to Abercrombie, a smiling Elauf said, “It’ll be better.”

Seely said Wednesday’s jury verdict was “icing on the cake” for the EEOC after previously winning on the liability issue.

“Samantha Elauf deserves every penny,” Seely said. “She is a courageous young woman who stuck with this case for three years in order to stand up for her rights and the rights of every Muslim woman to work wearing a headscarf.”

Obligatory and useless comment from terrorist-linked CAIR not printed here.

Posted on 22 Jul 11 by Creeping Shari’a

10 Failures of the US Government on the Domestic Islamist Threat

Center for Security Policy | Nov 12, 2010
By Patrick Poole

Albert Einstein once defined insanity as “doing the same thing over and over again expecting different results.” At the heart of the Team B II project is the belief that the Team A approach of our government to the Islamist threat, i.e. the received wisdom of the political, law enforcement, military and intelligence establishment, has proved to be a serial failure. In fact, we would be hard-pressed to find many instances in which the government Team A actually got it right. Rather than attempt to get it right, the establishment seems content to double-down on failure.

What follows are the most egregious and glaring failures of our national security agencies’ approach. This whitepaper compiles a representative sample of ten cases, but easily a hundred or more cases could be presented. These examples range chronologically from incidents that occurred in the late 1980s and early 1990s, to events that have happened within the past few weeks prior to the publication of this paper. From the first Bush 41 Administration to the current Obama Administration, the degree of failure is non-partisan. These cases also cover the gamut of federal agencies and departments, along with a few examples on the state and local level, showing that no segment of our government holds a monopoly on failure on this issue. The problem is universal.

Each of these cases is rooted in a fundamental failure by those government officials responsible to identify the nature of the threat. At their root these examples demonstrate what Team B II author and former federal prosecutor Andrew McCarthy has called “willful blindness.” For government officials who have sworn an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, however, their “willful blindness” is a breach of their professional duty to know, to understand and to respond.

It should also be noted that each of these cases has been brought to the public and elected officials’ attention before. In most cases, no action was taken despite public outcry. We hope that the winners of last week’s election will finally take responsibility for the nation’s security and take action against this threat of Shariah and Islamic terrorism.

Sources are provided so anyone– media, public, and policymaker– can understand the extent of the problem and investigate how our political, civic and religious leadership have allowed this threat to advance so far.

Posted on 10 Nov 10 by Center for Security Policy

Where the government (both federal and local) has failed here in America is by allowing Islam to advance throughout our borders, and allowing shari’a law to advance, like the Muslim Brotherhood has pledged in 1991 for America’s takeover. We have Dearborn, MI. as a highly shari’a compliant type American city, we have government officials that cater to the Muslim Brotherhood and it’s fronts, we have city officials that are Muslims and try to advocate shari’a in their cities (i.e L.A. County Sheriff Baca) or Muslim sympathizers (i.e. the city commissioners in Fort Collins, CO). Islam is taking over America because of the willful blinded eye that many people and government officials have. Islamic Muslim are working on building their Islamic Centers and their mega Mosques…Mosques, historically have been built by Islamic Muslims to proclaim “victory” over the “infidels” or “children of the Book or scriptures” in that area…and as a reminder to the defeated “infidels” that they are not worthy to even live, but the followers of the religion of peace have showed them mercy, so they must show respect…they show respect by being second class citizens and doing slave type work, if they weren’t actually slaves, and also by paying jizya tax, or protection tax.

We need to all protest…not violently, not by burning Qur’ans, not by vandalizing Mosques, but by prayer and fasting, and on a consistent basis, bombard your local governmental officials concerning the advancement of shari’a law and its threat and the the fact the the unindicted co-conspirators of the Holy Land Foundation of funding terrorist organizations trial (and found guilty) and the radical Islamic organization that is working on taking over America, (the Muslim Brotherhood) that they need to be stopped, and state officials need to press anti-shari’a law amendments into the state’s constitutions like Tennessee did.

retired Don

[UPDATED!] LITIGATION JIHAD: Hire a Muslim woman ONLY if you enjoy getting sued

Posted: July 13, 2011 | Author: barenakedislam | Filed under: Islam in America | 13 Comments »

MUSLIM woman sues Duane Reade after she was fired when she showed up for work one day wearing a headbag. Of course, these Muslim bitches never come in for an interview wearing a headbag, only after they are employed for a while. Then they sue you if you don’t like it.

(These kinds of stories are nearing epidemic proportions, and the instigator behind all these fraudulent lawsuits is Terrorist Front Group CAIR)

NY POST – A former Duane Reade employee on Long Island says she was fired when she started wearing a hijab, a traditional Muslim head covering, a lawsuit charges.

Hira Iqbal, 21, claims that boss Errol Smith told her store policy “does not allow people like that” to wear such clothes at work, claims the federal First Amendment lawsuit, filed in Central Islip. A spokesperson for Duane Reade said Iqbal quit and was not fired.

UPDATE: As if you didn’t have enough reasons not to hire muslims, here are 13 more.

Planks Constant (H/T Gerald)

1. Muslim Dunkin Donuts – No Pork on my Fork we read about a Palestinian Arab who sued Dunkin’ Donuts for discrimination against him based on his race by making the sale of breakfast sandwiches with bacon, ham or sausage a mandatory part of his franchise agreement. This is why Muslims cannot assimilate. They seek work for which they are not at all suited, rather they demand that the enterprise suit them.

2. Illegal immigrant Muslim FBI/CIA agent accused of passing info to Hizballah worked in Iraq questioning Al-Qaeda detainees.  It just keeps getting worse: the Keystone Kops idiocy of the FBI and CIA in hiring this woman and employing her in sensitive work is a manifestation of both agencies’ abysmal failure to address the ideological dimension of this conflict. They hardly know what a jihad is, much less know how to question a potential employee to determine her allegiance to the jihad and Islamic supremacism. On Tuesday, she pleaded guilty to conspiracy to illegally search FBI computers for classified information about Hezbollah and to naturalization fraud.

3. You’re standing at the checkout counter at Target; you unload you groceries, milk, bread, bacon, some fruit. The cashier, wearing a Hijab stops at the bacon and calls for help. You wait a few minutes for another worker to come by and help ring up the bacon and put it into a shopping bag. You ask if the cashier is Muslim – she says yes. If this were the Twilight Zone you would understand that you are in a world where up is down and left is right. Why would a Muslim work in a place where she is forbidden to handle pork, alcohol, or other filthy infidel products? Welcome to a Target store in Minnesota.

4. Your flight just landed and you exit the airport heading for a taxi. You are carrying a few bags of gifts from the duty free shop. The cabbie, a Muslim, refuses to take you because he suspects you may be carrying alcohol. The rest of the cabbies are Somali Muslims. What do you do? If you want to get home you’ll have to ditch the booze. That’s what happens to an airport that allows Muslims to be taxi drivers.

5. In Australia, where 2,000 of the 10,000 cabbies are Muslim, comes the story of Muslim taxi drivers refusing to carry blind passengers with their guide dogs because they consider dogs haaram despite the legal requirement for taxi drivers, shops, restaurants, hotels and supermarkets to accept guide dogs.

6. Are Minneapolis Taxi Fares Going To Support Al-Qaeda? In many cases American hospitality has been repaid with a refusal by the Somalis to integrate into the larger society that hosts them, bringing lawsuits and allying themselves with radical Islamist organizations. In fact many Somali Americans seem be intent on reproducing nothing more than “little Mogadishus” wherever they have been resettled. The track record of America’s Somali refugees so far suggests that these people are largely unappreciative of the stunning commitment which has been made to them by the people of the United States.

7. A female Muslim sued a Hair Salon operator for hurt feelings because she wasn’t hired as a hair stylist and was awarded £4,000 in compensation. Why she wasn’t hired? She wouldn’t remove her headscarf and show her hair while working [Radarsite: Muslim job applicant: Hire me or else —]. I suppose Muslim women can now apply for jobs as pilates instructors and refuse to work in anything but a full Hijab and anyone who refuses to hire her will be sued.

8. Electrolux settled a complaint with (who else) the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission over an allegation that it failed to allow prayer times for its Muslim employees. The Somali Community Center in Minneapolis had filed the complaint on behalf of 165 workers at Electrolux Home Products in St. Cloud , Minn. Under the settlement, Electrolux agreed to allow the workers time for sunset prayer, provide a Somali translator on occasions when policies or procedures are discussed, give managers and supervisors diversity training, and donate money to a local Islamic center.

9. Two women in Dearborn, Mich., have filed suit after they say a local McDonald’s manager refused them jobs because they wear traditional Islamic dress. “He simply (told me) I had to make a choice and remove my hijab, or I would not be able to establish employment there,” Quiana Pugh said. [DRUDGE Retort] Now why would a Muslim woman want a job when she knows she will be asked to handle a bacon, egg and cheese on occasion? Oh  yeah, L-A-W-S-U-I-T!

10. A Muslim said he is suing Tesco for religious discrimination because he was asked to handle crates of alcohol in a warehouse. Mohammed Ahmed, 32, was employed at the supermarket giant’s Lichfield depot in September last year for a job that included transporting various goods on fork-lift trucks [ifeminists.com].

11. ALCOHOL PRIZE OFFER AMOUNTS TO RELIGIOUS DISCRIMINATION? – Imran Khan, 25, claimed that the bottles of wine on offer put him at a disadvantage because, as a Muslim, he could not drink alcohol and was therefore unable to claim the prizes. British-born Mr Khan, who works for Direct Line Insurance, is seeking damages for “hurt feelings” under the Employment Equality (Religion or Belief) Regulations 2003. Mr Khan’s team leader, Louise Cummings, said she introduced the incentives as a means of “improving staff morale and performance”. “If I had realized that I had hurt anyone’s feelings, then I would have taken steps to rectify that immediately,” she added. Tariq Sadiq, for the company, said that another Muslim worker, who had won an alcoholic prize in a similar scheme, had “simply” exchanged it for an alternative.

12. Muslim sues Met after being told to fry bacon – A Muslim chef is suing the Met police after being asked to cook pork sausages and bacon for breakfast. Hasanali Khoja is accusing the force of religious discrimination after it refused to guarantee that he would not have to handle pork.

13. From the comment section of Jihad Watch, “I have a friend who works in the government run public trustees office…they have had an influx of Muslim employees over the past 5 years…2 years ago there was a notice circulated that employees were no longer allowed to have decorations on their desks or in the workplace such as Christmas or Easter items as this was inflammatory to those employees that were not Christian and did not celebrate those holidays. They were allowed to have “happy holidays” decorations that did not depict any religious or Christmas content. The Muslim employees were provided an area of the office (which was in view of the employees) to pray several times a day along with a person who led prayers out loud…Muslims did not have to be subjected to Christmas decorations once a year but the employees had to be subjected to muslim prayer daily during the work day. CAIR wants a workplace free of religious discrimination…so much for that.”

RELATED STORIES/VIDEOS:

american-businesses-hire-a-muslim-and-youre-likely-to-get-sued

it-serves-abercrombie-fitch-right-for-hiring-muslims-they-have-been-sued-by-them-at-least-twice-before

more-legal-jihad-muslim-teen-fired-from-popular-apparel-chain-for-wearing-a-bag-on-her-head

muslim-woman-in-hijab-walks-into-abercrombie-fitch-and-applies-for-a-job

america-gives-back-backlash-against-muslims-who-are-trying-to-make-the-workplace-sharia-compliant

u-s-muslims-complain-that-muslim-women-who-wear-bags-on-their-heads-are-being-discriminated-against-in-the-workplace

legal-jihad-not-hiring-muslim-bagheads-isnt-discrimination-its-called-a-dress-code

legal-jihad-gone-bad-nudie-pix-come-back-to-bite-muslim-woman-in-the-ass

legal-jihad-another-good-reason-for-never-ever-hiring-muslim-employees

how-many-more-reasons-do-people-need-for-not-hiring-muslims

cair-demands-air-france-apologize-for-sending-home-a-muslim-employee-who-refused-to-take-the-bag-off-her-head

muslims-demand-special-religious-accommodations-from-electrolux-for-ramadan

legal-jihad-muslim-airline-worker-sues-firm-because-other-employees-called-him-names

legal-jihad-not-hiring-muslim-bagheads-isnt-discrimination-its-called-a-dress-code

legal-jihad-muslim-woman-sues-nj-hospital-for-not-catering-to-her-religious-demands

listen-up-muslims-we-are-not-afraid-of-you

more-legal-jihad-from-terrorist-front-group-cair

u-s-muslims-complain-that-muslim-women-who-wear-bags-on-their-heads-are-being-discriminated-against-in-the-workplace

legal-jihad-muslim-woman-makes-a-federal-case-out-of-headscarf-ban-in-the-courts

sudden-jihad-syndrome-cover-up

somali-muslim-woman-we-will-fight-them-and-eat-their-flesh

all-americans-must-die-love-somali-muslims-tysons-plant-tennessee

tennessee-hitler-loving-jew-hating-somali-muslim-cab-driver-tries-to-kill-passengers

minnesotastan-santa-banned-from-head-start-classes-for-being-offensive-to-muslims

swift-meat-packing-plant-executives-cave-in-to-muslim-demands-for-ramadan-this-year

somali-muslims-importing-third-world-culture-at-u-s-taxpayer-expense

somali-muslim-immigrants-turning-american-small-towns-into-islamic-welfare-enclaves

terrorist-front-group-cair-demands-investigation-of-trouble-with-somali-muslim-immigrants-in-minnesota-schools

warning-get-into-a-taxi-with-a-somali-muslim-driver-at-your-own-risk

muslims-behaving-badly-in-america

minnesotastan-from-those-wonderful-folks-who-gave-us-the-flying-imams-and-the-first-terrorist-sympathizing-muslim-member-of-the-house-of-representatives

another-good-reason-not-to-employ-muslims

separation-of-mosque-and-state-not-in-minnesotastan

somali-muslims-get-out-of-my-country