My latest in PJ Media:
“Islamophobia” is reaching epidemic proportions in Old Joe Biden’s America: the Hamas-linked Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) and the Independence, Mo. law firm of Baldwin & Vernon filed a federal lawsuit Tuesday, claiming that Frontier Justice, a gun store and firing range in the Kansas City suburb of Lee’s Summit, discriminated against a Muslim woman, Rania Barakat, when it wouldn’t allow her to use the range while she was wearing her hijab.
If you believe the likes of CAIR, this is nothing out of the ordinary. You have already accepted the contention that America is a racist, redneck pesthole where roaming Trump supporters routinely make life miserable for pious, peaceful, innocent Muslims. That’s the narrative that CAIR would have you believe, and so it came as no surprise when this cynical and manipulative organization’s lawyers filed this suit. But the facts, as is virtually always the case in situations such as this one, are not as originally asserted.
The Associated Press reported that CAIR and Baldwin & Vernon claim “that the gun range at Frontier Justice in Lee’s Summit enforces its dress code in a discriminatory way that disproportionately affects Muslim women.” It seems that Barakat and her husband “went to Frontier Justice on Jan. 1 [2020] to shoot at the gun range. According to the lawsuit, Barakat was told she would not be allowed to use the range unless she removed her hijab, a religious head covering typically worn by Muslim women.”
That’s a clear case of discrimination, right? Clearly, Frontier Justice hates Muslims and doesn’t want them shooting guns. Or, if it is going to allow Muslim women in particular to fire weapons, they can only do so after being humiliated and forced to deny their faith and submit to the lustful gaze of the infidel males present, right?
That is evidently the reasoning of CAIR and Baldwin & Vernon. “This case,” said attorney Kevin Baldwin, “is about equality in all aspects of American life and about ensuring those promises and ideals set forth by the Founders ‘to secure the blessings of Liberty’ not just for themselves, but all who came after.”
Reality, however, is different. According to AP, “the gun range requires shooters to remove all head coverings except baseball caps facing forward. A store manager explained that shrapnel could cause the hijab and skin to burn.” Bren Brown, president of Frontier Justice, said, “It saddens us that anyone would say we are not inclusive, given that we serve all races and religions every single day in all of our stores. We pride ourselves on this fact, and we strongly believe in America and the Second Amendment that is for every single American. Period.”
There is more. Read the rest here.
somehistory says
For the money they believe they will get; for the power it gives them over the business, and the threat it makes to other businesses where *rules* apply to everyone…mozlum creeps included.
mozlums don’t want to obey any laws. They enter a country, knowing full well that there are laws that governments make and expect everyone to obey; but their intent is to break those laws and get special dispensation for being mozlum.
If whining isn’t good enough to get special treatment, then lawsuits are the order of the day for them. They demand, whine, and then take the business to court.
It’s obvious when one looks at all of the suits and at the hoaxes they pull…most of them using the scarf worn by some mozlums and used as a bludgeoning instrument in order to skirt a company rule or a government law.
They are hoping that one day, they will just show up and everyone will begin bowing and asking them just what they desire and if they are *offended* in some manner, this will be corrected with much bowing and apology. That is their goal.
gravenimage says
Hamas-Linked CAIR Files Discrimination Lawsuit Against Missouri Gun Range
…………..
Even though no headgear save front-facing baseball caps are allowed–it doesn’t matter who is wearing such headgear or what it is. Hope this lawsuit goes down in flames.
Westman says
It seems CAIR does not care that its actions create animosity in American-Islamic relations.
Its name would suggest hosting events and promoting understanding but on closer examination the word “Council” gives away its true intent. When Islam uses the English word, “Council” it usually means a group administering judgement.
The SPLC thought it could be the voice of MLK and then abused power until even the leftist media avoids it. How many more nuisance and money-grab suits until CAIR is irrelevant?
livingengine says
CAIR attacked 28 people on TV last year –
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tBDfeIjfpC8
PRCS says
A good site for all JW readers to visit: regularly.k
I do.
mortimer says
If Sikhs have a right to wear their turbans, then it’s hard to argue that Muslim women can’t wear their scarves.
However, the sikh headdress is meant to honor their God, while the Islamic scarf is the uniform of male supremacism.
The Islamic scarf says the woman is the absolute property of a man and does not suggest worship, though it is demanded by Allah in the Koran. The apparent reason for the scarf is as a uniform to identify Muslim women so jihadis will not accidently rape them.
gravenimage says
I doubt that Sikhs could wear turbans at this shooting range, either.
PRCS says
CAIR will win as Frontier Justice’s poor decisions and actions have made it so easy for them to do so.
Video evidence of customers wearing scarves and rearward facing ball-caps exposed the selective nature of their “forward facing only ball-caps) policy.
They should have made clear WHY hijab is not permitted on the range: because its primary purpose (Islamic superiority) offends “unbelieving” customers and staff.
Qur’an 33:59
gravenimage says
PRCS, I have heard this claim from Muslims–but I have not seen anything to confirm this on Frontier Justice’s own Instagram. Do you have links?
PRCS says
Confirming: see Complaint, Exhibi I.
As I suspected–it was taken by a third party.
Of note: This issue has–per the complaint– been ongoing since 2016. Not sure why CAIR lawyers have just now taken on this particular woman’s two-year-old claim (from 1-1-2020).
The CAIR Press Release: https://www.cair.com/press_releases/breaking-cair-baldwin-vernon-law-file-complaint-against-missouri-gun-range-that-discriminated-against-muslim-woman-in-hijab/
The complaint: https://www.cair.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/barakat_complaint.pdf
I don’t want Frontier Justice to lose of course, but it ain’t looking good for them–IMO.
U.S. business owners need to start throwing the “I’m offended” game back on them by pointing out how offensive hijab’s primary purpose is to we “unbelievers”.
gravenimage says
PRCS–with all respect–neither CAIR nor the suit itself say that others violating Frontier Justice’s dress code were allowed to shoot–the suit just complains that front-facing baseball caps are allowed–but this is explicitly in the dress code.
So I don’t see where they were specfically descriominating against Hijabs–in fact, they don’t single them out at all.
PRCS says
You obviously did NOT read the complaint.
57. An October 10, 2019 Instagram post tagging Frontier Justice shows a woman
shooting at the range while wearing a scarf wrapped around her neck. Exhibit I.
Case 4:21-cv-00934-RK Document 1 Filed 12/28/21 Page 8 of 11
Exhibit I photo is the very last page of that complaint.
gravenimage says
PRCS, of course I read the complaint. On page 36–the very last page–they feature a picture of a woman wearing a hoodie–with the hood *down*–and wearing a thin muffler around her neck.
This does not actually violate Frontier Justice’s dress code, which regulates head gear, not neckwear.
If CAIR *really* had any indications of those violating FJ’s dress code, they would present them–but they do not. And in the first part of the suit, as I noted, they just cite the reference to front-facing baseball caps being allowed as (supposedly) unjust.
And I notice that you are so incensed by FJ’s perported ‘Islamophobia’ that you are posting this on multiple stories–including on the “Robert Spencer Video: Afghan Refugees and the Escalating Threat of Jihad Violence in the US” story:
https://www.jihadwatch.org/2021/10/robert-spencer-video-afghan-refugees-and-the-escalating-threat-of-jihad-violence-in-the-us#comment-2396922
This story is not even about CAIR being out to destroy Frontier Justice, but is just about the threat of more Muslims flooding into the United States…
PRCS says
CAIR infers it. The complaint states it.
gravenimage says
PRCS, a law suit is not supposed to infer anything.
Do they just hope that some dhimmi judge will pretend that rules about headgear are actually about neckwear instead?
Robert Corrow says
“a lawsuit is not supposed to infer anything”
CAIR inferred it.
The lawsuit stated it.
Kenneth J Johnson says
This all smells like a set up to me. It looks like it was all planned. A Muslem husband and wife to enjoy using the range together. Just a little to cute. KEN
gregbeetham says
They run the risk of losing the case and also being labelled a vexatious litigant, once that happens all complaints they bring after that will be viewed in that light.
Beneath the Veil of Consciousness says
Shakedown artists. Reverend Al, are you following this? I think they have your playbook. What a bunch of hucksters. What a hoax. Trading false indignation for money.
notnolib says
I use IMI Israeli made ammo at the range. It’s really good ammo. Diamond cut HP, 124 grain. The Israelis know how to make effective ammunition. I highly recommend it.
OLD GUY says
This is just the beginning of the muslim/islamic invasion plan to disrupt and force sharia law in America. Funny how these same people from muslim countries want to come to America to get away from the wonderful lifestyle they had at home. I guess they think we should do a better job of taking care of them, after all that is the job they expect us lower than dirt Americans to do for them.
Mark says
Why is a terrorist supporting organization, like CAIR, even allowed to operate in the US?
PRCS says
You are wrong.
Pointedly, simply wrong and making excuse, after excuse for the behavior of yet another U.S. business that has given CAIR an easy-win lawsuit.
Period.
* multiple stories
erroneously posted on the Nov 1 article. That you were so worked up about it made my day.
gravenimage says
Is this a reply to my comments?
PRCS says
Yes, of course, it is.
“neither CAIR nor the suit itself say that others violating Frontier Justice’s dress code were allowed to shoot:
gravenimage says
What? I noted that CAIR presents no proof that anyone violated FJ’s dress code–and they haven’t.
And why would it “make your day” that CAIR is as you see it poised to ruin an American business, and that Anti-Jihadists are upset about this?
Robert Corrow says
This Anti-Jihadist wants our side to win.
Robert Corrow says
“What? I noted that CAIR presents no proof that anyone violated FJ’s dress code”
“neither CAIR nor the suit itself say that others violating Frontier Justice’s dress code were allowed to shoot”