Minnesota: Hijab-wearing sharia apologist running for Mayor of Rochester

News Ticker >

Minnesota: Hijab-wearing sharia apologist running for Mayor of Rochester


Ads by Revcontent
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Google+

Regina Mustafa says she hopes to be a voice for all of Rochester, but accuses critics of sharia of “fearmongering and hate.” In the second article below, she harshly criticizes Phillip Parish for saying that Islam is the “antithesis of the Constitution.” But it is. Islam means slavery and the U.S. Constitution is a document of freedom. Regina Mustafa is simply not being honest in contradicting this. If there were any enemedia reporters worthy of the name, they would challenge her on sharia oppression of women and non-Muslims, as well as its Jew-hatred and calls for violence. But no one will do that. If she is elected mayor of Rochester, Minnesota, the citizens of Rochester who voted for her will get what they deserve.

“Mustafa says she’ll run for mayor of Rochester,” by Randy Petersen, Post Bulletin, February 5, 2018:

Regina Mustafa says she hopes to be a voice for all of Rochester.

The founder of Community Interfaith Dialogue on Islam announced this morning that she is a candidate for Rochester mayor.

“I decided the mayoral race is the best fit for me,” she said. “I’ve had a vested interest in city government for awhile.”

In December, Mustafa said she planned to seek local political office but had not decided which position to pursue.

Earlier last year, she began a campaign for the 1st Congressional District after Rep. Tim Walz announced plans to run for Minnesota governor, but she suspended that campaign in October.

However, Mustafa said that didn’t end her desire to give back to her community.

“This city has given me so much, and I look forward to serving as Rochester’s next mayor and working to create a city that is welcoming and inclusive for all,” she said. “Affordable housing, a livable wage, and public transit will be top priorities.”

Mustafa moved to southern Minnesota 12 years ago from Philadelphia. She and her husband are raising two children, and she is pursuing a masters degree in Human Services from Winona State University — Rochester….

“Candidate under fire for calling Islam ‘antithesis of Constitution,’” by Heather J. Carlson, PostBulletin, January 19, 2018:

A long-shot Republican gubernatorial candidate is getting national attention for writing that he does not consider Islam a faith and that it is “the antithesis of the Constitution.”

Phillip Parrish, of Kenyon, wrote the comments in an email to Community Interfaith Dialogue on Islam founder Regina Mustafa. Mustafa, of Rochester, sent Parrish an email inviting him to sit down with her after learning he had recently attended a meeting featuring Usama Dakdok, an outspoken critic of Islam.

“I do not object to you attending his presentation, but wanted to know if you would like to speak to a Muslim about Islam. Since you have attended this talk about my faith, I figured you would also like to hear from a person who actually practices Islam,” wrote Mustafa, a former DFL candidate for the 1st Congressional District seat.

Parrish responded by saying he would be willing to meet but that “I separate Islam from the word faith because faith takes belief and Islam requires only submission.” He added that he would ask her to publicly denounce Sharia law and declare that “Islam, Sharia and the Quran are the antithesis of the U.S. Constitution.”

Mustafa posted the email exchanges on her Facebook page. Since then, Parrish’s response has drawn sharp criticism from civil rights organizations. The Southern Poverty Law Center wrote about Parrish’s comments on its “Hatewatch” blog. Muslim Advocates, a nonprofit based in Oakland, Calif., blasted Parrish’s remarks.

“Anti-Muslim bigotry like this emboldens those who would discriminate or commit acts of violence against Muslims. We’ve seen hate crimes, violence, and bigotry skyrocket as politicians have increased their attacks on Islam and Muslims,” said Muslim Advocates Policy Director Scott Simpson.

Mustafa has called on Parrish to drop out of the Republican gubernatorial race. In a press release, Parrish pushed back, saying he has no intention of leaving the race. In an interview, Parrish accused Mustafa of making a “disingenuous request” to meet with him in order to advance her own propaganda.

What is his response to being called anti-Muslim?

“I see myself as a person attempting to expose those who are attempting to set up rules and laws and regulations contrary to the U.S. Constitution,” Parrish said….

“It’s causing harm to people. Thousands of analysts like myself, thousands of law enforcement specialists have been trying to tell leadership this same message for over 20 years. And no one seems to want to listen or they live in some kind of utopic world of no, people really don’t think like that. They don’t really mean to cut somebody’s hand off because they stole something. They don’t really mean to put someone to death because they defiled themselves with an unclean woman. They don’t really mean to rape little boys on Thursday night because the imam gave them permission to do that,” Parrish said.

Mustafa rejected the idea that her invitation was in any way insincere. She said she is deeply disturbed by Parrish’s comments, saying they demonstrate a lack of understanding about Islam. She said Muslims in America have demonstrated a respect for both the U.S. Constitution and their religion and his comments are unfair to the Muslim men and women who have served in the U.S. armed forces.

“If you don’t think (Islam) is a faith, then my religious freedoms to you are negotiable and are at risk and I find that very alarming, and if he is saying that to his supporters, it’s the epitome of fear mongering and hate,” Mustafa said….

Rochester DFL Rep. Tina Liebling, a candidate for governor, called on Republican candidates to “denounce Mr. Parrish’s ignorant, islamophobic statement and pledge to encourage peace and understanding among Minnesotans regardless of race, religion, or national origin.”

Views: 22

Comment

You need to be a member of Tea Party Command Center to add comments!

Join Tea Party Command Center

LIGHTER SIDE

 

Political Cartoons by Tom Stiglich

ALERT ALERT

 Judge Orders Mueller To Prove  Russia Meddled In Election 

Judge Dabney L. Friedrich

A Washington federal judge on Thursday ordered special counsel Robert Mueller’s team to clarify election meddling claims lodged against a Russian company operated by Yevgeny Prigozhin, an ally of Russian President Vladimir Putin, according to Bloomberg.

Concord Management and Consulting, LLC. – one of three businesses indicted by Mueller in February along with 13 individuals for election meddling, surprised the special counsel in April when they actually showed up in court to fight the charges. Mueller’s team tried to delay Concord from entering the case, arguing that thee Russian company not been properly served, however Judge Dabney Friedrich denied the request – effectively telling prosecutors ‘well, they’re here.’

Concord was accused in the indictment of supporting the Internet Research Agency (IRA), a Russian ‘troll farm’ accused of trying to influence the 2016 US election.

On Thursday, Judge Freidrich asked Mueller’s prosecutors if she should assume they aren’t accusing Concord of violating US laws applicable to election expenditures and failure to register as a foreign agent.

Concord has asked Dabney to throw out the charges – claiming that Mueller’s office fabricated a crime, and that there is no law against interfering in elections.

According to the judge’s request for clarification, the Justice Department has argued that it doesn’t have to show that Concord had a legal duty to report its expenditures to the Federal Election Commission. Rather, the allegation is that the company knowingly engaged in deceptive acts that precluded the FEC, or the Justice Department, from ascertaining whether they had broken the law. -Bloomberg

On Monday, Friedrich raised questions over whether the special counsel’s office could prove a key element of their case – saying that it was “hard to see” how allegations of Russian influence were intended to interfere with US government operations vs. simply “confusing voters,” reports law.com.

During a 90-minute hearing, Friedrich questioned prosecutor Jonathan Kravis about how the government would be able to show the Russian defendants were aware of the Justice Department and FEC’s functions and then deliberately sought to skirt them.

“You still have to show knowledge of the agencies and what they do. How do you do that?” Friedrich asked.

Kravis, a prosecutor in the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, argued that the government needed only to show that Concord Management and the other defendants were generally aware that the U.S. government “regulates and monitors” foreign participation in American politics. That awareness, Kravis said, could be inferred from the Russians’ alleged creation of fake social media accounts that appeared to be run by U.S. citizens and “computer infrastructure” intended to mask the Russian origin of the influence operation.

“That is deception that is directed at a higher level,” Kravis said. Kravis appeared in court with Michael Dreeben, a top Justice Department appellate lawyer on detail to the special counsel’s office. -law.com

Concord pleaded not guilty in May. Their attorney, Eric Dubelier – a partner at Reed Smith, has described the election meddling charges as “make believe,” arguing on Monday that Mueller’s indictment against Concord “doesn’t charge a crime.”

“There is no statute of interfering with an election. There just isn’t,” said Dubelier, who added that Mueller’s office alleged a “made-up crime to fit the facts they have.”

Dubelier added that the case against Concord Management is the first in US history “where anyone has ever been charged with defrauding the Justice Department” through their failure to register under FARA.

© 2018   Created by Steve - Ning Creator.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service