As usual, CAIR, Â the unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case is behind this:
Probing infidel resistance per Litigation Jihad:
* doesn’t work for Jedi’s: Jedi Forced Out in Wales
A Web site, called “Flying While Muslim,” has been launched to seek support for theÂ six American imams (Islamic religious leaders) who say their rights were violated in 2006 when they were removed from a US Airways flight in Minnesota and arrested.
The “Flying While Muslim” site offers background information and updates about the six imams case and about racial and religious profiling of airline travelers. It also seeks donations to support the legal challenge to the airline. (shamelessly lifted from the Bunglawussi site)
A popular national chain of clothing stores is being sued by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission for allegedly not hiring a Muslim Tulsa teenager because she wears a hijab, a religiously mandated head scarf.
The EEOC filed the lawsuit Wednesday against Abercrombie & Fitch in U.S. District Court in Tulsa, citing the Civil Rights Act of 1964, modified in 1991, as the basis for the action.
The suit says that Samantha Elauf, 17, applied in June 2008 for a sales job at the Abercrombie Kids store in Woodland Hills Mall. A district manager allegedly told her that the hijab, which Elauf wears in observance of her religious beliefs, did not fit the store’s image.
“Defendant refused to hire Ms. Elauf because she wears a hijab, claiming that the wearing of headgear was prohibited by its Look Policy, and, further, failed to accommodate her religious beliefs by making an exception to the Look Policy,” the lawsuit states.
Elauf went to the Council on American-Islamic Relations-Oklahoma, which helped her file a complaint with the EEOC in Oklahoma City.
See also theÂ Guardian, 18 September 2009
Australia: Former Gitmo ape Mamduh Habib does Litigation Jihad also:
|Australia: Lawyer Tells Court Habib Case Outside Its Jurisdiction|
|Australia: Habib Case Raises Complex Issues|
|Australia: Keep Courts Out of Habib Case: Government Lawyersjoel Gibson|
- Khaled El-Masri has a long history of violent crime and Jihadist associations but always escapes doing jail time. He is also an expert in Litigation Jihad and a former Gitmo inmate….
Why would a Muslim teen in Islamic dress want to work at Abercrombie and Fitch? Think about it. It’s all about imposing Islam.
This should be good. Anyone with teenagers is quite familiar with the practically pornographic catalogs ofÂ Abercrombie and Fitch. Those soft porn fashion books are not allowed in my house. Left meets Islam. They will totally cave.
US teen alleges bias by Abercrombie & Fitch (hat tip Stan)
(OKLAHOMA CITY) A Muslim teenager claims in a federal lawsuit that she was denied a job at an Abercrombie & Fitch clothing store at a Tulsa mall because she wore a head scarf.
In the lawsuit filed Wednesday in U.S. District Court in Tulsa by theÂ Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 17-year-old Samantha Elauf said she applied for a sales position at the Abercrombie Kids store in the Woodland Hills Mall in June 2008. The teen, who wears a hijab in accordance with her religious beliefs, claims the manager told her the head scarf violates the store’s “Look Policy.”
“These actions constitute discrimination against Ms. Elauf on the basis of religion,” the lawsuit states.
A spokeswoman for the New Albany, Ohio-based retailer declined to comment on the lawsuit but said the company has “a strong equal employment opportunity policy, and we accommodate religious beliefs and practices when possible.”
An attorney for the EEOC claims the company violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which protects workers from discrimination based upon religion in hiring. The EEOC said the lawsuit was filed after the agency attempted to reach a voluntary settlement.
“It is unlawful for employers to treat applicants or workers differently based on their religious beliefs or practices in any aspect of employment, including recruitment, hiring and job assignments,” EEOC senior trial attorney Michelle Robertson said.
The suit seeks back pay for the teen and a permanent injunction against the retailer from participating in what it describes as discriminatory employment practices. It seeks undisclosed monetary and non-monetary losses resulting from “emotional pain, suffering, anxiety, loss of enjoyment of life, humiliation and inconvenience.”