I suspect this will turn rather messy:

Rather than "refuse for booze", what would stop them from stating that a booze-laden client was acting in a threatening manner, and refuse for this reason?

Lying makes for a formidable loophole,and I doubt the situation can ever be rectified as the city intends.

Posted by: Occupant at February 23, 2007 1:24 PM

I am not from the state of Minnesota, but I happily sent a letter expressing concern about the implementation of Islamic beliefs upon the travelers. I hope my letter is read...

...I encourage all to send a letter and express their concern regarding the Islami imposition....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at February 23, 2007 1:38 PM

I just had a wild idea. Get in a cab at the airport, perfectly sober, dressed very professional, and after you pay and start to get out, remove the pint of rot gut whiskey from your satchel or brief, descretly remove the cap, and silently lay the bottle under the drivers seat and smile or slightly giggle at the driver as you walk away.

P.S. Get off the street quickly!

Posted by: guide inside at February 23, 2007 1:40 PM

That's a sensible request. A letter, or an appearance if you live in the Minneapolis area, does not take much. You are not being asked to go on patrol in Ramadi or Fallujah or Baghdad, not being asked to risk your life, while the "Iraqi troops" -- or the few who actually show up and supposedly are the best ones, the ones who will work with you, when they don't hold back but do go ahead, do so in the main in order to warn their fellow Shi'a (or Sunnis) to hide whatever it is that the American soldiers may be looking for.

Here, and there, and everywhere, given the craven performance of the government, citizens must protest and put spanners in the Islamic works. It is important to do this, and to do other things in the same spirit, toward the same end.

Posted by: Hugh at February 23, 2007 1:42 PM

And furthermore, what would stop them from running over a booze-laden client if they so readily run over debators of religion?

A message must be sent that there are laws in this land which they will live by or leave. And Sharia has no lawful place in any moden Liberal Democracy.

Posted by: GreatShaitan at February 23, 2007 1:42 PM

Greetings in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, the Author and Finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

I'm sure we all agree that the sensible thing to do if you are a devout Baptist and want to really be obedient to what you believe, you refrain from seeking employment as a bartender or a strip club manager.

Somehow Baptists figured that out; hopefully the cab drivers and the bureaucrats in the Minnesota legislature can figure it out too.

Posted by: Stand fast in the liberty at February 23, 2007 1:45 PM

Thanks for the opportunity. Letter on the way.

Posted by: MP at February 23, 2007 1:45 PM

This is absolutely amazing - and illustrative of the anti-American stance taken by the Bush Administration.

Why are the cabbies not lined up and investigated for immigration fraud?

The Bush administration is so fixated on this country being overrun they will allow anything.

There can be no other explanation. The border guards being railroaded, the untold millions of illegals here being given benifits and the total refusal to implement workplace enforcement - except for a couple of photo-ops, that is.

The Bushes are globalists and are intent on destroying our borders.

I would be happy to hear lucid arguments to the contrary.

Posted by: infidel! at February 23, 2007 1:52 PM

A letter was sent from my business stating that as a businessman, I would be insulted, outraged and possibly wanting to seek a civil suit if I was denied cab service in Minneapolis because I was legally carrying a bottle of wine. I also told them that my business operates under the laws of Rhode Island and the United States of America and not some religious entity. I told them I would instantly fire any of my employees who would insult and refuse to service law abiding citizens.

Posted by: Briars at February 23, 2007 1:55 PM

En route.

Posted by: counterjihadi at February 23, 2007 2:08 PM

As a card carrying IATA member, my voice will be heard.

-XRDC

Posted by: XRDC at February 23, 2007 2:19 PM

Actually, is it such a bad idea? I love the idea of being able to recognize an Islamic cab, so that in addition to the options of taking a shuttle, or bus, or rental car, I can also pick a non-Islamic cab.

OTOH, I understand the 'give 'em an inch and they'll take a mile.

Posted by: Infidel Pride at February 23, 2007 2:29 PM

FILE UNDER: GIVE 'EM A BOTTLE AND THEY'LL TAKE THE WHOLE HOG.

Just read this at www.littlegreenfootballs.com

Friday, February 23, 2007
Pennsylvania Shari'a Watch

Muslims in West Philadelphia are seething over plans to relocate a liquor store closer to the University of Pennsylvania—because there’s also a mosque nearby: Potential move brings potential conflict.

For students living on Beige Block, the potential move of the liquor store closer to the area may be a godsend.

But to Ahmed Rushdie, the news is nothing less than “insulting.”

Officials familiar with the negotiations say that there are talks to move the 41st and Market streets liquor store to 43rd and Walnut streets, a location close in proximity to a K-8 school and a community mosque.

The Masjid Al-Jamia Mosque is located at 4228 Walnut St., while the Penn-Alexander school is at 4209 Spruce St.

Rushdie, a professor in Penn’s Near Eastern Language and Civilizations Department and a board member of Masjid Al-Jamia, says the move raises serious issues for Muslims in the area - under Islamic law, it is illegal for Muslims to consume alcohol.

Rushdie’s concerns go further than religious convictions, however: He said Masjid Al-Jamia is most concerned about the possible negative side effects that a liquor store might have for the area. “Most importantly, it’s really bad for the neighborhood because there are many families, and [it would be] less than 300 feet from the school on 42nd” Street, he said. “We’re not disputing the relocation of this store because it’s a religious matter only.” ...

“If this is the motivation of the establishment or to further fuel the pockets of the government through liquor tax, I’m unsure,” said area resident Asalamu Alaikum, a member of Masjid Al-Jamia. “However, we all agree that we don’t want to see our community fall victim to these types of establishments, as others have done all too often.”

College junior Artina Sheikh, vice president of the Penn Muslim Student Association, also spoke out against the possible relocation.

“The MSA is extremely concerned over this issue and objects to this establishment because of the moral implications of permitting wider distribution of alcohol to society at large,” she said.

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at February 23, 2007 2:48 PM

A key point to remember is that our infidel way of life is an INSULT to Muslims and their prophet.

An insult?

Yes, and do you know what the punishment is for those who "insult" the Prophet Muhammad? Do you?

Here's the punishement and the "proof":

http://www.masud.co.uk/ISLAM/misc/alshifa/pt4ch1sec2.htm

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at February 23, 2007 2:52 PM

This is laughable. Why do Muslims continue to grovel for such ridiculous rumblings? I have a set of questions:

1. Why should non-Muslims (who do not observe Islamic law) abstain from carrying alcohol in a taxi? Sources anyone?

2. When did it become anathema via Islamic law for a non-Muslim - I repeat, a non-Muslim - to merely carry alcohol?

3. Lastly, where in Islamic Law is there a prohibition against carrying alcohol in the first place?

Such elucidates the poverty of contemporary Muslim thought, an utter disgrace.

Best wishes,

Derrick Abdul-Hakim

Posted by: Derrick_abdulhakim at February 23, 2007 2:54 PM

what next, they won't accept women who aren't properly covered up? I'll have to carry a spare burqa in my purse if I want to catch a cab?

Going to type up my letter now

Posted by: kelisw at February 23, 2007 3:04 PM

@Derrick

Yes, but can a Muslim carry an infidel who's carrying alcohol?

What would Muhammad do?

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at February 23, 2007 3:17 PM

From the liquor store relocation story posted above: ". . .said area resident Asalamu Alaikum. . . "

Is that really this person's name, or was the reporter getting jerked around? I mean, if you were a reporter and I told you my name was "Hi Howareya," wouldn't you be even the littlest bit suspicious?

No end to the comic relief with Muslims, except for the bombing and beheading parts, of course.

Posted by: Marwan'sDaughter at February 23, 2007 3:20 PM

Are Muslims Dying For a Drink?

083.022
YUSUFALI: Truly the Righteous will be in Bliss:
On Thrones (of Dignity) will they command a sight (of all things):
Thou wilt recognise in their faces the beaming brightness of Bliss.
Their thirst will be slaked with Pure Wine sealed:

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at February 23, 2007 4:20 PM

kudos.................

I like muslim cabbies, never have to pay a fee....

just before we get to where I am going, I condemn moham and the evil vileness of the cult of islam and the filth that is the koran. they get so mad they stop the cab and ask to be exit. which I do and when I slam the door the cab rocks. I am 6-3 and over 250#'s.

come on muslim cabbies.........your next non-fare is waiting...

The Texican........

Posted by: The Texican at February 23, 2007 4:22 PM

Dear American In Germany,
I have not seen you posting for a long time nice to see you have lost none of your edge. As far as I am concerned the job description of a taxi driver means that you are obliged to transport passengers and not discriminate in anyway. These gentlemen should have been given there marching orders a long time ago. I seem to remember a certain American Admiral mentioning dam the torpedoes. It is about time the west started to have the same sort of attitude.

Deep regards

Holger Dansker

Posted by: Holger Dansker at February 23, 2007 4:27 PM

@Derrick
1. Why should non-Muslims (who do not observe Islamic law) abstain from carrying alcohol in a taxi? Sources anyone?

002.219
YUSUFALI: They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit."

2. When did it become anathema via Islamic law for a non-Muslim - I repeat, a non-Muslim - to merely carry alcohol?

IT ISN'T!!!

3. Lastly, where in Islamic Law is there a prohibition against carrying alcohol in the first place?

002.219
YUSUFALI: They ask thee concerning wine and gambling. Say: "In them is great sin, and some profit, for men; but the sin is greater than the profit."

======
Derrick, you know what Muhammad would do? He would smash the wine bottle over the kaffir's head and seperate his head from his body with the broken shards of glass.

Fahimta?

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at February 23, 2007 4:29 PM

Derrick

Here's your answer!

http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/78349

Sharia & Alcohol

Submitted by Mordechai Ben-Menachem, Feb 22, 2007 at 10:30

Upon reading this, I was unsure of the correct concept of Sharia, so I asked a leading Islamic Cleric for his opinion. My question was:
Aren't we missing something in this story? In my understanding of Islamic Law, and of course, I could be wrong, there is a prohibition for Muslims against drinking alcohol. There is no prohibition to view it or to allow others to drink it.

The taxi drivers are not really attempting to impose Sharia. They are attempting to impose Wahabbism.
Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi was kind enough to respond, and this is his response:

Dear Mr. Ben Menachem,

Shari`ah does not only forbids drinking wine only, since the Qur'an does not say what means "drinking wine is forbidden for you", but "wine is forbidden for you". A know hadith explains that the prohibition of wine includes " drinking, serving, selling, buying, pressing the grapes, transporting, asking for it and receiving its payment." From this point of view there exist no difference whatsoever between Sunni Islam, Shi'ism or Wahhabism.

However, the application of the rule to the specific case in question is surely depending on a Wahhabi-inspired interpretation. A taxi driver earns money by driving a car which transport passengers, which is a lawful job, and goes on being lawful even in cases when the passenger uses the taxi to go doing things which are forbidden in Islam. Were someone accepting a job which includes drinking, serving, buying or transporting wine, that would be forbidden in Islam and the money one earns would be unlawful. In this case, however, the taxi driver's job consists in transporting passengers, not wine, and in some cases those passengers - not the driver - can choose to bring the wine with them. By accepting those passengers and wine they carry, a Muslims driver does not violate the Shari`ah in the minimum.

Apart from this, I am not exactly informed about the legal status of taxi drivers in the U.S. In Italy taxi drivers are not public employees, but private workers (as individual firms or cooperative firms) who have an municipal authorization for a service of public utility. Every taxi driver is free to accept a passenger or to refuse him and/or his baggage, irrespective of the motivation, in the same way the owner of a shop is free to sell merchandise produced by a certain firm and not by another. A taxi driver can even choose to work for passengers without baggage only. He cannot work more than a certain number of hours each day, but is free to work less or even to abstain from work as long as he likes. The only exception detailed by the Law concerns carrying passengers with a physical handicap.

All the best,
Sheikh Abdul Hadi Palazzi

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at February 23, 2007 4:35 PM

If a Muslim cab driver is allowed to refuse to pick up a customer carrying a bottle of gin, why shouldn't a Muslim ambulance driver be allowed to refuse to pick up an accident victim that reeks of alcohol?

Have we gone nuts in this country? We can't even say a prayer before a high school football game, and we're considering giving Muslims a veto over how people live their own lives, so as not to offend Islamic moral sensibilities.

Why not ask Minneapolis Muslims to form a Virtues police to patrol the airport for alcohol and scantily dressed women -- including other things offensive to Muslims.

Why not buy them all a prayer rug at taxpayer expense, and get it over with?

I'm sure there's plenty of Federal Judges that will rule it's all perfectly constitutional. Multiculturalism and Diversity always trumps the constitution.

Posted by: rational at February 23, 2007 4:43 PM

@Derrick Abdul-Hakim
"1. Why should non-Muslims (who do not observe Islamic law) abstain from carrying alcohol in a taxi? Sources anyone?"

Practising religious harassment?

Seems like some of these cabbie guys just had their awakening - hey, it's not the yizha we get - it's simply a damned fare. Who knows, maybe some Somali sheikh had told them that in the US they just had to drive around with a car and the dhimmis would wait eagerly alongside the streets to jump in and pay them the yizha. (yeah, and there are these special cars - cabbies - with the yizha meter which always tells you how much this dhimmi's worth.. just pay a license and you become an authorized yizha collector..)

Maybe these poor guys just realized they got actually ripped off by the cunning dhimmis who evily used their ignorance to simply get a lift. No wonder they start getting mad..
Well, the dhimmis messed it up once more.

Posted by: flibustier at February 23, 2007 5:20 PM

Another solution would be that cabs that abide by sharia must be plainly marked as "Islamic Taxi." Free people can then decide whether to be "tolerant" or not. Mus could see that a fellow idiot is at the wheel and feel safe that the cab is haram.

Posted by: unicorns62000 at February 23, 2007 5:36 PM

Here's a simple solution to the whole problem.

As Josh L. Dickey of the Associated Press put it, when drivers at MSP refuse a fare for any reason, "they go to the back of the line. Waaaay back. Past the terminal, down a long service road, and into a sprawling parking lot jammed with cabs in Bloomington, where drivers sit idle for hours, waiting to be called again."

A tag team of patriotic individuals openly carrying liquor bottles needs to access the cab queue repeatedly, on a daily basis, so that any drivers refusing to transport them are rotated back to the end of the taxi queue and slowly have their earnings destroyed. There only needs to be a single car parked in the airport parking lot to serve as a shuttle back to the terminal. This is so that cab drivers accepting the customer can be presented with a legitimate short-hop fare. The shuttle driver then conveys the participant back to the terminal and reparks the vehicle afterwards. The shuttle's new location can be transmitted by cell-phone or GPS coordinates. For less than about $20.00 per day in airport parking fees and the time contributed by participants, these discriminatory cab drivers can be put out of business in a swift and perfectly legal fashion.

Below is the text of my email to the airport commission:

To Whom,

On no account must Muslim cab drivers be given any special dispensation for refusing law-abiding customers on the basis of them transporting alcohol. This represents blatant discrimination against ordinary people based upon the religious orientation of those who choose to do the discriminating, despite their capacity as providers of a public service. So long as individuals are legally permitted to carry unopened containers of liquor in public, cab drivers must be legally obliged to transport them. To accomodate the cab drivers' religious sensitivities is to legally sanction their blatant subscription to the code of sharia law. Sharia law represents a massive ongoing violation of human rights at all levels and constitutes one of the most brutal and vicious affronts to law abiding American citizens. Sharia law condones the spousal abuse of women, violence against those who choose non-Islamic lifestyles and an endless litany of Neanderthal and savage punishments for activities which are perfectly legal in America.

Pandering to the Muslim sensitivities of these cab drivers opens the door to a nearly endless process of further entrenching their arbitrary likes and dislikes into the daily operations of your metropolitan legal code. Doing so should open your organization to a slough of well-deserved lawsuits based on discrimination and imposition of religious commandment by state legal authorities. Additionally, you will be furthering the aims of individuals whose sole intention is the dismantling of America's constitutional law and system of legal jurisprudence. Any action upon your part to assist such a perversion of our legal system should be met with vigorous and persistent legal opposition, including the most costly form of lawsuits imaginable.

DO NOT acquiesce to the demands of these cab drivers. Doing so will make you the enemy of patriotic Americans everywhere. I hereby pledge to donate financially to whomever sues you should you be so ill-advised as to accomodate these anti-American seditionists.

Sincerely,

Zenster

Posted by: Zenster at February 23, 2007 6:11 PM

Greetings!
I'm new here, but I have been reading Jihad Watch. Time now. to become active.. at the very least.. get out a pen and paper. That is what CAIR has been up to...getting the little drip of muslims living here in our country to undermind it with the pen...The good news is... they are just a drip...WE THE PEOPLE are a flood!

Posted by: bob at February 23, 2007 10:15 PM

oh gawd, Daniel is quite the politician, maybe he's trying for another exclusive with Adam Gahdan. seems like lobbying is the way to the hearts of those in Washington? is it nobel to fight terrorism or to fight for a cause that is profitable?

think the cab drivers really care? they have their ticket to heaven.
what is the right way to fight the incideous evil of Islam? one cabbie at a time or facing the big guys?

Posted by: sectionOne at February 23, 2007 10:22 PM

"...they are just a drip...WE THE PEOPLE are a flood!"

Right on, Bob. Welcome to the site!

Zenster,

Great idea! (And great letter.)

Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at February 23, 2007 11:23 PM

This is ridiculous.
Whats next????
Islamic cabbies not allowing passengers who buy Kosher meat.Only Halal buyers allowed in taxis????

Posted by: Indiana_jones at February 23, 2007 11:27 PM

Zero tolerance for the intolerant - i.e. muslims.

"... the Metropolitan Airports Commission has worked with ... leaders from the *Muslim American Society* and the *Somali Justice Advocacy League*. The goal was to find a solution acceptable to everyone ... ."

The problems are - Muslim American Society and the Somali Justice Advocacy League - These should be outlawed in the USA. Somali justice belongs in Somalia. Muslim American Society - does not exist. It is American Society -period.
Since we have nothing but cowardly "leaders" -at every single level in the USA - who will not take the above steps - outlawing of organizations with the goal of destroying the USA as well as all non-muslim civilization - try this as solution: stop allowing muslims to immigrate to the USA and or send the muslims immigrants back to their muslim lands as they are incapable of and refuse to integrate. Problems solved.

Posted by: TINBH at February 23, 2007 11:38 PM

Da'awa with taxpayers money:

Kumbayah event in Victoria:

Social workers & Muhammedan da'awa doctors get to celebrate 400 'sensitivity training' and 'inter-faith daialogue'- events:

http://sheikyermami.com/2007/02/23/islamic-daawa-doctors-social-workers-unite-for-kumbayah-event-in-victoria/

Posted by: sheik yer'mami at February 24, 2007 12:22 AM

I sent a letter to the commission stating my opposition to any attempts to impose Sharia law on free people.There should be no concessions for Islam. Next Muslim cab drivers will refuse service to women without headscarfs or people carrying ham sandwiches.If carrying passengers with alcohol or seeing eye dogs bothers a Muslim cab driver's conscience let him find other employment that does not violate his conscience. That is what people who's religion clashes with their employment usually do. No one is born into the cab driver class in America, nor do Muslims have the right to deny other citizens service.

Posted by: Roxane at February 24, 2007 3:30 AM

this is the year of the pig! allow muslim taxi drivers to join in the celebration by passengers leaving pigs feet in the back seat for good luck.

Posted by: crumbinalfighter at February 24, 2007 3:32 AM

"The good news is... they are just a drip...WE THE PEOPLE are a flood!"

Well said, Bob!
I too hope to see the comments in this blog increase
into the hundreds soon.
I think that with comments it's not just that you have to write them if you think you have some valuable judgment or opionon to share.
Any comment also means to get your feet on the ground and show support.
A blog with thousands of comments would give Mr.Spencer much more political leverage which he absolutely deserves and needs. I hope that time comes that he can claim to voice the view of a majority, not just an easily to ignore minority.
I am happy if I can help spending some minutes of my time once a while for writing a comment to contribute one of these drops. Drops that one day hopefully become a flood which can't be ignored anymore.

Posted by: flibustier at February 24, 2007 4:16 AM

"People, just refuse to get into their cabs. Cripple them economically."

The problem is that any cab which a potential passenger refuses to use is probably not sent back to the taxi queue's end. Otherwise, I'd agree with you. Sadly, not enough people are sufficiently well-informed to make such a determination in the first place. Real countermeasures require a much more pre-emptive strategy.

This is why I suggested the tag team of legitimate alcohol carrying individuals. Any cabbie who refuses them is sent to back the end of the (rather lengthy) line.

Let the Islamist hacks object. Let them watch their gas tanks run dry and trip meters stay at zero. Let them go bankrupt. My heart pumps piss.

Evidently, others agree with my tag team strategy.

(Link: http://www.danielpipes.org/comments/78554)

Posted by: Zenster at February 24, 2007 10:27 PM

Dang nab it! Try the link without any http:// prefix!!!

www.danielpipes.org/comments/78554

They posted my exact suggestion! Major bragging rights!!!

Posted by: Zenster at February 24, 2007 10:38 PM