SCOTUS Asked to Review Case of Christian Cop Punished for Objecting to Mosque Event

via Supreme Court Asked to Review Case of Christian Police Officer Who Was Punished for Objecting to Mosque Event | American Freedom Law Center.

On September 15, 2014, the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) filed a petition for a writ of certiorari, asking the U.S. Supreme Court to review the case of Captain Paul Fields, a Tulsa, Oklahoma police officer who was punished for objecting to an order that mandated officer attendance at an “appreciation” event held at a local mosque and retaliated against for filing a civil rights lawsuit challenging this punishment as a violation of his constitutional rights.  Fields objected on religious grounds to the attendance order because the “appreciation” event was advertised as including—and in fact did include—religious proselytizing, and he is strictly prohibited from discussing his Christian faith while on duty, thereby creating for him a conflict and a moral dilemma.

Fields is seeking Supreme Court review of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit’s ruling disallowing him from amending his complaint to challenge on First Amendment grounds the City’s retaliation against him for filing this lawsuit.  The City claimed that the negative publicity from the lawsuit brought discredit upon the department.

Robert Muise, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel and lead counsel for Fields, commented,

“The Tenth Circuit’s ruling is troubling on so many levels.  Its conclusion that Captain Fields’ retaliation claim arising under the First Amendment would be futile is clearly erroneous, contrary to Supreme Court precedent, and indeed, establishes harmful precedent that will have a chilling effect on public employees who want to seek redress for the violation of their constitutional rights in a court of law.”

Muise continued,

“Just this past term, the Supreme Court reaffirmed that citizens do not surrender their First Amendment rights by accepting public employment.  If the Court means what it says, it will take up this case.”

As stated in the petition:

[A]s a direct consequence of the panel’s decision, a public employee who is considering whether to vindicate his or her constitutional rights in a court of law is now faced with a very difficult decision because if the employee does not ultimately prevail, the defendant-employer can fire (or take other adverse action against) the plaintiff-employee for the negative publicity the employer may receive as a result of the lawsuit or the statements made by the employee’s attorney during the course of litigating the claims.

* * * *

A court of law should never allow the government to punish an employee for filing a civil rights lawsuit that seeks to vindicate constitutional rights, as the panel has done here.

David Yerushalmi, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel, added,

“It is clear that the City and its senior police officials wanted to make an example of Captain Fields by harshly punishing him, a Christian, for objecting on religious grounds to an order compelling attendance at an Islamic event.  Allowing this ruling to stand—a ruling which now compels public employees to route complaints about constitutional violations to the very officials responsible for those violations as opposed to a court of law—robs Captain Fields of the very freedoms guaranteed by our Constitution that the courts are duty bound to uphold.”

Oklahoma politician’s townhall on Islam (video)

Reader’s may recall Bennett from a previous post. An update via Shoebat.com who writes:

The refusal of a politician to apologize for his Islamophobia is indeed rare. In fact, such an aggressive strain of Islamophobia can be incredibly dangerous to Islam. However, if enough intimidation is used, the Islamophobia can be quarantined. Instead of not issuing an apology, mutual face-saving measures between the ‘moderate’ voices of Islam and the Islamophobe tacitly agree to let the issue die.

Original source here, not Hamas-CAIR.

Bennett should release the rest of the video presentation particularly the scene at a mosque.

Let him know.

EMAIL: john.bennett@okhouse.gov
TEL: 1-800-522-8502

Oklahoma politician refuses to back down to CAIR, tired of “their lies and deflection”

via Oklahoma politician refuses to apologize for cautioning people to ‘be wary’ of Muslim-Americans – NY Daily News.

An Oklahoma politician is under fire for cautioning people to be “wary” of Muslim Americans — but he’s not backing down.

State Rep. John Bennett (R-Sallisaw) refused to apologize for a private Facebook post that called on Christians to “be especially wary” of people who call themselves Muslim-Americans because the Koran “clearly states that non-Muslims should be killed.”

The politician then linked to an article about the violent actions of Islamic State militants, NewsOK reports.

Bennett says he’s tired of being politically correct about Muslims.

“For us to sit back and listen to their lies and deflection and let them continue on their claims that this is all racist and I’m an ‘Islamaphobe,’ it’s just absolutely ridiculous,” he told KFOR.

Bennett, a U.S. Marine Corps reservist who served in Iraq and Afghanistan, lashed back with a claim that CAIR is a branch of the Muslim Brotherhood in America.

 “We must shine a bright light on the role of the Muslim Brotherhood and its varied tentacles in the U.S.,” Bennett said. “These tentacles include un-indicted co-conspirators of the U.S. vs. Holyland Foundation trial like the Council on American-Islamic Relations here in Oklahoma. Our borders are wide open to drug and human traffickers. Terrorism could come to Oklahoma just as easily.”

WhosFundingCAIR

On Wednesday, the Oklahoma chapter of a national Muslim advocacy group roundly rejected the implication that all Muslim-Americans are to be feared and asked Oklahoma’s Republican Party leaders to repudiate his message.

CAIR’s advocacy includes sharia law and Hamas terror. It’s landed many of its leaders in jail.

Adam Soltani, the Council on American-Islamic Relations’ Oklahoma director, compared it to accepting the KKK as representatives of all Christians.

Except, unlike Muslims, Americans – almost entirely Christian, challenged the KKK and put them out of business.

 Instead of rejecting Bennett’s claims, Oklahoma’s Republican leaders appeared to support him.

“It seems as if (CAIR’S) attack on his comments is disingenuous at best,” Weston said. “If they’re legitimate in wanting to come to the table and have an honest discourse, they can prove that by acknowledging the Jewish Holocaust happened, they can publicly recognize the right of Israel to exist and they can denounce the killing of Muslim converts to Christianity and other religions around the world.”

Never mind all that, Muslims could start by supporting a ban on sharia law in Oklahoma – supported by nearly 70% of Sooner’s. Instead, Muslims led by CAIR fought the citizens of Oklahoma to legalize sharia law.

 Oklahoma’s House Speaker Jeff Hickman said that “all members of the Oklahoma Legislature are duly elected by and accountable to their constituents, and are free to voice their own opinions.”

Someone in Oklahoma is aware.

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

Oklahoma: Counterterrorism Caucus Says CAIR Attacking Free Speech

cair-terror CAIRdiorama32Support Bennett:

EMAIL: john.bennett@okhouse.gov
TEL: 1-800-522-8502

Global Mosque Report (USA): May 2014

A new series over at Gates of Vienna. Each report is significantly longer than what is below covering all countries, however we’ve excerpted only the activity in the United States.

seattle-mosques

Seattle area mosques

Global Mosque Report: February 2014

This is the latest in a series of monthly reports by our British correspondent JP on the progress of worldwide Islamization, as represented by the building of mosques, and activities associated with mosques.

USA

California

Report on the $1.8 million, 18,000-square-foot, two-storey Islamic centre and mosque complete with minarets being erected in West Modesto.

Colorado

The Islamic Center of Fort Collins will host an open day on 1 March at its new mosque which features a 70-foot minaret and 50-foot dome, both topped with crescent moons.

Idaho

A variance request hearing ostensibly to focus on parking and public safety concerns over a proposed mosque in Pocatello was instead dominated by discussion of religious freedom and fear of Islam.

New Jersey

Traffic concerns of fire officials over the Islamic Society of Basking Ridge’s Liberty Corner mosque proposal were considered by Bernards Township planning board, but deemed legally irrelevant.

At a Bridgewater planning board, Yassir Abdelkader, president of the Al Fatah Center, spoke on behalf of his proposal to convert the former Redwood Inn into a mosque. He assured residents that there would be no services outside the mosque and no calls to prayer from the proposed mosque’s minaret.

Tennessee

Report that the lawsuit arising over Murfreesboro mosque approval has already cost Rutherford County $343,276, and the amount is expected to rise.

Global Mosque Report: March 2014

USA

Arkansas

In Lincoln a group of young Bosnian and Middle Eastern immigrants raised nearly $200,000 to purchase a long-empty church and convert it into a mosque.

California

Jamaal Diwan, imam at the Islamic Center of Irvine, interviewed by Orange County Weekly. A convert, his love of basketball and hip-hop led him to Islam.

Michigan

‘Questions about Islam’ event held at the Kalamazoo Islamic Center. “The main goal is to achieve a sense of understanding between those who practice Islam and those who do not,” said Farhan Igbal, a student at Western Michigan University.

New Jersey

Bernards Township: Islamic Society of Basking Ridge’s Liberty Corner mosque proposal met opposition from neighbours concerned about lights, noise, and traffic. Further hearings scheduled to take place in April and May.

Burlington County Muslim Association proposed a 22,745-square-foot building to house a mosque, elementary school, and day care center in Delanco.

United American Muslim Association Inc. filed an application to convert one of Clifton’s oldest buildings, erected in 1740, and latterly a funeral parlour, into a mosque.

New York State

North Side Learning Center purchased Holy Trinity Roman Catholic church in Syracuse for conversion into a mosque to be named ‘Mosque of Jesus the Son of Mary’ (Masjit Isa Ibn Maryam). A petition was lodged with the Landmark Preservation Board to remove crosses from the steeples and grounds as these are not in line with the ‘worshipping practices’ of the new tenants.

Ohio

Shakila Ahmad became the first woman president of the Islamic Center of Greater Cincinnati in its eighteen-year history. The mosque sees up to 3,000 Muslims involved on holy days, and there are an estimated 25,000 Muslims in the region.

Tennessee

Memphis Islamic Center to launch the first of three phases required for the construction of a $6.5 million, 63,144-square-foot rabat in Shelby County this summer. In October 2012, World Relief Nashville/Memphis was awarded a Preferred Communities grant by the Office of Refugee Resettlement.

Virginia

State delegate Alfonso H. Lopez defended his praise of Dar al-Hijrah Islamic Center in Falls Church after being rebuked by counter-terrorism officials and media for sponsoring a successful resolution at Virginia’s General Assembly commending the center.

Global Mosque Report: April 2014

USA

New York State

Syracuse Landmark Preservation Board voted to approve a request by an Islamic group called the Northside Learning Center to remove crosses from the Holy Trinity Catholic Church. The group plans to turn the former church into a mosque.

Tennessee

All of Rutherford County’s Circuit Court judges eligible to hear the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro cemetery lawsuit recused themselves, according to court records.

Washington

Redmond residents concerned over plans for the proposed two-storey, 22,467 square feet Anjuman-e-Burhani Mosque.

Global Mosque Report: May 2014

USA

 Iowa

One of the founding members of the Clinton Islamic Center, Dr. Anis Ansari, elected president for the fourth time in the past twelve years.

New Jersey

Bridgewater residents jeered and disputed traffic expert testimony that suggested the proposed Al Falah Center mosque development would not have a negative impact on local traffic. The next planning board meeting at the Bridgewater-Raritan High School is scheduled for 30 June.

New York State

Report on plans by the Islamic Society of Central New York to build a $1 million mosque-community center on land it owns on East Seneca Turnpike in the town of Onondaga. “Our numbers are growing — we need more space,” said society President Mohamed Khater.

Oklahoma

A federal appeals court ruled that a Christian police captain from Tulsa was rightfully punished for refusing to enter a mosque for a police appreciation ceremony.

South Carolina

The Islamic Center of Columbia, also known as Masjid al-Muslimiin, held a ‘Share Islam Day’ for those interested in the area’s diverse spirituality.

Tennessee

Senior Judge Paul Summers of Davidson County appointed to hear a case over a county-approved cemetery at the Islamic Center of Murfreesboro after all other judges in Rutherford County recused themselves from the matter.

Washington

Redmond residents concerned over plans for the proposed two-storey, 22,467 square feet Anjuman-e-Burhani Mosque on empty land near Microsoft Corporation’s headquarters.

 

JP at Gates of Vienna and all our readers can also refer to our “mosque” category to see all posts about mosque activity.

 

Oklahoma: 10th Circuit Affirms Punishment of Christian Cop Who Objected to Mandatory Mosque Event

10th Circus. via Tenth Circuit Affirms Punishment of Christian Police Officer Who Objected to Order Mandating Attendance at Islamic Event | American Freedom Law Center.

On May 22, 2014, a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit affirmed a lower court decision 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 objecting to an order mandating attendance at an Islamic proselytizing event held at a local mosque based on his religious beliefs.

Robert Muise, Co-Founder and Senior Counsel of the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) and lead counsel for Captain Fields in the case, commented,

“This ruling is troubling on so many levels.  We have argued throughout this case that Captain Fields was summarily punished for simply raising and asserting a religious objection to the order mandating attendance at the Islamic event, and that such discriminatory treatment violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments.  Yet, inexplicably, the Tenth Circuit refused to address this main issue on appeal, claiming that it was not raised below.  The court is wrong, and we intend to seek full court review of this patently erroneous decision.”

In its decision, the Tenth Circuit noted that Captain Fields’ briefs asserted that the City’s “reason for imposing punishment, or at least the reason for the severity of the punishment, was the religious nature of Fields’ objection to the order.”  The appellate court further noted that “there is evidence in the record that would support this assertion.  Some statements by TPD officials suggest that at least part of the motive for punishing Fields was that he posed a religious objection to the order and refused to attend the mosque event on religious grounds.”

Yet, the court refused to address the issue on appeal, claiming that it was not raised below.  Instead, the court avoided this central issue and simply held, as did the district court, that the order “did not burden Fields’s religious rights because it did not require him to violate his personal religious beliefs by attending the event . . . .”

Muise added,

““It is impossible to square the court’s opinion with the briefs and the record presented on appeal.  Indeed, even a cursory review of our briefing before the district court and in the appellate court makes clear the basis for Captain Fields’ constitutional claims: he was singled out for discriminatory treatment and thus punished because he raised a religious objection to the order.  That is religious discrimination, pure and simple.”

As Muise points out, Captain Fields’ objection to the order was clearly stated in the email he sent to his chain of command: “Please consider this email my official notification to the Tulsa Police Department and the City of Tulsa that I intend not to follow this directive, nor require any of my subordinates to do so if they share similar religious convictions.”

The official notice of the Internal Affairs (IA) investigation of the matter also clearly stated “that Chief Chuck Jordan has requested IA to conduct an administrative investigation in regards to your refusal to attend and refusal to assign officers from your shift, who shared your religious beliefs, to attend the” Islamic event.

In fact, when Chief Jordan was asked directly during his sworn deposition whether it was his “understanding that [he] could have accommodated Captain Fields’ religious objections to this event if [he] had made it voluntary for him,” the Chief responded, “Yeah.  According to his e-mail, yes, I could have.”

And if there were any remaining or lingering doubts as to why Captain Fields was punished, his official performance evaluation, which was signed and approved by Chief Jordan and Deputy Chief Webster, states that “Captain Fields was disciplined during this rating period for refusing to attend and refusing to direct that officers attend a law enforcement appreciation day at a local mosque.”

David Yerushalmi, AFLC Co-Founder and Senior Counsel, added:

“The evidence is overwhelming that the City and its senior police officials wanted to make an example of Captain Fields by harshly punishing him, a Christian, for objecting on religious grounds to an order compelling attendance at an Islamic event.  Consequently, when judges can rewrite the case and the case history to fit the conclusion they seek, as the Tenth Circuit has done here, due process is robbed of any meaning.”

For objecting to the order, Captain Fields was punitively transferred, subjected to an IA investigation, and suspended without pay for two weeks.  As further punishment, he was assigned to the “graveyard” shift.

Yerushalmi concluded:

“Had a Muslim officer objected to attending a Jewish event to be held at a synagogue on a Saturday and the officer was treated like Captain Fields, there is little doubt that the entire Tulsa Police Department chain of command would have been fired.”

As the Tenth Circuit acknowledged in its opinion, the undisputed record evidence demonstrated that during the Islamic event, which was held on a Friday—the “Sabbath” for Muslims—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.  Moreover, after the event, the Islamic Society posted on its website a photograph of the police officers sitting at a table with members of the mosque with the caption, “Discover Islam Classes for Non-Muslims.”

Consequently, Captain Fields’ objections were completely justified and substantiated.

The American Freedom Law Center intends to seek a rehearing en banc (full court) and review in the U.S. Supreme Court if necessary.

Read more about the case here.


Chief Dhimmi:

Tulsa Police Department
Chief Chuck Jordan

600 Civic Center, Suite 303, Tulsa, OK 74103 (918) 596-9328 TPDChief@cityoftulsa.org

600 Civic Center, Suite 303, Tulsa, OK 74103 (918) 596-9328 TPDChief@cityoftulsa.org

 

 

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?

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 36,964 other followers

%d bloggers like this: