E/CN.4/2005/61/Add.1 Page 81 Chapter's 2003 annual meeting about the EEOC's response to discrimination against Muslims and Arabs. The event, which was open to the entire community, took place at the Riverside InterChurch in Manhattan. 319. The Government further indicated that the EEOC had also addressed the two instances noted by the Special Rapporteur in which employees were allegedly disciplined or terminated from employment on the basis of their religion or national origin. 320. The first involved Bilan Nur, a customer service representative for Alamo Car Rental, who was denied permission in 2001 to cover her head with a scarf during the month of Ramadan consistent with her religious tenets. The company told her that the company dress code prohibited wearing a scarf but, in fact, Alamo apparently had no such policy. The company subsequently disciplined, suspended, and terminated Ms. Nur for failure to remove her headscarf. In September 2002, the EEOC filed a post-11 September-backlash discrimination lawsuit under Title VII against Alamo Car Rental. The lawsuit challenges the discipline, suspension, and termination of Ms. Nur, and seeks monetary relief, including back pay and compensatory and punitive damages. The EEOC is also seeking an injunction prohibiting future discrimination and any other relief to prevent Alamo from engaging in any further discriminatory practices. At the time of the communication this case was still in the pre-trial discovery phase. 321. The EEOC also filed a lawsuit in September 2002 in the other case referred to by the Special Rapporteur involving the Worcester Art Museum. The suit alleged that, in the wake of the terrorist attacks of 11 September 2001, the museum fired Zia Ayub, an Afghan-American Muslim man, on the basis of his national origin and religion. The suit was filed in the United States District Court for Massachusetts (Civil Action #02 CV 40176 NMG) and stated that on 4 January 2002, the museum terminated Mr. Ayub's employment without notice, allegedly for taking excessive time to complete security rounds on three separate occasions. The suit alleged that reasons given for Mr. Ayub's termination were false and were used as an excuse for discrimination. In addition, in Mr. Ayub's case, the museum failed to follow its usual and customary practice of issuing oral and written warnings, or a suspension, and it failed to follow its usual practice of issuing a memo to all employees reminding them of the museum's expectations. The EEOC complaint sought monetary and injunctive relief on behalf of Mr. Ayub, including back wages, compensatory damages, and punitive damages. The pre-trial discovery phase of this case was to conclude on 30 April 2004. 322. With regard to the several statements allegedly made by prominent individuals criticizing Islam to which the Special Rapporteur also referred, the Government indicated that such statements were not illegal under United States law. On 13 November 2002, President George W. Bush stated that, “Some of the comments that have been uttered about Islam do not reflect the sentiments of my Government or the sentiments of most Americans. Islam, as practised by the vast majority of people, is a peaceful religion, a religion that respects others. Ours is a country based upon tolerance and we welcome people of all faiths in America.” The Government also recalled its comments made in the above-mentioned response sent to the Special Rapporteur.