PDA

View Full Version : Here it comes, the Punishment!!



Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-14-2014, 08:18 AM
http://www.examiner.com/article/police-captain-punished-for-refusing-to-attend-muslim-brotherhood-linked-mosque

Police captain punished for refusing to attend Muslim Brotherhood-linked mosque

October 13, 2014
10:13 PM MST

The city of Tulsa, Oklahoma, punished one of its own veteran police commanders for his refusal to attend a Muslim religious service being held at a mosque he said practiced radical Islamic dogma, according to court records. He also "dared" to refuse to order his officers to visit a mosque he alleges has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.


Capt. Fields' life became a raging storm simply because he refused to visit a mosque that allegedly has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Capt. Fields' life became a raging storm simply because he refused to visit a mosque that allegedly has ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.

Courtesy of the Tulsa FOP

Captain Paul Fields said he was told to participate in what he characterized as a "proselytizing" Islamic worship service and that he must also order the police officers under his command to also attend and participate in the service. As a result he was relieved of his command and was harassed by the Internal Affairs Division (IAD), a group called the "rat squad" by most American cops in a majority of law enforcement agencies.

"Once some IAD squad begins to investigate you, even if you have an immaculate record as a cop, they dig until they find something that they can point to as being misconduct or corruption," said former police detective Sid Franes, who worked with a former IAD lieutenant in New York. "In Fields' case it appears they were claiming he was prejudiced against Muslims and he wasn't fit to lead police officers," Franes added.

When Fields took legal action against his police department, it ended up before the federal judges who sat on the Tenth Circuit Court of Appeals and the court upheld the punishment of Capt. Fields. In essence the court ruled that the decorated cop should have visited the mosque and brought his officers with him as he was ordered to do by the city's political leaders.

"Here is another example of lawyers wearing black robes telling Americans what church services they must attend. Would they have ruled this way if it were a Muslim being ordered to attend and participate in a religious service at a Hindu temple? Or at a Catholic Cathedral? I think not," notes former police lieutenant and campus police chief Lloyd Herrington. "Fields was part of an object lesson to follow a politically-correct orthodoxy that's taking over the nation and its public and private sector institutions," Herrington said.

Now Capt. Fields, with the help of a legal foundation that fights for constitutional rights, especially First Amendment rights, is aiming to take his legal battle to the U.S. Supreme Court. The Thomas Moore Law Center is providing Fields with pro-bono legal help in fighting not only a major city police department but also a federal court that has "lost its way" with a warped understanding of the U.S. Constitution and America values

The law center's lead counsel, Richard Thompson, said in a statement: “This case is another startling example of applying a double standard when Christian civil rights are involved. If this were a Catholic or Protestant prayer event, I am positive no Muslim police officer would have been ordered to attend. Further, no federal court would have approved the punishment of a Muslim officer had he refused to attend.”

The Muslim event was characterized as the mosque's Law Enforcement Appreciation Day, but it allegedly had nothing to do with appreciation of police officers. According to Fields' attorneys, Law Enforcement Appreciation Day involved the captain and his officers taking a tour of the mosque, attending a meeting with the mosque's leadership, attending the Muslim's weekly prayer service, acquainting the police officers with Islamic religious reading material, and lectures on Islamic beliefs.

The event, which was scheduled for Friday, March 4, 2011, which the Islamic leaders said was a "holy day," was also going to familiarize the cops with a white-washed version of Mohammad's life as well as key elements of the Muslim religion and prayers. Originally, the police officers were asked to attend voluntarily, but the majority of officers refused the invitation. At that point the police were mandated to show up at the mosque.

According to Thomas More attorneys and Capt. Fields, the mosque's clerics were clever in hiding their suspected radical-brand of Islam. For example, according to the law center, the same Muslim leaders had hosted a dinner to honor one of unindicted Imam Siraj Wahhaj co-conspirators involved in the 1993 bombing in New York City at the lower-level of the World Trade Center, that killed six people and injured many others.

Fields and his legal team possess evidence that the same Siraj Wahhaj told Muslims in New Jersey in 1992, that he wished Muslims were cleverer politically so they could take over the United States and replace its Representative-Republic government with a caliphate and Shariah law...................................

Think this man would be so very severely punished for refusing to attend a Christian church???
They are going to create a --"muslim card" to play just like the blacks have that false "race card" to play....
This is Obama's America folks, just like many of us stated was coming after the scum was sworn in.
This is the standard now being set... Obama leads the way... check NASA FOR THAT ....

I stated this was coming here in my thread titled , I Take My Stand, You---- I posted here 3 years ago.


http://www.debatepolicy.com/showthread.php?36912-I-take-my-stand-you

NOW WE SEE VERY CLEAR EVIDENCE OF IT AS I PREDICTED.-Tyr

fj1200
10-15-2014, 08:16 AM
The plan is working perfectly!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA err, nothing to see here. Move along.

Gaffer
10-15-2014, 08:29 AM
The plan is working perfectly!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA err, nothing to see here. Move along.

You're more correct than you know.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-15-2014, 09:16 AM
You're more correct than you know.

His blinders are deep and dark my friend..
Too much kool-aid I suspect as a young kid/adult . :laugh:-Tyr

fj1200
10-15-2014, 09:44 AM
You're more correct than you know.

That even police officers don't have the right to ignore direct orders?


His blinders are deep and dark my friend..
Too much kool-aid I suspect as a young kid/adult . :laugh:-Tyr

Perhaps if you could find a link NOT riddled with hyperbole and inaccuracies. :dunno:

Here are a couple:


"Capt. Fields is certainly entitled to his own, deeply held beliefs, but while on duty, he simply has no right to ignore or abandon those of other faiths," said Daniel Mach, director of the ACLU Program on Freedom of Religion and Belief. "The idea that an officer can pick and choose whom he will assist based on what they believe strikes at the heart of our most cherished constitutional values of religious liberty and equality."

The community event was described as a "casual come and go atmosphere" with a buffet of "American and Ethnic foods" and optional tours of the mosque and an opportunity to observe a prayer service. Officers were not required, however, to participate in any of these activities or even be on site during the prayer service.

The Tulsa Police Department regularly attends community outreach events hosted by religious organizations or held at religious venues of various faiths.
https://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/aclu-brief-argues-tulsa-police-officer-cannot-refuse-serve-people-other-faiths


“I would never assign a police officer to participate in a religious service,” he said. “This is about a group who bonded together because of their religion. We are not going there because they are Islamic. We are going there because they are Tulsa citizens.”
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/24/oklahoma-police-captain-filed-lawsuit-refusing-attend-islamic-event/

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-15-2014, 10:03 AM
That even police officers don't have the right to ignore direct orders?



Perhaps if you could find a link NOT riddled with hyperbole and inaccuracies. :dunno:

Here are a couple:


[/FONT][/COLOR]https://www.aclu.org/religion-belief/aclu-brief-argues-tulsa-police-officer-cannot-refuse-serve-people-other-faiths

[/FONT][/COLOR]
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/02/24/oklahoma-police-captain-filed-lawsuit-refusing-attend-islamic-event/



There is not a man alive that can force me to attend a service in a damn mosque. Gunpoint would be required to ever try to force me and if that was tried Id kill the SOB regardless of what uniform he wore or did not wear!!!

I feel sorry for you people that do not see what is being done to this nation and its citizens in favor of promoting Islam over al other religions here. You people are as clueless as were the Brits!
Britain will fall soon(become Islam dominated/ruled) 20 years at max about ten years at the least, IMHO.

GOOD too see you take up Jafar's slack now that he ran way after finally being exposed for what he was truly.

You ignored the severity of the action taken against the man and the fact that had he refused to attend a CHRISTIAN CHURCH THE DAMN ACLU WOULD HAVE BEEN ON HIS SIDE.
Hypocrisy in action that you pretend to not see and would never admit. -Tyr

fj1200
10-15-2014, 10:11 AM
There is not a man alive that can force me to attend a service in a damn mosque. Gunpoint would be required to ever try to force me and if that was tried Id kill the SOB regardless of what uniform he wore or did not wear!!!

I feel sorry for you people that do not see what is being done to this nation and its citizens in favor of promoting Islam over al other religions here. You people are as clueless as were the Brits!
Britain will fall soon(become Islam dominated/ruled) 20 years at max about ten years at the least, IMHO.

GOOD too see you take up Jafar's slack now that he ran way after finally being exposed for what he was truly.

You ignored the severity of the action taken against the man and the fact that had he refused to attend a CHRISTIAN CHURCH THE DAMN ACLU WOULD HAVE BEEN ON HIS SIDE.
Hypocrisy in action that you pretend to not see and would never admit. -Tyr

That's not a fact, that is speculation. Do you honestly think the officers would have refused an order to attend a function at a church or even a synagogue?

Point 1, he apparently wasn't required to attend a service:

Officers were not required, however, to participate in any of these activities or even be on site during the prayer service.

“I would never assign a police officer to participate in a religious service,” he said.
Point 2, don't take a position whereby you are required to take orders from a superior.
Point 3, rant away if you feel you must avoid actual issues. :)

tailfins
10-15-2014, 10:14 AM
I agree that the Mayor of Houston is a totalitarian, but I think the legal system will come to a reasonable resolution.

fj1200
10-15-2014, 11:31 AM
I agree that the Mayor of Houston is a totalitarian, but I think the legal system will come to a reasonable resolution.

Did you mean this to be in the Houston Mayor Lesbian thread?

Gaffer
10-15-2014, 01:23 PM
That's not a fact, that is speculation. Do you honestly think the officers would have refused an order to attend a function at a church or even a synagogue?

Point 1, he apparently wasn't required to attend a service:


Point 2, don't take a position whereby you are required to take orders from a superior.
Point 3, rant away if you feel you must avoid actual issues. :)

If he was not required to attend then why are they going after him for refusing to attend?

fj1200
10-15-2014, 01:34 PM
If he was not required to attend then why are they going after him for refusing to attend?

Apparently he was supposed to attend the event but wasn't forced to attend a service. :dunno: Not that you would get that from the OP though.

Gunny
10-15-2014, 03:10 PM
Apparently he was supposed to attend the event but wasn't forced to attend a service. :dunno: Not that you would get that from the OP though.

That doesn't make sense.

We can take this one to the 1st Amendment as well ... separation of church and state. Without evidence of wrong-doing, what business do the police, as an official entity, have in a church?

The Chief is correct on Constitutional grounds.

fj1200
10-16-2014, 07:16 AM
That doesn't make sense.

We can take this one to the 1st Amendment as well ... separation of church and state. Without evidence of wrong-doing, what business do the police, as an official entity, have in a church?

The Chief is correct on Constitutional grounds.

Not really. There is no establishment of religion here nor a prohibition of free exercise here. Nevertheless your argument would seem to suggest that any officer could refuse to serve and protect in a house of worship with which they were not a believer; separation of church and state don't you know. Besides, the business they have being there is that they were told do be there.

On another note, and not that you've done so, but why would someone claim "separation of church and state" in this case but then disavow that phrase as not being in the Constitution in other cases?

jimnyc
10-16-2014, 07:20 AM
I grew up with my Mom working at a Catholic church/school as a secretary. Its possible that they were invited to a function at the building but never attended the "religious" part. I know a mosque is different, but they could have had a "meet and greet" that was community related, but stayed entirely away from any services or religious related crap. It's possible it was mandatory to attend, for community relations, but not mandatory of course to attend any services there, or prayers or anything religious for that matter. If me, I would have went so as to avoid trouble with the force, but would have had a few pieces of bacon waiting in my pocket in case anyone tried converting me or praying to me. :)

fj1200
10-16-2014, 07:31 AM
It's possible it was mandatory to attend, for community relations, but not mandatory of course to attend any services there, or prayers or anything religious for that matter.

That's the word on the street.

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-16-2014, 08:04 AM
Not really. There is no establishment of religion here nor a prohibition of free exercise here. Nevertheless your argument would seem to suggest that any officer could refuse to serve and protect in a house of worship with which they were not a believer; separation of church and state don't you know. Besides, the business they have being there is that they were told do be there.

On another note, and not that you've done so, but why would someone claim "separation of church and state" in this case but then disavow that phrase as not being in the Constitution in other cases?

Your words..


Besides, the business they have being there is that they were told do be there.

^^^^^^ First you say he wasn't forced then you utter this insanity quoted above .

Logic is not your strong suit is it? :laugh:--Tyr

Tyr-Ziu Saxnot
10-16-2014, 08:10 AM
I grew up with my Mom working at a Catholic church/school as a secretary. Its possible that they were invited to a function at the building but never attended the "religious" part. I know a mosque is different, but they could have had a "meet and greet" that was community related, but stayed entirely away from any services or religious related crap. It's possible it was mandatory to attend, for community relations, but not mandatory of course to attend any services there, or prayers or anything religious for that matter. If me, I would have went so as to avoid trouble with the force, but would have had a few pieces of bacon waiting in my pocket in case anyone tried converting me or praying to me. :)

Every mosque in this nation should be under NSA investigation and the ones teaching Jihad and Allah commands the murder of innocent people and all infidels should be closed down .
Care to guess how many that would be. I know the answer , for all true mosques teach that..
Feds know it too but turn a blind eye because they are in league with the muslims.
blacks, GAYS/OTHER SEXUAL DEVIANTS , illegals and muslims are the new Super protected classes!
And each group knows it, asks for more and pay bribes to the bought out Dem party .
A reality and a very sad fact. -Tyr

fj1200
10-16-2014, 08:25 AM
Your words..



^^^^^^ First you say he wasn't forced then you utter this insanity quoted above .

Logic is not your strong suit is it? :laugh:--Tyr

Honestly it's like I'm talking to a child. Of course he was "forced"/told to be there, he wasn't apparently "forced"/told to attend a service. Try again at your little gotcha game because you failed at this one.

fj1200
10-16-2014, 08:27 AM
Every mosque in this nation should be under NSA investigation and the ones teaching Jihad and Allah commands the murder of innocent people and all infidels should be closed down .

I'm sure you're all for issuing a subpoena now aren't you? :rolleyes:

wet paper bag > your logic

Gunny
10-16-2014, 02:47 PM
Not really. There is no establishment of religion here nor a prohibition of free exercise here. Nevertheless your argument would seem to suggest that any officer could refuse to serve and protect in a house of worship with which they were not a believer; separation of church and state don't you know. Besides, the business they have being there is that they were told do be there.

On another note, and not that you've done so, but why would someone claim "separation of church and state" in this case but then disavow that phrase as not being in the Constitution in other cases?

That is not at all what I am suggesting. As a matter of fact, I specifically mentioned "without evidence of wrongdoing". Police, as an official entity have no business in church. The police represent the state. The church represents the religion.

It's no less an intrusion on the 1st Amendment than that dingbat mayor in Houston demanding copies of sermons prior their being preached. It's a show force by the state, and or intruding on what is being taught by the religions.

As to your last, I won't agree nor disagree since you apparently have a different definition of the 1st than I.

fj1200
10-16-2014, 04:09 PM
That is not at all what I am suggesting. As a matter of fact, I specifically mentioned "without evidence of wrongdoing". Police, as an official entity have no business in church. The police represent the state. The church represents the religion.

It's no less an intrusion on the 1st Amendment than that dingbat mayor in Houston demanding copies of sermons prior their being preached. It's a show force by the state, and or intruding on what is being taught by the religions.

As to your last, I won't agree nor disagree since you apparently have a different definition of the 1st than I.

I guess we do because separation is not in there. :poke:

I know you're not suggesting that I was just extending the logic which of course falls apart quickly. There are plenty of instances where police do community outreach stuff and that this one just happened to be at a mosque doesn't really change the relationship IMO. The police have "business" there because citizens are there.

Gunny
10-16-2014, 04:12 PM
I guess we do because separation is not in there. :poke:

I know you're not suggesting that I was just extending the logic which of course falls apart quickly. There are plenty of instances where police do community outreach stuff and that this one just happened to be at a mosque doesn't really change the relationship IMO. The police have "business" there because citizens are there.

Community outreach is just that.

And I still disagree. The police have no business there as an official entity unless enforcing the law. As an instrument of intimidation, presence or whatever, no, they don't. It's an intrusion by the state on religion.

fj1200
10-16-2014, 04:23 PM
Community outreach is just that.

And I still disagree. The police have no business there as an official entity unless enforcing the law. As an instrument of intimidation, presence or whatever, no, they don't. It's an intrusion by the state on religion.

Do the police regularly engage in community outreach?

Gunny
10-16-2014, 04:28 PM
Do the police regularly engage in community outreach?

What does that have to do with anything?

If the church INVITES the police, that's one thing. Community outreach gets people off the streets and/or tries to help them. That's a common goal and quite different than intrusion on religion by the state.

fj1200
10-16-2014, 04:32 PM
What does that have to do with anything?

If the church INVITES the police, that's one thing. Community outreach gets people off the streets and/or tries to help them. That's a common goal and quite different than intrusion on religion by the state.

We're apparently just not going to agree on that last part but if the police do community outreach for particular groups then it's not out of line that they do it for other groups and at some point there will be some sort of controversy.

Gunny
10-16-2014, 04:54 PM
We're apparently just not going to agree on that last part but if the police do community outreach for particular groups then it's not out of line that they do it for other groups and at some point there will be some sort of controversy.

There's a difference between invitation and intrusion.