At PJ Media I discuss a recent example of Islamic indoctrination — one of many — in the public schools.
Thursday was Hijab Day at NP3 High School (Natomas Pacific Pathways Prep), a public charter school in Sacramento, California. Predictably, the school responded to concerns over why a public school would be hosting such an event with charges that critics were motivated by “hatred” and “bigotry.” The whole episode became an illustration of how Islamic supremacists are manipulating politically correct, multiculturalist pieties to advance their agenda.
It all started when a Jihad Watch reader in the Sacramento area who is very close to NP3 High School sent me the flier for the day, which read:
NP3 Hijab Day
January 28, 2015
- The hijab is a headcovering worn by Muslim women as a symbol of modesty and their devotion to God.
- GIRLS! Come to the library Wednesday morning and MSA members will assist you in putting your hijab on.
- You can bring any type of rectangular (or square) that is bought at any store*
*If you do not have any scarves, they will provided for you to borrow for the day
The person who sent me the flier explained that this all started with a student at NP3 High who is an intern for the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), now designated a terror organization by the United Arab Emirates. This student, I was informed, gave a presentation about “Islamophobia” and Islam at what was a mandatory staff meeting that also included an official CAIR representative. The school then decided to sponsor an official “Hijab Day” in cooperation with CAIR. The flier also showed that another Muslim Brotherhood-linked organization, the Muslim Students Association, was also involved.
My source also told me that every female member of the faculty and staff, and students as well, was encouraged to wear a hijab Thursday, and that NP3’s principal, Tom Rutten, strongly encouraged everyone to participate and wear one.
I asked readers of my website, Jihad Watch, to contact Rutten and let him know, politely and courteously, that there were religion-and-state issues involved in this event, and also that public schools should not be working with groups that have demonstrable and proven links to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood. I suggested that readers ask him when NP3 Priest Collar Day, Nun Habit Day, and Kippah Day would be — or is it only Islam that gets this treatment? I also said they should ask him when NP3’s day would be to honor women and girls who have been brutalized and murdered for not wearing hijab, and why he was celebrating a garment that is, for all too many women, a sign of oppression and misogyny. I also asked people to write to Scott Dosick, the president of the Board of Trustees of the Natomas Unified School District, of which NP3 High is a part.
In conclusion, I wrote:
Remember that over at Hamas-linked CAIR they will be licking their chops and ready to pounce on any indication that Rutten or Dosick have been getting “hate messages” or “threats.” Do not give them ammunition in their jihad against freedom: be polite, courteous and reasonable in all communications, limiting discussion to asking calmly why Islam is getting this preferential treatment in a public school.”
Predictably, however, the next day Ibrahim Hooper of Hamas-linked CAIR triumphantly posted on his YouTube page this ridiculous “news story” about the controversy. It is indicative of how such issues are always treated in the mainstream media. Sacramento’s Fox 40 interviewed Rutten and CAIR. Rutten wearily said he had been receiving hate messages, although he neither showed nor quoted any. Fox 40 made no attempt to contact me or anyone who wrote letters to the school expressing concern over Hijab Day. The whole thing was dismissed, as always in the mainstream media, as “bigotry.” The Fox 40 story was also riddled with errors: it claimed that I named the student responsible for Hijab Day in my post; I did not, as you can see here. And the principal’s name is Rutten, not Sutten.
But sloppiness was not the worst of it. In recounting CAIR’s remarks, Fox 40 made no mention of CAIR’s ties to Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood, the jihad terror convictions of several of its former officials, the fact that the United Arab Emirates designated it a terror organization, etc. But it did go out of its way to say I (without naming me) am “anti-Muslim,” without bothering to note the issues regarding the oppression of women and religion-and-state involved in NP3’s Hijab Day.
Meanwhile, Rutten’s own response was passive-aggressive. On the one hand, he denied that Hijab Day was a school event: it was just a student’s presentation, he said, and he denied encouraging anyone to participate. On the other, he circulated an attack on those who had concerns as “hate-filled” and “irrational.” One exchange he had with a woman who was concerned about the program was illuminating in several ways. The concerned citizen wrote to Rutten:
I am a taxpayer, Girl Scout leader, and public education advocate in Southern California, and I am writing to express my shock, dismay, and disappointment at learning that a school in your district, the Natomas Unified School District, held a Hijab Day today, encouraging all girls and women to wear hijabs. This is outrageous.
It’s outrageous primarily because it brought religion into a public school in a way that directly conflicts with the Establishment Clause of the First Amendment, which prohibits school-sponsored prayer and religious indoctrination.
Encouraging girls and women to wear hijabs for “modesty” is clearly an example of religious indoctrination. Can you imagine the public outrage if a Jewish student requested “Yarmulke Day” and all men and boys at the school were urged to wear a head covering of the type that Jewish men and boys wear? It’s unimaginable.
For your future use, here’s a guideline on Religion in Schools produced by the ACLU: www.aclu-tn.org/pdfs/briefer_religion_in_public_schools.pdf.
Additionally, it’s astounding because, per the flyer, “Hijab Day” was organized by, or encouraged by the Muslim Students Association, which is considered by many national security experts to be tied to the Muslim Brotherhood. In other words, tied to terrorism. I could provide you a dozen links to articles about this, but perhaps you’d like to do your own google search. It’s out there.
I know that you are a busy man, Mr. Rutten, but I really would like to understand why the NP3 thought this was acceptable. If you’d please reply to me, I’d appreciate that.
Read the rest here.