TEMECULA: Despite threats if Muslims are allowed to build a mega mosque, City Council gives them the go-ahead

E-mails sent to the Temecula City Council in recent weeks warn of dire consequences if Muslims are allowed to build their monster mosque in Temecula’s Nicolas Valley, a rural community in the city’s northeastern corner.

NC TIMES (H/T Aaron)-- From one of the e-mails: “The decision you are going to make is no different than if you had prior knowledge of the Japanese bombing at Pearl Harbor and not only did nothing, you actually supported it.”

VIDEO OF THE PROPOSED MONSTER MOSQUE

There was also a missive that said “How are you all going to feel watching the destruction of this beautiful community knowing you are the cause because you allowed the Muslims to take over.”

The e-mails, from the general public, were forwarded last week to The Californian by members of the Temecula council. The council will rule Tuesday on an appeal of the Dec. 1 Planning Commission approval of plans for a mosque that have been submitted by the Islamic Center of Temecula Valley.

The appeal was filed by Temecula resident George Rombach on behalf of a group calling itself Concerned American Citizens.

NC TIMES – At the end of what city officials referred to as the longest meeting in city history, the City Council early Wednesday morning voted 4-0 to deny an appeal of the Planning Commission’s Dec. 1 approval of the Temecula mosque plans.

The 3:34 a.m. vote, with Councilman Chuck Washington absent, means the Islamic Center of Temecula Valley can move forward with the first phase of its mosque project absent any legal challenge.

Crafting the motion that was eventually approved, Councilman Mike Naggar added some conditions of approval sparked by some residents’ concerns about parking and traffic associated with the mosque.

The house of worship is slated for 4 acres of land near the intersection of Calle Medusa and Nicolas Roads in Temecula’s Nicolas Valley, a rural community in the northeastern corner of the city. The intersection is already home to two churches and some residents were concerned about added traffic congestion associated with the project as well as the possibility of more traffic accidents. (Not to mention five eardrum-shattering calls-to-prayer every day)

Residents who spoke during the hearing said traffic on Medusa routinely exceeds the speed limits due to motorists who use it a shortcut. And the intersection is especially congested before and after church services due to the Presbyterian and Baptist churches are near the site of the planned mosque.

Around the stroke of midnight, the mood in the chambers seemed to swing and a hearing that had been staid and full of planning jargon became a sort of free-wheeling debate pitting area Muslims and local members of the interfaith council against opponents of the mosque project.

Speakers directly challenged the Islamic leaders sitting in the audience. And more than one person criticized the Islamic ideology, saying it fosters abuse of women, violence and other alleged societal ills.

This portion of the hearing also featured speakers who defended the Islamic faith and said the people opposed to the plans for a mosque in Temecula were not motivated by their concerns about traffic issues or the construction of a building in a flood plain.

“It pains me to see Imam (Mahmoud) Harmoush dragged through the mud,” said Rev. Joe Zarro, a Murrieta pastor who serves as co-chair of the local interfaith council. (That’s right, better for your fellow citizens to be subjected to the Islamic death cult everyday)

At one point, Harmoush was targeted by a speaker, Rabbi Nachum Shifren of Santa Monica, who asked him to denounce Hamas, a militant group in the Gaza Strip that has been labeled a terrorist group by the U.S. State Department.

When someone in the audience shouted out that the topic wasn’t an issue related to the mosque proposal, Shifren shouted back, “That’s exactly the issue!”

Naggar addressed this type of discourse at the end of the hearing, saying that some of the people who spoke demonstrated a great amount of fear. He also noted that the fear expressed by some is rooted in tangible events that have been linked with radical Islam, events such as Sept. 11, the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber and the Times Square bomber.

According to the plans for the mosque, access to the center will be on Calle Colibri, a small cul-de-sac it will share with the Baptist church.

Residents opposed to the mosque formed a group calling itself Concerned American Citizens last summer and they have made their feelings known about the project during public meetings, a protest at the center’s headquarters on Rio Nedo and lectures at area churches and the city’s Community Recreation Center.

Offering reports from his personal observation of the intersection, he said the conditions are unsafe now due to the intersection being used as a shortcut by some motorists. With the addition of the mosque traffic, he argued, the intersection would be even more congested.

Some residents oppose the project for the planning reasons detailed above, but there also are some residents who say they oppose the construction of mosques because they think the facilities are not houses of worship but places where people are “brainwashed” with an ideology that fosters violence and a subjugation of the freedoms guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution.

Larry Slusser, a self-identified Mormon, said the U.S. erred following the attack on Pearl Harbor by putting Japanese-Americans in camps and he said there was a danger of making a similar mistake with Islam if we, as a country, blame the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001, or other terrorist acts on a small band of extremists. ”It’s wrong to transfer fear to a race. It’s wrong to transfer fear to a religion,” he said. (Of course, Larry and his Muslim pals share a love of polygamy)

Another member of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, a young man named Braden Harter, also used examples from history to make a point, saying the opposition to the mosque was based in fear. Harter said it seems, based on his reading of history, that this treatment of Muslims by a lot of people in the country is similar to how numerous ethnic minorities were treated throughout the years. (Other ethnic minorities were not systematically attacking America and killing our citizens and soldiers on American soil)

He went down the line, cataloguing anti-Catholic, anti-German, anti-Chinese and anti-Semitic sentiments. ”A lot of people pick on the new kids,” he said. (They are not the new kids, they are the new killers)

Eventually, however, Harter said that Muslims will become just like everyone else in the country and they, too, will start to “hate on someone else” in the future. (Muslim stated goals are not to blend in but to have Islam dominate and subjugate the rest of the country. See poster below)

A prohibition on calls to prayer was included in the original conditions of approval but there was a push to strengthen that section due to some concern that the Islamic Center could attempt to get the condition overturned by stating the ban clashed with its religious beliefs.

MUSLIMS NOT WANTED: DuPage County rejects proposed Islamic Center

But Muslims refuse to take ‘NO’ for an answer.

Chicago Tribune – But Muslim leaders and (left wing) representatives of other faiths are urging DuPage County officials to reject the recommendation of the county’s Zoning Board and allow construction of a mosque near Willowbrook.

Proponents of the plan said Wednesday that they were troubled that a factor cited during the Zoning Board’s discussion of the mosque was that it would add to an oversaturation of religious institutions in the area.

“How many mosques constitute an oversaturation in DuPage County or the unincorporated area of DuPage County, according to the DuPage County Zoning Board of Appeals?” asked Ahmed Rehab, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations, at a news conference. “The answer would be one. One would be one too many apparently, and that’s very disconcerting to us.” (Yes, one more is too many)

The problem with NJ Governor Chris Christie nominating a Muslim for Superior Court Judge isn’t what you think it is

The issue is not just that Sohail Mohammed represented 9/11 detainees.

Original story: nj-governor-chris-christie-nominates-a-muslim-lawyer-who-represented-islamic-terrorist-suspects-for-superior-court-judgeship

Sultan Knish — Representing 9/11 detainees may make him a less than ideal choice in a state that lost a great many people to Muslim terrorism on that day, but if that alone were the issue, there would be little to discuss here. Attorneys can and do represent clients without sharing their beliefs. The problem comes about when the attorney shares the beliefs of his clients.

Examples of lawyers like that include Lynn Stewart and Stanley Cohen. Like them, Sohail Mohammed did not just defend terrorists as an attorney, he made appearances on their behalf as a private citizen. From the Holy Land Foundation trial to Islamic Jihad leader Sami Al-Arian to a defense of Imam Quantani, even when he was no longer acting as his lawyer–Sohail Mohammed always seemed ready and willing to condemn the government’s legal campaign against terrorists, not in court, but as a private citizen. The issue is not so much what Sohail Mohammed did in court, as what he did out of court.

The issue isn’t that Sohail Mohammed is a Muslim.

In 2008, Judge Joseph Charles, a non-Muslim Superior Court Judge, heard a case involving a 17 year old Muslim girl in an arranged marriage who had been repeatedly beaten and raped by her husband. An Imam was called to the stand who testified that a wife must comply with her husband’s sexual demands. And Judge Charles decided that the husband was acting within the norms of Muslim practice, and could not be held accountable for it.

Again, Judge Charles was not a Muslim. Yet he issued a ruling in compliance with Islamic law, a legal code that discriminates against women. Lefty blogs have mocked the idea of Sharia in New Jersey. Except for that woman who stood in front of Judge Charles, it wasn’t a joke, but a horrible reality. And who was Judge Charles, he was a former Senator representing Jersey City, which has one of the larger regional Muslim populations.

We can see that a judge does not need to be a Muslim in order to rule in accordance with the discriminatory codex of Muslim laws. The issue is not that Sohail Mohammed is a Muslim, but what his view of the role of Islam in public life is.

The issue is that Sohail Mohammed is on the board of trustees of the Muslim American Union.

Chistie at an American Muslim Union function

The American Muslim Union is not a benign group, it has been accused of being extremist in the past, and shares much of its leadership with the Islamic Center of Passaic County, a mosque that certainly is extremist. Despite its nature, Christie has appeared at the ICPC and befriended its Imam, Imam Qatanani, who admitted to being a member of Hamas. Sohail Mohammed defended the Imam, as his lawyer and later spoke out as a private citizen. This raises concerns about both Sohail Mohammed and Christie.

There are legitimate concerns that the nomination is going forward as a payoff to Imam Qatanani of the ICPC, whose support Christie solicited during the election.

Imam Qatanani‘s association with the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization which seeks to impose Islamic law worldwide, and which has generated terrorist groups such as Hamas and Al Qaeda, raises legitimate questions about any politicians who would choose to affiliate themselves with him, and any organizations he is involved with. He has already shown the ability to compel politicians of both parties to do his will. The Muslim American Union is closely integrated with Qatanani’s mosque and Sohail’s role in the MAU should bear close scrutiny, particularly in light of recent revelations by terrorist researcher Steve Emerson that the AMU list appears to have circulated anti-semitic apologetics for 9/11.

The issue also is that New Jersey cannot afford a Superior Judge who is sympathetic or affiliated with Islamic extremists.

Rather than ratifying Sohail Mohammed without vetting him, his defenders should perform the due diligence necessary to clear the path for him. So far that hasn’t happened. Any questions raised about Sohail Mohammed have been treated as illegitimate without any actual grounds. Attacks have been leveled against those asking the questions, in order to ridicule the subject off the stage. It is of course easy to dismiss all questions by shouting racism, even though Islam is not a race.

But Judge Joseph Charles was not a Muslim, yet he denied justice to a Muslim woman, because his political background in Jersey City may have predisposed him to give more weight to the discriminatory dictates of Islamic law, rather than the laws of the State of New Jersey.

It is possible to be a Muslim, without following the discriminatory tenets of Islamic law. Without oppressing women, discriminating against gay people or hating Jews or Christians. Likewise, it is possible to be a non-Muslim, and yet give excuse such actions because they have a basis in the Koran. As Judge Joseph Charles did.

Charles is not a Muslim. Neither is Christie. But both have enabled Islamists to avoid the law. The law that says you cannot rape your wife or be a member of an Islamic terrorist organization, just because the Koran says so. Now the question falls on Sohail Mohammed. Can he honestly dispense justice or will he be influenced by his ties to Islamists in the AMU?

It’s not a ridiculous or a theoretical question. New Jersey has already experienced a Superior Court Judge ruling based on Islamic law. That makes it vital that no such incident can take place again. Too much depends on it.

The role of a judge is to bear the burden of the law. American law is the product of the people. Islamic law is the product of a religious theocracy. Any liberal who holds a lifelong membership in the ACLU, and devours articles about the dangers of Dominion Theology, should ask himself why he is so willing to ignore the political rise of a theocratic cult in any corner of the United States? Even at the cost of more abused women being denied justice because Islamic Sharia law says that a wife cannot say no to her husband.

To properly address the controversy involving Sohail Mohammed’s nomination by Governor Christie, it is important to take a long hard look at the American Muslim Union, at his relationship with him Imam Qatanani and at Sohail’s out of court activity and statements on terrorist prosecutions.

ALOHA AKBAR! Fearing an ACLU lawsuit, Hawaii bans prayer in the Senate

But where was that fear when Hawaii approved a bill declaring September 24th to be ISLAM DAY?

Via Founding Bloggers (H/T Susan K)

Hawaii News Now -- In response to a scene that played out in the Senate Chambers last legislative session, senators have chosen to forego invocations held at the start of each floor session. (SEE VIDEO BELOW)

Thursday’s decision was made after careful thought and consideration, with the state attorney general offering his opinion, as well as claims of a lawsuit by the American Civil Liberties Union.

“It’s not saying that everyone should be a Christian or everyone should be a believer, but it’s a recognition that God does exist and to live a healthy life and that faith is important”, said Rev. Dan Chun of the First Presbyterian Church of Honolulu.

“We’re not going to be threatened by a suit. I think it came down to everybody’s individual process on how to conduct their spiritual business”, said Senator Brickwood Galuteria.

We did speak with Mitch Kahle, who started the ruckus last year. He says the decision is a victory for the people and just another step in the quest for lawmakers to follow the laws.

It all started here when leftie pigscum activists stated a fight over prayer in the Senate

Hawaii’s state Senate overwhelmingly approved a bill to celebrate ‘Islam Day’–over the objections of a few lawmakers who said they didn’t want to honor a religion connected to Sept. 11th.

FOX NEWS – The Senate’s two Republicans argued that a minority of Islamic extremists have killed many innocents in terrorist attacks.

“I recall radical Islamists around the world cheering the horrors of 9/11. That is the day all civilized people of all religions should remember,” said Republican Sen. Fred Hemmings to the applause of more than 100 people gathered in the Senate to oppose a separate issue — same-sex civil unions.

The resolution to proclaim Sept. 24, 2009, as Islam Day passed the Senate on a 22-3 vote.

The bill seeks to recognize “the rich religious, scientific, cultural and artistic contributions” that Islam and the Islamic world have made. (That’s a laugh)

“We are a state of tolerance (for everyone but Christians). We understand that people have different beliefs,” said Sen. Will Espero, a Democrat. “We may not all agree on every single item and issue out there, but to say and highlight the negativity of the Islamic people is an insult to the majority” of believers “who are good law-abiding citizens of the world.” (To celebrate Islam anything is an insult to all Americans, another reason why Hawaii should never have become a state)

But Republican Sen. Sam Slom argued that the United States has become too sympathetic toward Islamic extremists.

“I don’t think there’s any country in the history of the world that has been more tolerant than the United States of America, and because of that tolerance, we’ve looked the other way a lot of times, and many thousands of our citizens have been killed by terrorists,” said Slom, a Republican.

The lone Democrat voting against the bill opposed it on church-state separation fears.

PHOENIX: Dr. Zuhdi Jasser on the trial of the Muslim man who ran over and killed his daughter for her ‘Western ways’

Jasser is an outspoken opponent of his fellow Muslims who perpetrate honor killings and terrorism, but conveniently ignores the fact that this kind of behavior is sanctioned in the religion that he still follows.