How do they feel about not handling paychecks?

Posted by: KAOSKTRL at March 13, 2007 2:15 PM

Sharia law continues in Minnisotastan.

Posted by: Elric66 at March 13, 2007 2:18 PM

It's amazing how many things they "can't handle." Since we eat the pork inside the thick plastic hermetically sealed vacuum package that they won't even touch ... well, you can imagine what they think of us.

Doesn't bode well for the future, eh?

BTW, it will come out that there is nothing in Quraan to forbid this. But it makes no difference. This is Wahabbism.

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at March 13, 2007 2:19 PM

I wonder what the response would be if cash to purchase such savories would be taken from an empty Spam can? Hmmm...almost makes me want to go shopping!

Posted by: Shakey_Premise at March 13, 2007 2:27 PM

This is Islam in weakness. What demands will be made when Muslims represent a larger percentage of the population? As a religion, but not primarily a religion, Islam is not compatible with the best of America. Let them eat pork.

Posted by: StillBreathing at March 13, 2007 2:57 PM

What else might be difficult to handle? Anything containing alcohol, such as beer, which is widely sold, even in Minnesota. Female customers who might be wearing that dangerously provocative dress that forces Muslim men to suppress their natural urge to rape them, or perhaps forces them to do so. The horror of having to be civil to, say, an Orthodox Jewish family, or a Hindu one. Aside from all pork, which means Cambell's Pork 'n Beans, and all breakfast sausages, and hot dogs, and a thousand other things that it is difficult to avoid -- and what if something with pork in it happened, while in the basket, to touch another item of food, and that then the Muslim cashier, in handling that other item, inadvertently had "touched" the invisible residue of that pork-based or pork-containing item -- all of this will render someone determined to be a devout Muslim not much good, in the United States, as a cashier in a food store. There must be something Muslims can do, without breaking the rules.

But what?

Posted by: Hugh at March 13, 2007 3:01 PM

Here's an idea. Get the juiciest package of bacon. tear a small hole in the corner (you're going to buy it anyway) and when the cashier refuses demand you ring it up yourself, be so incompetent that you "accidently" splatter pork juice all over her hijab and face. Of course, you apologize profusely.

Posted by: Provoslavni at March 13, 2007 3:02 PM

"There must be something Muslims can do, without breaking the rules."

...go back to the Middle East ..

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 13, 2007 3:03 PM

One of the comments on the original article:

Submitted by Hasarreef Mahogoff (not verified) on Tue, 03/13/2007 - 11:06am.
I never stop laughing at the inferior infidels as we cause them anger as we slowly take over their land. And you are so ignorant you don't even see it happening. Seriously, you don't deserve a country.

Posted by: Silvester at March 13, 2007 3:12 PM

Here we go again, imposing there views on the rest of the world. I am against discrimination, but why is it always a one way street when it comes to muslims. If this is allowed to continue in a few years it will be accepted as normal and total dimmitude will be much easier for our Grandchildren to accept as the norm. The simple answer is show them the door. The Mayor of Tamworth in Australia has also been asked to take in a couple of dozen free loaders from Somalia. He has refused saying why, out of the nine we have got now, eight out of the nine have been in trouble with the police, and only one works. The anal solids have been raining down around his ears for the last couple of weeks, It seems stupid to me when an elected representative starts to use his common sense and gets castigated.

Posted by: Holger Dansker at March 13, 2007 3:14 PM

Cabbies refuse passengers carrying bottled alcohol – now hijab-clad, checkout clerks refuse to handle a customer’s packaged bacon. What next?!! My dog is the sweetest, gentlest, most lovable, female, Australian Shepherd that anyone could possibly imagine – wouldn’t hurt a fly -yet: when I am leash walking this kind and gentle animal, all the local, holier-than-though, Paki-muzzlims in my neighborhood give us an extremely wide berth as we quietly pass by. One old sandal-clad coot even regularly feigns a violent allergic reaction saying that he simply can’t be around any animals with fur (humm: wonder what he might say if I had a smooth-skinned, Vietnamese Pot-Bellied pig??) This seeming universal muslim terror of canines was always a great mystery to me until I latter found out that dogs are on the non-halal list for these self righteous, dirt bags. Something about the jinn spirits they equate with angels (more like demons to me) won’t frequent their homes if there are any furry, canine critters about. This psychotic, spiritual incompatibility with certain commonplace western things brings to mind that many of these Islamic transplants might have well have initially stayed home, among their native date palms, had they encountered more pork farms and dog breeders along the way to greener, western pastures!

Posted by: descendantofacrusader at March 13, 2007 3:19 PM

Here's a hint to American employers: STOP HIRING THEM!!!

Posted by: Prickzilla at March 13, 2007 3:31 PM

I have a theory: I do believe Mohammed suffered from obsessive-compulsive disorder and as the voice of God he inflicted his personal problems on millions of people.

I read once that Mo was so very fond of cats (the ones who clean themselves constantly) that when one fell asleep on the sleeve of his robe, he cut the sleeve off rather than disturb the cat. On the other hand, dogs, and I have one so I know, just aren't all that tidy.

OCD would also explain the repetitive behaviors, the ritual cleanliness requirements, and the ridiculous insistence of his followers that they not touch something that touches a ritually unclean item. Mo not only suffered from OCD, he figured out how to make it contagious.

Have these silly people never heard of gloves?

Posted by: MerryMaven at March 13, 2007 3:35 PM

This is an easy one to stop. Leave the bacon till nearly last in the groceries, then if the cashier refuses to touch it, don't get angry, simply say: "That is your prerogative. Peace be upon you", and walk out of the shop. The shop will be left with a mountain of food items, most rung through the till, and a rapidly increasing queue. You will not be at fault because it was the cashier who terminated the transaction, and you have been perfectly polite. If a few people did this, the cashier would get the sack. If the manager has a go at you, simply state that you are showing religeous sensitivity.

Posted by: Paul at March 13, 2007 3:52 PM

Paul-

Oh, that is rich!

BIG HIGH FIVE COMING FROM ME TO YOU.

YOU CAN COUNT ON ME TO EXECUTE YOUR BRILLIANT SUGGESTION!

Bravo!

Posted by: Ynkedoodl2 at March 13, 2007 4:00 PM

"Here's a hint to American employers: STOP HIRING THEM!!!

...seconded...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 13, 2007 4:01 PM

Testing..I've just signed up with Typekey.

Posted by: WriterMom at March 13, 2007 4:02 PM

reverse the question. Would you eat something touched by a muslim?

answer yourself and wonder why all those places haven't closed for bankrupcy.

Posted by: FedUpagain at March 13, 2007 4:14 PM

And again I say that this is a severe miscalculation by muslims, to think they can actually push this envelope already.

I say, BRING IT ON! Keep showing America just how ignorant and petty you are. Keep showing us how your religion makes you completely incompatible with our way of life here in the civilized 21st century. Keep it up, so we see the true you.

Sooner or later, even the nutbats will get sick and tired of this bullshit - sick of being on the receiving end of it, sick of hearing about it day after day after day, and sick of defending it.

Posted by: JenBee at March 13, 2007 4:20 PM

Tell the store manager the service is poor and you are considering taking your business elsewhere. Then go home and write a complaint letter to the corporate office , attn to the CEO (whose name you should be able to get with a little research on the internet or with a call to the head office in your town). Tell all your friends to do the same...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 13, 2007 4:21 PM

Goes to show...even if you give the Muslim a job , they don't work....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 13, 2007 4:26 PM

Well, now what if said muslim decides one day not to check out any items containing any of the items on the following list which are denoted as haram or mushbooh: http://www.cookeryonline.com/Vegetarian/halal.html

Or even worse would only check out things specifically marked as halal: http://www.eat-halal.com/

How do you check if you cannot even touch it? She would need another member of staff to pick up each item, hold it in front of her eyes and rotate it so that she could read the list of ingredients.

I do not think she is forbidden to touch the packaging in Islam. But she could argue she is forbidden to sell it - that's aiding and abetting, being an accessory.

Perhaps we could persuade muslims or some of them at any rate that they must not eat ANYTHING that was not eaten in 7th century Arabia. It could be argued, after all, that any variety introduced into their diet as a result of Arab expansionism must have been taken over from infidel habits and muslims are forbidden from imitating infidels in anything.

In fact, I think we should be more accommodating and provide many more services for them. We should let them have their sharia courts - for themselves only - and let them police their own populations. But they have to do it properly. They must punish any deviation from the strictest interpretation of Islamic law. All men must have the appropriate Islamic attire and a beard of the prescribed length. No muslim may consume, or indeed work in any premises selling haram items. No muslim can mix with us or have us a friends. ALL acts of adultery must be appropriately punished - yes, with stoning. After all, it is only a very small fraction of such infringements that come to light. WE can provide the technology to make sure these things are better policed. And they must all pray 5 times a day. Even if many people need to be woken from their beds for the first prayer by 'religious police.' And as soon as any individual muslim has sufficient funds for the hajj, well off he goes. He only needs to do it once. It will be a relief to have that off his mind and know he has performed his duty.

Let them have sharia law.

Posted by: kevin at March 13, 2007 4:50 PM

I am afraid you’re years behind us here in the UK. With the warm approval of the Blair government, labour unions accepted the right of Muslims to refuse to handle pork several years ago. Consequently when they eventually push to have this confirmed in law, the government can turn round in surprise and say,

“What's your problem? We’re only confirming something the unions recognised and agreed years ago!

BTW it is reported the police cannot use dogs in muslim areas or to search muslim houses.

Posted by: Fred at March 13, 2007 5:35 PM

You know, I decided never to take a job doing IT work for a cat-worshiping cult because the employer-candidate would require I be in the presence of cats being worshiped, which of course offend my doggish belief system. Because I know those not-so-idyllic cats idols are necessary in order for that cat-worshiping cult to continue doing what it was created to do, I seek clients elsewhere. If this Muslim lady doesn't want to handle pork, I have an idea: why doesn't she go work for a Kosher deli, meet some good folks and make friends out of them. ;)

Actually I guess the term "nuclear football" is insensitive too, since it prevents most Muslims from owning one. After all, we all know footballs are (or were) made out of pigskin. So should Osama get one of those, out of respect, we probably should refer to it instead as his nuclear wiffle ball.

On the other hand, we could exploit this in our war on Islamo-Terrorism if everyone takes pork rinds on his or her next flight: no true Islamofascist will dare do anything suicidal so long as the possibility exists his body and those pork rinds should be eternally united.

Actually, I know that's an old idea, just feeling a bit ornery today. There are so many places to go with this! ;)

Posted by: Blogbat at March 13, 2007 5:47 PM

I wear a hambone necklace. If I go to Transylvania I can plug the bone holes with garlic... then I'm free from both kinds of blood suckers.

Q.E.D.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at March 13, 2007 5:57 PM

To win the war in iraq they should send a herd of pigs in the enemies direction or in a riot so at least they would dispurse. Send to the caves of Afgahnistan pigs to smell out the people but I guess no need they bomb the caves anyway.

You know what mean, use pigs and dogs because it's this hyper sensitive logic that does them more damange and don't forget nude pictures maybe the Sun news paper, how much can they take? No one will need to use guns in the end.

Posted by: jesusisthelamb at March 13, 2007 6:44 PM

Stupid beliefs like that mentioned in the article reflect the stupidity of muslims and their backward ideas.

Posted by: callmeinfidel at March 13, 2007 6:59 PM

So other employees are forced to do the work that these Muslim employees are refusing to do, i.e. handle pork products. One person is doing his and another employee's job. Only seems logical than that these Muslim employees should take a pay cut for not being able to do what they were hired to do; if not that, they should be demoted to a position they can do without religious objections, or fired altogether.

We just keep giving concession after concession to these people, and most of us don't even seem to realize how quickly it's all adding up.

Posted by: staff_of_magius at March 13, 2007 7:37 PM

"I like pigs. Dogs look up to us. Cats look down on us. Pigs treat us as equals."

Winston Churchill

Posted by: greatcometof1577 at March 13, 2007 7:43 PM

MerryMaven,

Yes! You said what I've wanted to say. I think the topic of Robert's next book would be a psychological analysis of Muhammed. Since he's not a psychologist, perhaps he can co-write it with a psychologist. Heck, people have written about Hitler this way.

Posted by: wrathofasma at March 13, 2007 7:45 PM

"There must be something Muslims can do, without breaking the rules."

...go back to the Middle East ..
Posted by: exsgtbrown

Hear hear! The RoP® doesn't belong in the free world.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 13, 2007 8:03 PM

Once again, Islam shows itself as nothing but a religion of the externals. The hijab, not shaving, wudu, not consuming pork or alcohol and now not even touching it. All in the name of purity.
No mention made of the hate, brutality, pride, superiority and various other attitudes that most Muslims display toward non-Muslims. You know why? Mohammed could do nothing about changing a person's heart. His words can only ever lead to a bit of window dressing - at best.
I actually spoke on this very topic at church last Sunday. A Bosnian former Muslim was in the congregation. She spent the entire time staring at me with a frown on her face. When she approached me afterward, she thanked for bringing such a wonderful message and it had changed her perception of her Muslim colleagues. Instead of viewing them with dislike and suspicion, she was able to feel compassion for them.
(The above will make no sense to non-Christians.)
OT -I've been keeping an eye on the site visitor stats. Wow - is JW racking up the visitors or what?

Posted by: toothy at March 13, 2007 8:45 PM

How would you feel if a cashier made you swipe your own groceries because of his/her religious beliefs?

Not a problem because I refuse to interact with Moslem employees of any retail establishment. I just move to another line and do business with my own kind.

Local car dealership was kinda cranky when I walked out on a car sale because the salesperson was Palestinian. Told the manager I didn't want to give a commission to anyone who would spend it on suicide bombs to kill Israelis. Bought the same car at another dealership an hour later.

Posted by: dm60462 at March 13, 2007 9:38 PM

I just cruised the Star website.

I think the readers are beginning to get pissed off. About due time.

It seems that they have schmucks for legislators.

If I were going thru a checkout lane and someone refused to ring something up, they would be looking at a lot of "take-Backs".

Posted by: credit man at March 13, 2007 9:46 PM

Another comment from that same article:

[-]

I work at HCMC and our
Submitted by Anonymous (not verified) on Tue, 03/13/2007 - 12:26pm.
I work at HCMC and our muslim health care assistants refuse to feed patients if any part of the meal contains pork. These patients are unable to feed themselves, and sometimes end up waiting 1 or more hours to eat, until a staff member that doesn't have a problem with the food (or the work) can feed them.

I also encountered a new health care assistant that refused to give a male patient a bath because it was "against her religion". This particular patient was unable to do it himself and had to sit in a wet and soiled bed until I could find someone who could help me and it wouldn't interfere with their religion. I will say though, she has since been able put this aspect of her religious practice aside and can now give any patient a bath, male or female.

These patients are vulnerable and it's degrading enough to have to rely on someone to feed you or bathe you, but then to be told "sorry you will have to wait because it's against this persons religion to do their job."

Think about that the next time you are in the hospital and your nurse is too busy to help you because he/she has to do someone else's job because they "can't."

[-]
.
.
.

This is what it will come to, everywhere.

Posted by: Borg at March 13, 2007 10:03 PM

If you tell them they shouldn't take a job that puts them in contact with one of their irrational phobias, they'll just go on welfare claiming that you've given them no choice. They have us over the barrel, and they know it. Very empowering for them.

Islam is completely incompatible with our normal societies.

Posted by: feralee at March 13, 2007 10:06 PM

I am going to be the voice of dissent on this. Most stores hire people with the knowledge of reasonable accomadations. How much extra time did it take for the transaction to take place? Does having another coworker ring up pork fall into the category of reasonable accomadation for that store? Did she agree to ring up pork products upon hiring or did they agree to work around it?

Posted by: sh217 at March 13, 2007 10:21 PM

All kufrs should carry "Infidel's Revenge"
http://www.thebackpacker.com/trailtalk/thread/42639,-1.php
on their body or in their purse when traveling.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 13, 2007 10:43 PM

Maybe R. Catholic and Orthodox Christians who work in supermarkets should not ring up meat during Lent, on Fridays, particularly to people wearing hijabs. As for the E. Orthodox, they can also abstain from ringing up dairy products, eggs and fish any day of the week.
I wonder what would happen to Filipino house-keepers in Dar el Islam if they refused to work on Sundays?
I myself like to carry loose pork-rind residue in one of my pockets in case I go into a Middle Eastern grocery or restaurant. And the money I pay them whether in convenience stores or gas stations is wrapped voluptuously in a pigskin billfold.
It seems to me that Islam adherents are getting bold(er) than usual and pushing the boundaries. Poor Minnesota. I hope the liberal multi-culturalist yuppie-refugees will wake up before it's too late.

Posted by: Sansantiago at March 13, 2007 10:48 PM

descendantofacrusader
Here is why they give dogs a wide berth.

From Muslim #3813

Abu Zubair heard Jabir Abdullah saying: Allah's messenger ordered us to kill dogs and we carried out this order so much so that we also killed the dog roaming with a women from the desert. Then Allah's apostle forbade their killing. He said: "It is your duty to kill the jet-black (dog) having two spots (on the eyes) for it is a devil.

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 13, 2007 10:50 PM

Again, this is the absurdity of the 'halal' that is a knockoff of the Jewish Koshering Laws.

The Jewish laws of kashrut are more rigorous and extensive and the muslim version is simply representative of the submission of others non muslim to it's dictates. If I were an orthodox jew, I'd in no way think you, as a non jew were obligated to eat as I, nor feel the lesser for your tastes. And so, any refusal on my part would be impolite and worse.

This is the point I raised last yr about the nonsensical dhimmitude of the Brits with that piggy bank bit, banning it in bank desks, so as to not offend muslims. How dare they.

But how dare we not laugh in their faces for their arrogant demand and the banks submissive subservient imposition on customers. again, the jews were tormented off and on during their 1200 plus years in britain, but never did they ask anyone to bend over for their beliefs as with the piggy banks or their dietary laws. The fact that they chose this for themselves should be a testament not to how 'different' they were, and such, but how much more right thinking their laws were and are, and the more to be respected as not imposing on others.

The muslims laws do, have always represented submission and disrespect for others and should be sneered at for just this. This too is part of our battle- to not allow this dhimmitude to be placed upon us.

Posted by: mgoldberg at March 13, 2007 10:54 PM

I say they give her some huge tongs or some oversized rubber gloves and call it a day.

Me, I'm heading over to the next EEOC halal meat market to apply as a butcher. Of course, I expect them to accomodate my religious objections to the tasmiyah blessing, facing the ka'aba, not stunning the animal, etc.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at March 13, 2007 11:08 PM

This is just ridiculous. They shouldn't be hired by Target if they are going to pull this crap. Its bad enough Target lets someone work in a hijab.

Posted by: DavidE at March 13, 2007 11:21 PM

OT
But on the subject of muslims and pork....an American soldier has a plan....
http://www.vidmax.com/index.php/videos/view/728

Posted by: Carolyn2 at March 13, 2007 11:59 PM

There must be something Muslims can do, without breaking the rules.

But what?

Posted by: Hugh at March 13, 2007 03:01 PM

They bitch and moan with alacrity and believe their own lies, but that doesn't pay a salary. It does generate plenty of revenue through frivilous litigation, and CAIR looks for any excuse to sue an innocent corporation on behalf of a muslim parasite who refuses to follow company procedures because they violate his religion.

Again, I implore someone to name one positive, constructive contribution that muslims make to American society.
.

Posted by: Susanp at March 14, 2007 12:27 AM

Employers just need to become more aware of the problem and make sure they have watertight contracts that ensure anyone taking the job is actually willing to do the whole job. Bad news about UK unions supporting this nonsense!

Posted by: Lili at March 14, 2007 12:53 AM

Wafa Sultan for President
Ayaan Hirsi Ali for Vice President

Posted by: MelM at March 14, 2007 1:01 AM

If this happened to me, I'd let them process all the groceries and ring up the bill. Then I'd say (preferably to the manager) I don't want anything touched by a Muslim, and walk out.

Posted by: Brett_McS at March 14, 2007 1:47 AM

My Hindu neighbor's muslim maid refused to do 'dusting' as her collection consist of Nataraja Statue and many such 'Idols'. Another muslim neighbour was so panic stricken on receiving a gift that remotely resembled Goddess Sarawathi, that she threw it in the trash can.

Many muslim followers of Ramdev never fail to emphasize again and agian their *discovery* of all yoga postures and Praanayama encapsuled in their " namaz practices ".

Posted by: Crows&Cows at March 14, 2007 1:55 AM

Kanchan Gupta writes:(
Fanatics demand, we concede)

"Strangely, while the practitioners of Islamic fundamentalism insist it is their right to be fanatical about their faith, they are unwilling to allow those who subscribe to other faiths similar fanaticism. I recall getting into an argument with the .. editor of an Arabic magazine, published from Cairo, over lunch at India House while the Ambassador looked increasingly alarmed. The editor, an accomplished man who had spent the better part of his life in Paris and was no fire-breathing Islamist zealot, was remarkably passionate in his defence of Islamic fundamentalism and fundamentalists. "We don't just believe in Islam, we practice it. And only when we practice the fundamentals of Islam can we claim to be good Muslims. If those fundamentals make us fundamentalists, so be it. And if those fundamentals militate against what others believe in, it is the others who must compromise on their beliefs and accommodate our fundamentalism," he said, his voice, stridently shrill, rising with each sentence. My post-lunch notes also refer to some other points made by him, but they are not really germane to the issue.


If Islamic fundamentalism is justified, then so is Christian fundamentalism, Jewish fundamentalism and Hindu fundamentalism, I suggested to him, half in jest, mindful that it was an official lunch. "No. No other religion demands of its followers to be fundamentalists. They can't just decide to be fanatical about their faith. Fundamentalism of any other variety is wrong and unacceptable," he asserted. In brief, in the cloistered world of fundamentalist Islam, everything else is wrong, including legitimate criticism of Islamic fanaticism that rejects rational, secular politics but expects accommodation and compromise, both on its terms.

Seen from the perspective of those who subscribe to - and defend - fundamentalist Islam and the fanaticism that it breeds, it is perfectly alright to use textbooks in schools that denigrate other faiths. Hence, King Fahad Academy in London uses books that teach Muslim children Jews are "repugnant" and Christians are "pigs". Hindus, being 'pagans', do not merit mention in such texts, thank god for small mercies. Hence also the demand that hate speech laws should not apply to Muslims because it is their religious duty to denigrate others, but others do not have the right to either protest against such denigration or question the basis of this presumed right of the fanatics.

.... liberal democratic Governments in the West who are being alarmingly discomfited by the clamourous assertion of the fanatics' right to be obnoxiously hurtful in thought and deed....

...For all his bluff and bluster and his claimed emphasis on "enlightened moderation", Gen Musharraf has singularly failed in confronting fanatics. Instead, he has repeatedly sought negotiation and compromise, falling back on what Kertesz describes as "rational politics" to deal with irrational demands, often with comical results. The pistol-packing, fatigues-wearing General beat a hasty retreat when confronted with burqa-clad, AK-56-wielding women who ostensibly study theology at Hafsa Madarsa near Islamabad. They stood guard over an illegally constructed 'library' which the municipal authorities wanted to demolish. In the end, the authorities had to not only back off, but also promise to rebuild demolished mosques that had been illegally constructed on Government land.


As for our secular democracy, fanatics have always had their way with the Government of the day. Not only has the Government of India repeatedly caved in before fanatics, it has willingly offered to accommodate their absurd and illegitimate demands to buy peace. So we have a situation where Islamic banking is being talked of as a secular necessity and Islamisation of the economy as a precondition for India's development. Where's the conflict"?

http://www.dailypioneer.com/columnist1.asp?main_variable=Columnist&file_name=KANCHAN77%2Etxt&writer=KANCHAN&validit=yes

Posted by: Crows&Cows at March 14, 2007 3:12 AM

Seeing as nearly everyone on this board thinks that it's ridiculous to accomodate muslims who refuse to handle pork, how do you feel about accomodating christian pharmacists who refuse to fill orders for contraceptives?

Posted by: G.K. at March 14, 2007 3:13 AM

Tell them its soya !

Posted by: aladdinsane57 at March 14, 2007 3:28 AM

" how do you feel about accomodating christian pharmacists who refuse to fill orders for contraceptives?"

...just the same way...do not give them your business....send the ceo of the pharmacy chain notification of the reason you no longer do business with his business, inform him that you are recommending to your friends that they, too, look else to shop...send an editorial letter to your local newspaper, call your local talk radio host....the parmacist who refuse to sell contraceptive just like the clerk who refuses to handle the stores products are considered to be carrying out the policies of the business...if no sales is what they want...then no sales is what they get...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 14, 2007 6:39 AM

The solution is simple.

Don't put money into any Islamic related business.

There is a growing movement of people who shop wisely and refuse to fund Islam.

http://notoislam.blogspot.com/

Posted by: No To Islam! at March 14, 2007 6:42 AM

Here's a story about a butcher who didn't hire a muslim because he sells pork and then was sued and lost the case. Incredible as that seems. It seems to be on purpose that muslims apply for jobs that don't suit them just so they can sue. And the ignorant judges go along with it. Where is the justice?

If you have many applicants you can't decide who is best to hire anymore?

http://trans.voila.fr/voila?systran_lp=fr_en&systran_f=1173877155&systran_id=Voila-fr&systran_url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.france-echos.com%2Factualite.php%3Fcle%3D11916

Posted by: Borg at March 14, 2007 9:05 AM

"Here's a story about a butcher who didn't hire a muslim because he sells pork and then was sued and lost the case"

...such cases should be place on a docket that will not come in ...say...5 or 6 years...let the case just wait...

it is indeed a shame the employers cannot hire the best employee for his business...

...of course, the employer , if forced to hire unsatisfactory employees, should immediately sue the same court to fire the employee....for insubordination or failure to satisfactorily perform the necessary job duties such as being able to handle and sell his products...

if it takes a court order to hire the person , it may well take a court order to fire the person...

another alternative is to create an blackmarket employee base and just never advertise job openings...

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 14, 2007 9:16 AM

First we hear Muslim cab drivers refuse passengers that have possession of liquor. Second we have same cab driver refusing blind men with seeing eye dogs. Now we have a Muslim cashier at a grocery store refusing to swipe Canadian back bacon! All these acts are grounds for dismissal!

Posted by: The Resistance at March 14, 2007 10:13 AM

dock the pay for every instance of a job non compliance complaint by a customer....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 14, 2007 10:22 AM

File a discrimination law suit.

As an employee of a company, they are not allowed to discriminate against any customer based on Sex, Religion, Gender...

Discrimination works both ways

If Muslims can file suit over Airline tickets. then Infidels can sue over Bacon.

Posted by: flowerknife_us at March 14, 2007 11:23 AM

Plus the cashier will be extra slow checking out the customer because they have to look over everything before they scan it so they can decide if it is ok to touch.

Posted by: Borg at March 14, 2007 11:37 AM

"I read once that Mo was so very fond of cats (the ones who clean themselves constantly) that when one fell asleep on the sleeve of his robe, he cut the sleeve off rather than disturb the cat."

Although this would be a major redeeming characteristic for old Mo, it really isn't. Mo didn't care about the kitten but didn't want to make Ayesha cry. The little girl adored her kitten and so Mo cut off the sleeve to keep the child happy. The story may be apocryphal anyway.

Posted by: Provoslavni at March 14, 2007 11:44 AM

"File a discrimination law suit.

As an employee of a company, they are not allowed to discriminate against any customer based on Sex, Religion, Gender...

Discrimination works both ways

If Muslims can file suit over Airline tickets. then Infidels can sue over Bacon."

...Then file a second suit at the same time listing the Muslims Mosque as a defendent for teaching discrimination.....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at March 14, 2007 12:03 PM

G.K. - If the pharmacist owns the store, it should be his/her decision to make. If the pharmacist is an employee, the decision on what to sell should be management's. Target could refuse to stock items that its islamic employees regard as haram. I, in turn, could shop at a competing store rather than spend my $ at Target. The same thing should apply at a pharmacy.

Posted by: MP at March 14, 2007 1:04 PM

I, I think like everyone else, am getting so tired of this BS. But the action list for when things like this happens should be something like this:

1) Exactly where does it say in your religion that you can't handle packaged groceries/alcohol/dogs/.

2) Where is your mah'raam if you're such an observant muslimah?

Posted by: thomas ato at March 14, 2007 1:10 PM

"1) Exactly where does it say in your religion that you can't handle packaged groceries/alcohol/dogs/."

Certainly not here:

005.005 (Notice this is a very, very late Sura)
YUSUFALI: This day are (all) things good and pure made lawful unto you. The food of the People of the Book is lawful unto you and yours is lawful unto them.

Or here:

002.173
YUSUFALI: He hath only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and that on which any other name hath been invoked besides that of Allah. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- then is he guiltless. For Allah is Oft-forgiving Most Merciful.

Or here:

006.145
YUSUFALI: Say: "I find not in the message received by me by inspiration any (meat) forbidden to be eaten by one who wishes to eat it, unless it be dead meat, or blood poured forth, or the flesh of swine,- for it is an abomination - or, what is impious, (meat) on which a name has been invoked, other than Allah's". But (even so), if a person is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- thy Lord is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Or here:

016.115
YUSUFALI: He has only forbidden you dead meat, and blood, and the flesh of swine, and any (food) over which the name of other than Allah has been invoked. But if one is forced by necessity, without wilful disobedience, nor transgressing due limits,- then Allah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.

Or even here:

005.003 (Said to be an interpolated older verse within sura 5)
YUSUFALI: Forbidden to you (for food) are: dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine, and that on which hath been invoked the name of other than Allah; that which hath been killed by strangling, or by a violent blow, or by a headlong fall, or by being gored to death; that which hath been (partly) eaten by a wild animal; unless ye are able to slaughter it (in due form); that which is sacrificed on stone (altars); (forbidden) also is the division (of meat) by raffling with arrows: that is impiety. This day have those who reject faith given up all hope of your religion: yet fear them not but fear Me. This day have I perfected your religion for you, completed My favour upon you, and have chosen for you Islam as your religion. But if any is forced by hunger, with no inclination to transgression, Allah is indeed Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful.

Notice most of these verses state that under certain circumstances they may even EAT it. None of these verses say they may not handle it. One Muslim website seemingly referred to the Tanakh to explain the prohibition (Leviticus, 11: 7-8).
http://www.muslimfriends.com/blogs/blog_messages?blog_id=112691

Interestingly, there seems to be no consensus.

"Dr. Muzammil Siddiqi, former president of the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA) and member of the Fiqh Council of North America, states:

"For a Muslim, it is forbidden or haram to sell things that are forbidden.

You should try to find a halal job as soon as possible. Be active in seeking another job even if it pays a little less than what you earn now.

If you cannot afford to live and maintain yourself and your family without a job, then work at this job until you find another one. Quit this job as soon as you find a halal position. May Allah help you.' "

Versus

"Islamic Religious Council of Singapore has stated the following:

Pork and pork by-products are considered to be major impurities (najis). As such, if one's clothing or body becomes contaminated with pork, one cannot perform prayer until the contaminated area has been properly purified. One must use one part earth and water and six parts water for the purification process.

Using gloves or any other material as a barrier to avoid direct contact with pork is allowed. But if the material contaminates one's body or one's clothes, then it should be purified.

Handling vacuum-wrapped pork is allowed because the impurity is contained inside the wrapping. But as a precaution, one should wear gloves in the event that the wrapper gets punctured or has been previously contaminated.
Gloves that have been used to handle pork should be purified accordingly, or else they should be thrown away if they are disposable."

Source: http://www.turntoislam.com/forum/archive/index.php/t-3636.html

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at March 14, 2007 2:19 PM

Hmmm. I have Celiac Disease. I think I'll take a job in a donut shop and then make the other employees do everything for me because handling baked goods can make me sick (if I mistakenly ingest any).

Does Target have a donut shop? It sounds like a great place to (not) work.

Posted by: Josephine at March 14, 2007 2:48 PM

Here is Siddiqi as president of FCNA
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1145175679974&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaEAskTheScholar

8. Transaction of haram items, such as intoxicants, are forbidden.

The Prophet's general advice to all people was, "What is lawful is clear and what is unlawful is clear, but between them are certain doubtful things which many people do not recognize. He who guards against the doubtful things keep his religion and his honor blameless, but he who falls into doubtful things falls into what is unlawful, just as a shepherd who pastures his flocks round a sanctuary will soon pasture them in it. Every king has a sanctuary, and God's sanctuary is the things he had declared unlawful" (Al-Bukhari).

Here are the official translations from Bukhari which Siddiqi has smeared together:

Volume 1, Book 2, Number 49:
Narrated An-Nu'man bin Bashir:

I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'Both legal and illegal things are evident but in between them there are doubtful (suspicious) things and most of the people have no knowledge about them. So whoever saves himself from these suspicious things saves his religion and his honor. And whoever indulges in these suspicious things is like a shepherd who grazes (his animals) near the Hima (private pasture) of someone else and at any moment he is liable to get in it. (O people!) Beware! Every king has a Hima and the Hima of Allah on the earth is His illegal (forbidden) things. Beware! There is a piece of flesh in the body if it becomes good (reformed) the whole body becomes good but if it gets spoilt the whole body gets spoilt and that is the heart.

And

Volume 3, Book 34, Number 267:
Narrated An-Nu'man bin Bashir:

The Prophet said "Both legal and illegal things are obvious, and in between them are (suspicious) doubtful matters. So who-ever forsakes those doubtful things lest he may commit a sin, will definitely avoid what is clearly illegal; and who-ever indulges in these (suspicious) doubtful things bravely, is likely to commit what is clearly illegal. Sins are Allah's Hima (i.e. private pasture) and whoever pastures (his sheep) near it, is likely to get in it at any moment."

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at March 14, 2007 2:56 PM

It's pretty simple. If you can't do the job, i.e. handle pork, then you shouldn't be working.

So any food jobs, that involve park, should not be given to Muslims.

Pretty logical.

Posted by: Monkeywho at March 14, 2007 5:31 PM

Monkeywho,

According to Siddiqi, not to mentions Sahih Bukhari, it should be rather that "if you can't do the job (for religious reasons, and are not under compulsion), do not take the job".

I think Target was quite noble in offering these disadvantaged Muslims who could not find a halal job temporary employment (and under which circumstances it is not sinful for the Muslims--see above). But it is not Target who should change. The Muslimah should be looking for a halal job and change employment as soon as possible, even if it means a pay cut, according to her religious leaders and sahih texts.

Posted by: Concerned Citizen at March 14, 2007 6:26 PM

Nods sagely, takes another bite of pulled-pork sammich, and sip of Carlsberg. Unh -hunnnnh.

Posted by: MP at March 14, 2007 9:06 PM

How funny!

Muslims can't touch pork, but they have no problem with bomb belts!

Posted by: witness at March 14, 2007 10:44 PM

you can send your backlash to Target at
guest.relations@target.com

My letter to Target:

I think you had better fire the people who are refusing to serve Christian Americans buying pork at your check-out counters....The so-called religious zealot "muslims" refusal to touch pork, even though it is packaged and sealed with heavy duty celophane, is said to be because of their so-called "religious" beliefs.

You will start some real religious boycotts this way....I suggest you nip this in the bud.

You are being targeted (pun intended) for boycotts on the blogs......check out these, just to name a few.....in fact, why not Google this subject, and find how many bloggers have decided to quit shopping at Target?

YOU WILL LEARN THE POWER OF THE BLOGS IF YOU HAVE NOT YET DONE SO.......i SUGGEST YOU GET YOUR PUBLIC RELATIONS on this and write your own responses in the blogs to keep there from being a boycott. We Americans have had enough.

http://atlasshrugs2000.typepad.com/atlas_shrugs/2007/03/cultural_jihad_.html

http://www.buzz.mn/?q=node/898#comment-1330 (NEWSPAPER)

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1800179/posts

You are going to let your one or two religiously fanatic employees determine your overall customer base???? I was in a WalMart in line, when I noticed the Somali woman at the counter writing down all the check info from the customer ahead of me, on a tiny little piece of paper after he left the counter. I assumed it might be for store purposes.

I also wrote a check, but upon second thought I walked back, only to find her writing down my info as well.....Had it been on some authentic store list, OK...but apparently she was writing this down for her buddies who do ID theft. I demanded the manager show me her little list, and allow me to change my mind, pay by credit card, and get my check back. She reacted and tried to say I was racist, but I stood my ground......and the manager finally had to insist (three or four times) that she go to the back office. I never saw this woman again.

I hereby proclaim it is against my beliefs to have anything whatsoever to do with such muslim people. In fact, when I see them coming towards me, I should make a huge swing around them so as not to have their garments touch me.
If I see them working in a store, from now on, I will no longer shop at that store... PERIOD.

My belief is in the equality of people, and I cannot rightfully give my creit information to clerks who belong to a religion that promotes my downfall in the tiniest of actions, and the death of every non-muslim around them. Such people "believe" we deserve any crime they commit against us, and as an employer that should concern you, since they have no conscience about stealing from an infidel employer.

I say we, as non0musl;im societies, have nothing to do with these muslims, i.e., do not speak to them, and thus do not open ourselves for a libel suit! These people need the old fashioned treatment they used to give sailors out at sea: no one, no one at all who believes in equality of persons, should speak to them under any circumstances whatsoever.

If my job requires it, I should write down my questions, but not speak to them. If they do not read English, I guess it is their option to bring someone muslim who does...even if it meant that they would have to wait 24 hours for someone to fly in.

And muslims wonder why we do not accept islam...they push all the petty stuff on us that separates them from reality, and then they complain that they feel alienated.....these people are masters at projecting their own hang-ups onto everyone else.

WHAT THEY REPRESENT (violence against women, jihad, kill the unbeliever infidels, etc. etc.) could be against your beliefs as much as it is against mine, and after all, according to their logic, I am not required to have anything to do with people who are at war with my beliefs, am I?

Posted by: hateterrorists at March 15, 2007 6:50 AM

Just fire the bums.

If Target doesn't fire the bums, I never buy anything from Target again.

Simple.

Posted by: joeblough at March 16, 2007 2:24 AM

Again, I implore someone to name one positive, constructive contribution that muslims make to American society.
.

Posted by: Susanp

I IMPLORE SOMEONE TO NAME ONE POSTIVE, CONSTRUCTIVE CONTRIBUTION THAT muslim's MAKE TO ANY SOCIETY.

Posted by: citizensoldier at March 18, 2007 1:56 PM