Sunday, February 24, 2008

Fighting Back

If the west launches a united front against the creeping encroachment of sharia law into our countries, the jihadists will back down. Daniel Pipes points out instances of islamists retreating in the face of hostile opposition to attempts to impose sharia law. For instance, muslim cab drivers refusing blind passengers with seeing eye dogs have been jailed and fined and as a result, CAIR, losing in courts of law and public opinion, capitulated and urged muslim cab drivers to accomodate blind passengers and now claim that islamic law does allow dogs to be used for the visually impaired. In my view, the islamists are testing us in these small areas, seeing if we have the will to resist and if not, then they know we are ripe for the taking for much larger plans they have in store for us in the future. We must stop them in their tracks now and launch a full frontal assault against sharia, showing no signs of weakness. We shall never allow some alien culture to displace the US constitution and impose their medieval, barbaric laws upon us.
Westerners opposed to the application of the Islamic law (the Shari'a) watch with dismay as it goes from strength to strength in their countries — harems increasingly accepted, a church leader endorsing Islamic law, a judge referring to the Koran, clandestine Muslim courts meting out justice. What can be done to stop the progress of this medieval legal system so deeply at odds with modern life, one that oppresses women and turns non-Muslims into second-class citizens?

A first step is for Westerners to mount a united front against the Shari'a. Facing near-unanimous hostility, Islamists back down. For one example, note the retreat last week by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in a dispute concerning guide dogs used by the blind. [emphasis added].

Muslims traditionally consider dogs impure animals to be avoided, creating an aversion that becomes problematic when Muslim store-owners or taxi drivers deny service to blind Westerners relying on service dogs. I have collected fifteen such cases on my weblog, at "Muslim Taxi Drivers vs. Seeing-Eye Dogs": five from the United States (New Orleans, Cincinnati, Milwaukee, Brooksville, Fl.; Everett, Wash.); four from Canada (Vancouver, twice in Edmonton, Fort McMurray, Alberta); three from the United Kingdom (Cambridge, twice in London); two from Australia (Melbourne, Sydney); and one from Norway (Oslo).

News accounts quote Muslim cabbies rudely rejecting blind would-be passengers, yelling at them, "No dog, No dog, Get out, get out"; "Get that dog out of here"; and "No dogs, no dogs." The blind find themselves rejected, humiliated, abandoned, insulted, or even injured, left in the rain, dropped in the middle of nowhere, made late for an appointment, or caused to miss a flight.

Islamist organizations initially responded to this problem by supporting anti-canine cabbies. The Muslim Association of Canada pointed out how Muslims generally regard dog saliva as unclean. CAIR on one occasion echoed this assertion, claiming that "the saliva of dogs invalidates the ritual purity needed for prayer." On another, the head of CAIR, Nihad Awad, declared that "People from the Middle East especially ... have been indoctrinated with a kind of fear of dogs" and justified a driver rejecting a guide dog on the grounds that he "has a genuine fear and he acted in good faith. He acted in accordance with his religious beliefs."
Continue

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

What do you expect from guys like Daniel Pipes, Douglas Feith and M. Thomas Eisenstadt?