<< "MANY WOULD REACT AS HE HAS DONE" ~ MAIN ~ ORDERS FOLLOWED >>
LIGHTS OUT
Daniel Pipes on the decision of Minneapolis officials to equip taxis with booze-refusal lights:
The two-light plan takes Muslims’ religious views into consideration for mundane commercial transactions in Minnesota. A government authority thus sanctions a signal as to who does or does not follow Islamic law. What of taxi drivers beyond those at MSP? Other Muslims in Minneapolis-St. Paul and across the country could well ask for the same religious consideration. Bus conductors might follow suit. The whole transport system could be divided between those who are observant of Islamic law and those who are not ...
It is precisely the innocuous nature of the two-light taxi solution that makes it so insidious — and why the Metropolitan Airports Commission should reconsider its wrong-headed decision.
Consider it done:
Two weeks ago, Twin Cities airport officials were firming up plans to allow many Muslim taxi drivers — staunchly opposed to transporting passengers carrying alcohol of any sort — to alert potential fares of their beliefs with a different-colored light atop their cabs.
After a barrage of negative feedback, they’ve decided to scrap the idea.
“Since then, we’ve heard from Australia and England. It’s really touched a nerve among a lot of people. The backlash, frankly, has been overwhelming,” said Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. “People are overwhelmingly against any kind of cultural accommodation.”
Excellent. Although taxi drivers aren’t impressed:
“It’s going to be tough, it’s going to be really tough, I don’t know what’s going to be next,” said Ali Abdi of St. Paul. “We have the right (to refuse to transport alcohol). We are still human being(s).”
One gets the idea that Muslims must be considering alcohol to have near-magical powers. (Much like women’s hair, I guess.) The Koranic prohibition may only be on drinking it, but better stay 100 feet away from any alcohol to be on the safe side.
It’s becoming difficult to discern whether Muslims are acting more like modern children or like medieval adults.
#4
It’s becoming difficult to discern whether Muslims are acting more like modern children or like medieval adults.
Spoilt children, who have never heard the word no from someone who really meant it.
They would never try this crap in some of the countries they have hailed from (taxi pun) but are having a go in America and Australia as they know (on past examples) they can get away with it.
What I cannot stand, be it Lebanese in Sydney, Russians in Israel or French anywhere, are immigrants who voluntarily enter a country, complain that it’s not like the old country and try to make it so.
So we have a kind of Muslim apartheid slowly taking shape,
soon taxis and buses for Muslims only,next restaurants that don’t serve pork for fear of offense and so on.Posted by Torontosteve on 2006 10 11 at 07:19 AM • permalinkThey do have the right to go back to the countries they came running away from and practice Islamic law there. Otherwise, they could get with the fucking program and realise they live in a secular society where you carry any and all passengers in a cab.
Posted by The Best Infidel on 2006 10 11 at 07:21 AM • permalinkWe have the right (to refuse to transport alcohol).
Check your taxi license. You probably have no such “right”, any more than another taxi driver could refuse service to a Muslim.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 11 at 07:21 AM • permalinkwith my dog, pig, and bikini clad girlfiend( carting 10 gallons of vodka)
Now *that’s* a party.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 11 at 07:26 AM • permalinkNah, just turn up with a pen and paper, and start doodling in the back of the taxi as he’s driving you. When he asks what you’re doing, say.
“I’m drawing Mohammed burning in Hell. Look, here’s the demon sodomising him with a pitchfork.”
Posted by Quentin George on 2006 10 11 at 07:31 AM • permalink#10
Love it. You have the right idea. You might just want to recite some ancient text condemning Islam too - the icing on the cake.
Posted by The Best Infidel on 2006 10 11 at 07:35 AM • permalinkThey are both right.
Muslims have the right to refuse to transport alcohol and MSP has the right to refuse them licenses for inadequate job performance.
Perhaps this is a situation best addressed by the BBB.
I think the best idea is to let them have their own cab company and lease their own space at the airport.
People are seriously considereing giving people the right to discriminate in way that interferes with performing their job (transporting people and their belongings in queue). First come, first servered, or pre-ordered on demand. Fuck all else.
They do have the right to go back to the countries they came running away from and practice Islamic law there. Otherwise, they could get with the fucking program and realise they live in a secular society where you carry any and all passengers in a cab.
Exactly right.
Posted by Mr. Bingley on 2006 10 11 at 08:10 AM • permalinkMay be the same there, bit a slogan here in the U.S., is if “you drink, don’t drive”. Now of course you have choices with this slogan, call friend, or your wives, (YES or husbands) if you don’t mind being in divorce court…BUT it has been said, that if all else fails…Call a Cab.
It is a very small leap from carrying booze outside of ones body, to refusing those that carry booze, inside of the body. It could Very well be the next step, mainly for the reason that, discrimination has already occurred with the blind, the gays and who knows where or what next. With no defenders of ‘rights’ whatsoever by their side.
True no one but a true friend, likes to carry a sloppy, slobbering drunk in his or her vehicle, but a drunk could with some trouble could eventually slur…“bit the coaps, said eye tu du ths”, to a cultist cab driver.
abc Religion Report this week.
Presenter Stephen Crittenden Radio National.
First interviews Dr Amir Ali of Curtin University..who did try to take a stand and was described as a Rushdie.He said the newspaper had “made a mistake” and withdrew his opinions on liberalising his religion.
Second..Dr Farish(apologise if wrong spelling)Noor, Malaysian Specialist Academic in Berlin.
Main points in a long interview (worth hearing)
Increasingly similar terms and themes being used by both sides (Indo and Malaysian Muslims).
Increasing number of contacts and seminars between both sides especially since 9/11,now conspiracy theories being pushed about danger of persocution of Muslims-“to set up a kind of hate machine directed towards other religions”.
Moderating Muslim groups like Sisters in Islam being sidelined.
The Malay/Muslim Constituency is the biggest VOTE BANK in Malaysia and politicians like Anwar Ibrahim cannot afford to ignore them.
Dr Mahatir allowed the elevation of sharia courts as a way to give equal status to Malay Muslims in Civil Service,an emerging Malay Muslim Middle class.
(PARAPHRASED -TO HELP THEM FEEL LESS MARGINALISED AND DISCRIMINATED AGAINST.
THEY ARE NOW THE STRONGEST AND LARGEST GROUP OF CIVIL SERVICE.
SEEING THE EMERGENCE OF A RELIGIOUSLY INSPIRED PUBLIC SECTOR.COULD CREATE A PARALLEL ISLAMIC CIVIL SOCIETY.
24 NEW ngos and lobby groups have emerged in the last two years,MARGINALISING the SECULAR CIVIL SOCIETY in both countries.
This social scientist/human rights person interviewed Bashir.
He said it was impossible to do a “critical interview”-he was far too media savvy and could deflect questions.So he decided to “let him say what he wants.”
What he heard from Bashir he had “heard it all before” in STHN THAILAND,PAKISTAN AND INDIA.
“People like you and I may be terrified of his vision for the future but he is consistent”. (apparently Indo and Mala people like “consistency” as they are not “stable” societies or perceived as such.)
“ESTABLISHING AN ALTERNATIVE ISLAMIC CIVIL SOCIETY WILL LOCK IN RADICAL ISLAM”.
A sense of “global Muslim Consciousness”.Apologies for length of the above but the message is clear.
Giving way and indulging ONE special group in our society (which after all is one people come to because it is so good) will establish a parallel or alternative civil society WHICH WILL LOCK IN RADICAL ISLAM.
So we should not be CHANGING our societies to suit them or even to make them feel “LESS MARGINALISED or COMFORTABLE”.
They have no more or less rights than any other people in society.Hey, we’ve got 20 documented complaints of towelhead taxi drivers here in Melbourne refusing to take blind people with seeing-eye dogs.
And these pricks have the cheek to call the dogs dirty!
Posted by Oafish and Infantile on 2006 10 11 at 09:00 AM • permalinkSlightly OT, but we were speaking of surrendering (kind of):
Headlights on in day, says EU
BRITISH motorists are to be forced to drive with their headlights on during daytime under new EU laws.Ministers admitted yesterday they were losing a battle to opt out of the proposed rules.
Eurocrats want all member states to follow Scandinavia, where dipped headlights are compulsory on all moving vehicles 24 hours a day.
Between Brussels and Mecca, the Brits don’t have a chance.
Posted by Art Vandelay on 2006 10 11 at 09:18 AM • permalinkI’d rather like some sort of physical notice of whether I was about to get in a muslim taxi or not. Stone cold sober, dog and alcohol-free, I’d still move along to the first cab driven by a non-muslim. My right to spend my dollar as I see fit.
In fact, the very next time I use a taxi, I’ll make sure I don’t use one driven by a muslim. I’ll start out with “Salaam Malekum” and if I hear back any version of “Walekum Salaam” I’ll be out of that cab and on to the next one.Even if you’ve never had an alcoholic drink, your body technically contains numerous types of alcohol (an alcohol in this sense is any compound with a hydroxyl group attached to a saturated carbon atom). By this definition, cholesterol is an alcohol, as is Vitamin A (see here for more). So I guess that means Ali won’t be carrying any overweight people with cartons of milk from now on either.
But what this weasley camel jockey and his band of jicabbies probably think they’re banning is ethyl alcohol, also known as ethanol. But even then, do these masters of Koranic verse really understand how widespread the use of ethenol is? Wikipedia has a nice discussion that shows Ali the Ponce will soon be rejecting perfume, paint and medical wipes too.
Like all medievalists, Ali is long on self righteous indignation and short on fucking brains. My suggestion is he join his true brethren - survivalists living in desert bunkers surrounded by barbed wire and with ten years worth of spam and baked beans for when the big one drops - and give up trying to make headway in a developed economy.
The supreme irony of all is that the English term “alcohol” is derived from Arabic (الكحول)...
Still human beings, eh? Let’s see on Google News how the Human Beings are behaving this morning:
Unexploded bomb found near blast site in North Cotabato
Renewed fighting erupts in Sri Lanka ahead of peace talksSaddam, co-defendant ousted from courtroom
Qatar’s mediation effort fails as Hamas rejects Israeli state
Race chief backs Straw on veils
It could go on for the whole page, but I get tired at my advanced age. If it weren’t for that freaky bastard in North Korea, all the bad news in the world would be from the “Human Beings” of the sort that drive these cabs.
“We have the right (to refuse to transport alcohol). We are still human being(s).”
Uh, so are the people you get paid to transport.
I’m thinking about deliberately carrying an alcoholic beverage in my checked bag from now, just to spite these cultural imperialists and deny them my money. I think it’d be just delightful if everyone else would start doing the same.
“People are overwhelmingly against any kind of cultural accommodation.”
Talk about lost in an ideological hall of mirrors.
This idiot simply does not see the connection between what he lovingly describes as ‘cultural accommodation’ and everything PC-types claim to abhor. To wit, discrimination, apartheid and treating everyone differently on the basis of arbitrary distinctions, in this case, religious orientation.
And, of course, the ‘journalist’ found such a sand-poundingly ridiculous statement not worth notice, much less a challenge.
When is the ACLU going to file suit defending the drunks’ right to a cab ride?
I’m surprised this hasn’t been a bigger issue. Intoxicated people are always exhorted to take a taxi home to be on the safe side. If taxi drivers refuse them service, would they not then be promoting drunk driving or other dangerous behaviors?
And I really do not see how being a human is a point or argument in this issue at all. A non sequitir if ever there were one.
This idiot simply does not see the connection between what he lovingly describes as ‘cultural accommodation’ and everything PC-types claim to abhor. To wit, discrimination, apartheid and treating everyone differently on the basis of arbitrary distinctions, in this case, religious orientation.
All that bad stuff can only be done by white Christians, dontchaknow.
Posted by Rob Crawford on 2006 10 11 at 10:40 AM • permalinkThanks for your input, Oz. I have a feeling it was the off-shore attention that turned the trick. Awaiting breathlessly the next move.
Posted by Kyda Sylvester on 2006 10 11 at 10:49 AM • permalink#46 Muslihoon
The cabbies are not, according to anything I’ve read, refusing service to people carrying alcohol in their bloodstream, just in their bags. Hypocritical? Consider that their taxis are running on 10% ethanol.
- - -
Clearly there must be guidelines in place to get a hack permit that require non-discrimination in general, and compliance with the Americans With Disabilities Act in particular, so the refusal to pick up passengers using guide dogs should be huge.
Alcohol carriers may not be a protected class, and it’s conceivable that the rules don’t foresee discrimination against someone who is simply doing something lawful, like carrying alcohol. On the other hand, there is no law that passengers can’t discriminate, so letting the market decide with the lights might have worked quite well, despite Pipes’ understandable concerns that it could be so innocuous as to lead down a slippery (but not alcohol-soaked!) slope.
Me? I don’t usually drink, but from now on I’m taking a tiny bottle of Jack Daniels in my luggage.
“People are overwhelmingly against any kind of cultural accommodation.” said Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport spokesman Patrick Hogan
Only those of us paying attention, dumbass. Some of us actually understand how cultural conquest works.
Give them an inch and they’ll take your life.
PS For all you who continue to believe that the lights would have worked out to correct the system through free market means, consider this:
ANSWER would have immediately notified their multitude of radicalized campus guerilla units with orders to mobilized all of their allied useful idiots and lines would be formed at each and every “muslim lit” cab. Each of those stooges would have had fare cash in hand provided by their parent organizations, allies and donor/supporters.By the end of the first week, demanding a “muslim lit” cab would have become the common habit for the majority of the leftobots and other allies of our enemy.
I emailed the Pioneer Press reporter to ask about the context of the issue, mainly what rules the cabbies agree to live by to operate a taxi as MSP Airport and in the surrounding communities. (And to address my persisitent 10% ethanol question!) I’ve not found much from 1100 miles away.
Question: Might the Metropolitan Airports Commission have lit the fuse on this? Several websites for business and government conferences held in the Twin Cities area imitate the language here that fares “include a $3.00 trip fee… which allows drivers to recoup airport permit fees.” But the 2005 conferences quote a $2.25 trip fee, suggesting that the underlying airport permit fees also recently increased by a 1/3! Perhaps this fee increase combined with post-Katrina gas price increases combined to squeeze the jicabbies’ wallets. I was unable to determine whether per-mile metered rates have changed, which would certainly matter a great deal.
“People are overwhelmingly against any kind of cultural accommodation.”
Yes, like Rosa Parks.
Posted by wronwright on 2006 10 11 at 12:11 PM • permalinkHmmm.
What I find curious is the fact that, according to the taxi commission, 80% of the airport’s taxi drivers are muslim.
So what exactly is supposed to happen during the Thanksgiving and Christmas holidays when people are travelling home carrying bottles of wine? Are they supposed to split up the remaining 20% of the non-muslim cabs?
I realise the situation has perhaps changed, though I haven’t read anything that would prevent the muslim taxi drivers from continuing to refuse alcohol laden passengers, but the very idea of allowing this sort of nonsense simply beggars the mind.
Posted by memomachine on 2006 10 11 at 12:26 PM • permalink” ‘We have the right (to refuse to transport alcohol). We are still human being(s).’
Uh, so are the people you get paid to transport.”
That other people are human and have rights, too, seems to be the missing premise in Muslim logic.
The speaker managing to turn the issue into a wail of victimization and self-pity shows you how quickly they’ve learned to work our culture of complaint. And they are working it—that’s just exactly what this is. You couldn’t convince me in a million years that there’s a real religious principle or emotion here.
They’ll continue to push and pick and irritate and violate, as long as they get away with it.
#31 Crash, I heard the show as well. Ya gotta love Stephen’s comment after Amir Ali rang off.
“I don’t know about you, but I had the peculiar sensation that I was interviewing two Dr Alis there.”
Cracked me up, and right in morning peak hour traffic, too. Here’s the transcript for thems as is interested.
I reckon (and I’ve said it before) that this is not random…call me paranoid but this is a deliberate, global push by these idiots to see just how much we’ll take before we simply start topping ‘em.
Posted by MentalFloss on 2006 10 11 at 09:36 PM • permalink“Distilling is the highest form of patriotism”.
Jack Daniels.
Posted by Infidel Tiger on 2006 10 12 at 12:01 AM • permalinkAre these the same caring, compassionate “officials” who won’t tolerate a Christian Pharmacist refusing to dispense the abortion pill? Guess it depends on whose ox is being gored…
Posted by nofixedabode on 2006 10 12 at 01:25 AM • permalink#75, nofixedabode:
Guess it depends on whose ox is being gored…
Or maybe it also has to do with who’s more likely to kick in your door in the middle of the night and force you to watch as your children are sodomized, your wife is raped and everyone gets a complementary beheading… if told their wishes are denied?
Either way, cowards or quislings. Each as disgusting and unworthy as the other.
Either way, cowards or quislings. Each as disgusting and unworthy as the other.
They encourage this behavior by reward. The cowards or quislings will pay, eventually. And we’ll pay for permitting their existence.
Posted by nofixedabode on 2006 10 12 at 12:46 PM • permalinkWhat next? Muslim taxis catering solely to Muslims? Muslim taxi drivers refusing to take non-Muslims? The ACLU will no doubt be DEFENDING their “right” to exercise their “religion”.
Posted by Wylie Wilde on 2006 10 12 at 03:25 PM • permalink
Page 1 of 1 pages
Members:
Login | Register
| Member List
You’ve got the right to get another job that doesn’t conflict with your arcane, idiotic beliefs, Abdul.
You don’t have the right to inflict said daffy ideas on others in a free, western, secular democracy.
I suggest you put in for a vacancy driving technicals in Mogadishu- guaranteed booze free.