CAIR: Arizona Muslim Sues Intel for Discrimination

This is exactly what Hugh has been talking about: make this country less inviting for Muslims.

What has to happen, though, is that merely asking questions about the nature and aims of Islam, 'radical' or not, must not become a crime or subject to penalties. We must not become like France

In the case, the lawyers for Intel should be sure to use the occasion to ask the plaintiff about his own beliefs. Qur'an and hadith should be copiously quoted from. Muhammad's own history should be adduced, and the plaintiff asked a series of questions to find out what he thinks about such matters as the spread of Islam world-wide, the instruments of Jihad, the institution of dhimmitude, and so on. Let any and all such trials be the occasion to educate the court, the media, the local population about Islam.

And since when does asking questions -- surely many are asking similar questions -- about Muslim behavior, Muslim beliefs -- constitute harassment?

The attempt to silence any open questioning of Islam is part of a sustained campaign. In the 1980s, Jacques Ellul wrote that in France "it is impossible to say anything truthful about Islam." This case is really not about harassment; it is about free speech.

Time to file a few lawsuits of our own for anti-American, anti-Jewish and anti-Christian bias. Hit them where it will do the most damage...

Lawsuits are a very good idea, especially if they can be undertaken pro bono. There are far more non-Muslim lawyers, able and keen to join the fight against Jihad, than there are lawyers willing to offer their services for free to the likes of CAIR. The Motley-directed (Joel Motley, of tobacco lawsuit fame, who comes from South Carolina, and through his actions is redeeming the honor of the same palmetto state that has also provided a number of well-known Saudi and Arab apologists -- whether hirelings, like the PR man Crawford Cook, or the recently-deceassed John C. West, or the ill-concealed antisemitism -- which often turns people into apologists for Islam, and pooh-poohers of the Jihad, for obvious reasons -- that deplorable ranter Ernest Hollings) lawsuit against assorted Saudis deserves support, and praise. If Motley and the lawyers working with him manage to separate the Saudis from some of their allowance money, by winning a lawsuit, they will have done more to take away support for the world-wide Jihad, through the funding of madrasas and mosques, and the continued largescale bribery of diplomats, retired CIA agents, academics (all those King Abdul Aziz Professors, all those "Centers" and "Institutes" for the "study" (read: apology) for this and that, than any single act by the United States government.

Any reservations one has about the tort bar will disappear if tort lawyers manage to sue, and sue again, the Saudis, CAIR, and the rest of those who threaten us, in their promotion of Islam -- and terrorism is but one of their instruments --in ways both obvious and visible, and unobvious and hidden.

As Robert S. said many of our instituitions are
"comprimised", I would say corrupted - especially
the courts.

Instead we must use stigma, cutting comments,
impoliteness, and various forms of cruelty in
dealing with our enemy. Of course all these
things can be masked.

Christians, Jews, loyal American secularists must
start having more children and raising their
minds free of multiculturalism.

I have suggested - seriously - changing the evil
characters in fairy tales from witches and wolves
to radical muslims.

I fear is the culture isn't changed we too will
be on the road to extinction like Europe.

Nah.

I cant agree with this.

What if Catholics were asked "why do you want to kill Protestants?" or "Are you a paedophile ?"
on a constant basis by their supervisors?

Regardless of what one's beliefs are, the workplace should be neutral, and supervisors are not Grand Inquisitors with unlimited power.

Or will you refuse to work with Hindus next?

Well the Hindus are not trying to destroy
our nation and cut our throats.

Those who are trying to kill us deserve the
business end of Grand Inquistors and unlimited
brut power.

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

Who knows whether or not the guy is telling the truth, or he was just no good at his job?

Anyway, it'll make people much more wary about employing Muslims... and I wouldn't blame them if CAIR gets involved as they always do.

America will end up with a high percentage of Muslims on the dole, just like Europe.

http://www.caircan.ca/itn_more.php?id=A59_0_2_0_M

Now that your on the subject of CAIR,please take
the time to visit the CAIR CANADA site and search the archives for press release item
from september 14th 2001.
Not only is the paranoia and denial running
rampant,but Muslims seem more concerned about
having their feelings hurt than taking the time
to mention the un-Islamic act on the WTC
cremated 24 CANADIANS against their will.
Also check the March 2004 archive and see how
a Mosque damage was portrayed as a "Hate-crime"
and the article next to it lists attacks on
Jewish homes and graveyards as a act of
"Vandalism" .

There are close to 40 Islamic groups with
Charity status to fight Islamophobia and the
horriffic injustice in Canada they now claim
stems from Muslims being under seige.
Most of these 40 organizations lay claim to
being the voice of 500,000 Muslims in
Canada. They fail to mention that not all
are citizens and they now tell Muslims they can get a "Know your rights" booklet to avoid helping in assisting the RCMP to catch terrorists.
If Canada is so unjust they now demand SHRIA
law as a guide to live by,then why don't they just select a Islamic State that already has this
liberating doctrine from the Quran.

Just a additional note on workplace protection from verbal or emotional suffering.
I worked with a Muslim that praised the Hamas
and Hezbollah,he also mocked Christians for
having Santa Claus and Easter bunnies as
symbols of their faith. I had to hear this
at least twice a week along with the Israel
Palestine issue.
Now in schools the Christmas break is the
festive season and the usual play was replaced
with the "Multicultural Winter Padgent" .
Muslims scream about a separation of Church
and State yet are given a prayer area in the school for daytime prayers. Concordia University
is under a Human Rights complaint from Muslims
that want a Prayer room,they are also upset that a notice in the washrooms forbids the
washing of feet in a public sink meant for
cleaning hands,it's being seen as an attack on Islam to ban their right to pray 5 times a day.
The wife of Mayer Arar is running for a
Federal seat in Ottawa,this is while he is suing
Canada for 400 million dollars for his
torture in SYRIA. What a sleazy way to
by-pass getting terrorist funds into Canada
to support Mosques that produce Jihadists.

I still feel that if only about 300,000 Muslim
Citizens in Canada have this much power now,wait
until they form a Political party and push for
an Islamic State next to the USA border to
lauch Palestinian style raids against Americans.

There'll be no stopping them since our
current Government appeased Al-Qaida by staying
out of Iraq and giving the Khadr family free
health care.

Cheez said: What if Catholics were asked "why do you want to kill Protestants?" or "Are you a paedophile ?" on a constant basis by their supervisors?

Regardless of what one's beliefs are, the workplace should be neutral, and supervisors are not Grand Inquisitors with unlimited power."

*ROFL* Do Catholics have doctrines of "Slay unbelievers where you find them"? Do Catholics have teachings excusing and justifying paedophilia? Obviously not! However, jihadists are acting in accord with what the Koran tells them to do. That's the fundamental point here, Cheez. The Catholic examples you cite are people being untrue to their faith; beheading people, lying to outsiders, and so forth are prescribed by the Koran.

By rights, Microsoft has the resources to really fight this suit. It would be great if they did I fear that the corporate legal department will cave in rather than fight CAIR. Corporate legal departments have really ended up funding the "diversity" movement because they recommend that a company hired BOGUS diversity trainers as a defense against lawsuits. I could see Microsoft's corporate lawyers advise an out of court settlement along with the adoption of guidelines for non-discriminatory work rules, just to avoid future lawsuits.

By the way no one can openly avoid hiring Muslims without violating the laws against employment discrimination.

> no one can openly avoid hiring Muslims without violating
the laws against employment discrimination.

Very true.

But they can't me from being impolite, abrupt,
and rough.

They can't stop me from eating smelly sausage
in the work place during RAMADAN! - and offering
it too them!

I won't ever stop fighting - ever!

Nor will I ever stop fighting to subvert such
laws and abolish them.

Intel does a lot of business with Israel, and is expanding. That's probably what this is about:

http://www.newsoftheday.com/israel/

Why can't anyone sue CAIR??

Hugh F -

SUBJECT: "tu quoque" arguements

you have mentioned in your posts
the argumentative technique of
"tu quoque"(latin for "he did it too!"???)

i would appreciate if you could educate us a bit here regarding that (common) agrumentative technique and its use in the durrent ideological/religious war.

to be aware of it and not back down when
one is slimed with it and to be able to cut thru its *moral-relativity-smokescreen*
would be a boon to all of those of us here who wish to help our neighbors see thru to the roots of Islam.

the recent dialogue about Muslim "Taqiyya"
was very useful (and confirmed feelings i had had in exchanges with Arabs in the past...
surface "friendly",but no genuine *friendship*)
and i have been making the effort to share the knowledge and web-links with friends.

an example from this thread:

given CheezeNCrackers facile comments:

"What if Catholics were asked "why do you want to kill Protestants?" or "Are you a paedophile?"
on a constant basis by their supervisors?"

and nomorejihad's accurate rejoinder:

"*ROFL* Do Catholics have doctrines of "Slay unbelievers where you find them"? Do Catholics have teachings excusing and justifying paedophilia? Obviously not! However, jihadists are acting in accord with what the Koran tells them to do. That's the fundamental point here, Cheez. The Catholic examples you cite are people being untrue to their faith; beheading people, lying to outsiders, and so forth are prescribed by the Koran."

...i think people becoming aware of the "tu quoque" argumentative ploy will allow them to score meaningful points...not in convincing confirmed Islamic believers,but in waking up our neighbors to the realities of "jihad"
and "Taqiyya".

thanks in advance.

-doc

PS -

this *equivalency arguement*
takes many forms for muslims,
and does so in a repetitive,broken-record manner:

-the "muslim"(???)native americans
and their poor treatment
-the Crusades
-the State of Israel as "worse than the Nazi's"
-the idea that the Old Testamnet and the New Testament are "just as bloody as the Quran"

and on and on and on and on....

their preference for this form of argumentation has many roots....

and i'm sure with a little thought,
each of the poster here at jihadwatch.org
can think of multiple reasons
why the muslim apologists would resort to this type of hollow argument for defending their cause.

Gee, "doc" speaking of FACILE ...

It would be nice if you actually posted an argument, instead of ad hominem.

BTW, do you actually know what "tu quoque" means, or did you just read about it, and think it would make you sound knowledgable?

Here, just for you: http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/ad-hominem-tu-quoque.html

Athena:

I don't think being rude to individual Muslims is an effective means of resisting Islamization.

Becoming educated and active in the local organizations that affect our daily lives helps. When you go to your Church make sure that you show up at the "inter-faith" dialogues ready to ask informed questions.

When your daughter or son attends a youth activity make sure that you attend when a visiting imam is invited to speak to the children.

Follow up on the textbooks your children are reading and take action through the PTA or whatever, if they are not accurate about Islam.

Rudeness to individuals is un-Christian, un-Jewish, unBuddhist and un-Hindu and so on. We shouldn't lose our good manners for pete's sake. It will just given them a "justified and confirmed case of islamophobia" for CAIR to carp about.

Save your energy for the real battles; those of principle

in case you missed it
cheese:

my post was a question.

and i stand my my contention that your comments were facile and nomorejihad's reply
more than adequately answered you.

in addition ,you claim that my comments
addressing your arguement were an
"ad hominem" attack...

"did you just read about it, and think it would make you sound knowledgable?"

i addressed your arguement.
if you take that personally,
i believe that's your issue,not mine.

-doc

My apologies if I misunderstood you.

"Tu quoque" -- you also, you do it too. It can be used by anyone. It is one thing if people in Iceland wish to express dismay at the behavior of half-a-dozen American soldiers at Abu Ghraib. It is quite another if the Arabs, and Al Jazeera, scream feigned outrage about American behavior when their routine treatment of captured enemy soldiers involves extreme torture (which I won't go into here) and frequently execution (how many Israeli soldiers, known to have been captured alive, are ever returned alive? Enough said.).

In American law, there is something called the "clean hands" doctrine, a kind of legally enshrined equivalent of "tu quoque." See Black's Law Dictionary, or any one of the 85 million law students/lawyers in this crazy but lovable country.

There is nothing particularly magical or wonderful about the idea: it simply goes to the hypocrisy of those who feign outrage over some practice of which they themselves are past masters.

I sent this e-mail to CAIR. I will let you know if I get a response:

Hello-

I have spent more time that I should trying to understand the nature of the conflict we currently face…maybe someone there can shed some light.

Let me preface my question with a general statement…having been raised in the Roman Catholic Church, I was taught that there is much in the scriptures that can be more described as parables than the word of God. We were taught to read the Old Testament especially with this in mind, focus upon the teachings of the New Testament, and especially, adhere to the words in the Sermon on the Mount.

Your website defines the Quran as the word of God…and unfortunately, as I read the Quran (especially much of Sura 9 http://www.submission.org/suras/sura9.htm) I see quite a bit that states than non-believers should be subjugated or killed. The scary part as I see it is that it does not seem to take much ”interpretation” to draw this conclusion. Rather, this meaning seems to come verbatim from the text.

Do Muslims repudiate this notion of subjugating the world under Islam? Do Muslims really believe that people who do not believe in One God, should be converted or killed? To say no to this last, in my mind, can only logically follow with qualification by Islamic leaders, on a widespread basis, that some portions of the Quran do not apply and should not be followed as written.

Kirk

kirk:

Any answer they give you will be based on taqiyya.

Kirk--
The Qur'an is an "incondite" (Carlyle's word) jumble, repetitive, illogical, full of non sequiturs and internal contradictions. About 20% of it is completely incomprehensible. The scholar who writes under the name "Christoph Luxenberg" has done brilliant work analyzing the passages that are otherwise inexplicable, by seeking their meaning in the Aramaic in which, obviously, the Ur-text of the Qur'an was originally written (Arabic was not a written language in the seventh and eighth centuries; people vary in their theories as to its origin: some think an early version was composed to Christianize the pagan Arabs; still others think it was to Judaize them. I am inclined to the view that the Arabs themselves, possibly in Damascus (there is no evidence for the Hijazi origins of Islam -- most likely it originated in what is now Jordan, or Mesopotamia, or southern Syria), where Abdel Malek may have had the whole thing concocted from the various texts and bits and pieces of distorted Christian and Jewish lore that were there for the taking and recomposing, put the thing together as a new religion that would be sufficiently familiar to the Christians and Jews they first conquered. Better to present those who are more advanced, richer, and more populous (and who might be able to organize themselves once the initial shock of conquest had worn off) with a belief-system that incorporates a sufficient number of their own, prior beliefs so as to appear familiar and comfortable. And what better way to promote and justify your own role as conqueror than by proclaiming yourself the bearer of a truth -- not a new, improved truth, but the uncreated and eternal truth that always was there, for all people, everywhere, are "born Muslim" (in Islamic ideology), but have their true nature distorted or perverted by "ungrateful" (kufr) Unbelievers.

Unfortunately, though there are internal contradictions, they are resolved through the "science of abrogation" that is practiced by commentators on the Qur'an. And in every case, they have "abrogated" the milder, so-called Meccan suras, and accepted instead the later, much harsher, so-called Medinan suras. And their "science" is final; there is no appeal.

Over many centuries, the world of Islam did throw up a few people who wanted to change the doctrines. Some were openly, others quietly heretical. In the last two centuries, a number of Muslim thinkers tried to see if there was some way they could "modernize" Islam. al-Afghani, Abduh, and others all tried and failed. They did not want necessarily to make Islam more palatable to non-Muslims, or for non-Muslims, but simply to create a world where Muslims could learn to think, and create (often their goal was simply to make Islam more powerful, not to defang it).

There is no way to "reform" Islam. Had there been, one of those talented people would have succeeded. But how do you change the uncreated word of God? How, once Bukhari and Muslim and several others have, a millennium ago, set down the "authoritative" or accepted hadith (stories about the words and acts and even the silences of Muhammad), do you change those hadith? You can't. That is the problem. When Irshad Manji and other Bright Young Things (she hardly knows what Islam is, though she gets enormous mileage out of "being a Muslim") tell us that they can "interpret" away the bad parts, they are flatly wrong. Better to look at what Ibn Warraq, Ali Sina, and the growing number of ex-Muslims, our surest guide in these matters, tell us about the belief-system of Islam and its immutable nature, and its horrible consequences to the mental makeup of the True Believer.

Ataturk did not reform Islam. He limited it. He constrained it. He monitored it. He weakened the ulema, he attacked the mosques, he made deep belief a handicap in the obtaining of government jobs, and an obstacle to joining the Turkish army. It worked. It cannot be permanently kept in place without constant vigilance by secular Turks, who know far better than Westerners all the wiles of the non-secular Turks. A secular Turkish woman described to me how, as she herself was standing in line at the American Embassy to obtain a visa for herself and her daughter (now enrolled in a private school in Massachusetts), a clearly devout Muslim girl in front of her carefully removed her hijab, affixed an earring to each ear, put on high heels, and applied lipstick to her lips just before entering the building. Visa to the U.S. triumphantly obtained, she then wiped off the lipstick, removed the earrings, replaced the high heels, and put her hijab back on, as she marched off. A small vignette, but telling.

To whoever said this-

"I don't think being rude to individual Muslims is an effective means of resisting Islamization."

I totally disagree.

I will be rude to those adherents of a cult founded by a psychotic pedophile!
I will be rude to adherents of a cult who practice female genital mutilation and demand that their women be covered from head to toe because their nutjob 'prophet' mohamMUDHEAD viewed females as 'walking vaginas'!
I will be rude to adherents of a cult that think it glorious to have their children blow themselves up for a death god and take money for it!
I will be rude to adherents of a cult who are actively using our Constitution to set up their cult theocracy in America!
And, I will be exceptionally rude to tree hugging, kumbayah singing pseudo amerikans who don't know their arse from a hole in the ground, and continue to be deliberately ignorant of islam's goals for America thus aiding and abetting them in achieving their goals!!

Yes indeed I will!

Those who are simply rude to individual Muslims will gtive CAIR a documented and provable case of Islamophobia which CAIR will use in its propaganda effort.

Effective efforts against Islamization require effective political organizing and the formulation of effective, legal , and honorable strategies.

Petty insult hurling will only play into CAIR's hands

Hugh -

Thanks for your thoughtful replay to my post. Unfortunately, the more I research and learn about Islam, the more discouraged I become about finding any hope of peacefully coexisting with it.

At first, I beleived the rhetoric of our own President..."the extremists have hijacked a peaceful religion".

For all of the things that Bush has been accused of lying about, this appears to be the only clear cut, inarguable whopper he has cut loose...WMD's? probably shipped to Syria or Iran, and surely that sarin gas shell was not just a solitary shell hidden under someone's bed in a shoebox...no ties with terrorism? what about funding the families of suicide bombers...the first world trade center attack, the attemp on Bush Sr,. the list goes on...

But calling Islam a peaceful religion is like calling a crocodile a lizard. Why lie about this? I can only think that it is our hope to not have to begin the systematic destruction of the Islamic world. We start by creating a beacon of freedom in Iraq, and hope that this creates a domino effect in that part of the world...

I don't think it is going to work. My gut feel is that most of the Islamic world believes the basic ideology outlined in the Quran. But it is not just our presence in Iraq that is seen as a direct affront to the core of their beliefs. It is our presence in the world. What we see as giving them the freedom to choose is seen as an attempt to impose our own ways...be they labeled Christian, Jewish, or hedonistic.

Last night, drinking beers, I posted some posts that sounded pretty hateful...but really, I am very fearful that we will have no choice but to hurl missiles into the Islamic world.

I just doubt that there is anything we can do to sway the hearts of most Muslims to accept the presence of other beliefs and ideologies.

Cair has many questions to answer for and
I see the Video of Mr.Hooper's tirade against
free speech was moved off their home page on
the internet.
Someone is pointing out Muhammed's biography
which included some acts of murder and war,Hooper loses it and resorts to the "Bigot
and racist" rant to defend Islam.
What a sorry man,hollow of any morals or ethics
and shouts down any damaging truths about Islam.

One Islamic American site had charts that gave profiles on Arab and Muslims,it was more of
a census but what shocked me was the item on
shopping.
Seems that 98 percent of Muslims and Arabs
indicated they don't drive or buy American
automobiles.
Looks like they'll rant and rave for jobs in
the USA but won't support the economy,Japanese,German,Swedish,Korean,and British
imports top the list. Since reading this I try to avoid MiddleEast run stores or businesses owned
by Arabs and Muslims.
Just check out the make of car that Hijab is
in,or the trunk decal of an Middle East flag
showing foreign pride.

Cancer eats you from inside to kill you
slowly,CAIR is a cancer in America and defends
the Islamitization of NorthAmerica as part
of the Global domination. This isn't my paranoia
it's in the Quran,a British Imam stated the
world is the property of Allah and Jihad is the
responsibility of Muslims to reclaim all the land
for Allah.

Some questions every attendee to an inter-faith event needs to ask the imam:

(1) Explain dhimmi status.

(2) How come two million Armenian Christians and a somewhat smaller number of Assyrians were massacred or expelled from eastern Anatolia between 1890-1925?

(3) Why is Iraq, the land of the Babylonian Talmud and the place where the prophets Daniel and Ezekiel are buried now virtually Judenrein?

(4) Give us a list of prominent Islamic clerics who have condemned the Armenian massacres and present-day actions against Christians in Sudan and Indonesia.