| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Clash of civilizations update. From the Norwegian Kafir's Fjordman blogspot:
[B]lind people with their guide dogs are finding it increasingly difficult to get a taxi ride, and not just in the capital. In Oslo, Muslims make up such a high percentage of cab drivers that it can be hard to obtain a taxi during Islamic holidays. The following example is from the city of Drammen outside Oslo, one of the Norwegian municipalities where the number of Muslim immigrants is now so large that the conflicts are becoming significant. A pro-Israeli politician from the rightwing Progress Party recently received death threats here. A lady in Drammen ran into some unexpected difficulties when travelling to visit another town:Grethe Olsen, accompanied by her guide dog Isak, experienced being rejected by no less than 21 taxis before finally getting a ride. Olsen thinks the taxi drivers said no for religious reasons. The Norwegian Blind Association confirms that this is a well known problem all over the country, especially in cities with many immigrants. It arises when a blind person accompanied by a guide dog wants to take a taxi from a stand, instead of ordering one in advance.
According to spokesperson Amber Khan from World Islamic Mission in Oslo, this has nothing to do with Islam. "This is culture, not religion," she says. "If somebody is dependent upon a dog, this should take precedence over religion." Director Viggo Korsnes in Norway's Taxi Association has no sympathy for drivers who refuse to accept guide dogs into their cars. "You are obliged to accept the dog. Those who don't should find something else to do."
Amber Khan is not entirely wrong. Dogs, although considered extremely dirty animals and greatly disliked, are permitted for certain limited uses, such as guarding your property. I have never seen anything mentioned about guide dogs included in these few exceptions. At best, it is a matter of a great deal of interpretation. Khan is blatantly wrong in stating that this has nothing to do with the Islamic religion. First of all, Islam is not just a religion, but culture and politics as well, all rolled into one. It is difficult to see how non-Muslims are supposed to separate between religion and culture given that Islam admits no such distinction. And core Islamic texts do reveal a strong distaste for dogs, going back to Muhammad himself.
Here are two hadith from the most important collections for one billion Sunni Muslims:
Bukhari Volume 7, Book 72, Number 833:
Narrated Abu Talha : The Prophet said, "Angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or there are pictures."
Muslim Book 010, Number 3811:
Abdullah (b. Umar) (Allah be pleased with them) reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) ordered the killing of dogs and we would send (men) in Medina and its corners and we did not spare any dog that we did not kill, so much so that we killed the dog that accompanied the wet she-camel belonging to the people of the desert.
From Islam Q&A: Ruling on having a dog
According to Islaamic Sharee'ah, it is not permitted to keep a dog except within narrowly-defined limits, as the Prophet explained: "Whoever keeps a dog, his good deeds will decrease every day by one qeeraat (a unit of measurement), unless it is a dog for farming or herding." Dogs are extremely naajis (impure, unclean). Keeping dogs nowadays is the habit of the kuffaar (infidels), who adopt them as friends, kiss them, let them lick them and their clothes, sleep with them and even leave them money in their wills. Keeping a dog is an imitation of the kuffaar. Some Muslims may claim that they need to keep a dog at home for purposes of protection, to which we respond that nowadays there are burglar alarm systems and other measures one may take for security purposes, and there is no need to keep a dog, praise be to Allaah.
Posted by Robert at April 6, 2005 7:27 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Again a minority culture attempting to impose their values on the host majority. These taxi drivers must be fined or jailed for breaking the law that deprives the blind of their civil rights.
I am sure that Muslim in Norway will sue the government for denying them their religious rights that are incompatible with Western values. Thus, Muslims don't belong in the West.
Posted by: epg![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at April 6, 2005 8:44 AM
What would they do with a seeing eye pig?
Posted by: Hulegu Khan at April 6, 2005 9:00 AM
Infidel man's best friend, perhaps.
Posted by: Hugh at April 6, 2005 10:04 AM
Muslims need to be in their own lands, far away from civilization. They have demonstrated that they can not live with civilized people.
Posted by: Carolyn2 at April 6, 2005 10:40 AM
The Prophet said, "Angels do not enter a house in which there is a dog or there are pictures. Oh, and Hummel figurines. Angels hate Hummel figurines."
at April 6, 2005 11:30 AM
This is OT but it’s something that occurred to my nasty little mind recently about Ramadam.
A few years ago I was working with a Moslem who was not really observing Ramadam properly, much to the consternation of his wife. These days I doubt he would admit any laxity at all but that was then. He mentioned that it began and ended with the sighting of the moon above Mecca not England. Knowing that the fast was between sunrise and sunset I asked whether it was sunrise and sunset in Mecca, knowing that night and day are much nearer in length towards the tropics, compared with England where in June sunrise is about 4am and sunset 10 pm. That would mean 18 hours of fasting and 6 of feeding compared with 12 fasting and 12 feeding in the Middle East. The answer was that it was the time of sunrise and sunset, “in the place where you are” Last year Ramadam occurred in autumn in the Northern Hemisphere. So now that there are Moslems as far north as Norway what will they do? Ramadam in winter will be easy, no daylight - no fast. But what happens when Ramadam occurs in summer? Now in Great Britain we do at least get a sunset in the summer. No food or drink during the hours of daylight. No darkness in Norway in which to eat or drink between May and August. I think this has distinct possibilities……
at April 6, 2005 11:35 AM
Great news.
Now all we have to do is put dogs everywhere here in the US.Supermarkets,gas stations,the dmv,hospitals,and especially airports.Every business in America should have a dog.
We should take Washington off the one dollar bill and replace his picture with a puppy.
We should open the cages at every SPCA in the country.
JLP
at April 6, 2005 12:43 PM
Simple solution.
Secretly record blind people with dogs being refused a cab, with blind person carrying hidden microphone.
Take away Cab licences of all concerned.
Show documentary on TV.
Posted by: Celsius at April 6, 2005 1:19 PM
As soon as thry`ll reach a higher percentage of the total population,they will petition the government to deny licenses to dog owners and to make owning a dog,illegal.
Dog ownership will probably be declared as offensive for the muslim community and banned...
at April 6, 2005 4:31 PM
Interesting twist,I agree, it would be cruel to force a Dog to share a Taxi with a Muslim.
When a large number of Somali refugees poured into an area with mostly highrise apartment,long term tenants with dogs were expected to get rid of them to appease the Muslims that said if they touch a Dog they must have a bath.
I never thought that having a bath was a bad thing,anyway the non-Muslims in the building
re-named their dog's Mo-ham-med.
The muzzies should have quit while they were ahead.
at April 6, 2005 10:39 PM
This is one battle that us kafirs, even the most pathetic appeasing dhimmis amongst us, won't let the Muslims win. Our love for dogs is just too deep. Just let anyone suggest that dogs be banned or even curtailed to appease Muslim "sensibilities" and Islam's image will never recover from the backlash and vitriole hurled its way. Go ahead, Muslims. Just try it. Make our day.
Add the dog issue to the issue of blind and handicapped people dependent on dogs in order to live a decent life, and you lose. We love our dogs. We love our people who live with various physical and mental challenges. A taxi driver here who refused a blind woman was fined $1600. Don't know if he was Muslim or just an insensitive grub. How anyone could refuse a Golden Lab is beyond me.
I guess they don't have seeing eye dogs in Islamic countries. What do they do with their blind people there anyway? Make them sit by the side of the path and beg for money? Drown them at birth?
Posted by: feralee at April 7, 2005 12:43 AM
If it were for spiritual blindness, every Muslim would be required to have a seeing-eye dog.
They don't seem to understand the idea of a friend, only a fearful fellow slave of Allah.
And dogs will not be slaves out of fear. Only love.
A concept and reality alien to the Islamic mind.
Posted by: BigSleep at April 7, 2005 2:08 AM
could be why muzzi,s are so screwed up,when they where children,they never had a puppy to love
Posted by: shiva at April 7, 2005 3:33 AM
Dogs smell fear,so a dog is more libel to attack a muslim than a human being.Because the smell of fear is the same as aggression.If a dog should attack a muslim I would not blame the dog. Humans and dogs have learnt to live together,where as a muslim fears and hates dogs to such an extent,that the dogs reaction is pre-emptive self defencce.
I would like to add that as far as muslins are concerned we have a lot to learn from our faithful friends.
If muslims want to learn about love they should throw their quoran onto the fire,and then come home with a puppy
Now excuse me while cuddle up to my endlessly drowling rottwiellers
at April 7, 2005 4:22 AM
It is strange this refusal of dogs. Although the Quran forbids ownership and selling and buying of cats (yes, cats also) and dogs, it allows to keep dogs for certain purposes as watching, herding and guarding. Following the Quaran even the strictest follower should allow a dogs with a handicapt person into its cab. Thus, the drivers concerned are insenitives grubs, whether they are muslims or not.
Remember when China forbade ownership of singing birds, not because there was any rational reason for it, but just to pester its people and to show its totalitarian power over them? Rings a bell.
Posted by: Ernst at April 7, 2005 6:12 AM
I guess they don't have seeing eye dogs in Islamic countries. What do they do with their blind people there anyway? Make them sit by the side of the path and beg for money? Drown them at birth?
Posted by: feralee at April 7, 2005 12:43 AM
Muslims are much like the Nazis when it comes to disabled, crippled, or mentally handicapped people. They have no use for them, even within their own families. Widows and orphans are left to fend for themselves, despite debilitating restrictions against the free movement of women. I don't know what they do with all their charity proceeds besides donating it to terrorist organizations, butI do know that muslims are very selective when it comes to compassion, charity, and benevolence. Their hearts bleed for the families of homicide bombers. I wouldn't want to be a blind person at the mercy of muslims.
One of the many contradictions in the Qur'an concerns dogs. Muhammad allegedly ordered one of his caravans of stolen booty to go around a dog that was giving birth in its path. This is touted as an act of great mercy. In another sura, the deranged prophet orders all dogs killed. I can't imagine why he had such a drastic change of heart but he was often capricious. If allah hates dogs, why did he create them? I guess they were good target practice for Muhammad's brave warriors.
Hungry, homeless orphans have never been one of muslims' favorite causes, especially if they are disabled, crippled, maimed or retarded. Widows might as well cut their own throats if they have no close family to help them. I don't think adoption is allowed by Islam, but muslims will take homeless children and use them as sex and labor slaves.
It's probably the dogs that the cab drivers don't like. Muslims hate dogs but most dogs are friendlier and far more trustworthy than muslims. I'll take a dog to a muslim any day.
at April 8, 2005 1:34 AM
I guess they don't have seeing eye dogs in Islamic countries. What do they do with their blind people there anyway? Make them sit by the side of the path and beg for money? Drown them at birth?
Posted by: feralee at April 7, 2005 12:43 AM
Muslims are much like the Nazis when it comes to disabled, crippled, or mentally handicapped people. They have no use for them, even within their own families. Widows and orphans are left to fend for themselves, despite debilitating restrictions against the free movement of women. I don't know what they do with all their charity proceeds besides donating it to terrorist organizations, butI do know that muslims are very selective when it comes to compassion, charity, and benevolence. Their hearts bleed for the families of homicide bombers. I wouldn't want to be a blind person at the mercy of muslims.
One of the many contradictions in the Qur'an concerns dogs. Muhammad allegedly ordered one of his caravans of stolen booty to go around a dog that was giving birth in its path. This is touted as an act of great mercy. In another sura, the deranged prophet orders all dogs killed. I can't imagine why he had such a drastic change of heart but he was often capricious. If allah hates dogs, why did he create them? I guess they were good target practice for Muhammad's brave warriors.
Hungry, homeless orphans have never been one of muslims' favorite causes, especially if they are disabled, crippled, maimed or retarded. Widows might as well cut their own throats if they have no close family to help them. I don't think adoption is allowed by Islam, but muslims will take homeless children and use them as sex and labor slaves.
It's probably the dogs that the cab drivers don't like. Muslims hate dogs but most dogs are friendlier and far more trustworthy than muslims. I'll take a dog to a muslim any day.
at April 8, 2005 1:34 AM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)