Empire State Bldg Owners Sued – Didn’t Allow Muslim Prayers

#1
volmaverick

volmaverick

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 17, 2012
Messages
6,036
Likes
13
#1
The Empire State Building owners, Malkin Properties, just learned they are being sued for $5 million. The lawsuit stems from an incident in which the Muslim plaintiffs claim they were unjustifiably denied their civil rights to pray on someone else’s private property.

Fahad and Amina Tirmizi of Farmingville, NY claim they were “assaulted, battered and forcibly removed” from the observatory in July of 2013. They also assert that it was somehow related to their wardrobe choices of traditional Muslim attire.

Fahad Tirmizi said, “We weren’t doing anything wrong, we just wanted to enjoy the view like everyone else.” He doesn’t state how he was able to admire the view from a head down kneeling position on the floor, or why he forced the security officers to resort to “menacingly” poking him while being told in a loud voice that he was not allowed to pray on the deck.

Empire State Bldg Owners Sued - Didn't Allow Muslim Prayers on Observation Deck | Conservative Infidel Conservative Infidel


What rights to do whatever one pleases does one have on someone else's private property?

They cannot ‘PRAY’ on MY private property, either!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#2
#2
I would agree with this, especially if they don't allow anyone else to pray up there either.
 
#3
#3
I was wondering how long it would take Mav to get a hold of this story. A little under a week or so, but still pretty good timing.
 
#9
#9
therealUT said:
Yes. It is also on the national register of historic places and, thus, receives public subsidies.
Click to expand...

I would think that's irrelevant.

Farmers receive subsidies, you can't pray at their house either
 
#10
#10
Obsessed said:
I would think that's irrelevant.

Farmers receive subsidies, you can't pray at their house either
Click to expand...

But, the federal government can impose certain restrictions on subsidized privately-owned farm lands. Choosing to register one's private property with the national park service changes the game in a way in which the property in a very relevant sense becomes public or common, in a way that a private house or business is not. Nobody forced the empire state building to be registered. The owners registered for federal benefits. The tradeoff is a significant change of status.
 
#14
#14
More than likely this has nothing to do with prayer. I would bet the ESB people have rules against sitting or laying on the floor of the observation deck for safety reasons. And I would also bet the plaintiffs know this.

If they would have tried praying while standing there would not have been a problem, IMHO.
 
#17
#17
hog88 said:
Having property on the registry dosn't automatically mean you recieve subsidies.
Click to expand...

Correct. But, if you do, especially in a public access venue (such as the ESB), then the funding conditions will, more than likely, include provisions that retain access, guarantee access to all citizens (and, most likely, foreign tourists), and demand stringent justifications for the removal of individuals from the property.
 
#18
#18
therealUT said:
Correct. But, if you do, especially in a public access venue (such as the ESB), then the funding conditions will, more than likely, include provisions that retain access, guarantee access to all citizens (and, most likely, foreign tourists), and demand stringent justifications for the removal of individuals from the property.
Click to expand...

You may be correct I don't know, however it dosn't allow anyone to violate access rules such as sitting or laying.
 
#19
#19
I don't understand.

OP claims the lawsuit is because they could not pray. Then, OP says the lawsuit is because they were beaten and assaulted.

Big difference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top