ACLU opens investigation of Islamic public school in Minnesota

OtisRush.jpg

It must be a cold day in Hell today.

Anyway, here is the ACLU’s March 18 press release (thanks to Richard) about their investigation of the school, and here is the article I wrote last week about the Tarek Ibn Zayed Academy.

Considering the ACLU’s collaborations with CAIR, I expect that the Academy will forthwith get a clean bill of health. And then the ACLU will be able to say, Why, of course we investigated.

FacebookTwitterLinkedInDiggBlogger PostDeliciousEmailPinterestRedditStumbleUponPrint

Comments

  1. says

    Absolutely excellent news, I applaude the ACLU for having the courage to go through with this. It won’t come to anything as ME money will pour into the coffers to fight any law suit.

    Fight it where you find it!

  2. says

    Good news to see the ACLU actually doing something constructive for change. But I’m with Abu, as soon as a sizable donation from Saudi Arabia comes in. . .dead issue.

  3. says

    What a lovely, yet most assuredly useless, empty, token gesture from the ACLU, who have basically cornered the market over the years on gestures like these.

  4. says

    “What a lovely, yet most assuredly useless, empty, token gesture from the ACLU, who have basically cornered the market over the years on gestures like these.”

    Cite some instances.

  5. says

    The tone of this letter is so deferential and mild. I’d love to see a collection of comparable letters sent to institutions that ACLU suspects of establishing Christianity. Do they exhibit the same level of self-doubt and circumspection?

  6. says

    “I’d love to see a collection of comparable letters sent to institutions that ACLU suspects of establishing Christianity.”

    Good point. Why don’t we dig some up and analyze them?

  7. says

    Not only should this schools public funding be suspended, but the school should not be allowed on american soil. Any school that teaches islam does so at the expence of western society. Why is the US shooting itself in the foot by allowing islam to gain an advantage in America? I did not say it first, but I agree we should ban all muslim immigration. Islam is not compatible with western society.

  8. says

    OT ALERT… OT ALERT… OT ALERT…

    This just in from the Barrack Obama speech on that idiot racist preacher… please note the last sentence.

    But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

    Wouldn’t it be nice if Bush or McCain could say that?

  9. says

    “Why don’t we dig some up and analyze them?”

    Yeah, let’s do that.

    We can start with the case, probably only a few years old, where the ACLU went batshit crazy over the fact that there’s a small Spanish mission that has an even smaller cross on the flag of Los Angeles. The fact that the Roman goddess Pomona is the centerpiece of the flag somehow was missed by these interpid defenders of American civil liberties.

    The sole arbiters of the Bill of Rights also failed to do anything about the public college in Minnesota that recently installed, with state funds, footbaths to facilitate muslim religious practices.

    There were several cases in 2002 of the ACLU vigorously defending us from monuments of the Ten Commandments in courthouses. It’s a good thing too, because people who saw the monuments were instantly brainwashed by their mesmerizing powers to become either Christians or Jews.

    In 2000, the ACLU saved the universe by challenging the state motto of Ohio, “With God All Things Are Possible,” as an unconstitutional endorsement of religion. That the founding documents of the United States are replete with references to the Divine, God, and Creator (yet was not considered problematic by the people who wrote the very Bill of Rights the ACLU claims to cherish) was somehow missed by these “scholars”.

    Any internet search on ACLU activity will reveal more spiteful, bigoted, and unconstitutional attacks like these. Combined with lack of ACLU activity on islamic encroachment in areas like public schools (Pretend-You’re-A-Saudi-Muslim Day, anyone?) and airports (Islamic prayer rooms), it’s not hard to see why they fail to meet any criteria for objectivity.

  10. says

    “Yeah, let’s do that.”

    Except that you didn’t “do that.”

    The notion is that correspondence from ACLU addressed to Christian entities would be somehow less deferential to their sensibilities than those addressed to Muslims.

    You didn’t produce missives from the ACLU to Christian bodies.

    You merely trotted out all the old Talk Radio canards and conveniently ignored all the instances where the ACLU has defended the rights of Christians.

    Both would be irrelevant. I want to see the correspondence. Did you find any? I made a cursory search but have yet to find anything compelling.

    I did find this case interesting: http://www.aclupa.org/pressroom/aclucallsforstatedepartmen.htm

    Though it doesn’t fit the criterion of my suggestion: examining missives from the ACLU addressed to Christian bodies and comparing their tone to that of correspondence with Muslim bodies.

    I don’t want you think that I am 100% behind the ACLU. I would have chosen not to defend NAMBLA if I were them, for instance, even if there was a valid case.

    However, the ACLU is frequently criticized and misrepresented; I can’t count how many times someone has been “surprised” when the ACLU has taken their side in an issue.

    :rollseyes:

  11. says

    “That the founding documents of the United States are replete with references to the Divine, God, and Creator (yet was not considered problematic by the people who wrote the very Bill of Rights the ACLU claims to cherish) was somehow missed by these ‘scholars’.”

    The only reference to God in the US Constitution (you know – that document mainly inspired by British and Roman law and which serves as the actual basis of our government) is in the date.

  12. says

    This is laughable. The ACLU press release is inquiring as to whether or not the academy is violating first amendment establishment clause.

    They are concerned that it may have something to do with:

    “…the existence of a centralized carpeted area.”

    “…the school’s website includes a voluntary recruitment form that includes a request for volunteers to assist with Friday Prayers.”

    “…promoting and facilitating after-school religious studies conducted under the auspices of the Mosque that is housed in the same building as the school.”

    Please clarify. We are not sure, even though the mosque is in the school.

    Are the taxes paying for the mosque as well or just the “secular” portion of the school?

  13. says

    The attitude displayed by Charles Samuelson in his letter displays the arrogance of these self-appointed arbiters of civil liberties. While some of the school’s activities appear to promote religion unlawfully, Samuelson takes up the mantle of authority reserved to the court when he deigns to instruct the school in what it MUST do. He has no authority over them, and the only leverage the ACLU has is the threat of litigation. If they file suit, the case will be decided by the court, not the ACLU.

    Now, having said that, I do hope the ACLU’s action will bring further public scrutiny to the situation, and any unlawful abuses will be curbed. But I am not counting on the ACLU to get the job done.

  14. says

    “The attitude displayed by Charles Samuelson in his letter displays the arrogance of these self-appointed arbiters of civil liberties.”

    Wait – I thought the comments-section consensus was that the ACLU was very deferential in its manner of addressing the school administrators.

    As for their following through – let’s all pledge to keep an eye on the case – shall we?

    When all is said and done and settled let’s all make an analysis of all the parties involved.

  15. says

    non-croyant, if the ACLU had historic precedents in their sights, and were so noble in purpose they would bring human life defined at the moment of conception, which it is. Just simply establish this as fact because it is the truth.

    Precedent may not be the correct and proper legal word for what I’m inferring here, but the courts are not a truth seeking function, are contemptible, and the administration of the law is a farce if such a common-sense task for the definition of human life cannot be thought out and implemented into judicial proceedings.

    I am sometimes stunned to realize all the so-called conservative lawyers over the last five decades that have been churned out of all these “prestigious” universities and colleges, the cream of the crop, and none of these “brilliant” young minds have yet thought out the words and rationale to bring the judicial system to admit the adjective describes the noun: “it” is HUMAN life.

    Conservatives, ACLU, “the Law,” … what a joke,

    … and I simply had to get that off my chest. (:~)

  16. says

    “Conservatives, ACLU, “the Law,” … what a joke,

    … and I simply had to get that off my chest. (:~)”

    “Believer is far more EVIL than a False God, for Google
    cut back my Site from 34,000,000 to 4,000,000 in 1 night
    for the above Statement. 1 Day1God exists only as Evil.
    I thought Google was free of such evil bias, predjudice
    and shenanigans that block real truth from being known.
    Once before, Google cut back my site from 89,000,000 to
    34,000,000 in a single act for something I said, that/s Evil
    Google is ONENESS EVIL as I
    experienced and you can see.
    Evil people propose Time Cube Trim.”

  17. says

    It must’ve been a tough act for some, an easier decision for others.

    Collaborate with and assist the forces that be, and save your life, and go pick up your honor and self-respect when it’s over. Or join the resistance and make those bastards start paying for every single future act.

    That’s definitely a “toughie.”

  18. says

    It must’ve been a tough act for some, an easier decision for others.

    Collaborate with and assist the forces that be, and save your life, and go pick up what’s left of your honor and self-respect when it’s over. Or join the resistance and make those bastards start paying for every single future act.

    That’s definitely a “toughie.”

  19. says

    This is Sure too be a BIG MoneyMaker for the ACLU. They sure know how to spot an opportunity, I’m sure the Dinars and being exchanged for $$$$$$$$$$$$$ right now.

  20. says

    The ACLU might be very liberal but they are not composed of stupid member and MAYBE a few of them start thinking that they are digging their own grave when they support some Islamic foundation or defend the interest of Islam in this country.
    and it just takes one person a little bit smarter than the rest of the club to change their views about Islam
    “Educate one and you hit one hundred”
    See what is going to happen.