Two Muslim suburban Pittsburgh students say they were told to remove their scarves or go home because the scarves were disruptive.
The Gateway High School seniors, 18-year-old Mohammad Al-Abbasi and 17-year-old Ahmad Al-Sadr, chose to go home Tuesday. They say the scarves, also called kaffiyehs, show their Middle Eastern heritage and that they’ve long worn them. But Al-Abbasi says he believes some students and parents recently complained that the kaffiyehs are symbols of hate and terrorism. [Well, duh. —DOB]
Tuesday’s order also comes about a week after Al-Abbasi was told to remove a T-shirt bearing an anti-Israeli sentiment. Al-Abbasi admits he shouldn’t have worn it. [Why not, I wonder? Because it gave credence to the boy’s real position vis a vis hate and terrorism?]
His mother plans to meet with school administrators Wednesday. A message left for the principal wasn’t returned.
CAIR: Penn. Muslim Students Allowed to Wear Kaffiyehs
[Well, apparently, when Mom didn’t get a response from the principle, she called in CAIR to the rescue. Surely that’s a normal mom’s reaction?]
A prominent national Islamic civil rights and advocacy group said today that two Muslim high school students in Pennsylvania will now be allowed to wear kaffiyehs, a checkered scarf worn by many men in the Middle East.
In a meeting this morning with the parents of one of the students and a representative of CAIR’s Pittsburgh chapter, the school’s principal agreed to allow the kaffiyehs. He reportedly said his initial ban on the scarves was an attempt to “diffuse tension” between Jewish and Muslim students. The Muslim students say they suffered verbal abuse after another student at the school published a commentary falsely [according to whom?] claiming the scarves are “hate” clothing.
What do you suppose made the principle cave in against his/her righteous argument?
Beheader hubby was hero to U.S. Muslim activists
TV network founder got award from controversial group CAIR
A Muslim TV network founder who has been charged with beheading his wife was the recipient of an award from the controversial Council on American-Islamic Relations, the self-described Muslim civil rights group that boasts of its influence on U.S. government policy.
The Flying Dutchman: Free-speech hero or an anti-Islamic publicity hound?
Geert Wilders is coming to America.
A member of the Dutch Parliament who was banned last week from entering the United Kingdom because of his inflammatory anti-Islamic views is about to be welcomed to the United States by some notable conservatives.
Geert Wilders–who has publicly compared the Koran to “Mein Kampf”-is scheduled to make public appearances in Washington next week, including a Feb. 27 press conference at the National Press Club. Wilders is seeking to promote his movie “Fitna,” an incendiary short documentary film that depicts Islam as a religion of terrorists.
This article just gets worse. No wonder they’re going out of biz with this kind of slanted reportorial/commentary horsepucky.—DOB
Geert Wilders Is a Test for Western Civilization
“. . . Fast forward to Mr. Wilders’s situation and what’s remarkable is that his most serious detractors — those that aren’t themselves Islamists or spokesmen for supposedly mainstream Muslim organizations — tend to fall to the political left. In Holland, leaders of both the Socialist and Labor parties support the prosecution. In Britain, it’s the Labour government of Gordon Brown that has enforced the travel ban. In Germany, the leftish Der Spiegel calls Mr. Wilders “pushy” and accuses him of making “hate-filled tirades.” Elsewhere he is described as a “racist,” an “Islamophobe,” and so on. . . .
For liberals, the issue is straightforward. If routine mockery of Christianity and abuse of its symbols, both in the U.S. and Europe, is protected speech, why shouldn’t the same standard apply to the mockery of Islam? And if the difference in these cases is that mockery of Islam has the tendency to lead to riots, death threats and murder, should committed Christians now seek a kind of parity with Islamists by resorting to violent tactics to express their sense of religious injury?
The notion that liberals can have it both ways — champions of free speech on the one hand; defenders of multiculturalism’s assorted sensitivities on the other — was always intellectually flimsy. If liberals now want to speak for the “right” of this or that group not to be offended, the least they can do is stop calling themselves “liberals.” . . .
Islamic subversion alleged by speaker
By Brian Mosely
A former FBI special agent told law enforcement and Homeland Security personnel that a network of Islamic organizations are working to incrementally implement Islamic law in the United States. . . .
During a presentation at the Bedford County Emergency Management Agency, former FBI agent John Guandolo briefed members about groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood, which he claims is working with other Islamic groups to slowly implement Shariah, also known as Islamic law, which encompasses all areas of life.
“They’re having great success of implementing Shariah law, I could give you a thousand examples,” Guandolo said. . . .
Why did the reporter feel it necessary to put “alleged” in the title?—DOB
Jailhouse Islam Behind Cop Killing?
. . . “Well, he’s a cold blooded killer is what he is, and he knew exactly what it is he wanted to do,” Ramsey said. Ramsey told Fox 29 News that police are now trying to determine if Scrugs — who also goes by the alias Rasheed Abdulghaffer — may have converted to a radical form of “jailhouse Islam” during his years in prison.
His last name is Scrugs. His first name is now Rasheed. And the cops wonder if he converted?—DOB
Court bars release of 17 Uighurs detainees into US
WASHINGTON – A federal appeals court on Wednesday ruled that 17 Turkic Muslims cleared for release from Guantanamo Bay must stay at the prison camp, raising the stakes for an Obama administration that has pledged to quickly close the facility and free those who have not been charged.
In a showdown over presidential power, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit said a judge went too far last October in ordering the U.S. entry of the 17 men, known as Uighurs (WEE’-gurz), over the objections of the Bush administration. [!!!]
Sufi wants Islamic rule worldwide
Tehreek-e-Nifaz-e-Shariat Muhammadi (TNSM) Chief Sufi Muhammad, who signed a controversial peace deal with the NWFP government on Monday, said he hated democracy and wanted supremacy of Islam over the entire world.”From the very beginning, I have viewed democracy as a system imposed on us by the infidels. Islam does not allow democracy or elections,” . . .
But certainly nobody’s going to take him seriously, certainly not our new Sec/State . . . (see next)—DOB
Clinton Says U.S. Seeks Unity With Muslim World
TOKYO, Feb. 17 — Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said Tuesday that the Obama administration will make “a concerted effort” to restore the image of the United States in the Islamic world and will seek to “enlist the help of Muslims around the world against the extremists.”