Islam - America > Maine Muslim to stand trial for attacking NYC cops; Boulder Terrorist examined again for competency to stand trial; Art Prof sues University for unfair dismissal

..

Maine: Muslim who struck two NYPD officers with a machete

intended to carry out jihad against ‘anti-Muslim’ officials

SEP 16, 2023 9:00 AM BY ROBERT SPENCER

Anyone who stands publicly against jihad violence and Sharia oppression is labeled “anti-Muslim,” in an attempt to give the impression that his or her opposition is rooted in bigotry and hatred of a certain group of people, rather than in rejection of an aggressive and supremacist ideology. This smear can have lethal consequences, as Trevor Bickford demonstrated in Times Square.

Maine man accused of Jihad attack on NYPD officers to stand trial

by Adam Bartow, WMTW, September 14, 2023:

NEW YORK — The Wells man accused of attacking police in New York City near Times Square with a machete on New Year’s Eve is now scheduled to stand trial on federal charges in March 2024.

A judge Wednesday scheduled Trevor Bickford’s trial to begin on March 18. Bickford is charged with four counts of attempted murder of officers and employees of the U.S. Government. He has pleaded not guilty.

He is also facing state charges after a Manhattan grand jury levied an 18-count indictment accusing Bickford of attempted murder in the first degree in furtherance of an act of terrorism and multiple charges of assaulting police officers.

According to the state indictment, Bickford studied radical Islamic ideology, intended to carry out “jihad,” and aimed to attack U.S. officials he thought to be “anti-Muslim.”

According to the NYPD, Bickford allegedly struck two of the officers in the head with the machete, lacerating one of their heads and breaking the other’s skull. All three officers were taken to a hospital and are expected to recover….

Man accused of King Soopers mass shooting scheduled for

late September hearing on competency

by Julia Cardi, Denver Gazette, September 14, 2023:

The man accused of 2021’s mass shooting in Boulder will have a two-day hearing on Sept. 27 and 28 to determine if he has the mental capacity to stand trial.

Ahmad Al Aliwi Alissa, 24, was previously ruled incompetent to face the case against him since late 2021. He has undergone treatment, including forced medication, from state doctors at the Colorado Mental Health Institute at Pueblo. A report submitted by his treatment providers in August to the case’s attorneys and 20th Judicial District Judge Ingrid Bakke indicated doctors now believe he is fit to stand trial.

The defendant is accused of killing 10 people on March 22, 2021 at King Soopers on Table Mesa Drive. He faces more than 100 charges and sentence enhancers, including 10 charges of first-degree murder, counts of attempted murder and charges related to possessing banned high-capacity gun magazines….

Al Issa - ready for his 72 virgins

SEP 18, 2023 9:00 AM BY ROBERT SPENCER

This is odd, because he was reported as having been declared competent to stand trial just weeks ago. Either the report was wrong or his case is tied up in bureaucratic wrangling, or both.

All this focus on whether or not Ahmad Al Issa, who murdered ten people in a Colorado supermarket in 2021, is competent to stand trial has overshadowed other considerations regarding his motive. There has been a great deal of argument over whether or not he was an Islamic jihadi, and one unappreciated bit of evidence in this regard is that when he was apprehended, Al Issa was wearing only shorts. Yet he hadn’t entered the supermarket in this state of undress. Why had he taken off his clothes after shooting people?

A clue may come from 9/11 hijacker Mohamed Atta, who packed a fancy suit in his luggage on that fateful day, in anticipation, according to a letter that was also in his luggage, of “marriage” to the “women of paradise,” whom he would encounter “dressed in their most beautiful clothing.” Islam envisions a physical paradise of eternal sex with heavenly virgins. While Atta envisioned some initial formalities necessitating the suit, Al Issa may have had a more direct approach in mind: he was likely anticipating being killed by police and showing up in paradise undressed and ready for action. Once it was clear, however, that he wasn’t going to be killed, he may have begun to feign mental illness in order to avoid prison and be confined to a much more lax mental hospital. After all, “The Prophet said, ‘War is deceit.’” (Bukhari 4.52.269)

This is not idle speculation, as it was clear from his social media accounts, which were scrubbed shortly after his attack, that Al Issa was a deeply religious Muslim who was intensely worried about “Islamophobia.” None of this, however, has been discussed at all in any open forum in connection with his case, likely because far-Left Colorado officials are as concerned about “Islamophobia” as was Al Issa himself, as well as because of the questions about his mental state. Yet it has been common practice for years to classify as manifestations of “mental illness” what are clearly Islamic jihad attacks, and Old Joe Biden’s handlers had every reason not to want a major jihad massacre in the U.S. so soon after their doddering corruptocrat began pretending to be president.

It has become obvious to me that all deeply religious Muslims are mentally ill. As such, they should be segregated from healthy societies before they commit insane massacres.

There’s another curiosity about this case: the establishment media routinely and unanimously gives the shooter’s name as “Alissa,” despite the fact that he himself wrote it as “Al Issa” on his Facebook and Twitter accounts. Is the media trying to obscure Al Issa’s Arabic and Islamic identity? “Journalists” wouldn’t do that, now, would they?

Court Allows Religious Discrimination Claim to Go Forward

in Ex-Hamline Prof’s Mohammed Images / Islamic Art Controversy

by Eugene Volokh, Reason, September 16, 2023 

As readers of the blog may know, Hamline University declined to renew Erica López Prater’s instructor contract because she displayed Islamic Art containing images of Mohammed in her World Art class, and some students objected. López Prater sued, and on Friday Judge Katherine M. Menendez (D. Minn.) allowed her religious discrimination claim to go forward (López Prater v. Trustees of the Hamline Univ. of Minn.):

Ms. López Prater alleges two theories of religious discrimination: 1) discrimination because she is not Muslim, and 2) discrimination because she failed to conform to certain religious beliefs of others (i.e., that it is improper to view images of the Prophet Muhammad)…. Although the Court appreciates that Ms. López Prater alleges unusual and somewhat indirect theories for religious discrimination, it does not believe that novelty in this context equates to failure to state a claim. Given the lens applicable at this stage, where a plaintiffs’ allegations are taken as true, dismissal is not appropriate.

Ms. López Prater may have difficulty proving her case at later stages, especially because demonstrating that Hamline would have treated her differently if she was Muslim seems very hard to establish. But the sole question before the Court at this stage is whether her allegations plausibly state a claim for relief, and Hamline bears the burden of dismissal….

Ms. López Prater maintains that Hamline would not have labeled the act of showing the images “Islamophobic” if she were Muslim. She also points to the temporal proximity between the uproar over her showing the images and Hamline’s decision not to renew her contract as suggesting a discriminatory motive. Exactly two weeks after Ms. López Prater met with Dean Kostihova and was told that there was a large outcry within the Muslim Student Association and Muslim staff were threatening to resign, she was notified by the department head that the spring semester class she had been scheduled to teach was being cancelled and that her contract would not be renewed. Ms. López Prater responded to that email, suggesting that the change must be related to her showing images of the Prophet Muhammad in class. The department head did not deny this suggestion. The continued description of her conduct as “Islamophobic” by members of Hamline’s administration suggests that it was a problem that Ms. López Prater did not conform to the belief that one should not view images of the Prophet Muhammad for any reason.

The information in Ms. López Prater’s complaint is sufficient to plausibly allege that Hamline took the adverse actions because she was not Muslim or did not conform to the religious beliefs held by some that viewing images of the Prophet Muhammad is forbidden. And while Hamline contends that Ms. López Prater’s non-conformance theory must fail—because she did not allege that Hamline itself held those beliefs—caselaw recognizes that an employer can discriminate against an employee if it acts on the preference of third parties such as customers or clients. Therefore, Ms. López Prater alleging that Hamline discriminated against her by acting on the preferences of certain Muslim students and staff members is sufficient at this stage….======================================================================================================