Knee Jerk Dhimmitude

(with a hat tip to The Last English Prince)

See Waiter admits making up story about customer who called him a terrorist and didn't tip at the Dallas News.

Reminder: Islam is not a race.  Being a Muslim is a choice; being the member of a particular race is not a choice but rather a genetic fact.

The Last English Prince tells us about the erroneous knee jerk reaction of the the Salt Grass Restaurant:

...Problematic is that once Khalil put up his Facebook post exposing anti-Muslim sentiment, Salt Grass management was thrust into the spotlight.

They made an unbelievable error in judgment.

The employee should have been suspended with pay pending the outcome of an investigation. Instead, management banned a customer.

Management should have vigorously noted the unverified nature of the hatefest and welcomed all customers to experience the warmth of their dine-in restaurant culture....

Read the rest HERE. Worth your time.

Muslims Object To Dracula Untold

From Bare Naked Islam (citing New Republic):

...The Sultan’s cruelty then is the will of the Muslim god, who is out to get your children. Today, vilification of Islam has reached such heights, that even when the Sultan is cast opposite history’s bloodiest-psycho-tyrant, it’s Dracula who emerges as the tragic hero.

Read the rest HERE.

Bare Naked Islam's commentary:

DRACULA UNTOLD is the story you definitely haven’t heard before. It tells the tale of Vlad Țepeș, the impaler, a warrior and leader who would do anything to save his family. And when all other options are exhausted, he goes looking for help in places dark and deep, and comes out changed forever.

The trailer for Dracula Untold:

Congress, "All-American Muslim," and Lowe's

What to say to THIS?

US Representatives Hansen Clarke (D-Detroit), Gary Peters (D-Bloomfield Twp.) and John Dingell (D-Dearborn) were among 32 congressmen who authored a letter asking Lowe's chairman and chief executive to reconsider his advertising decision regarding "All-American Muslim."

[...]

In an unrelated political move, California Senator Ted Lieu has said he is considering calling for a boycott of the corporation....

More at the above link.

How can there be this many members of Congress even considering getting involved in a private business's business?

Buy Lowe's!

(Hat tip to THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS)

Exercising its prerogative as a business, Lowe's has pulled its sponsorship of the television show All-American Muslim.

The usual suspects are all riled up over Lowe's decision.

And get this!

A state senator from Southern California said Sunday he was considering calling for a boycott. Calling the Lowe's decision "un-American" and "naked religious bigotry," Sen. Ted Lieu, D-Torrance, told The Associated Press he would also consider legislative action if Lowe's doesn't apologize to Muslims and reinstate its ads.

Legislative action to force a business to sponsor a TV show? Why? Because Muslims (and Islam) must always have the upper hand, even to the point of violating capitalistic principles.

Of course, CAIR is involved:

Dawud Walid, Michigan director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said his group felt "extreme disappointment" at Lowe's "capitulation to bigotry."

Walid said he has heard expressions of anger and calls for a boycott by Muslims but said a key to resolving the Lowe's advertising controversy will be how non-Muslim religious leaders and others react to Lowe's decision....

"Others"? As in legislative bodies and courts?

Lowe's had better not back down on this!

Fellow infidels, if Lowe's stands their ground, buy at Lowe's this Christmas.

Galloping Shari'a

An interesting anecdote (hat tip to Razorsharp Claws):

Obama Disappoints American Muslims

Cry me a river.

From the Washington Post:

...Obama has not visited a mosque in the United States since taking office, although he has done so in Egypt, Turkey and Indonesia as part of his project to repair U.S. relations with the Muslim world. Bold abroad, Obama’s outreach has been largely invisible at home as Muslim Americans confront enduring suspicion and, in some cases, outright hatred a decade after the attacks.

Read the entire whining thing at the above link.

Infidel Women Must Cover Up During Ramadan?

From special swimming sessions for Muslimas to all women must cover up! That's the push now in Australia, so as not to offend Muslims during their so-called holy season (hat tip to Bunkerville):


Get ready, fellow infidels! This could be coming to the United States sooner than we can possibly imagine.

Hell, before you know it, we infidel women here in the United States will have to cover up during Ramadan just to run errands in certain communities.

It's all about establishing Islamic supremacism in the West. Muslims are not satisfied to confine their supremacism to their own countries.

Minnesota Head Start Bans Santa Claus

The Pagan Temple, citing this story about immigrants from Somalia being offended by the giant elf, states:

Perhaps a compromise is in order. Instead of his traditional attire, dress him in flowing white robes and wrap a rag around his head. Instead of saying "Ho, ho, ho" and carrying a big bag of wrapped presents, he can scream "Allahu Akbar" and wave a blood dripped scimitar.

Or, we could actually do the sensible thing-tell them to adjust to our culture or get the fuck out. Now that's a concept.

I vote for doing the sensible thing.

Safety Is Now Racism: Muslim Woman Cries, Bitches, and Moans Cuz Skating Rink Won't Let Her Wear Hijab

Safety Is Now Racism: Muslim Woman Cries, Bitches, and Moans Cuz Skating Rink Won't Let Her Wear Hijab

From Jawa:

A Muslim woman was asked to either remove her headscarf or wear a helmet because the scarf, should it fall off, posed a danger to other patrons. She, of course, is now claiming discrimination. Covering her hair is much more important than the safety of others...



Click on the title to get the whole story over at Jawa.

Damage Control

Some Muslims are now worried that the firing of Juan Williams might backfire on them:

WASHINGTON — NPR's decision to fire news analyst Juan Williams for controversial remarks he made about Muslims on airplanes was not only roundly criticized by conservatives Thursday, but was viewed with alarm by some Muslim American activists and scholars.

Public radio executives defended the move, saying that Williams' comment on Fox News violated the news organization's ethics guidelines and undermined his credibility. Williams said Monday on "The O'Reilly Factor" that he worries when he sees Muslims in traditional garb on airplanes.

But some prominent Muslim thinkers expressed concern Thursday that his firing would contribute to what appears to be a widening gulf between Muslims and non-Muslims in the United States...

Yes, the gulf is getting wider. People are catching onto the fact that there is no freedom of expression in Islam and that Moslems want to impose their strictures, their shari'a, on America.

I say: Let the gulf grow even wider. That's the only way for those who love and want to maintain Western civilization to preserve our way of life.

You can't win a battle if you don't draw battle lines.

Muslims Threaten Facebook, Give In To Our Anti-Freedom Demands, Or We'll Pick Up Our Toys and Run HomeTo Mommy"

From NBC:

Facebook has a new PR issue on its hands.

Apparently, its made as many as 2.5 million customers mad enough to threaten a boycott.

The group claims to represent Muslims who are mad about the removal of four Facebook pages.

These are the pages no longer available on the site:

• Facebook.com/Rassoul.Allaah
• Facebook.com/Logo.Ramadan
• LikesFacebook.com/I.Love.Mohammed
• Facebook.com/Quran.Lovers

The deadline is a week from today.  The group claims it has hundreds of thousands of users who are ready to jump ship to another site called madina.com, which is a Islamic social networking site.

For now, the group is trying to get its message out by posting the same comment over and over on Facebook blogs.

Facebook Admins, Moderators, Mark Zuckerberg, Dustin Moskovitz, Sheryl Sandberg, and Matt Cohler; Although you have attended the world's best communication skills courses you have been most successful in growing great hatred and hostility between you and Muslims around the world, but seriously this time you have caused an almost unrepairable damage.

They go on to list their demands:

1. Reactivating the four pages that have been disabled
2. Adding a Facebook Term that illegalizes disrespecting all Islamic religious symbols, including Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) and the Qur'an, as well as Prophet Moses (PBUH), Prophet Jesus (PBUH), and the original Bible
3. Disabling any Facebook Page, Group, or Event that shows direct or indirect disrespect towards Islamic religious symbols

We have a message into the Facebook press folks to see if they have a comment on the movement.    We also have no idea why the four sites were taken down in the first place.  Hopefully Facebook will answer our inquiry soon.

Check back for updates.

 Such Muslims are invited to go fuck themselves up the ass with a pork sausage.

Our Dhimmified State Department

From Jihad Watch, citing the Daily News:

State Department bows to Sharia, condemns Motoons

WASHINGTON: The US has deplored blasphemous images of Prophet Muhammed (PBUH) on Facebook as "deeply offensive to both Muslims and non-Muslims alike", saying America does not condone expressions that lead to violence or hatred. The US State Department also expressed respect for any actions that need to be taken under Pakistani law to protect their citizens from offensive speech, but expected a balance between restricting offensive material and ensuring flow of information for the Internet users. "Obviously, this is a difficult and challenging issue. Many of the images that appear today on Facebook were deeply offensive to Muslims and non-Muslims alike," Philip J Crowley, assistant secretary of state, said.

I think I'm gonna puke.

Visit Jihad Watch to read Robert Spencer's commentary.

In part, Mr. Spencer said:

[T]he Motoons are not a stunt, not a joke, not a raspberry to anyone, not an exercise in obnoxiousness or gratuitous offense. The Motoons are rather the foremost battleground in the defense of the freedom of speech today.

Be sure to read the rest!

Meanwhile At NCIS

NCIS as in the actual Naval Crime Investigative Service, not the CBS television series.

According to this Washington Post Muslims-whine-again piece, entitled in the newspaper's hard-copy edition as "Lifting the Siege on American Muslims" and "Compassion, prejudice and American Muslims" in the online edition:

...[L]ast week, the Naval Criminal Investigative Service stopped using an anti-Muslim film "Obsession: Radical Islam's Obsession with the West" to train agents.

Not unexpected, of course, what with BHO's outreach to the Islamic world and actual ban on certain terminology.

Here's an excerpt indicating the gist of the article cited above:

Today, though, American Muslims feel under siege. Too many feel the American dream is not for them.....

Muslims in the United States feel as if they're under siege?

Is that so?

Remember the days before 9/11, all those years during which we didn't need to have security all over the place, including taking our shoes off at airports, bag searches at museums, and barriers in front of our national memorials and museums? We have the jihado-maniacal Muslims to thank for all these inconveniences and delays.

Yet, American Muslims feel as if THEY are under siege.

We are living in the Age of Inversionism.

So far, the above-cited article has four pages of comments. Just one of those comments as a sample of the dust-rolling going on at the Washington Post's web site:

goodmam wrote:
I believe myself to be a tolerant person. I have been acquainted with Muslims as neighbors, colleagues, and students and knowing them has enriched my life. I know they represent the face of American Islam far more than the fanatics do. But I can never understand their thundering silence when the fanatics shout. As Americans, aren't they offended by deadly plots against their countrymen? Have they been cowed into silence? If the fanatics distort their religion, where is their outrage? I know that moderate people are usually outshouted by extremists, but Mr. Shater's remarks will have more power if Americans hear vigorous criticism and condemnation of Muslim terrorism from American Muslims.
5/15/2010 12:35:47 PM

Let's Review The List Of Lists

"The List of Things That Offend Muslims," over at The Amboy Times. This list is one that should be read and reviewed often so as to see just how much and Muslims are complaining about all the many offenses to their sensitivities.

Today, of course, Amboy posted on the recent threats directed against the creators of South Park (posted earlier here at IBA).

Today, Amboy also posted about this:

New York, Apr 12: Katie Holmes’s new film ‘Son of No One’ enraged Muslims in Queens when a prop mentioning the Koran was posted in public view.

CNN Readers Respond To Radical Muslims Threats On The Lives Of South Park Creators

UPDATE HERE AT THE TOP OF THE POST - Hmm, some interesting comments in our comments section as well. You'll have to check them out.

First, here is the article CNN ran:

Security Brief: Radical Islamic Web site takes on 'South Park'

"South Park" showed the Prophet Mohammed disguised in a bear suit.

The radical Islamic Web site Revolutionmuslim.com is going after the creators of the TV cartoon series "South Park" after an episode last week included an image of the Prophet Mohammed in disguise.

Revolutionmuslim.com, based in New York, was the subject of a CNN investigation last year for its radical rhetoric supporting “jihad” against the West and praising al Qaeda leader Osama bin Laden. Its organizers insist they act within the law and seek to protect Islam.

On Sunday, Revolutionmuslim.com posted an entry that included a warning to South Park creators Trey Parker and Matt Stone that they risk violent retribution – after the 200th episode last week included a satirical discussion about whether an image of the prophet could be shown. In the end, he is portrayed disguised in a bear suit.

YouTube: Watch Trey Parker and Matt Stone talk about the decision

The posting on Revolutionmuslim.com says: “We have to warn Matt and Trey that what they are doing is stupid and they will probably wind up like Theo Van Gogh for airing this show. This is not a threat, but a warning of the reality of what will likely happen to them.”

Theo van Gogh was a Dutch filmmaker who was murdered by an Islamic extremist in 2004 after making a short documentary on violence against women in some Islamic societies. The posting on Revolutionmuslim.com features a graphic photograph of Van Gogh with his throat cut and a dagger in his chest.

The entry on Revolutionmuslim.com goes on to advise readers:

“You can contact them [the makers of South Park], or pay Comedy Central or their own company a visit at these addresses …” before listing Comedy Central’s New York address, and the Los Angeles, California, address of Parker and Sloane’s production company.

Contacted by CNN, the author of the post, Abu Talhah al Amrikee, said that providing the addresses was not intended as a threat to the creators of South Park but to give people the opportunity to protest.

Over still photographs of Parker, Stone, van Gogh and others, the Web site runs audio of a sermon by the radical U.S.-born preacher Anwar al-Awlaki, who is now in hiding in Yemen. The sermon, recorded some time ago, talks about assassinating those who have “defamed” the Prophet Mohammed – citing one religious authority as saying “Harming Allah and his messenger is a reason to encourage Muslims to kill whoever does that.” U.S. officials say al-Awlaki is on a list of al Qaeda leaders targeted for capture or assassination.

The clip ends with a warning on a graphic directed at Parker and Stone, saying “The Dust Will Never Settle Down.”

Al Amrikee said the purpose of including the al-Awlaki sermon in his posting was to remind Muslims that insulting the prophet is a severe offense for which the punishment in Islam is death. He said RevolutionMuslim may hold protests about the show.

Calls to Comedy Central were not returned.

My question is this, WHAT KIND OF PUSSY-ASSED GOD IS THIS ALLAH, THAT HE CAN BE "HARMED" BY HUMAN BEINGS?

OBVIOUSLY, ALLAH IS MY BITCH!

Now, here are some of the responses from CNN readers:

In my opinion this is would be aiding and abiding anyone who wishes harm on these cartoonists. Isn't that a crime? Just because you are clever with a threat doesn't make it less a threat. Home land Security, put these guys in front of an American jury and let's see if they interpret this posting as a creditable threat.
It's hard to believe groups like these reside in the U.S. especially in New York of all places, this must make the families of the victim of 9/11 feel like no one is on their side. Posted by: JMcTigue

It's interesting that while this group enjoys the right to free speech under the U.S. Constitution, they do not respect others rights to the same. Posted by: Buddy

If Islam is a religion of peace then where is the outrage from the rest of the Muslim community? These are obviously thinly veiled threats designed to get someone to do their dirty work no matter what they say.

Posted by: Bill

The FBI needs to shutdown that website and charge the owner with conspiracy, racketeering and threats. Posted by: JamesKerr

Go read more comments at CNN.

It would seem less and less people are fooled by Islam these days.

By the way, here’s a screenshot of RevolutionMuslim’s post/death-threat (their website is currently offline)

Here’s their video. . .

Smear tactics against the Simon Wiesenthal Center

Following Arab "claims" that the Simon Wiesenthal Center's planned Museum of Tolerance in west Jerusalem is supposedly built on a Muslim cemetary, the MSM has launched a smear campaign. First:

(IsraelNN.com) A group of Arabs joined by European human rights activists have joined forces to demand that the United Nations halt the building of a Jewish "Museum of Tolerance" on a plot of land they say is an ancient Muslim cemetery.

This is just the latest in a series of attacks made on the project, which is run by the Simon Wiesenthal Center in Los Angeles, since 2004. Islamic groups and various Arabs have complained that the museum is slated to be built on the Ma'aman Allah (also known as Mamilla) cemetery. They say the burial site contains thousands of graves and dates back hundreds of years. Some gravestones are present today in the area.

The Simon Wiesenthal Center replied to the Arab outcry by saying the museum would be built adjacent to the cemetery, on a plot which is currently a parking lot. The Center said the parking lot, which was built 50 years ago, was not protested at the time of construction.

It's obvious they just don't want one built even near the cemetary. And by the way:

The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem has allowed building over gravesites in the past, according to a report by the Associated Press.

Jewish/Christian cemetaries, to be sure.

Some of the most distasteful MSM attacks have been from the UK Times, The Examiner, Metro Santa Cruz, McClatchy, and another from the Los Angeles Times, which even perpetuates the lie that "palestinians" were expelled, and not a single mention of those Jews who were driven out of Jerusalem's Old City and such places during 1948. At least they allow for a counterpoint made by Marvin Hier about the real location:

Listening to the few vocal opponents of our Museum of Tolerance Jerusalem project -- among them the notorious Sheik Raed Salah, leader of the extremist Northern Branch of the Islamic Movement in Israel -- you would never know that the Israeli Supreme Court deliberated for almost three years before unanimously rejecting all their claims and authorizing the Wiesenthal Center to begin construction. Just six weeks ago, Chief Justice Dorit Beinish also rebuked those who re-petitioned the Supreme Court for an "abuse of court proceedings," ordering them to pay professional costs.

Still, our opponents would have you believe that in the name of tolerance, our bulldozers actually have invaded the adjacent Mamilla Cemetery, desecrating ancient Muslim tombstones and historic markers.

They don't want you to know the real facts. The museum is not being built on what can rightfully be called the Mamilla Cemetery, but on a three-acre site in the heart of West Jerusalem that, for more than half a century, served as the city's municipal car park. Each day, hundreds of people of all faiths parked in the three-level underground structure without any protest from Muslim religious or academic leaders or interest groups. Additionally, telephone and electrical cables and sewer lines were laid deep below ground in the early 1960s, again without any protest.

As the Supreme Court noted in its ruling, "for almost 50 years the compound has not been a part of the cemetery, both in the normative sense and in the practical sense, and it was used for various public purposes." It also noted: "During all those years no one raised any claim, on even one occasion, that the planning procedures violated the sanctity of the site, or that they were contrary to the law as a result of the historical and religious uniqueness of the site. . . . For decades this area was not regarded as a cemetery by the general public or by the Muslim community. . . . No one denied this position."

In fact, the entire area of the Mamilla Cemetery had long been regarded by Muslim religious leaders as mundras -- abandoned. A cemetery not in use for 37 years is considered mundras and without sanctity. That explains why in 1946 the most prominent Islamic religious figure of the day, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem, presented plans to build a Muslim university on a large portion of the Mamilla Cemetery itself (a rendering of which we presented to the court). Today, the concept of mundras is widely accepted and practiced in Jordan, Lebanon, Egypt, Saudi Arabia, the Palestinian territories and throughout the Arab world.

[...]

Recent critics such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations, Americans for Peace Now and the Center for Constitutional Rights argue that the Museum of Tolerance should abide by a higher standard than the letter of the law. We do, as the above quote from the court confirms. When we first heard of protests against our plan, in January 2006, our lawyers attempted to meet with Salah but were rebuffed. Once a legal case was filed, the Supreme Court's mediator tried, but fared no better. We offered solutions to build without disturbing the bones -- also rejected. We offered to restore the neglected and virtually abandoned nearby Mamilla Cemetery -- not interested.

And that's just another sign of how this only stems from anti-semitism.

The Jerusalem Post also makes clear the real picture here, as does the Jerusalem Dispatch. Those MSM publications who've lent themselves to the attacks here should retract and apologize for helping cause all the trouble they're going to cause.

THE CROSS INSULTS ISLAM! RED CROSS URGED TO DROP THE CROSS AS IT'S SYMBOL, IT'S SO ....."CRUSADES"

From Atlas Shrugs:

You can't make this stuff up.

In the UK, their Labour minister is urging the Red Cross to drop one of the most recognizable icons the world. It insult Islam.

If the cross is "undermining the work of the humanitarian organisation" why provide "humanitarian" aid to anti-humans? Why nourish people that kill, persecute, force conversion on non-believers.

Islamic supremacism is not just territorial. It's .......... everything.

Calls for Red Cross symbol to be axed over links to the Crusades via Europe News hat tip Kenny S

Labour minister has sparked controversy by claiming that an alternative symbol is needed for the Red Cross because of the logo's supposed links to the Crusades.

Foreign Office minister Chris Bryant said that the historic emblem risked undermining the work of the humanitarian organisation.

His intervention came as MPs debated the adoption of the 'red crystal' - a diamond-shaped badge - to avoid the religious connotations of the cross and crescent symbols currently used by the international body.

But critics said the new insignia was a sop to political correctness and warned that it may be the first step towards it replacing cross and crescent. Others fear that it may not be as widely recognised on the battlefield.

'It is, in an effort not to be contentious, possibly too anodyne to serve its purpose,' Tory MP John Hayes said.

Philip Davies, a Tory backbencher, said: 'At face value to the layman it seems at best a solution looking for a problem and at worst another example of extreme political correctness.

[...]

'There is also a risk of confusion with many different symbols, and that terrorists may exploit that to mask themselves when carrying out attacks,' he added.

The founding Conference of the Red Cross Movement in 1863 adopted a red cross on a white background – the reverse of the Swiss flag – as the emblem of the voluntary medical personnel who assisted the wounded on the battlefield.

It was never intended to have any religious meaning and is thought to have been intended as a tribute to traditionally neutral Switzerland, which hosted the conference.

However, the symbol unintentionally raised suggestions that it was somehow linked to the Hospitallers, a military order which took part in the Crusades, the centuries long series of military campaigns waged by Christians from Europe.

Subsequently, a red crescent emblem was adopted in tandem.

Mr Bryant told the Commons: 'The reference to the Crusades is... not lost to some people which, of course, anybody involved in the Red Cross would wholly deprecate.

'The truth of the matter is that it has been difficult in some places for us to ensure that these connotations of a religious war or a religious crusade don't undermine the work that the Red Cross or Red Crescent is able to do.'

The International Red Cross and Red Crescent Movement hope that the neutrality of the red crystal will help improve protection for casualties, military medical services and humanitarian workers.

It was chosen because it is devoid of religious and other partisan connotations.

Next stop

Anonymous comments:

'Soldier badge is banned'?

ARMED cops patrolling Heathrow Airport have been banned from wearing tiny Union Jack badges in support of British troops. 

It appears as if there is a concerted uniform effort to rid England of her Christian symbolism. 

Where the fuck is the Church of England?

Imposing The Moslem Dress Code On Infidels

The camel's nose (cultural sensitivity) is inside the tent, so further demands appear.

From this source:

Six Flags asks workers not to wear shorts on Muslim Day

It’s Muslim Day at Six Flags Magic Mountain on Saturday and Santa Clarita resident A.J. Jones is curious to know if the park hosted other religious events in the past.

This is Magic Mountain’s first year hosting Muslim Family day. It is far from its first time hosting a religious event, said park spokeswoman Sue Carpenter.

"I think it’s great as long as they open it up to everyone," said Jones, whose friend works at the park.

Jones is concerned the park’s supervisors asked the employees to wear pants Saturday to cover their legs despite the unusually high heat. "I think its kind of strange," Jones said. "It’s been so hot for pants."

But Carpenter said not to worry.

"Out of respect, we request the employees wear their uniform pants, instead of their shorts," Carpenter said. "It is only a request, it is not mandatory."

The Islamic Circle of North America requested the day as a celebration for end of Ramadan....

Just watch. It's a request this time around. But in the future, we can expect a mandatory dress code for infidels when in the presence of Moslems, maybe during all of Ramadan. Watch for that step in Europe first, then here in the United States.

Farfetched? I don't think so. After all, the West has already made dhimmitudinal concessions which were unthinkable just two or three years ago.

By the way, when I ran spellcheck on this posting, the word "Moslems" came up as an error. It isn't.

(Hat Tip to Islam In Action for the above link)

Old Country Buffet Targeted By CAIR

From this source:

A civil liberties group for Muslims on Friday called upon the Eagan-based company that owns Old Country Buffet to investigate an incident involving a girl who says she was denied a summer restaurant job because of her religious headscarf.

The Minnesota chapter of the Council on American-Islamic Relations is asking Buffets Inc. to investigate the incident, offer a written apology and participate in the group's workplace sensitivity and diversity training.

[...]

In the Minnesota incident, Maryam Abdi, 16, who lives across the street from the Old Country Buffet in Fridley, said she interviewed for a part-time job as a cashier in July.

At the start of the interview, she said the manager asked her if she wore her headscarf all the time. Abdi said yes, and explained that she wears the scarf as part of her religion. She said the manager told her it would violate the company's uniform regulations and asked if she'd be willing to take it off for the job. Abdi declined, but said she told the manager she would be willing to match her scarf with the uniform....

Starting at the bottom of the hour when WC and I interviewed Nonie Darwish on KFNX on July 31, 2008, Ms. Darwish shared with us her views as to why the West should be concerned about Moslem women who wear the head covering. The recording of that interview is available for download in the sidebar here at IBA. Listening to her response is worth your time and might surprise you a bit. The practice has an underlying motive.

The ACLU Advises Moslems

Not a surprise, of course.

Excerpt from this article in the LA Times:

May 29, 2008

A report that mosques in Los Angeles and San Diego are under federal surveillance has resurrected fears in the Muslim community about government monitoring and led two civil rights groups Wednesday to call for congressional hearings.

[...]

Corey Saylor, Washington spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, said the article in the San Diego Union-Tribune "has again raised concerns that our community is being watched."

[...]

ACLU lawyers regularly go to mosques to advise worshipers that they do not have to answer questions from FBI agents about how long they have been in the United States, how often they attend services and what they get out of the sermons...

How many jihadomaniacs are hiding behind the ACLU's lawyers?

Crossposted at THE ASTUTE BLOGGERS , where Reliapundit comments as follows:

amazing: the aclu actually has an outreach program to teach disobedience and obfuscation to potential enemies.

this is treason.

at the very least, this is like a mob lawyer who advise his mafia clients on how to set up rackets in advance of doing crime.

lawyers are then not representing clients, but part of the criminal enterprise.

lawyers have done time for this, and the aclu should be busted for this.