Oklahoma: Counterterrorism Caucus Says CAIR Attacking Free Speech

Yes, that’s what sharia does. via Counterterrorism Caucus Issues Second Response to CAIR. h/t halalporkshop

State Rep. John Bennett, chair of the Counterterrorism Caucus of the Oklahoma Legislature, issued a second response to the criticism leveled by the Oklahoma chapter of Council on American-Islamic Relations to the seminar being sponsored by the caucus on Friday, Nov. 1 on the floor of the Oklahoma House of Representatives.

By bringing pressure on CLEET, CAIR sought to preempt the daylong seminar entitled, “Iran, Hezbollah, and the Drug Cartels: Counterterrorism Considerations,” presented by experts at the CLEET-accredited Center for Security Policy. CLEET is not a sponsor of this Counterterrorism Caucus and the seminar sponsored by the Counterterrorism Caucus is not a CLEET-sponsored seminar. Furthermore, CLEET had no role in selecting the speakers. Due to an oversight, the Counterterrorism Caucus sent out a Media Advisory that did not contain a Disclaimer but CLEET does not endorse the content of this seminar and any comments about the counterterrorism seminar should be directed to the Center for Security Policy, not to CLEET.

“This is an attack on free speech and an attempt to deny vital information to our law enforcement officers who are trying to protect the citizens of Oklahoma.” said Bennett, R-Sallisaw and Chairman of the Counterterrorism Caucus. “Why would CAIR would want to attempt to prevent factual information about Iranian terrorists or the Mexican drug cartels from coming out? Does CAIR really want to stand up for Iranian terrorists or the drug cartels?”

In the interest of the safety of Oklahomans, the caucus feels it is crucial to go ahead with the seminar, Bennett said. With nearly a century of combined experience as practitioners of US national security policy—including a former CIA case officer, an Assistant Secretary of Defense, and an Undersecretary of Defense for Intelligence and Delta Force commander—the credentials and expertise of Clare Lopez, Frank Gaffney and Jerry Boykin, respectively, are appropriate as trainers for the topics to be discussed.

Appeals Court Rules Abercrombie & Fitch Hijab Ban Not Discriminatory

via Judicial Watch – Corruption Chronicles: Appeals Court Overrules: Hijab Ban Not Discriminatory

In a painful defeat for the Obama administration, a federal appellate court has overturned a judge’s ruling that a clothing retailer discriminated against a Muslim woman for denying her a job because she wore a religious headscarf known as a hijab.

The lawsuit was filed by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws. Under Obama the agency has brought a number of similar lawsuits on behalf of Muslims around the country alleging violations of religious and civil rights. In this case the agency accuses a retail giant, Abercrombie & Fitch, of illegally discriminating against a Muslim woman by ruling her out for employment over her religious headscarf.

The woman, Samantha Elauf, applied for a job at an Abercrombie & Fitch store in a Tulsa, Oklahoma mall in 2008. The company, which focuses on hip casual wear for consumers aged 18 to 22, has a policy against head covers of any kind for its employees. According to the EEOC it amounts to discrimination based on religion and that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Employers are required to accommodate the sincere religious beliefs or practices of employees, the agency says, unless doing so would impose an undue hardship on business.

A federal judge in Oklahoma agreed, ruling in 2011 that the law imposes an obligation on the employer to accommodate the religious practices of an employee or prospective employee unless it would result in undue hardship on the conduct of its business. In his order the U.S. Chief District judge, Gregory Frizzell, said the store violated Elauf’s civil rights when it didn’t hire her. Elauf was awarded $20,000 in damages and the EEOC bragged that the court sent a clear message to employers.

But the retailer appealed and this week the Denver-based Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals reversed the ruling in favor of the EEOC, saying the store’s policy is not discriminatory, but rather intended to promote and showcase its brand, which “exemplifies a classic East Coast collegiate style of clothing.” Abercrombie & Fitch contends that prohibiting head covers is critical to the health and vitality of its “preppy” and “casual” brand, according to the ruling.

Additionally, the federal appellate court found that Elauf’s religious headscarf only became an issue after she was ruled out as a candidate. “Ms. Elauf never informed Abercrombie prior to its hiring decision that she wore her headscarf or `hijab’ for religious reasons and that she needed an accommodation for that practice, due to a conflict between the practice and Abercrombie’s clothing policy,” the decision states.

The Obama administration has for years targeted this particular retailer over the hijab issue, filing lawsuits in different parts of the country. In fact, last month an Obama-appointed federal judge ruled that one of Abercrombie’s northern California stores violated a Muslim woman’s (Umme-Hani Khan) civil rights when it enforced the company’s not head cover policy. Judge Yvonne Gonzalez Rogers of the U.S. District Court, Northern District of California ruled that the retailer is liable for failing to accommodate the Muslim woman’s religious beliefs and may owe punitive damages.

“Reasonable jurors could determine that by offering Khan one option—to remove her hijab despite her religious beliefs—Abercrombie acted with malice, reckless indifference or in the face of a perceived risk that its actions violated federal law,” the judge writes in her 27-page opinion. Khan was represented by a renowned Islamic terrorist front group, Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), that’s tight with the Obama administration.

Daniel Greenfield tells us what the MSM won’t and asks a quite relevant question, Federal Appeals Court Strikes Down Obama Inc’s Claim that Hijab Ban is Discriminatory:

The EEOC’s witness on behalf of the Hijab was apparently John Esposito, the director of Georgetown University’s Prince Alwaleed bin Talal Center.

Esposito is funded by Saudi money and Saudi Arabia has been aggressively pushing the Hijab Jihad against women abroad. He is notorious for his Islamist ties and support for terrorists.

Saudi Arabia has been absolutely ruthless about enforcing its Jihad against women. At the cost of women’s lives.

The Saudi enforcement of the Hijab or other headcoverings are routine. Now Obama’s EEOC used a Saudi agent to enforce them in America. Is this really what equality means?

Counterterrorism Caucus Announces Oklahoma Chapter of CAIR Ties to Terror-Supporting Imam

Now what will they do about it? via Oklahoma House of Representatives – News Story. h/t @zTruth (follow her on twitter)

OKLAHOMA CITY – The Counterterrorism Caucus of the state Legislature announced today evidence collected against the Oklahoma chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations and its ties with an Imam who has supported terrorists in the past.

At its recent annual banquet, Imam Johari Abdul-Malik, Outreach Director of the Dar Al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church, Va., delivered the keynote address at CAIR’s banquet. The Dar Al-Hijrah Islamic Center was identified in the 9-11 Commission Report as the mosque frequented by several of the 9-11 hijackers.

James Lafferty, chairman of the Virginia Anti-Sharia Task Force, had this to say about Abdul-Malik: “In his public statements, Abdul-Malik demonstrates regularly his contempt for the rule of law and his support for terrorist acts against America … and praises those who have attacked our country and attempted to kill the President of the United States. No American should honor this man or his disgraceful words and behavior.”

A letter from VAST included links to newspaper articles which cited several incidents from Abdul-Malik’s past:

- He defended Ahmed Omar Abu Ali, a Dar Al Hijrah, member who is serving a life sentence in a federal prison for nine counts of terrorism including a plot to assassinate President George W. Bush, kill members of Congress and bomb restaurants, nightclubs and other public places across America.

- He also defended Ali Al Timimi, a Muslim cleric of Fairfax, Va., who was convicted in April, 2005, and is serving a life sentence in a federal prison for counseling others to wage war against the United States and use firearms and explosives in furtherance of violent crimes.

- He was often cited as the spokesman for the Dar Al Hijrah mosque and he used his position there to defend numerous convicted terrorists and question the judicial system in the United States.

Past newspaper reports show Abdul-Malik’s extreme positions.

“Our whole community is under siege,” Abdul-Malik told the New York Times on Feb. 27, 2005. “They don’t see this as a case of criminality. They see it as a civil rights case, as a frontal attack on their community. The feeling I get here on a daily basis must be what it was like to be a member of Martin Luther King Jr.’s church following the case of Rosa Parks. People always ask: ‘What is the latest from the courthouse?’”

And on April 27, 2005, he told the New York Times Muslims aren’t free to speak their minds in the United States.

“There is a view many Muslims have when they come to America that you could not be arrested for something you say,” Abdul-Malik said. “But now they have discovered they are not free to speak their minds. And if our opinions are out of vogue in the current climate, we feel we are all at risk.”

State Rep. John Bennett, Counterterrorist Caucus chairman, said CAIR and other groups like it have been identified as front organizations for terrorist groups.

“In the case of U.S. vs. The Holy Land Foundation, the largest terrorist-financing trial in the history of the U.S., CAIR was identified as a Muslim Brotherhood front organization and an unindicted co-conspirator,” said Rep. Bennett-R, Sallisaw. “In fact, CAIR and several others petitioned the federal court to have their names removed from the co-conspirator list.

“But U.S. District Court Judge Jorge Solis denied their motion in a Memorandum Opinion issued on July 1, 2009. In doing so, Solis wrote: ‘The government has produced ample evidence to establish the associations of CAIR, the Islamic Society of North America, the North American Islamic Trust, the Holy Land Foundation, the Islamic Association of Palestine and Hamas.’”

Rep. Bennett added that the caucus had discovered a letter from the FBI’s Oklahoma City Field Office in which Special Agent in Charge James Finch says that the FBI cannot participate in a planned Muslim Community Outreach Program because of the “planned participation by the Oklahoma Chapter of CAIR.”

“As we have said repeatedly, we believe that the vast majority of Muslims in Oklahoma are peace-loving, productive members of society,” Rep. Bennett said. “We support wholeheartedly their constitutional right to practice their religion in peace.

“The stated, two-fold goal of the Muslim Brotherhood, however, is to establish global Muslim rule, or a ‘caliphate,’ and to replace our constitution with Sharia law. To say, as some have suggested, that CAIR is a Muslim civil rights group is simply inconsistent with the evidence. The theme of CAIR’s annual banquet this year was Upholding our Constitution, Defending our Faith. One has to wonder whose constitution they’re talking about.”

OTBR reading for Oklahoma politicians: Muslim Leader Declares That Oklahoma Tornadoes Are Allah’s Punishment for Killing Muslims

Oklahoma: Mosque going up in residential neighborhood against neighbors wishes

via Permit recommended for Edmond Islamic center over opposition | News OK.

EDMOND — Planning commissioners turned down an Edmond pastor who asked them to delay voting on an Islamic activity center permit and investigate ties between the Islamic Society of Edmond and national Islamic groups.

A request by the Rev. Paul Blair, pastor of Fairview Baptist Church, was interrupted by planning Chairman Barry Moore shortly after Blair began speaking during the Tuesday’s meeting.

“We are here to talk about land uses, not anything else,” Moore said. “We are not going to get into what is and what isn’t.”

Blair claimed the Islamic Society of Northern American, which he identified as the applicant for the specific-use permit, and the North American Islamic Trust, owners of the land, were proven in federal court to be affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

We’ve added hyperlinks since dhimmi reporters, like Chairman Barry Moore, refuse to do their jobs. 

County assessor records show the North American Islamic Trust owns the land where Edmond’s mosque now sits and the lots to the west where the activity center would be built. The Islamic Society of Edmond, which is the applicant for the project, owns the lot to the south of the mosque at Thatcher Street and University Drive.

After the meeting, Moore called the discussion inappropriate.

“It was not on the agenda to discuss,” Moore said. “We were here to discuss a specific use permit, a land use.”

Planning commissioners recommended issuance of a permit to allow the two-story, 34-foot-tall building with a 14-foot dome to be built near the southwest corner of Wayne Avenue and University, next to the mosque that has been in the city since 1990. The vote was 4-1 with Commissioner Bill Moyer voting against the request.

Moyer questioned the amount of available parking on the property at 525 N University Drive.

Property owners in the 300 block of Thatcher Street sent a three-page letter to the planning commission opposing the activity center. They claim the building would be too large for a single-family residential neighborhood.

The proposed building is one foot shorter than what city code allows for a single family structure. The new building would cover 8,307 square feet. The existing mosque is 680 square feet in size.

“The proposed structure is a very modern style that will be haughty and dominate the skyline and not fit into the style of the existing neighborhood,” the letter stated. It was signed by Marsha and Jim Honomichl, 311 E Thatcher, and listed the addresses of two other homes whose owners are opposed.

Neighbors also are concerned about parking and traffic flow because University of Central Oklahoma students park on the street.

The site will have 22 parking spaces. The Islamic Society also has written permission to use 14 parking spaces owned by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a half-block to the south.

Moyer said he was concerned because someone else owns the off-site parking.

“This is the first case where the parking is under a different ownership,” City Planner Bob Schiermeyer said. “We would have to revisit this if they would lose those 14 spaces.”

What are you going to revisit after the mosque is built in a residential neighborhood that stands out like a sore thumb and is in use and is overflowing with Muslims who will be demanding an even larger building with more parking funded by Saudi’s, defended and agitated by terror-linked CAIR and the DOJ to litigate you into approving it? The only thing these cowards will be revisiting is why they didn’t deny it in the first place.

But yet again, zoning regulations are altered for Muslims. We call it the zoning jihad. Click the link below for many more examples.

Oklahoma Passes Bill Forbidding Courts From Using Foreign, Religious Law

It’s a sad state of affairs when the U.S. can’t ban Islamic sharia law by name. via Okla. Legislature Passes Bill Forbidding Courts From Using Foreign, Religious Law.

The upper house of the Oklahoma Legislature passed a bill that would prevent the use of religious or foreign laws in American courts.

House Bill 1060, considered by some to be an “anti-Sharia” bill, passed the Oklahoma Senate Monday in a vote of 40 yeas to 3 nays. Due to an amendment being added, it awaits the approval of the bill’s author before it can go to the governor.

“Any court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency ruling or decision shall violate the public policy of this state and be void and unenforceable if the court, arbitration, tribunal, or administrative agency bases its rulings or decisions in the matter at issue in whole or in part on foreign law that would not grant the parties affected by the ruling or decision the same fundamental liberties, rights, and privileges granted under the U.S. and Oklahoma Constitutions,” reads HB 1552.

Republican State Representative Sally Kern, author of HB 1552, told The Christian Post that while considered by some to be an attack on Muslims, the bill is not discriminatory.

“The bill is not biased against any particular group of people. It only deals with protecting our Constitutional rights when any foreign law would be used in an American court to deny any American of their Constitutional rights,” said Kern.

This is not the first time that Oklahoma has considered an “anti-Sharia” law. In 2010, about 70 percent of Oklahoma voters approved State Question 755, a measure which said courts could not consider “international or Islamic law when deciding cases.” After the question succeeded, a federal judge blocked it from being implemented, declaring it unconstitutional.

Oklahoma senate overwhelmingly approves bill banning foreign law

Will liberal, apologist politicians and judges side with Muslims fighting for sharia law in Oklahoma or the will of the people? via Oklahoma Considers Foreign Law Court Ban – ABC News.

OKLAHOMA CITY February 12, 2013 (AP)

Oklahoma lawmakers are considering banning judges in the state from basing any rulings on foreign laws, including Islamic Sharia law.

A Senate panel on Tuesday overwhelmingly approved the bill, which has broad support in the Republican-controlled Legislature. The bill would specifically make void and unenforceable any court, arbitration or administrative agency decision that doesn’t grant the parties affected by the ruling “the same fundamental liberties, rights and privileges granted under the U.S. and Oklahoma constitutions.”

“This is a way to protect American citizens … where somebody may try to use any kind of foreign law or religious law to affect the outcome of a trial,” said Sen. Ralph Shortey, R-Oklahoma City, who sponsored the bill. Shortey described it as “American Law for American Courts.”

A handful of other states have laws aimed at keeping courts from basing decision on foreign legal codes, including Islamic law. Oklahoma voters approved a constitutional amendment in 2010 that would have specifically prohibited courts from considering Sharia law, but a federal judge blocked its implementation after a Muslim community leader alleged it discriminates against his religion.

Yesterday we learned that Oklahoma formed a bipartisan Counterterrorism Caucus, identifying the Muslim Brotherhood as a potential threat

State Rep. John Bennett (R-Sallisaw) announced the formation of a bipartisan Counterterrorism Caucus in the Oklahoma Legislature during a press conference held today.

Bennett, who served as a Counter Terrorism and Intelligence Specialist with the Marine Corps in Iraq and Afghanistan, also pointed out that the Counterterrorism Caucus grew out of a grassroots movement of concerned citizens and identified several of the civilian leaders in attendance.

We are concerned about the possibility of Muslim Brotherhood organizations operating here in Oklahoma whose stated goal is replace our Constitution with Shariah law.”

The zTruth website has, in the past, focused on the Muslim Brotherhood threat in Oklahoma. Searching their archives or contacting the site would be a good start for Okee’s.

Oklahoma forms bipartisan Counterterrorism Caucus, Muslim Brotherhood identified as threat

Will they investigate CAIR? via Sequoyah County Times

State Rep. John Bennett (R-Sallisaw) announced the formation of a bipartisan Counterterrorism Caucus in the Oklahoma Legislature during a press conference held today.

Bennett, who chairs the caucus, was flanked at the press conference by a number of state senators and representatives, including caucus co-chairman state Rep. Gus Blackwell, as he detailed the formation of the first-ever counterterrorism caucus in the Oklahoma Legislature. Maj. Gen. (Ret.) Rita Aragon, the secretary of veteran affairs in Oklahoma, also attended and will participate in the caucus.

“We believe that the time has come to address the potential terrorists threats facing the citizens of Oklahoma,” Bennett said. “Few people realize the nature and extent of the threats we face and our mission is to identify publicly those threats and come up with a strategy to defeat them.”

Bennett, who served as a Counter Terrorism and Intelligence Specialist with the Marine Corps in Iraq and Afghanistan, also pointed out that the Counterterrorism Caucus grew out of a grassroots movement of concerned citizens and identified several of the civilian leaders in attendance.

“We the people have spoken and we, their elected representatives, are listening,” Bennett said.

Citing evidence from United States vs. The Holy Land Foundation (2008), a federal district court case in Dallas that was the largest terrorism-financing trial in the history of the United States, Bennett talked about the threat of Sharia law.

We are concerned about the possibility of Muslim Brotherhood organizations operating here in Oklahoma whose stated goal is replace our Constitution with Shariah law.”

Other speakers at the press conference included state Rep. Sally Kern, who is the sponsor of the American Laws for American Courts bill, and state Sen. Ralph Shortey, who sponsored a similar bill in the Senate.

The caucus will also focus on other areas of concern that were mentioned include environmental terrorism and the so-called “lone wolf” terrorists similar to those responsible for the 1995 Murrah Federal Building bombing.

Bennett also pointed out that former CIA Director James Woolsey spoke last year at the High Noon Club in support of the American Laws for American Courts bill and that LTG (Ret.) William “Jerry” Boykin, former commanding general of Delta Force. He also spoke at several other functions by grassroots organizations.

“We had some national leaders who came to Oklahoma last year to help draw attention to some of the issues we are facing and we intend to continue that practice,” Bennett said.

More than 70% of Oklahoma’s citizens voted in favor of banning sharia law but it was the Muslim Brotherhood-linked CAIR – an unindicted co-conspirator to that Holy Land Foundation conviction – that fought in favor of sharia laws and a judge sided with the terror-linked Muslims.

 

Oklahoma Bankers Assn changes security policy for Muslims after meeting terror-linked CAIR, ACLU

Another successful shake down for sharia. Like airport security and prayer in school, there are rules for Muslims and rules for everyone else.

via Oklahoma bankers group updates security policy on religious headwear | NewsOK.com. h/t Islamist Watch

The Oklahoma Bankers Association has tweaked its recommended “no hats, no hoods, no sunglasses” security policy at banks after an incident at a Tulsa bank last year involving a woman customer wearing a religiously mandated head scarf, or hijab, raised discrimination claims.

The Oklahoma Bankers Association clarified the voluntary initiative, designed to boost safety at banks by making it easier to identify robbers, after meeting with the American Civil Liberties Union of Oklahoma and the state chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

The meeting was prompted in October when, at a Tulsa bank, a woman wearing a hajib was told she would have to be escorted into the bank because of the policy on head-covering attire. She and groups supporting her claimed the policy was discriminatory.

The ACLU and state CAIR chapter on Thursday praised the industry group for responding to those concerns.

“We are incredibly pleased that the OBA recognizes that respecting the religious requirements of their customers and ensuring a safe and secure banking environment can go hand in hand,” Ryan Kiesel, executive director of the ACLU of Oklahoma, said in a statement.

Adam Soltani, executive director of state chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said his group met with Oklahoma Bankers Association members to explain the different types of head coverings worn by Muslim women and those of other faiths.

The OBA essentially just announced to bank robbers in Oklahoma that if they wear a burka like bank robbers do in Philly, they’ll have much less resistance.


Fed judge rules against Tulsa cop punished for refusing to attend mosque

via Press Releases | Federal Judge Dismisses Constitutional Claims of Tulsa Police Captain Punished for Objecting to Order Mandating Attendance at Islamic Event | AFLC – American Freedom Law Center.

Tulsa, Oklahoma (December 14, 2012) — In a short, 16-page opinion, an Oklahoma federal judge ruled late yesterday that the City of Tulsa and two of its senior police officials, Chief of Police Chuck Jordan and Deputy Chief of Police Daryl Webster, did not violate the constitutional rights of Captain Paul Fields, a Tulsa Police officer who was summarily punished for refusing to attend a mandated Islamic proselytizing event held at a local mosque. Despite the fact that the federal judge was required to view the evidence and all reasonable inferences drawn from that evidence in favor of Captain Fields before dismissing his constitutional claims, the judge concluded that “no reasonable jury could find Fields was personally ordered to attend” the Islamic event “because the directive at issue permitted him to assign others to attend rather than attend himself.” By doing so, the judge avoided addressing a central issue in this case, stating, “The issue of whether a directive requiring his personal attendance at the event would have violated his First Amendment rights need not be decided here.”

Robert Muise, Co-Founder and Senior Counsel of the American Freedom Law Center and lead counsel for Captain Fields in the case, commented, “This ruling is troubling on many levels. However, this fight is far from over. Judge Frizzell may have been the first judge to review and decide the important constitutional issues at stake in this case, but he won’t be the last. We will be appealing this ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.”

Muise commented further, “Contrary to the judge’s ruling in this case, the evidence is undisputed and overwhelming that Captain Fields was punished for merely raising a religious objection to the mandatory order, and this included punishing him for refusing to attend the Islamic proselytizing event based on his sincerely held religious convictions.  In short, the judge simply got it wrong.  We are eager to get this case before the Tenth Circuit.”

As the sworn testimony in the case demonstrated, during the Islamic Event, the Muslim hosts discussed Islamic religious beliefs; they discussed Mohammed, Mecca, why Muslims pray, how they pray, and what they say when they are praying; they showed the officers a Quran; and they showed the officers Islamic religious books and pamphlets that were for sale and encouraged the officers to purchase them.  Consequently, Captain Fields’ objections were completely justified and substantiated.

Muise concluded, “One of the tragedies of this case is that the City’s attorneys have decided to publicly vilify Captain Fields by denying the sincerity of his religious beliefs and falsely claiming that his religious objections were motivated by anti-Muslim sentiments.  The bitter irony is that Captain Fields was one of the primary officers involved with helping to protect this mosque from a criminal suspect intent on doing harm, and it was this very incident that served as the justification for the ‘appreciation’ event in the first instance.

Turkey Infiltrating US Through Native American Tribes

via Islamist Watch.

Turkey’s government, under Islamist leadership, has developed a remarkable but obscure tactic to make inroads into the United States.

Recently, Native American Congressman Tom Cole (R-OK, member of the Chickasaw Nation) introduced H.R. 2362, the Indian Trade and Investment Demonstration Project. The bill singles out Turkish-owned companies for exclusive investment preferences and special rights in Native American tribal area projects.

Congressman Cole freely admitted the following on the House floor:

There’s no question that I was approached by the Turkish American Coalition [properly the Turkish Coalition of America], who have a deep interest in Turkey and American Indians.

“Deep interest” indeed. The bill was the culmination of a curious multi-year effort by Turkey to ingratiate itself with Native American tribes: tribal students now study in Turkey with full scholarships; Turkish high officials regularly appear at Native American economic summits; and dozens of tribal leaders have gone to Turkey on lavish all-expense paid trips.

Why the intense interest in business and cultural ties with Native American tribes only now, when Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan and his Islamist Justice and Development party (AKP) have taken Turkey down a path of aggressive and dangerous Islamism?

Evidence from Uzbekistan points to a possible nefarious motive: Infiltration and Islamization. The government of Uzbekistan is claiming that private Turkish business interests in the Central Asian country have been acting as a front for banned Islamist extremists. According to Agence France-Presse:

[The Uzbek government is] accusing Turkish companies of creating a shadow economy, using double accounting and propagating nationalistic and extremist ideology. … Long wary of the influence of Islamic fundamentalism … secular authorities appear to be linking Turkish private business to the activities of the Nurcus, an Islamic group that is banned in the country. [Nurcus is also banned in Russia].

Is it really in America’s national security interests to have thousands of Turkish contractors and their families flooding into America’s heartland and settling in semi-autonomous zones out of the reach of American authorities? Especially if their intent is to form intimate business and social ties with a long-aggrieved minority group?

_ _ _ _ _

H.R. 2362 was narrowly defeated on July 23, when a “suspension of the rules” vote (usually reserved for non-controversial votes with limited debate) failed to attain the required two-thirds majority. But troublingly, 220 representatives voted in favor – representing both parties and all ideological strains – with 160 opposed and 49 abstaining.

The bill could come up for a vote again, at any time.

In the original version of H.R. 2362, the stated purpose was to “encourage increased levels of commerce and economic investment [with Native American tribes] by private entities incorporated in or emanating from the Republic of Turkey.” It allowed for select Native American tribes to lease land held in trust by the United States for “a project or activity … in furtherance of a commercial partnership involving one or more private entities incorporated in or emanating from the Republic of Turkey.”

When the bill came up for a vote, its backers were forced to offer an amended version. The phrase “or other World Trade Organization (WTO) member nations” was placed after “Republic of Turkey” in the passages above.

The amended version still maintains that Congress “finds that the public and private sectors in the Republic of Turkey have demonstrated a unique interest in bolstering cultural, political, and economic relationships with Indian tribes and tribal members;” and that removing “barriers” and encouraging a “more robust relationship” between “Turkish and Indian tribal communities” is “in the interest” of “the United States-Turkey relationship. [Emphasis added].

These “interests” are not defined.

The bill, in both its forms, severely limits federal oversight of the investment projects, and does not even require the Department of the Interior to approve the leases. The term of the leases could stretch 75 years, effectively tying the hands of future Administrations.

Presidents would come and go. But Turkey would have a semi-permanent foothold in America’s heartland.

Read it all at Stunner: Turkey Infiltrating Native American Tribes – and May Get Congressional Help and contact your elected officials and let them know you are no longer voting down the party line and are watching their votes.

Turkey’s Ambassador to the U.S., Namik Tan (arrow), hosts Native American tribal leaders at Turkey’s Embassy in Washington. At right is Oklahoma Congressman Tom Cole (member of the Chickasaw Nation tribe) who introduced a “Trojan Horse” bill that would give Turkey unfettered access to Native American tribal lands. At left is Lincoln McCurdy, President of the Turkish Coalition of America. More photos documenting Turkey’s intense cultivation of ties with Native American tribes are at the end of this article.

Turkey State Minister and AKP party member Zafer Caglayan (red tie) welcomes a Native American tribal leader to Turkey during the 2010 Native American Business Cooperation Trip.

Tulsa: Muslims tell interfaith dhimmis to abide by sharia

And Muslims (and the fools who aid and abet them) tell us sharia is not applied to non-Muslims. via Z-Truth: Islamic Society of Tulsa to non-Muslim teenage girl visitors: cover your head, wear long skirts, enter mosque separately from the boys!

The Islamic Society of Tulsa operates the Masjid Al-Salam Mosque,  For the upcoming annual interfaith youth tour the mosque has advised the young girls who may attend:

** Your cooperation is requested in dressing modestly at the Masjid Al-Salam Mosque.

Women are requested to wear long skirts or loose slacks and a head covering such as a hat or headscarf. Men and women will enter separately and be seated on the floor.

Interfaith is a one-way street. Suckas. Pact of Umar anyone?

PS: This is the same terror-linked mosque that threatened and defamed a Muslim who wrote a local op-ed opposing Osama bin Laden and also was a participant in the demotion of a police chief who refused to attend a “voluntary” mosque outing by the entire police department.

It’s creeping in Tulsa (where sharia was banned by citizens but forced upon them when the feds ruled Islamic sharia law is Constitutionally protected).

Good news though, six more mosques being built right now in Oklahomastan.

Sharia Creeping in the Tulsa Police Department?

An issue we’ve posted on several times since it became public has hit the more mainstream lately. via PJ Media » Creeping Sharia on the Tulsa PD?

Is it a case of anti-Muslim bigotry or a principled stand against creeping sharia?  Is it insubordination on the part of a rebellious police officer, or is it simply a case of police department management being caught with their heads up their brass?

A Tulsa police captain is suing his department to regain his lost pay and assignment after he was suspended for two weeks and transferred for refusing to attend a “cultural event” at a Tulsa mosque.  Captain Paul Fields, a 17-year veteran of the department and a devout Christian, informed his chief that he would not attend the event, billed as a “Law Enforcement Appreciation Day,” to be held in March 2011 at the Islamic Cultural Society of Tulsa.

According to the lawsuit (PDF), in January 2011, Tulsa Deputy Police Chief Alvin Webster announced in a staff meeting that the event was upcoming and solicited volunteers to attend.  In February 2011, an email regarding the event was sent to all Tulsa police officers.  Attached to the email was a flier from the Islamic Society describing the event and inviting police officers to attend.  When neither Captain Fields nor any of his subordinates responded to the invitation, a subsequent email was sent informing Fields that his attendance was no longer voluntary but mandatory, and that officers from each shift under his command were also expected to attend.

Capt. Fields responded with an email of his own, informing his superiors that he believed the order was unlawful as it violated his religious convictions and that he would not be attending.  He also said he would not order any of his subordinates who held similar convictions to attend the event.

Efforts were made to persuade Capt. Fields to change his mind, but when he did not he was served with his transfer and suspension for failing to observe Rule 6 of the Tulsa Police Department Rules and Regulations – Duty to Be Truthful and Obedient.

Granted, while Capt. Fields, like any police officer, does indeed have a duty to be truthful and obedient, he should not have a duty to serve as a prop in the service of Muslim religious proselytizing and the advancement of Muslim political aims.

As stated in Capt. Fields’s lawsuit, the Islamic Society of Tulsa “supports and promotes” on its website both the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Islamic Society of North America, both of which were identified as unindicted coconspirators in the Holy Land Foundation terrorism-funding case.  The lawsuit further describes a network of individuals associated with both the Islamic Society of Tulsa and the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization guided by what is known as its “Strategic Goal Memo,” which includes the following passage:

The process of settlement is a “Civilization Jihadist Process” with all the word means. The Ikhwan [a.k.a., Muslim Brotherhood] must understand their work in America is a kind of grand jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and “sabotaging” its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God’s religion is made victorious over all other religions.

The Islamic Society of Tulsa tried to put a benign face on its law enforcement event, but Capt. Fields was well founded in detecting sinister motives and refusing to participate.  But even if there were no links, however tenuous, between the Society and terrorist groups, should Capt. Fields or any police officer be ordered to attend a religious event on duty?  If a Muslim police officer had been ordered to attend a Christian event, is there a sentient being in America who believes his superiors would not acquiesce (and quickly!) to his objections?

Such is the fear of appearing “Islamophobic” among politicians – and remember that most police commanders are politicians first and cops second – that they’ll go to absurd lengths to demonstrate how open-minded and tolerant they are, how committed they are to the gods of “diversity.”

When no police officers volunteered to attend the event at Islamic Society of Tulsa, the Tulsa P.D. brass panicked at the thought that they might be perceived as backward and intolerant.  They needed cops to turn out, so they ordered them to do so without regard for the propriety or even the legality of the order.

What Capt. Fields knew, what every police officer knows, is that there are always cops in every department who will do almost anything to curry favor with the brass if it means gaining some advantage in the next promotional competition.  The Tulsa P.D. chief could have quietly put the word out that he needed some cops go down and break bread with the local jihadists for an hour or so, and that anyone who agreed to do so would be remembered favorably in the upper ranks of the department.  Put that together with the offer of free food and you would have had squad cars lined up two-deep up and down the block in front of the mosque and everyone would have been happy.

Instead, the chief puffed up his chest and said he wasn’t going to let some damned captain tell him where he would and would not go.  So now the matter heads to federal court, where the chain of command of the Tulsa Police Department is very likely to be embarrassed, as they should be.

“Jack Dunphy” is the pseudonym of an officer with the Los Angeles Police Department. The opinions expressed are his own and almost certainly do not reflect those of the LAPD management.

Maybe “Jack Dunphy” can investigate things in his own back yard and report on Lee Baca and Los Angeles Police Department Deputy Chief Michael Downing. Here’s just a few of the posts we have that an insider concerned with ‘creeping sharia’ within a police department might be able to shed significant light on:

At least six new mosques open or under way in Oklahoma

It’s no wonder they fought so aggressively to permit sharia law in Oklahoma. via Oklahoma: Muslims celebrate first Ramadan in new Norman mosque.

(Ahlul Bayt News Agency) – Such is the case with the 7,000-square-foot mosque that opened in the spring at 420 E Lindsey in Norman. The Islamic Society of Norman recently held a community open house at the mosque. Friday, the mosque began hosting prayers and fellowship gatherings for Ramadan, the Islamic holy month of fasting.

Farid Elyazgi, the society’s spokesman, said he and other mosque leaders have anticipated the nightly Ramadan gatherings because it will be the first time the holiday has been celebrated in the new facility.

Elyazgi said about 95 percent of the $950,000 cost to build the mosque came from within the Norman Islamic community. Muslims in other parts of the metro and state, and even other states, contributed as well.

Imad Enchassi is president and imam of the Islamic Society of Greater Oklahoma City, one of the largest Muslim congregations in the state. He said the Norman Muslim community, like others of its kind, started out small but has experienced enough growth over the years to warrant upgraded or new worship facilities. Other congregations are following suit.

Every single mosque is expanding,” Enchassi said. “There’s a lot of growth and progress.”

Enchassi said there are plans to build a new mosque or add on to the current mosque at 525 N University near the University of Central Oklahoma in Edmond. He said leaders of a mosque near the campus of Oklahoma State University recently built a new multipurpose building and are raising funds for a new mosque. Also, he said, leaders of a mosque at 1322 NE 23 are in the process of relocating to another property that will better accommodate their faith community’s growth.

Enchassi said Islamic faith communities in other parts of the state also are responding to growth. He said a new mosque was recently completed in Ardmore and a new mosque will soon open in Lawton, the second one in that city.

Enchassi said the mosque expansion efforts are obvious indicators of a thriving Muslim population in the state. He said there are an estimated 30,000 Muslims in Oklahoma and although they make up less than 1 percent of the state’s population, they add to their communities in many ways, including establishing thriving businesses and being industrious professionals in their career fields.

And fighting FOR sharia law in Oklahoma, opposing nearly 80% of that state’s citizens.

The first mosque cost a million dollars. Who is funding all these mosques?

 

Bill Banning Sharia Law In Oklahoma Killed By Senate Committee

Rogue state governments ignoring the overwhelming will of the majority of its voters and bowing to the whims of Islamic terrorist-linked sharia advocates CAIR. via KTUL.com – Bill Banning Sharia Law In Oklahoma Killed In Committee.

Oklahoma City – The measure banning Sharia law in Oklahoma courts passed by Oklahoma voters in 2010 was shot down by a senate committee Thursday.

That move prompted responses by the bill’s author and the group who filed a lawsuit against it.

State Question 755 banned the consideration of Islamic Sharia law, derived from the Quran, when deciding Oklahoma court cases.

It passed with 70 percent of the vote in November 2010, so then came House Bill 1552, by State Rep. Sally Kern.

That bill passed the Oklahoma House of Representatives on a bipartisan 76-3 vote on its third reading in March 2011.

During a hearing this week, members of the Senate Rules Committee voted 6-9 against the measure.

A lawsuit against the measure was filed soon after by the Council on American-Islamic Relations in federal court because many Muslims felt it was a way to politically bash the group.

A federal judge sided with the [terror-linked]  group in November of last year, issuing a preliminary injunction that kept it from becoming law.

On Thursday, Kern said she was shocked by the committee’s failure to pass the bill.

“This measure has broad support in Oklahoma and killing it is a slap in the face to voters who believe foreign law should have no bearing on legal decisions that impact Oklahomans in Oklahoma,” Kern said.

The article’s author Homa Quazilbash doesn’t bother to note CAIR’s history of terror links, numerous executives arrested and deported on terror charges, and extensive and ongoing legal jihad against Americans. To institute sharia law.



Muslims, Harvard shill for Islam, celebrate sharia law & its “desirable chilling effect” in US

via Muslim civil rights advocates celebrate major victory in Oklahoma court

Muslim civil rights activists in the United States are celebrating a major victory in an Oklahoma court. According to Noah Feldman, professor of law at Harvard University, the law would likely discourage similar legislation in at least 20 U.S. states over the past several years.

LOS ANGELES, CA (Catholic Online) – A federal appeals court this week agreed with a lower court that blocked an Oklahoma law that would have barred state courts from considering or using Shariah law, the Islamic code of conduct.

Feldman says that the decision “should have a good, positive, desirable chilling effect . It should tell people in those jurisdictions that (similar laws) almost all will be judged unconstitutional.”

The issue began in the November 2010 election, when Oklahomans voted in favor of referendum SQ 755 – described as “a preemptive strike against Sharia Law coming to Oklahoma.”

“The courts shall not look to the legal precepts of other nations or cultures. Specifically, the courts shall not consider international law or Sharia law,” the amendment read.

Sharia law always has a desirable, chilling effect on freedom. But thanks for clarifying your intentions. Feldman is vehemently pro-sharia, pro-Muslim Brotherhood and it’s a strain embedded in the Obama administration who likely watched closely, if not influenced, the Oklahoma situation from day one. As Christine Brim noted in Sharia Comes to the Supreme Court:

In December, 2006, Kagan hired Noah Feldman, architect of Iraq’s Constitution requiring Shariah, as a star faculty member at Harvard Law School.  On March 16, 2008, Feldman published his controversial article “Why Shariah” in the New York Times Magazine, which promoted “Islamists” -  the Muslim Brotherhood – as a progressive democratic party, and promoted Shariah as a model not just for Muslim-majority countries but for all: “In fact, for most of its history, Islamic law offered the most liberal and humane legal principles available anywhere in the world…”  The article was adapted from his book The Fall and Rise of the Islamic State, which was published in late March, 2008.

On September 16, 2008, Kagan whole-heartedly endorsed Feldman’s promotion of the Muslim Brotherhood and Shariah by honoring him with the endowed Bemis Chair in International Law.  Feldman’s speech on receiving the award was revealing: he advocated for an international, “outward interpretation” of the Constitution that could “require the U.S. to confer rights on citizens of other nations,” and allow for an “experimental Constitution.”

As to the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamist worldwide political organization that Feldman and Kagan support? Their motto is as revealing as Feldman’s speech:

“Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. Qur’an is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

Given that slogan, you could well ask if Feldman really meant the Muslim Brotherhood when he wrote about “Islamists” in the book Kagan so admired that she gave him an endowed chair.  And he anticipated that question; in the second footnote in his book he states, “Throughout this book, when I refer to Islamists or Islamism, I have in mind mainstream Sunni Muslim activists loosely aligned with the ideology of the transnational Muslim Brotherhood (MB)…the Brotherhood broadly embraces electoral politics, but without eschewing the use of violence in some circumstances, notably against those whom it defines as invaders in Iraq and Palestine.”



Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33,612 other followers

%d bloggers like this: