69 million page views

The right to choose a non-Muslim taxi? What about the security threat?

Reader comment on item: Resisting Islamic Law
in response to reader comment: BCCLA supports Muslim taxi drivers against blind passengers with guide dogs

Submitted by Doc Tater (United States), Feb 22, 2008 at 18:27

Good pick-up Glen. Thanks for this info. It's Minneapolis all over again, but now in an even more Muslim-accommodating city.

While the BCCLA is busy advocating for Muslim taxi drivers to have the freedom to choose not to take blind people with guide dogs in their cabs, maybe they'll advocate for my right to not ride in a Muslim's cab.

I'm sure Aziz Khaki, the vice-chair of the Muslim Canadian Federations, would agree, since any argument he could make for the rights he's claiming for Muslims would apply equally to persons with my beliefs. I have a right to choose, according to my beliefs, to not step into the cab of a sworn mortal enemy who is obliged to defeat and exterminate me whenever he has the chance.

Therefore, I would like the BCCLA to advocate for my rights by requiring that all Muslim taxis have an easily identifiable marking, like green paint with a yellow crescent moon pattern on the sides, so I'll be able to find a non-Muslim cab whenever I need a ride in Vancouver.

Furthermore, since blind people with guide dogs have rights too, and since they can't see a clearly marked Muslim cab to avoid getting into it, IF THAT IS THEIR CHOICE, ACCORDING TO THEIR BELIEFS, then Muslim cabs should be required to continuously emit a distinctive acoustic signal, like a beeper, or a Middle Eastern theme song, that they'd all use. Knowing that Muslims don't like them, with their unclean guide dogs, blind people should be scared to death that they might unwittingly stumble into a Muslim cab, and then the outraged and devout Muslim cabbies might abduct them and cut off their heads in front of video cameras, or abuse their dogs, or in some other way impose cruel punishments that might be called for in sharia law.

But, wait! There's an alternative to all these complicated arrangments. We could all just acknowledge that the Muslims in BC are asking for special accommodations for no other reason than that they're attempting to convince legislatures to enact sharia law into the laws of non-Muslim lands, and DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT. If they don't like driving a cab in Vancouver, the way it is now, they can go back to whatever place they were in before, or find a different line of work.

Let's drop the gloves and come out swinging for real. I'm tired of playing paddy cake with these guys.

Think about this: say there is a large group of Muslim cabs, owned by Muslims, driven by Muslims, and dispatched by Muslims. It's a situation like the one in Minneapolis, where there's a big community of Sudanese Muslims ( think Mogadishu, think Blackhawk Down) who drive a large percentage of the cabs in the city. They are all connected by a network of radio communications, and those radios are easily encrypted. The encryption can easily be changed, on any hour of any day that it is advantageous to do so.

The cabs are almost all identical, and almost impossible to identify by witnesses or security cameras, and the cabbies all look the same, especially when they want to look the same. They all speak a language that almost nobody else can even understand, and most of the government agencies who might try and monitor their activities have to rely on co-religionists from the same country as the cabbies to translate whatever the cabbies and dispatchers are saying over the radio.

They blanket the roads to and from airports, bus stations, rail stations, sports arenas, and government buildings. At any moment they can completely paralyze all surface travel to and from those centers of activity that routinely contain huge numbers of people in high concentrations, and which are prime targets for Muslim terrorists. (Unlike the anti-terror commissions in the UN, we are not obliged to ignore the connection between Muslims and Muslim Terrorist activities.)

They probably all go to one mosque or a very few mosques, where they are recruited to violent jihad by a small number of radical clerics and cell members. Imagine the ease (I'm sure the bad guys already have) with which plane hijackings could occur, or airport hostage situations could be arranged, if all the roads around an airport were suddenly blocked by as few as a half dozen or a dozen cabs. Don't be surprised if Minneapolis and Vancouver are subjected to multiple simultaneous car bombings, at some point, and the car bombs are driven by Muslim cabbies, or driven by shahids from the same mosques the cabbies go to, who conveniently replaced the usual Muslim cabbies when it became time for a car-bombing to take place.

Maybe we should think of Muslim cabbies as a serious security threat, and stop giving them special favors when we should be monitoring, isolating, incarcerating or deporting the ones who don't pass some sort of loyalty tests.


Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".

Follow Daniel Pipes

Facebook   Twitter   RSS   Join Mailing List

All materials by Daniel Pipes on this site: © 1968-2024 Daniel Pipes. daniel.pipes@gmail.com and @DanielPipes

Support Daniel Pipes' work with a tax-deductible donation to the Middle East Forum.Daniel J. Pipes

(The MEF is a publicly supported, nonprofit organization under section 501(c)3 of the Internal Revenue Code.

Contributions are tax deductible to the full extent allowed by law. Tax-ID 23-774-9796, approved Apr. 27, 1998.

For more information, view our IRS letter of determination.)