<< SAME DIFFERENCE ~ MAIN ~ IT WON THE SILVER BEAR >>

DOG SHUNNED

Vancouver joins Minneapolis, Melbourne, London, and Drammen in the global cab conflict:

A case potentially pitting rights of the disabled against religious beliefs will be heard by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal after a blind man from the North Shore who uses a guide dog to get around launched a complaint against North Shore Taxi.

Bruce Gilmour filed the complaint after a cab driver from North Shore Taxi refused to let his guide dog into the cab in January of this year. Gilmour, who says it’s not the first time he’s been refused service by a taxicab, is complaining that North Shore taxi discriminated against him on the basis of physical disability.

But the taxi driver, Behzad Saidy, is arguing his Muslim religious beliefs will not allow him to take dogs in his taxi, because Muslims can’t associate with dogs.

Posted by Tim B. on 11/17/2006 at 11:10 PM
  1. Why not put the dog in a burqa?

    Posted by stackja1945 on 2006 11 17 at 11:21 PM • permalink

  2. Hey, Canada has already basically given up.  Why should this be any surprise?

    Posted by JorgXMcKie on 2006 11 17 at 11:21 PM • permalink

  3. Well…what can ya’ say…Alcohol, dogs, next women MUST be in burqa’s to ride in cabs. Suppose that means, pigs are definitely out, huh?..It’s becoming a crescent world people…and all we do is watch, except Bruce Gilmour.

    Truth be told, Mr. Gilmore is one of the few, that can truly SEE.

    Posted by El Cid on 2006 11 17 at 11:27 PM • permalink

  4. I hope Mr. Gilmour will persist in his suit to the end of all courts that will hear him, and I hope he would include Mr. Saidy as a defendant.  North Short Taxi might have the funds to last awhile, but Mr. Saidy likely does not.  Then we’d see how long Muslim religious principle lasts against the almighty dollar.

    Posted by RebeccaH on 2006 11 17 at 11:39 PM • permalink

  5. Maybe the cab company will hire Paco Animal Control Officers® although I suppose there might be some confusion over who to take away.

    Posted by andycanuck on 2006 11 17 at 11:46 PM • permalink

  6. Oh great:  a Canadian Human “Rights” Tribunal. 
    Arggghhhhh.

    Posted by heather on 2006 11 17 at 11:47 PM • permalink

  7. It’s happened in New Orleans and Cincinnati as well.

    Posted by Donnah on 2006 11 17 at 11:49 PM • permalink

  8. #7 - FTA:  “guide dog owners need to be sensitive to the needs of the Muslim community”

    BULLSHIT

    Posted by bondo on 2006 11 18 at 12:01 AM • permalink

  9. If you can’t win the taxicab war, you can’t win the war against anything.

    Posted by Merlin on 2006 11 18 at 12:04 AM • permalink

  10. Under the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), privately owned businesses that serve the public, such as restaurants, hotels, retail stores, taxicabs, theaters, concert halls, and sports facilities, are prohibited from discriminating against individuals with disabilities. The ADA requires these businesses to allow people with disabilities to bring their service animals onto business premises in whatever areas customers are generally allowed.

    The Americans With Disabilities Act of 1990.

    Do ya’ think, Muslims can understand this?

    If NOT, when this discrimination happens in the U.S., The Feds should stick these Muslims in the ass, just as Muslims do with sheep, goats, camels (for taller Muslims, only please.)

    Posted by El Cid on 2006 11 18 at 12:22 AM • permalink

  11. “Smithers, release the hounds!”

    Posted by Mitch on 2006 11 18 at 12:34 AM • permalink

  12. Then yank his license and it ceases to be a problem.

    Posted by jeff mccabe on 2006 11 18 at 12:45 AM • permalink

  13. Former Soviet refusenik Natan Sharansky summed it up neatly: In a dictatorship, you need courage to denounce the evil.  In a free society, you need courage to see the evil.

    Posted by The Sanity Inspector on 2006 11 18 at 12:46 AM • permalink

  14. #7 - FTA:  “guide dog owners need to be sensitive to the needs of the Muslim community”

    BULLSHIT

    Good call!

    Posted by rinardman on 2006 11 18 at 12:53 AM • permalink

  15. So, these guys have been driving taxis here in the US for how long now?  And the problems with alcohol and dogs are just now being voiced?  Did someone find a new Surah or hadith nobody knew about before?  Or are there a legion of taxi drivers going to hell?  Or, perhaps, it is all part of of someone’s plan to undermine the laws and customs of the countries involved.

    Nah.  That would make it some kind of conspiracy and they’ve told us that they just want to be a part of America (Canada), being good Americans (Canadians) and all.

    See what happens when you start basing laws on a collectivist basis.  You can only define a right by reference to the individual; that is what guarantees our freedom and makes us equal before the law.  Legitimately, no individual can claim a right that infringes on, or negates another individual’s rights.  Course, we’ve pretty much given up that concept.  We’re paying for it now in ways that were predictable, but ignored or poo-pooed.

    Posted by saltydog on 2006 11 18 at 01:12 AM • permalink

  16. I’m amazed that the demarcation only applies to dogs. Muslims can’t associate with non-muslims. How long until that becomes a ‘reason’ not to take fares?

    Bugger off and get another job. Or just bugger off.

    Posted by kae on 2006 11 18 at 01:12 AM • permalink

  17. “....because Muslims can’t associate with dogs.”

    Of course not—it’d give the muslims an inferiority complex.

    Posted by Crusader-Rabbit on 2006 11 18 at 01:13 AM • permalink

  18. It would be interesting to see how much courts and tribunals are being clagged up by claims related to Muslim sensitivities and where they are brought by Muslims, how many are instigated by Muslim civil rights organisations (as has been uncovered in our taxi campaign).
    This one made me balk: barely a convert and already crying victim (and wanting pay for maternity leave no less)

    Posted by saint on 2006 11 18 at 01:15 AM • permalink

  19. because Muslims can’t associate with dogs

    My thought was: Of course not, the dogs might get fleas.

    But that’s O&I, isn’t it.

    Posted by kae on 2006 11 18 at 01:17 AM • permalink

  20. As a Canadian, I have no idea what law exists that applies to this situation.  Other than, we all should be nice to each other.

    Posted by heather on 2006 11 18 at 01:20 AM • permalink

  21. Oh and don’t give up on the Kanucks
    just yet.

    Posted by saint on 2006 11 18 at 01:25 AM • permalink

  22. “his Muslim religious beliefs will not allow him to take dogs in his taxi, because Muslims can’t associate with dogs”

    of course not. dogs have standards.

    Posted by Harry Buttle on 2006 11 18 at 01:29 AM • permalink

  23. The driver has it backward. No self-respecting dog would associate with a Muslim.

    Posted by Harry Eagar on 2006 11 18 at 01:31 AM • permalink

  24. #17—Crusader-Rabbit

    ”....because Muslims can’t associate with dogs.”

    Of course not—it’d give the muslims an inferiority complex.

    Ripper, Newk.

    Posted by hipower on 2006 11 18 at 01:32 AM • permalink

  25. Introducing the all-new muslim repellant spray, available in dog,pork,and educated woman.

    Posted by Daniel San on 2006 11 18 at 01:38 AM • permalink

  26. OT: G20 protesters attacking police, proudly displayed on their website.

    Posted by Evil Pundit on 2006 11 18 at 01:43 AM • permalink

  27. If they think the dog is unclean then they could just fucken clean the dog. Problem solved ;-)

    When you think about it, the guide dogs are more useful than the cab drivers. The dogs are actually helping the blind whereas these cab drivers don’t want to. Perhaps the dogs could teach these cab drivers what to do.

    Posted by The Best Infidel on 2006 11 18 at 01:55 AM • permalink

  28. #26 - I’ve got three comments:

    1) The government should institute a policy that the cost of any damage caused by protesters is deducted from grants towards the arts.

    2) A Palestinian flag?  WTF?

    3) They should’ve built grandstands for the media.

    Posted by tdw77 on 2006 11 18 at 01:58 AM • permalink

  29. Of course not—it’d give the muslims an inferiority complex.

    Oh? Have dogs won Nobel Prizes too, Crusader-Rabbit?

    Posted by andycanuck on 2006 11 18 at 01:58 AM • permalink

  30. #27 - I say we replace taxi drivers who refuse to take the blind with guide dogs. 

    Even better, how about “education” for these taxi drivers involves being a guide dog for a week.

    Posted by tdw77 on 2006 11 18 at 02:01 AM • permalink

  31. #26
    The masked ‘tard in the tutu could do with a whack with a taser.

    Posted by kae on 2006 11 18 at 02:07 AM • permalink

  32. Muslims can’t associate with dogs.

    Rubbish.

    Dogs are permitted in Islam if they provide a service or benefit.  They are denied the house so they cannot steal leftovers from plates.  Suggestion – either side your floor quickly or buy a damned table, for Pete’s sake.

    Posted by Anabel on 2006 11 18 at 02:10 AM • permalink

  33. I am not prjeudiced on this issue; I say that both the blind guy and the muslim are unfit to be taxi drivers.

    Posted by 2dogs on 2006 11 18 at 02:16 AM • permalink

  34. #26, From the current Age report on the yahoos in Melbourne’s streets:

    Dan Rae, from Christchurch, New Zealand, sustained a cut to the head above his right eye when he was struck by a policeman’s baton.

    Mr Rae, said he was trying to push a barrier forward toward the lines of police blocking Collins Street, when one officer lent over the barricade and hit him on the head with his baton.
    “He took a full swing at me as hard as he could… I wasn’t expecting it,’’ Mr Rae, told theage.com.au.

    The 30-year-old builder, who travelled to Australia to visit family and attend the demonstration, was treated at the scene by members of the protesters’ first aid team, who cleaned and bandaged the wound.

    Six magic words, Dan:
    1. Fuck.
    2. Off
    3. Back.
    4. To.
    5. New.
    6. Zealand.

    Posted by cuckoo on 2006 11 18 at 02:21 AM • permalink

  35. #34

    7. Now.

    Posted by kae on 2006 11 18 at 02:31 AM • permalink

  36. 25 Daniel San

    Introducing the all-new muslim repellant spray, available in dog,pork,and educated woman.

    I think what you are looking for can be found here and here.

    Posted by The Prez on 2006 11 18 at 02:51 AM • permalink

  37. sorry that second one should be here

    Posted by The Prez on 2006 11 18 at 02:54 AM • permalink

  38. They are forbidden to associate with Dogs.

    Pond Slime, however, is totally acceptable…

    Posted by oswald bastable on 2006 11 18 at 02:58 AM • permalink

  39. I don’t see why the problem can’t be solved by having a Muslim-only cab service. Then the rest of us can stay away from it.

    Of course, Muslim cabbies don’t actually WANT to drive Muslims only. They want to drive non-Muslims around so they can lecture them.

    Posted by Ozwitch on 2006 11 18 at 03:45 AM • permalink

  40. “Oh? Have dogs won Nobel Prizes too, Crusader-Rabbit?”

    “too”? you mean wahabbists have won Nobel Prizes?
    Hold on, we could be on to the news story of the week…just as soon as andycanuck names these brilliant muslim taxi drivers.
    This is exciting stuff, being part of a scoop and all.

    Posted by Crusader-Rabbit on 2006 11 18 at 03:51 AM • permalink

  41. This taxi driver business has all the elements of being an orchestrated power play to see how much bullshit the infidels will take.

    One little slice off the salami at a time. No one will fight over a single slice, and soon there will be no salami left except the string.

    And no one will fight over that, either.

    Posted by Pedro the Ignorant on 2006 11 18 at 04:01 AM • permalink

  42. #41, exactly so.

    Posted by Crusader-Rabbit on 2006 11 18 at 04:03 AM • permalink

  43. ...his Muslim religious beliefs will not allow him to take dogs in his taxi, because Muslims can’t associate with dogs.  It’s not that sort of pick up, goat-boy.

    Posted by lotocoti on 2006 11 18 at 04:42 AM • permalink

  44. Headline: Dog vs Dogma

    Posted by Stevo on 2006 11 18 at 04:46 AM • permalink

  45. #44

    Or, Imam Bites Dog, or Man, Dogma Bites

    Posted by surly on 2006 11 18 at 06:07 AM • permalink

  46. Vicki (Doberman age 8wks) absconds with the prayer rug.

    Posted by rhhardin on 2006 11 18 at 07:56 AM • permalink

  47. #1 stackja1945

    Why not put the dog in a burqa?

    Should we take the woman out first?

    Posted by flying pigs over mecca on 2006 11 18 at 07:57 AM • permalink

  48. Where does all this Muslim anti-dog stuff come from? Surely Allah is just dog spelled backwards.

    Posted by Hanyu on 2006 11 18 at 09:22 AM • permalink

  49. Regarding Canada:

    1.  We’ll get back to you.  We’re a little busy right now killing all the Taliban we can get our sights on.

    2.  So the taxi driver can pick and choose his customers.  Of course, customers can pick and choose taxis too.  Perhaps a boycott of cabs driven by Muslims (perfectly legal; you can’t force anyone to take a cab) would do the trick.
    All cab customers could follow this routine:

    “Taxi!”

    “Yes, where do you want to go?”

    “Do you take guide dogs?”

    “No, they’re against my religion.”

    “Then off you go. It’s against my beliefs to patronize any business that does not accept guide dogs.”

    Hit the buggers in their pocket books.

    Posted by JJM Ballantyne on 2006 11 18 at 10:32 AM • permalink

  50. #25 ah, you have discovered the Pork And Canine Olfacticator spray, soon to be released by Parfum de Paco, i believe

    Posted by KK on 2006 11 18 at 10:34 AM • permalink

  51. I don’t think that’s a muslim thing, It’s just a mideast superstition, could be wrong though.

    Posted by aaron_ on 2006 11 18 at 10:47 AM • permalink

  52. Muslims can’t associate with dogs

    That’s the kind of information they need on the flowchart at the immigration office. Application Denied.

    Posted by paulris on 2006 11 18 at 10:58 AM • permalink

  53. Re #49:

    Regarding Canada:

    1.  We’ll get back to you.  We’re a little busy right now killing all the Taliban we can get our sights on.

    The Canadians are helping there.  First hand.  They just need to fire some stupid taxi drivers, is all.

    Posted by The_Real_JeffS on 2006 11 18 at 12:16 PM • permalink

  54. #29 - of course not.  That’s one more sign of their moral superiority.

    Posted by Steve Skubinna on 2006 11 18 at 01:17 PM • permalink

  55. #40 Crusader-Rabbit, some Muslim twat was complaining this week that the Nobel Prizes were racist because the tiny, worldwide Jewish population had won 167 Nobel Prizes over the years while Muslims (counting 100s of millions) had hardly won any—only four. That was a shot at them, not our Jewish allies in the GWOT.
    http://tinyurl.com/y8fw88

    (Sorry, I thought that the story had been around enough of the big blogs, like LGF, that it was common knowledge.)

    Posted by andycanuck on 2006 11 18 at 02:00 PM • permalink

  56. I believe it was Mark Steyn (who else) who suggested that the Canadian perfect storm will be when the lesbian couple sues the local mosque to be able to get married there.  When PC meets Multi-Culturism does a black hole develop that sucks all liberals in the world into it?

    Posted by Cliff on 2006 11 18 at 02:09 PM • permalink

  57. Muslims can’t associate with dogs.

    I bet there’s an exception for terrorist dogs, though.

    Posted by PW on 2006 11 18 at 03:10 PM • permalink

  58. Are goats OK?

    Posted by Big Arnie on 2006 11 18 at 04:29 PM • permalink

  59. #55: aaah..thanks for that andycanuck. For a moment there I thought..well, you know what I thought.
    Shoulda known better. My bad.

    Posted by Crusader-Rabbit on 2006 11 18 at 04:54 PM • permalink

  60. But the taxi driver, Behzad Saidy, is arguing his Muslim religious beliefs will not allow him to take dogs in his taxi, because Muslims can’t associate with dogs.

    because they bite a lot harder when you try to…

    Posted by richard mcenroe on 2006 11 18 at 07:30 PM • permalink

  61. #59 That’s okay, Crusader-Rabbit; I wasn’t exactly clear that I meant to imply that dogs had probably won more Nobels than Muslims had. (Pavlov’s spring to mind—or should I say ring a bell?)

    Posted by andycanuck on 2006 11 18 at 11:17 PM • permalink

  62. Arabs and Salukis. An odd relationship that probably lends nothing to the argument.

    The Saluki is a breed of dog that is a member of the sighthound family, that is, hounds that hunt by sight rather than scent. The Saluki is one of the oldest dog breeds known, and originally came from the Middle East, where it was used (and is still used to some extent) by the Bedouins for hunting hare and gazelle.

    Salukis were first brought into England in 1840 and were known as Persian Greyhounds. There was no real interest however, until the Hon. Florence Amherst imported the first Arabian Saluki in 1895 from the kennels of Prince Abdulla in Transjordania. In Persian-speaking countries the Saluki is called the tazi, or “one who gallops.”

    In Arabic countries most dogs are referred to as kalb (meaning dog) but salukis are referred to as salukis; this is because of their royal background and their ‘clean’ living habits, and is also due to their value (capital and sentimental).

    These factoids are gathered from various sites, the most ridiculous of which is here.

    Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 11 19 at 04:45 AM • permalink

  63. Page 1 of 1 pages

Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.

Members:
Login | Register | Member List

Please note: you must use a real email address to register. You will be sent an account activation email. Clicking on the url in the email will automatically activate your account. Until you do so your account will be held in the "pending" list and you won't be able to log in. All accounts that are "pending" for more than one week will be deleted.