Texas: Muslim convict demands sharia, court agrees

Source: Court: Texas can’t ban longer beards on Muslim inmates | www.statesman.com

Texas prison officials cannot prohibit Muslim inmates from growing a beard up to four inches long or from donning religious head wear, a federal appeals court has ruled.

David Rasheed Ali, serving concurrent 20-year sentences for arson and aggravated robbery, filed suit seven years ago arguing that the tenets of his religion required him to wear a beard and a kufi, a knit skullcap.

Ali’s lawsuit continued because he was seeking to wear a four-inch beard and because he wanted to wear a kufi in all areas of prison, not only in his cell or during religious services as allowed by Texas prison policy.

Prison officials argued that a longer beard and kufi posed security risks, making it easier to hide contraband and more difficult to identify inmates — either by hiding tattoos and other distinctive marks inside prison, or by allowing escaped inmates to quickly change their appearance.

But in a ruling delivered Monday, the 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said the Texas prison system’s grooming and religious head wear policies violated a federal law that protects the religious practice of inmates.

“Although we must respect a prison official’s expertise” on safety matters, Justice Edward Prado wrote for the court’s three-judge panel, the U.S. Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act requires policies that infringe on religious practice to be the “least restrictive” possible.

Under the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s procedures, corrections officers require inmates with longer hair to shake it out with their fingers to prove it is free of contraband — a policy that would work on four-inch beards as well, Prado wrote.

“TDCJ could revoke an inmate’s beard privilege if he abused it or refused to comply with the searches,” Prado said, adding that the same confiscation policy also applies to kufis and other religious head wear.

The ruling affirmed a 2014 judgment by U.S. Magistrate Zack Hawthorn in Beaumont, who ordered prison officials to allow Ali, 33, to grow a longer beard and wear a kufi throughout the Michael Unit in Tennessee Colony. Ali, a trusty, lives in a dorm outside the prison’s fence line, court records showed.

“We are reviewing the opinion and have no further comment at this time,” Texas prisons spokesman Jason Clark said Tuesday.

 

Citadel says no to Muslim’s hijab request, terror-linked CAIR threatens lawsuit

Source: Muslim student’s family considering legal options in Citadel’s hijab decision

CHARLESTON, SC (WCSC) -A spokesman for the family of a newly-accepted Muslim student at The Citadel says they are considering legal options following the Commandant of Cadets’ decision to reject the student’s request to wear a head cover.

citadel

According to a statement from Lt. Gen. Jon Rosa, an American Muslim student accepted to the Class of 2020 asked to wear a head cover, called a hijab, along with the Citadel’s standard blue, black and white uniform.

“While we hope the student will enroll in the college this fall, the Commandant of Cadets, after considerable review, determined the uniform exception cannot be granted,” reads the statement.

“The standardization of cadets in apparel, overall appearance, actions and privileges is essential to the learning goals and objectives of the college,” it continues. “This process reflects an initial relinquishing of self during which cadets learn the value of teamwork to function as a single unit.”

Lt. Gen. Rosa says The Citadel recognizes the importance of a cadet’s spiritual and religious beliefs and provides services for specific needs whenever possible.

“Cadet religious officers arrange transportation to churches, mosques, synagogues and other places of worship for those without cars,” he said. “Accommodations for prayer and dietary needs are common at the college.”

Abdul Mjeed, the Sheik of The Central Mosque of Charleston said Tuesday he answered questions from Citadel officials to help them better understand the religion.

“[They] asked me if it was mandatory for a woman in Islam to wear the hijab or wear that scarf,” he said. “I said yes it is.”

According to Mjeed all women over 10-years-old who practice the religion, must wear the head scarf.

If they don’t, it can be considered a sin.

Female members of the mosque said they respect the decision made by the Citadel.

“Every institution has their own policies and rules that we need to respect them,” said Reshma Khan, the Women’s representative at the mosque.

However Khan and Ruby Abid, another member, said they do have some reservations about the decision and what it could have meant to society today.

“If they would have allowed her to wear the scarf it would have been very positive in these current days of Islamic-phobia,” Abid said.

“It would have broken a lot of barriers and it would have given us a warm feeling,” Khan added.

Suzanne Chisholm is a graduate of the Citadel.

She said she stands by the decision made, saying she had to make sacrifices herself in order to become part of the Citadel community.

“I had to wear a uniform I didn’t want to wear,” Chisholm said. “I had to cut my hair. I had to follow a bunch of rules and regulations that I didn’t want to follow, but if I didn’t want to do those things then I shouldn’t have gone to the Citadel.”

“This world is full of choices,” Abid said. “If she (the Muslim student) happens to not choose this choice, maybe there is something better waiting for her.” Continue reading

Minnesota: Fired Muslim assembly line workers file lawsuit after ignoring break policy

Now they are waging legal jihad.

h/t Refugee Resettlement Watch who writes:

For the life of me, I don’t know why these manufacturers keep doing the same thing and expecting a different outcome—hire Muslims then end up in legal hot water over prayer break times.And, if you don’t know what this is….this is creeping shariah!

Bam. Source: Fired Muslim workers claim discrimination at plant in Owatonna – StarTribune.com

Nearly two dozen Muslim Somali-Americans are filing discrimination charges with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity against hardware maker AmesburyTruth and Doherty Staffing Solutions.

The fired workers said they were denied a place to pray at an Owatonna, Minn., manufacturing plant and lost their jobs for trying to practice their religion.

The Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations is leading the effort on behalf of 21 former workers who were terminated in May and June 2015.


[CAIR has been named a terrorist organization by the UAE, part of HAMAS by a federal judge, and banned by the FBI.]


The employees were told that if they could not comply with the plant’s break schedule or could not wait until their shifts were over to pray, they could not continue working, according to the council, which goes by the acronym CAIR-MN and is a member of the nation’s largest Islamic civil liberties advocacy group.

A number of workers were told to go home and wait for the company to make accommodations but were never called back to work, according to CAIR-MN. Some employees were fired for “violating the bathroom policy” by spilling water on the floor.

AmesburyTruth is headquartered in Edina and makes hardware for doors and windows, weatherstrips and extrusions. The company has about 2,000 employees at 11 locations around the country.

The Owatonna plant employs about 800 workers and specializes in making windows, hinges, locks and other hardware used in casement windows.

Kevin Anez, marketing director for AmesburyTruth, declined to comment on the case because it was a pending legal matter, but issued a statement saying the company did nothing wrong.

“AmesburyTruth complies with all local, state and federal workplace laws. We adamantly deny any wrongdoing related to the pending EEOC charge.”

Representatives from Doherty Staffing, an Edina employment firm that placed some of the former workers, did not return requests for comment.

Under the law, both would be responsible for the working conditions.

CAIR-MN’s civil rights director Amarita Singh underscored that Muslim employees have the constitutional right to have employers accommodate their religious practices.

“These employees were working on an assembly line in a manufacturing plant,” Singh said. “They wanted to pray, and the company said they were not able to accommodate them because if they step away they can’t keep the production line going.”


More via: FFA – CAIR demands that Truth Hardware allow for special Muslim prayer times in the workplace.

Click here to send your email to encourage Truth Hardware to stand by their decision and not surrender to demands for special Muslim prayer times in the workplace.


Obama is bringing Muslims by the tens of thousands to the U.S. In your towns and businesses they will pull this same Islamic supremacist tactics forcing you to build mini-mosques in your businesses, allow sharia breaks, serve halal food and have non-Muslims pick up the slack. And if you don’t comply with their sharia demands, they will hire foreign-funded terror front groups like CAIR to wage legal jihad against you. Either way you lose.

Stopping Muslim immigration is critical to the survival of America. Your children and theirs will thank you.

 

 

California: Muslim fugitive caught, files lawsuit over hijab removal

Once again we see the fake piety. This broad had at least 3 warrants outstanding for vehicle theft, resisting arrest and petty theft. She had no problem committing crimes, but to remove the head covering was just intolerable.

via Long Beach police respond to lawsuit filed over removal of Muslim woman’s headscarf

Police said they have a duty to protect all people who are in their custodial care.

The Greater Los Angeles Area chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations filed the lawsuit today in Los Angeles federal court on behalf of Kirsty Powell, who alleges that the incident occurred May 5, 2015 at the Long Beach police station.

Long Beach City Attorney Charles Parkin said his office has not yet been served with the lawsuit, and therefore had no comment.

In a statement late Monday, the police department said it removed Powell’s headscarf – as it does for other items such as belts, neckties and shoelaces – for the safety of the individual, staff and other prisoners.

“We respect the religious rights and beliefs of all people and understand the sensitivity of this matter,” said Chief Robert Luna said in a statement.”

According to CAIR, Powell and her husband, Deshawn Smith, who are both African American, were driving home near Market Street and Long Beach Boulevard when they were pulled over by an officer with the Long Beach Police Department.

Police said officers pulled over the car Powell was riding in for having an unsafe hydraulic suspension. Officers discovered she had three outstanding misdemeanor warrants, for vehicle theft, resisting arrest and petty theft.

During the arrest she was told by the officers that she would have to remove her hijab, according to CAIR, which says Powell made several requests for a female officer to search her. Police said the scarf was removed and “placed into her property bag where it was secured.” Her bail was set at $36,000.

The political advocacy group says officers informed Powell that she was “not allowed to wear her hijab” and that they were “allowed to touch a woman.”

While handcuffed at the police station, the arresting officer forcibly removed Powell’s head covering and forced her to remain exposed overnight, in plain view of other male officers and dozens of inmates, the suit alleges.

CAIR-LA Civil Rights attorney Yalda Satar says Powell’s First Amendment rights to the free exercise of religion were violated.

At least four female officers were at the station and available to remove Powell’s hijab, which she repeatedly requested, Satar said. One female officer escorted Powell to a holding cell, after her headscarf had been removed, Satar said.

“It’s usually done in private, having them remove it, patting it down so there’s no kind of weapon in there or contraband,” Satar said. “Initially, the request was made at the intersection.”

Police said they have a duty to protect all people who are in their custodial care.

The department “takes great pride in our community partnerships,” according to the statement. “We will continue to work with local religious leaders to make sure we are mindful of cultural sensitivities while ensuring the safety of all involved.” Officials added they will also reach out to other local law enforcement agencies to ensure that the department’s policies and practices are consistent with industry standards.


Apparently the media or police department did not make the mugshot available. Why not?

Meanwhile, Tareq Oubrou, director of the Bordeaux Mosque, said on May 7 that wearing a hijab, or Islamic headscarf, is not a mandatory religious practice for women.

California: Cafe Countersues Muslim Women Fraudulently Claiming Discrimination

An update on the Muslim freeloaders who refuses to leave cafe and then waged legal jihad when kicked out.

Source: Urth Caffe Retains AFLC to Countersue Muslim Women Fraudulently Claiming Discrimination | American Freedom Law Center

Shortly after being served with a fraudulent lawsuit alleging religious discrimination, the Urth Caffe in Laguna Beach retained the American Freedom Law Center (AFLC) to respond to the litigation.

David Yerushalmi, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, issued the following statement:

“This lawsuit is a fraud and a hoax on the courts and the media.  Beware.”

Yerushalmi went on to explain:

“The Urth Caffe did not discriminate against the women who have filed this fraudulent lawsuit.  The claim that these women were asked to leave the café because they were wearing hijabs is laughable.  That night, as every Friday night, a large number of young people, including a majority of whom are Muslim and of Arab descent, make up the base of Urth Caffe’s customers.  Not surprisingly, many of these customers are women wearing hijabs.  None of these other Muslim women were asked to leave.  The women who now claim victim status were not asked to leave, but only to abide by the café’s policy to give up their high-demand outside patio table after 45 minutes to allow other customers, including those wearing hijabs, to enjoy the experience.”

Several key facts have been lost in the media frenzy to present this story in the wake of the hyped press conference of yesterday announcing the filing of the lawsuit.  First, one of two owners who manage the Urth Caffe is herself a Muslim woman.  Jilla Berkman, a co-owner of the Urth Caffe with her husband, was the one who actually authorized the call to the police after the women now claiming victim-status were loud and abusive to the Urth Caffe employees and refused to give up their table per the stated policy.  Second, the lead plaintiff in the frivolous lawsuit is Sara Farsakh, a college-age activist for Palestinian causes who self-promotes her involvement in radical organizations, at least one of which calls for the destruction of Israel.  Third, the organization behind the scenes organizing this fraudulent lawsuit is CAIR, or the Counsel on American-Islamic Relations.

Robert Muise, AFLC co-founder and senior counsel, explained:

CAIR, currently named a terrorist organization by the UAE, was previously named as an unindicted co-conspirator and Muslim Brotherhood-Hamas front group by the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office in the successful prosecution of a terrorist funding cell organized around one of the largest Muslim charities, the Holy Land Foundation (HLF).  HLF raised funds for violent jihad on behalf of Hamas, and top CAIR officials were part of the conspiracy.”

Muise added,

“It is not surprising that the FBI has publicly terminated its outreach activities with CAIR.  Moreover, this fraudulent lawsuit is what the Muslim Brotherhood itself describes as ‘civilization jihad.’  In other words, this lawsuit is being waged to use our anti-discrimination laws not for equal protection, but to attain special protection and rights for sharia-adherent Muslims who reject America and the Judeo-Christian values it stands for.”

AFLC has a history of successfully defending law-abiding Americans and American businesses against CAIR-induced lawsuits.  Just recently, a federal court in Florida dismissed a CAIR lawsuit against a gun store owner in Florida and a court in Michigan ordered a CAIR client to pay thousands of dollars in sanctions for issuing abusive subpoenas.

Yerushalmi remarked:

“This case will be no different. We intend to sue Farsakh and her co-conspirators for trespass and to seek damages for filing this fraudulent lawsuit.”

California: Muslim freeloaders refuse to leave cafe, wage legal jihad when kicked out

Source: Urth Caffe disputes claims of Muslim discrimination | abc7.com

In the video, a woman claims she and her friends were asked to leave the Urth Caffe in Laguna Beach for being Muslim.

But the owner of the restaurant said the woman’s claims are not true.

Sara Farsahk, the woman who posted the video on Facebook, claimed she and her Muslim friends were the victims of discrimination at Urth Caffe.

She explained that they were asked to leave after 45 minutes, to free up a table for customers ordering at the counter.

In the video, the women can be heard stating there are empty tables in the restaurant. When they wouldn’t leave, the manager called police.

The video has been viewed more than 200,000 times.

ABC7 reached out to Urth Caffe, which said it does have a policy that patrons must give up or share their table after 45 minutes when it’s busy.

The owner, Shallom Berkman, said there were people waiting in line that evening.

“Everybody wants an outside seat. We have this policy to make things fair and accommodate everyone who wants to enjoy Urth Cafe,” Berkman said.

But to make things clear, Berkman stated the women were not asked to leave because they are Muslim.

“My wife is Muslim and I’m Jewish. We like to say we’re a sign of world peace,” Berkman said.

But the outrage generated by Farsakh’s Facebook post prompted Yelp to block anyone from reviewing Urth Caffe so that people wouldn’t post their views on the news story.

Berkman said he’d like to offer Farsakh a meal on the house.

“We’re very sorry that she has this feeling that this was something racist, but that is just not the case,” Berkman said.

Farsakh did not want to comment on camera for ABC7’s story. She met with the Council on American Islamic Relations on Monday and they planned to issue a statement on her behalf Tuesday morning.


Terror group CAIR must have told the hijabi’s to wage jihad against the cafe…legal jihad. The plaintiffs did not say how much they are seeking in damages, but it could be millions.

Colorado: Federal jury rules against Muslim workers who sued airport company

via Federal jury in Denver rules against Muslim workers who sued employer – Denver Post  h/t: Islamist Watch

A federal jury Thursday rejected claims by Muslim women that they were discriminated against for clothing required of them by their faith — including head scarves — by a ground services company at Denver International Airport.

The eight jurors also ruled, after almost three weeks of trial, that JetStream Ground Services did not deny the women accommodations because of their religion or retaliate against them.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sued the company in 2013 claiming JetStream violated the civil rights of the Muslim women by refusing to hire them or firing them or reducing their hours if they were religiously observant.

JetStream offers ground services for airlines including cargo, freight, mail handling, aircraft maintenance and cabin cleaning.

The EEOC suit sought back pay and compensatory damages for plaintiffs Safia Abdulle Ali, Sahra Bashi Abdirahman, Hana Bokku, Sadiyo Hassan Jama and Amino Warsame.

The case was heard in U.S. District Court in Denver.

JetStream attorney Raymond Deeny said in court the company does not discriminate against women but had to lay off numerous employees when the company lost a contract with DIA.

Diane King, one of the lawyers representing the women, told jurors during the trial that it was up to them to send Jetstream a message to obey the law.

Andrew Volin, another attorney on the JetStream team of representation, said the company’s owners — who were in court Thursday — had no comment on the jury’s decision.

An attorney for the women who sued JetStream also declined to speak about the verdict and said they were exploring their appellate options.


Related:

Muslim prayer room at Denver Airport separate from room for Christians and Jews

 

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 56,072 other followers

%d bloggers like this: