San Diego Under Attack By CAIR To Incorporate Islamic Studies

San Diego Fights Back Against CAIR In Their School


WND – 4/1/2017 – “Moms declare holy war after school teaches Islam ‘true faith’

FOX News Insider – 4/29/2017 – “Dept. of Education Asked to Remove Islam Materials From Public Schools”

Geller Report – 3/24/2017 – “VIDEO Peel school board: Outraged parents near revolt against Muslim prayer in schools”


US Dept of Education – 2/7/2003 – “Guidance on Constitutionally Protected Prayer in Public Elementary and Secondary Schools,” referencing Section 9524 of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (“ESEA”) of 1965. Obama updated some parts of ESEA but not Section 9524 at least not that I could find in a cursory search.

“The legal rules that govern the issue of constitutionally protected prayer in the public schools are similar to those that govern religious expression generally. Thus, in discussing the operation of Section 9524 of the ESEA, this guidance sometimes speaks in terms of “religious expression.” There are a variety of issues relating to religion in the public schools, however, that this guidance is not intended to address.

The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment requires public school officials to be neutral in their treatment of religion, showing neither favoritism toward nor hostility against religious expression such as prayer. 

Accordingly, the First Amendment forbids religious activity that is sponsored by the government but protects religious activity that is initiated by private individuals, and the line between government-sponsored and privately initiated religious expression is vital to a proper understanding of the First Amendment’s scope. As the Court has explained in several cases, there is a crucial difference between government speech endorsing religion, which the Establishment Clause forbids, and private speech endorsing religion, which the Free Speech and Free Exercise Clauses protect.”

For example, teachers and other public school officials may not lead their classes in prayer, devotional readings from the Bible, or other religious activities. Nor may school officials attempt to persuade or compel students to participate in prayer or other religious activities. Such conduct is “attributable to the State” and thus violates the Establishment Clause.

Prayer During Noninstructional Time

Students may pray when not engaged in school activities or instruction, subject to the same rules designed to prevent material disruption of the educational program that are applied to other privately initiated expressive activities. Among other things, students may read their Bibles or other scriptures, say grace before meals, and pray or study religious materials with fellow students during recess, the lunch hour, or other noninstructional time to the same extent that they may engage in nonreligious activities.  While school authorities may impose rules of order and pedagogical restrictions on student activities, they may not discriminate against student prayer or religious speech in applying such rules and restrictions.

…Organized Prayer Groups and Activities

Students may organize prayer groups, religious clubs, and “see you at the pole” gatherings before school to the same extent that students are permitted to organize other non-curricular student activities groups. Such groups must be given the same access to school facilities for assembling as is given to other non-curricular groups, without discrimination because of the religious content of their expression.

…Religious Expression and Prayer in Class Assignments

Students may express their beliefs about religion in homework, artwork, and other written and oral assignments free from discrimination based on the religious content of their submissions. Such home and classroom work should be judged by ordinary academic standards of substance and relevance and against other legitimate pedagogical concerns identified by the school. Thus, if a teacher’s assignment involves writing a poem, the work of a student who submits a poem in the form of a prayer (for example, a psalm) should be judged on the basis of academic standards (such as literary quality) and neither penalized nor rewarded on account of its religious content.

…The Supreme Court has also held, however, that the study of the Bible or of religion, when presented objectively as part of a secular program of education (e.g., in history or literature classes), is consistent with the First Amendment. See Schempp, 374 U.S. at 225.

Rosenberger v. Rector of Univ. of Virginia, 515 U.S. 819 (1995); Board of Educ. v. Mergens, 496 U.S. 226 (1990); Good News Club v. Milford Cent. Sch., 533 U.S. 98 (2001); Lamb’s Chapel v. Center Moriches Union Free Sch. Dist., 508 U.S. 384 (1993); Widmar v. Vincent, 454 U.S. 263 (1981); Santa Fe, 530 U.S. at 304 n.15. In addition, in circumstances where students are entitled to pray, public schools may not restrict or censor their prayers on the ground that they might be deemed “too religious” to others.

Public Schools are bound by the same rules as all government agencies. They can not arbitrarily break the law using local sentiment. Thus the “national flag” issue is also bound by federal law as are all normal activities.

Before appearing before a school board meeting, I suggest that those with a legitimate objection check with a lawyer on federal laws and the Department of Education just as a point of reference. Work together especially if there is a time limit to speak.  Maybe each objection be a sentence which all agree on then each member speak their objection.

Make sure to phrase your speech as close to law as possible. If safety and bullying concerns are expressed then stick to those issues and address current policy. Don’t deviate.

“Hate speech” has been used frequently by groups who have an agenda which is the polar opposite of what the parents want. They have taken this to court and more often than not have won.

I would also suggest that you flood local media and social accounts with the information. There may be other concerned parents but they are not aware of the issue or afraid to come forward on their own.

Shouting and ranting on doesn’t help.

SCHOOL BOARDS are elected. Use that power of vote to gain a member or members more sympathetic to federal law not any specific organization. The grassroots efforts by non-constitutional groups is exactly where change begins and makes the most difference. This is about your children’s future and their indoctrination into something that is not compatible with our constitution.

Until CAIR and other brotherhood groups are brought before a court and found to be anti-American and removed from our nation, you have to continue as if they also have a legitimate right to be in the US. Use their own techniques against them in that case so long as no law is broken or civil discourse is not lost.

These groups that are anti-constitution in nature win if we all do not employ our laws against them. They have after all learned exactly how to use the same laws against us. As patriots and parents, it is our duty and right to stand up for the laws and education of our children.

If those laws are no longer working then follow the steps to change the law together as one not individually. Not every case will be successful just like a single drop of water will not erode a piece of ground. Anti-American groups have known this and employed it for years.

The CAIR observatory may have hit upon a way to successfully halt CAIR and its non-violent jihadist tentacles. Here is what they suggested. I haven’t researched at all but if true it may actually work. This certainly should be at least one avenue to use with those more knowledgeable.

CAIR Observatory
CAIR and the Foreign Agents Registration Act

“We argue that CAIR qualifies under FARA as a foreign agent because it
-has taken cash, loans, pledges of donations and real property from foreign principals;
-has held numerous meetings, conducted correspondence and received direction from foreign principals; and in return
-has sought to influence domestic and foreign policy through political activities and public information activities directed at elected officials, government employees, law enforcement employees at all levels of government, the media, businesses large and small, civil society organizations, and individuals.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with CAIR’s political activities is irrelevant as to whether or not CAIR should be registered as a foreign agent under FARA. CAIR’s activities fit all definitions of a foreign agent under FARA.”

CAIR Prior Claims Concerning Receipt of Monies from Foreign Donors

CAIR’s public statements about receiving foreign funds have changed over time from flat denials to carefully worded admissions. They are useful as a comparison to the actual facts and as a comparison to the wording in the FARA law.

According to FARA 611 (b) a foreign principal is defined as “a government of a foreign country and a foreign political party… a person outside of the United States… a partnership, association, corporation, organization, or other combination of persons organized under the laws of or having its principal place of business in a foreign country…”

In a press release issued after 9-11, CAIR officials flatly asserted: “We do not support directly or indirectly or receive support from any overseas group or government.”

In 2008, in response to an appeal of a dismissed lawsuit by radio host Michael Savage, CAIR issued a statement saying “CAIR is proud to receive support of every individual, as long as they are not an official of any foreign government and there are no strings attached to the bequest.”

In January 2009, in a public statement made by CAIR in response to a decision in the Michael Savage lawsuit, they stated: “There is nothing criminal or immoral about accepting donations from foreign nationals…The U.S. government, corporations and non-profit organizations routinely receive money from foreign nationals.” This statement was meant to counter allegations of impropriety at CAIR’s receiving $500,000 from Saudi billionaire Prince Al-Walid Bin Talal. “Bin Talal is not a member of the Saudi Arabian government,” CAIR added. “He is a private entrepreneur and international investor.”

At their current (February 2010) website, in a document titled “Dispelling Rumors about CAIR”, they state: “CAIR’s operational budget is funded by donations from American Muslims. While the majority of CAIR’s financial support comes from American Muslims, CAIR is proud to receive the support of every individual–whether Muslim, Christian, Jewish, or of another faith background–who supports the organization’s mission of promoting justice and mutual understanding.

This willingness to accept support from foreign nationals exists as long as there are no ‘strings’ attached to the bequest.”

Keep fighting for your rights. Parents Use the Parent Teacher Organization or some local concerned group, stay involved even if you think you have no time. We are already being made aware of the dangers which have polluted young minds of millennials, surely we don’t want this dangerous mindset to continue.


About Uriel

Retired educator and constitutionalist
Tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to San Diego Under Attack By CAIR To Incorporate Islamic Studies

  1. Auntie BS says:

    Screw CAIR! They are a terrorist organization that promotes Sharia Law over Constitutional law. They not only should NOT be in our schools, but should not be allowed in the United States, Canada, or Europe at all! GTFO, CAIR!

  2. Auntie BS says:

    CAIR is a terrorist organization, promoting Sharia Law over Constitutional Law, denouncing American values, declaring us to be infidels who should be killed, and is working to overthrow our government from within, through political process. It has no place in our schools, not to mention on our soil. CAIR should be banned from the western World as obstructionist, subversive, and promoting violence. It is high time that people realized that Islam is not merely a religion, but it is a CONQUEST whose goal is to take over the entire world. It is misogynist, anti-democratic, and should be BANNED! GTFO!

  3. comcast536 says:

    I agree Uriel, spot on.

  4. Hardnox says:

    All of this in contrary to Federal Law. Stop it. The remedy is simple.