Michigan: Judge dismisses lawsuit, rules threat of Islamic jihad trumps freedom of speech, assembly

Updates on posts here, here and here: The Rest of the Story. via (Bush-appointed) Judge tosses Dave Agema’s suit after self-professed ex-Muslim terrorist’s speech shut down | MLive.com.

ALLEGAN, MI – A federal judge has dismissed a lawsuit against Allegan Public Schools after police shut down a self-professed ex-Muslim terrorist’s speech at the high school over safety concerns.

The ruling brings to an end a lawsuit that former state Rep. Dave Agema, R-Grandville, and other organizers filed after Allegan Police Chief Rick Hoyer shut down the speech after he learned that the speaker had a $25 million bounty on his head.

Event organizers – Agema, Elizabeth Griffin, Mark Gurley and Willis Sage – arranged for Kalam Saleem [sic], a self-professed former terrorist who teaches the dangers of radical Islam, to speak Jan. 26, 2012, at Allegan High School.

The organizers said that Saleem “has a unique perspective on the internal threat to America posed by Sharia law and radical Muslims as he was once a Muslim involved in terrorist activities who has since transformed himself and converted to Christianity.”

Others, including the Council on American-Islamic Relations, or CAIR-MI, and People for the American Way, dispute his claims he was once an Islamic terrorist, and contacted the school district before the event occurred.

The author’s tagline at the end of the article reads, “John Agar covers crime for MLive.” John Agar is either ignorant of CAIR’s criminal history or purposely concealing it from readers. CAIR is a designated Islamic terrorist group in the UAE and named a Hamas front group by the United States, banned by the FBI, with many of its leaders jailed or deported. Check the HAMAS-CAIR section, lower left of the home page.

The event was to take place from 6-9 p.m. at Allegan High School. Organizers had asked two police officers be present for the event.

Allegan city police, including Chief Hoyer, were at the scene. Shortly before it was to begin, a woman told police “that Kamal Saleem had a $25 million bounty on his head,” records showed.

CAIR complained.

A police officer talked to Saleem’s bodyguard, who didn’t deny the existence of the bounty. The bodyguard “further stated that there had been death threats directed toward Kamal Saleem from Islamic terrorists in the past,” records showed.

Hoyer ordered the event shut down while Saleem was speaking.

Agema and the others filed a lawsuit in U.S. District Court against the City of Allegan, its police chief and officers, Allegan Public Schools and the leaders of CAIR-MI and People for the American Way. U.S. District Judge Janet Neff has dismissed the cases.

The plaintiffs argued that their rights to freedom of speech and assembly were violated, that the school district, which charged $90 for the room, breached its contract and that CAIR-MI and People for the American Way, by contacting the school district, were guilty of “tortious interference of a contract.”

Neff dismissed the final claims, against the school district, on Monday, March 9.

“The School District Defendants assert that the testimony in this case has instead consistently confirmed that it was the report of the bounty, death threats and security concerns that motivated the termination. Indeed, the School District Defendants opine that ‘(had) Defendants been motivated by an intent to muzzle Mr. Saleem based on the letter received from CAIR or objects voiced through telephone calls, they would have refused to allow the event commence rather than cancel it mid-stream,” the judge said.

She said that even if police and school officials mistakenly assessed the risk of danger, the plaintiffs could not show they acted unreasonably.

She cited a previous ruling that said the government didn’t have to wait “‘until havoc is wreaked to restrict access to a nonpublic forum.'”

Neff has earlier ruled that police Chief Hoyer’s decision to halt the speech after hearing the bodyguard report death threats by Islamic extremists “was a reasonable safety precaution and a legitimate reaction to a potentially dangerous situation at a public high school.”

The plaintiffs argued that hecklers were the “true cause” of the speech being stopped.

Indeed, it was CAIR who shut this down because of the content of the speech. And when the event went forward, they pulled a last minute stunt leveraging their co-religionists as a threat to full advantage. As eyewitness and Allegan County Commissioner wrote to us, there was never even a hint of a threat:

At the event, 3 officers instead of 1 showed up at 5:40 pm, there were no threats; there were no picketers, no protesters. We were about 1/4 of the way through Kamal’s speech, of which, “was about protecting our Constitution from Sharia law” and there were no threats to this event! Kamal Saleem has spoken at several venues consisting of Colleges and Schools, never being shut down, with any threat whatsoever. Kamal’s unarmed body guard had explained that, along with the issue “of the rumors” to the officers in detail, about the price on his head and that it was a rumor from 5 years ago!

The Sunset Lanes (where we finished the Allegan venue) on the 26th, 1st assembly of God in GR on the 25th, Streeters Center in Traverse City on the 27th and finally the Moline Baptist Church on the 29th Of January 2012, with Kamal speaking at each event, were all advertised and accomplished in the same week without any threat to the public and without incident!

The true Islamophobes are Chief Hoyer and Judge Neff.

Brooklyn: Muslim who refused to ring up pork suing Costco

via Former employee suing Costco for religious discrimination, happened at Sunset Park location | 7online.com. h/t BNI whose piece is titled: NEVER HIRE A MUSLIM Reason #134

(WABC) — A man is suing Costco for religious discrimination.

He tells Eyewitness News exclusively that when he refused to work with pork, the major retailer sent him outside to gather carts.

“Just because you have a different belief, that doesn’t give anybody the right to treat you different,” said Jean Camara, suing Costco.

That’s why Jean Camara says he’s doing what he’s doing, suing Costco for religious employment discrimination.

The devout Muslim says he was working as a cashier’s assistant at the Costco in Sunset Park Brooklyn in September of 2012 when pork came across the conveyor belt.

It’s against his religious beliefs to touch either pork or alcohol.

Actually, the devout Muslim is either a) ignorant of his so-called religion b) lying or c) both. So says an imam:

Local Imams told The Arab American News that Muslims are allowed to scan and sell pork products if they work for an establishment that requires them to do so.

Camara says after telling his managers this, they transferred him outside collecting the shopping carts.

Camara says they never told him why he was reassigned.

Is being told why you’re reassigned some sort of employment law? He didn’t want to do his job that included ringing up pork-buying infidels.

“I think that as the case progresses in the trial we are in now, I think the facts are going to come out and they’re going to speak for themselves,” said Chauncey Henry, Camara’s attorney.

Camara says he asked his managers if he could work in the electronics department, but his requests were repeatedly denied.

He ended up filing a human rights complaint against the company.

16 days later, he was fired for insubordinate conduct.

“We all share different beliefs so we all should be treated equally no matter what belief we have,” Camara said.

“It’s not OK to discriminate against someone for their religion. It isn’t OK. It isn’t OK to treat them differently others because of what they believe in. I think that everyone is entitled to the same treatment. I think that’s what this case is about,” Henry said.

It’s not ok to falsely accuse employers of discrimination either. This frivolous lawsuit should be thrown out and the devout Muslim should be made to pay all Costco’s expenses and the court costs.

Michigan: Muslim wages legal jihad after arrested for driving illegally, told to remove hijab for mugshot

via The Arab American News – Local Muslim woman filing lawsuit against Dearborn Heights Police for forcing her to remove hijab during arrest. h/t Dee


DEARBORN HEIGHTS – A 27-year-old local Muslim woman is filing a lawsuit against the Dearborn Heights Police department for forcing her to remove her hijab when she was arrested and booked for a traffic misdemeanor offense on July 9, 2014.

Malak Kazan said she was humiliated by the department’s policy, which required her to remove her scarf when she was detained for driving on a suspended license. As part of the booking process, Kazan was asked to remove her hihab for her mug shot.

Kazan allegedly expressed concern about the policy to the police men on duty, claiming it was a violation of her religion. She allegedly asked for a female police officer, but was told they couldn’t provide her with one.

After growing frustration, Kazan was able to speak to a supervisor, who told her that removing head wear was part of the department’s policy and that she needed to comply or she would be further detained.

Local Attorney Amir Makled from the Law Office of Cyril C. Hall, is filing the case at the U.S. District Court this week. He is demanding the department change its policy and is also seeking both compensatory and punitive damages for his client.

“To be exposed in front of men who aren’t part of her immediate family is a serious breach of faith and practice,” said Makled. “She has a sincere belief in her religion and to be demanded to remove her scarf is a clear violation. She felt extremely humiliated.”

After Kazan was forced to remove her hijab for her mug shot, she was allegedly told she couldn’t put it back on while she was in custody.

This incident marks the latest in several discriminatory claims launched against the city of Dearborn Heights and its police department.

In late 2014, the American Arab Civil Rights League (ACRL) also filed a suit against the city claiming that its police officers lacked diversity training and treated Muslim Americans like “second class citizens.”

Makled called on Dearborn Heights Police Chief Lee Gavin to provide the police force with extensive diversity training in order to better reflect the city’s multi-cultured residents.

“It’s clear to me that the city needs further diversity training and more diversity is needed in the police force,” Makled said. “Their policies need to be reviewed and need to reflect and serve the constituents in the city.”

The officers who took Kazan into custody and were involved in her booking process have yet to be identified. The lawsuit is listing the city, its police department, the officers who booked Kazan and Chief Gavin as the defendants on the case.

Kazan told The Arab American News that she wants to set a precedent with her incident so that other Muslim women aren’t placed in similar circumstances with local authorities.

“I honestly don’t want other women to be put in my position, where they are forced to take off their scarf in front of men they don’t know,” Kazan said. “I was so upset. It was such an uncomfortable feeling. I’ve worn my scarf for 12 years and my religion says that I can’t take it off. It’s not just a religious issue; this is a part of me – It’s my culture, my life and my identity.”

Makled said he commends Kazan for having the courage to come forward and be open about her incident.

“It’s absolutely brave for her to come forward and to discuss this openly in public,” Makled added. “It’s a good showing of her character. She wants to be the trailblazer for this new policy change that we are trying to implement.”

Makled believes there are other women in the city who could’ve possibly encountered similar experiences with the department, but may have been too embarrassed to come forward. He is hoping the case will prompt policy changes at the local municipalities.

“We hope this case can be a learning point for other departments,” Makled added. “I do believe this has happened to other residents within the city of Dearborn Heights and if there are women that want to come forward, please contact me so we can work together collectively to change this policy.”


Islamic ambulance chasing to terrorize kufr cops. Terror-linked and listed Muslim Brotherhood-front group CAIR:

…tells The Arab American News that the civil rights organization has successfully collaborated with the Canton and Hamtramck Police Departments to accommodate hijab attire during the lock up process.

However, their attempts were unsuccessful in both Dearborn and Dearborn Heights.

According to Walid, CAIR-MI met with Dearborn Heights Mayor Dan Paletko and Chief Gavin to discuss religious friendly accommodations almost two years ago. They also met with senior officers in Dearborn to discuss similar policies, but have yet to see the departments take any pro-active measures.

Stand your ground mayor, no more sharia accommodations!

Apparently this Muslim broad is no stranger to law enforcement, and had a previous booking photo:

Malak Kazan pictured in a previous booking photo.

Malak Kazan pictured in a previous booking photo.

Clearly she has no regard for American laws, via Fox2:

Kazan had let her driver’s license expire and there were two warrants for her arrest because she never appeared in court. In November of 2014, she was booked and detained.

“Articles such as hats, caps, hijabs, can contain concealable items that could pose a threat or chance of injury to the cops or to themselves,” said Dearborn Heights Police Chief Lee Garvin.

Supreme Court rules for bin Laden-praising, throat-slitting bearded Muslim inmate

Gregory Abdul Maalik Muhammad Holt

via Supreme Court Rules for Bearded Muslim Inmate – ABC News.

A unanimous Supreme Court ruled Tuesday that a Muslim prison inmate in Arkansas can grow a short beard for religious reasons.

The court’s decision in a case about religious liberty stands in contrast to the Hobby Lobby case that bitterly divided the justices in June over whether family-owned corporations could mount religious objections to paying for women’s contraceptives under the health care overhaul.

The justices said that inmate Gregory Holt could maintain a half-inch beard because Arkansas prison officials could not substantiate claims that the beard posed a security risk.

Holt claimed that he has a right to grow a beard under a federal law aimed at protecting prisoners’ religious rights. The law is similar to the Religious Freedom Restoration Act that the court said in a 5-4 outcome in late June could be invoked by business owners who object to paying for contraceptives.

This time around, the Obama administration, religious groups and atheists alike backed Holt, also known as Abdul Maalik Muhammad. More than 40 states allow inmates to keep beards.

Justice Samuel Alito said in his opinion for the court that Arkansas can satisfy its security concerns in some other way when “so many other prisons allow inmates to grow beards while ensuring prison safety and security.”

Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, who wrote the dissent in the Hobby Lobby case, remarked on her view of the differences between the two cases in a brief separate opinion Tuesday.

Unlike the exception the court approved in June for Hobby Lobby, “accommodating petitioner’s religious belief in this case would not detrimentally affect others who do not share petitioner’s belief,” Ginsburg wrote.

Judd P. Deere, a spokesman for Arkansas Attorney General Leslie Rutledge, expressed disappointment with the ruling, but said the court “emphasized that prisons are dangerous places” and that judges must take security into account when analyzing religious freedom claims.

Holt is serving a life sentence for a brutal assault on his girlfriend and is being held at a maximum security prison 80 miles southeast of Little Rock. His case first came to the court’s attention when he filed a handwritten plea to the court asking it to block enforcement of Arkansas’ no-beard rule.

Holt argued in court papers that his obligation to grow a beard comes from hadiths, accounts of the acts or statements of the Prophet Muhammad. In one statement attributed to the prophet, Muslims are commanded to “cut the mustaches short and leave the beard.”

Holt said he understands that statement to mean he should grow a full beard, but offered a half-inch beard as a compromise because California allows Muslim inmates to wear beards of that length.

The case is Holt v. Hobbs, 13-6827.

As posted previously on Gregory ‘Abdul Maalik Muhammad’ Holt:

This pious Muslim convert also threatened jihad on jurors, served prison time for threatening President George W. Bush’s daughters and wrote to jailers promising a deadly “jihad” inside the courtroom should “the verdict in my trial go south.”

Muslims demand NYPD remove terrorism report, halt terror monitoring, expunge records of radical mosques

This is how sharia keeps creeping. Back in 2009, Muslims forced the NYPD to reword the report. Now it appears that Obama, Holder, al Blasio and the Muslim Brotherhood front groups want the evidence to disappear forever. via NYC may yank terrorism report to appease mosque ‘spying’ critics | New York Post

In top-secret talks to settle federal lawsuits against the NYPD for monitoring mosques, the city is weighing a demand that it scrub from its Web site a report on Islamic terrorists, The Post has learned.

The groundbreaking, 92-page report, titled “Radicalization in the West: The Homegrown Threat,” angers critics who say it promotes “religious profiling” and discrimination against Muslims. But law-enforcement sources say removing the report now would come at the worst time — after mounting terror attacks by Islamic extremists in Paris, Boston, Sydney and Ottawa.

Here in New York, Zale Thompson, a man who heeded online calls by ISIS for jihad, attacked two NYPD officers with a hatchet in October.

“The harm is that it sends the message that the NYPD is ­going to back down on its counterterrorism effort in the name of political correctness,” said a former NYPD official. “Shame on the NYPD if they do.”

Sources familiar with the case confirmed that removal of the NYPD report is one of the major sticking points in settlement negotiations.

Also on the table are demands that the NYPD halt any ongoing surveillance in the Muslim community and that records of prior monitoring be expunged, sources said.

With what seems today like a crystal ball, the 2007 NYPD report identified an “emerging threat” — al Qaeda-inspired jihadists in the United States and abroad, hell-bent on attacking their host countries.

“Radicalization is something the NYPD saw happening in Europe,” said the former NYPD official. “It was prescient in identifying this phenomenon and predicting it would increase.”

Among the report’s warnings:

  • “The majority of radical individuals began as ‘unremarkable’ — they had ‘unremarkable’ jobs, had lived ‘unremarkable’ lives and had little, if any criminal history.”
  • Most terrorist wannabes are reasonably well-educated male Muslims between ages 18 and 35, local residents, second- or third-generation with roots in the Middle East or South Asia, and from middle-class families.
  • “The Internet is a driver and enabler for the process of radicalization” — providing information on extremist beliefs to practical advice on constructing weapons
  • Recent converts to Islam can be the most radical. “Their need to prove their religious convictions to their companions often makes them the most aggressive.”
  • Potential jihadists flock to mosques as their religious beliefs deepen, then withdraw from them when “the individual’s level of extremism surpasses that of the mosque.”
  • Once a person is radicalized, an attack can happen very quickly. “While the other phases of radicalization may take place gradually, over two to three years, this jihadization component can be a very rapid process, taking only a few months, or even weeks.”

Under former Police Commissioner Ray Kelly, the report served as a blueprint for the NYPD’s “demographic unit,” which sent plainclothes detectives into Muslim cafes, stores and mosques to detect potential terrorists.

After the initiative was exposed by The Associated Press, Muslim leaders and groups filed two lawsuits in Brooklyn federal court claiming they were subjected to unwarranted surveillance.

The suits complain the radicalization report puts virtually all Muslims under suspicion.

Last April, Police Commissioner Bill Bratton disbanded the intelligence-gathering unit.

A spokesman for the city Law Department said, “Discussions are ongoing, and nothing is final.”


 In another telling sign of reporting incompetence, the NY Post fails to link to the report or mention that the recent assassination of two NYPD officers was also carried out by a Muslim linked to NYC mosques. Find more on both below:


Georgia: Muslims file another lawsuit against city after scaring city into approving mosque in mall

The city is already ****ed. Will some brave citizen please file the challenge!! via The Marietta Daily Journal – Lawsuit filed in Mosque application. h/t Islamist Watch

KENNESAW — A federal lawsuit was filed against the city of Kennesaw on Tuesday in relation to one resident’s application to use a retail shopping center suite as a mosque, said Doug Dillard, the applicant’s attorney.

Dillard said the lawsuit was filed as a precaution in case anyone challenges the City Council’s Dec. 15 vote to approve the mosque application.

“If the opposition to the mosque filed a lawsuit and for some reason the vote that they took on December 15 was declared null and void, then all we’ve got to fall back on is their actions on Dec. 1,” Dillard said.

On Dec. 1, the council voted 4-1 to deny the mosque application, but then reversed that decision on Dec. 15.

However, Dillard said if the Dec. 15 vote is successfully challenged within 30 days of the vote, then the denial from Dec. 1 still stands.

Dillard said the lawsuit is there as a safety net until those 30 days run out. Then, the applicant can know for sure that the Dec. 15 approval stands.

“If the 30-day appeal period goes by and there is no appeal, we can always dismiss the lawsuit, but we had to file it as a preventative measure just in case someone challenged the December 15 action,” Dillard said.

A council member, a resident or anyone could challenge the vote, Dillard said.

Kennesaw Mayor Mark Mathews said he has not heard any indication from council members that there could be a challenge to the approval.

“As for the decision made by council, I have not heard any comments or discussions regarding any changes to the last action taken. The permit was approved unanimously,” Mathews said.

The lawsuit filed Tuesday in the U.S. Northern District Court references the First, Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth amendments to the United States and Georgia constitutions as well as the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, a federal law protecting religious institutions from discriminatory zoning laws, Dillard said.

“Obviously, we hope we don’t have to litigate against the city. We hope the Dec. 15 vote is (upheld),” Dillard said.

Meanwhile, the applicant is beginning to get the retail space ready to become a mosque, Dillard said.

“They’re going forward with more requests for the permits and that kind of thing. They’re going full speed to make use of the property,” Dillard said.

As noted in a previous post, Georgia: Legal jihad terrorizes council members to approve mosque in retail shopping center:

Council member Debra Williams, who voted against the mosque the first time, changed her vote, as did council members Leonard Church, Tim Killingsworth and Jim Sebastian. Cris Eaton Welsh was the only member who voted in favor of the mosque both times.

“We denied a nightclub there a few months ago and we argued the same thing – traffic, noise and parking,” she told WND. “And it would have operated at night when all the other businesses were closed and they were willing to put in sound-proof walls. They should sue our pants off.”

Yes they should.


Minnesota: Feds force city to accept mosque, and only a mosque, in St. Anthony business center

Zoning jihad run amok. By terrorist-named CAIR’s count, it’s one of at least 28 mosques being forced on Americans by it and the DOJ. The city states it will not allow any other religious group to do the same. Laws for Muslims and laws for the rest of us. via Under pressure from feds, city of St. Anthony agrees to Islamic center | Star Tribune.

An Islamic worship center once rejected in St. Anthony will open after all under a settlement reached between the city and the U.S. attorney’s office.

“The city’s decision will be reversed and soon members of Abu Huraira will be able to hold prayer services in this building,” said U.S. Attorney Andy Luger Tuesday, standing outside the office building that has been the focus of a two-year battle.

Luger said he was “proud” of the agreement, which settles a lawsuit his office filed against St. Anthony in August. Eight local imams, four from the new center, stood behind him along with other Somali worshipers.

Not-so-happy looking mayor, Islamo-bidding Luger and his Muslim pals

Not-so-happy looking mayor, Islamo-bidding Luger and his Muslim pals

“God bless you and God bless America,” said Sheikh Abdirahman Omar, vice president of the center. He thanked the Justice Department and “all the neighbors who have reached out to us and offered your support and encouragement.”

St. Anthony Mayor Jerry Faust also praised what he called a “compromise” and predicted that the City Council will approve the settlement. That would undo its 4-1 vote in 2012 to reject the request by Islamic leaders to place the worship center in the building. “We welcome the Islamic Center to the city of St. Anthony,” he said.

The council will vote on the deal at its Dec. 23 meeting and if approved, it is subject to a public meeting to take place no later than Feb. 10, 2015.

The settlement was hammered out in a 12-hour meeting last Thursday before U.S. Magistrate Judge Jeffrey Keyes.

It specifies that the office building, which is owned by the Islamic group, will house the worship center in about 12,940 square feet in the basement. The group will also have use of the atrium on the first floor. The building, located at 3055 Old Hwy. 8, is the former Medtronic headquarters.


Under the agreement a Planned Use Development is created, and the remainder of the building, about 90 percent of the floor space, which is zoned for light industrial use, will be rented out to businesses, as the Islamic Center had originally planned. The agreement will not allow the Islamic Center to expand the worship center into the other parts of the facility.

The deal will not change the character of light industrial land use zoning for that portion of the city, so it will not open the door to other religious groups opening worship centers there, city officials said.

“It is still our position that a light industrial zone is not an area for religious assembly,” said Jay Lindgren, the city attorney. “We don’t admit to any liability.”

The proposed center, which is expected to draw 1,500 Somalis had drawn intense opposition from some people in St. Anthony. The case is one of about 28 nationally in which federal officials are investigating local refusals to allow mosques and Islamic centers, said the Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations.

After the council’s 2012 vote, the Minnesota Chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations asked federal authorities to investigate whether the city had violated the federal law on religious land use.

And even after the council’s vote, the Muslim group proposing the Islamic center bought the former Medtronic Inc. headquarters for $1.9 million.

Ellen Longfellow, the group’s civil rights attorney, said, “We applaud this decision in support of religious freedom and hope for a speedy resolution to the case so that the local Muslim community may have access to the facilities required to meet its needs.”

Who in their right mind would buy a $1.9M building if they thought even for a second that they’d never be able to use it? Who advised them to buy it? Where did they get the money and where did they get the money for attorney’s who are embedded with the DOJ?

As we noted in our previous post on this legal jihad: Minnesota: Obama DOJ Sues to Force Another Mosque on America, City Fights Back

City Attorney Jay Lindgren said. “They are just not allowed in the roughly 5 percent of the city reserved for industrial uses. … An industrial zone is designed to create jobs and be an economic engine.”

What company will want to operate a business in a building that houses a mosque in the basement and atrium? Who would want to work there?

We suggest a pork processing or sales operation, a liquor store, an adult bookstore, a Christian bookstore, or maybe a gay operation of some kind for starters.


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 41,865 other followers

%d bloggers like this: