Archive for February 5th, 2008

“Raging Muslim Taxi Drivers in North American Cities” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler

Tuesday, February 5th, 2008

Are immigrant Muslim taxi drivers heroically selfless “family men” or are they soldiers in an advancing jihadic Army?

As a New Yorker, I have been driven by very friendly and exceptionally courteous male Muslim taxi drivers from Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Egypt, and Somalia, and once, by an enchanting woman driver from Afhganistan—but I have also held on for dear life as ill-tempered, mentally unbalanced, unbelivably misogynistic male Muslim drivers have indulged in full-blown rage attacks as they careened in traffic.

Of course, I have also experienced similarly bad behavior at the hands of home-grown taxi drivers as well. Maybe long hours, low pay, and No Exit will do it every time.

Nevertheless: Aqsa Parvez’s father Muhammed, who honor-mudered his daughter because she refused to wear an Islamic headscarf worked as a taxi driver in Mississauga, a suburb of Toronto. Yasir Said, who murdered his two teenage daughters, Amina and Sarah, because they had become too western, was also a taxi driver in Dallas.

Taxi drivers in England have been known to constitute a network in which they spy on and actively return girls and women who are trying to escape being honor murdered. According to a just-released report, UK teachers and police officials are “afraid to take action against so-called honour crimes for fear of being accused of racism.” The Daily Mail notes that, in addition,

“Researchers say taxi drivers, police and government workers of Asian origin are returning women to the domestic abuse they want to escape.”

Taxi drivers again!

In 1997, in New Orleans, a blind woman tried to enter a taxi with her seeing eye dog. The Muslim taxi driver physically attacked her and further injured an already-broken wrist. At trial, the judge described the driver’s behavior as a “total disgrace” and sentenced him to 120 days of community service at the Lighthouse for the Blind.

In 1999, a Muslim taxi driver in Cinncinati refused to transport a blind female passenger with a seeing eye dog. The woman complained; CAIR defended him as having acted in accordance with his religious beliefs. (Dogs are considered impure and contact with them is considered to render a Muslim ritually unfit for prayer).

In 2000, in Edmonton, Canada, a blind woman tried to enter a cab with her seeing eye dog. The driver first claimed “allergies,” but then stated that “taking a dog conflicted with his religion.” At trial, he failed to produce the necessary proof from an allergist. However, the case against him was dismissed because it had been improperly filed.

We also know that in 2005 and 2006, some Muslim taxi drivers in Minneapolis refused to pick up airport fares whom they suspected of transporting alcohol or pork. In 2007 the Metropolitan Airport Commission of Minnesota they unanimously voted to crack down on such drivers who “declined to transport passengers with alcohol or pork” ).

What next? Will Muslim taxi drivers refuse to transport “naked” women? “Naked” as in with their faces showing?

But, what’s true of some Muslim taxi drivers is also true of some Muslim convenience store owners.

For example, in 2003, in Edmonton, Canada, a blind woman tried to enter a convenience store owned by a Muslim and was forcibly ejected by the owner who stated that “this store is also my church because I pray and eat here and my religion will not allow dogs or any animal to come in here.” In 2004, at trial, she stated that he started yelling at her and did not allow her to explain why she needed the dog, what the dog meant to her, or to enunciate her legal rights.

In 2005, a blind man in Brooksville, Florida, who tried to enter a store with his seeing eye dog, was similarly thrown out by a raging Muslim.

Other correlates of “raging Muslim” behavior also exist: Poverty, a limited education, (but this is not always so), dim prospects for a brighter future—coupled with a very specific cultural and religious zero-frustration tolerance, hostility towards non-Muslims, and paranoia when non-Muslims are in control. However, “male” and “Muslim” are also correlates of this behavior.

Please understand: Nothing that I am saying has anything to do with “race.” Muslims come in all colors and ethnicities.

If I lived in England, I would now have to describe Muslim taxi drivers who engage in any of the above behaviors as committing “anti-Islamic” acts. By the way, I originally thought that UK officials had lost their last marble when they issued these new, Orwellian directives, but I also understand that these officials are finally getting desperate and want to inspire the hopefully “good” but all-too-silent Muslim majority to protest the jihadists who have hijacked their culture and religion.

Let’s see if this works.

A final point: Generations of immigrants to the West have “done time” as taxi and truck drivers, dishwashers, small shop owners. There is no shame in this. They have put their children through college and graduate school. I hope that the silent Muslim majority, including the taxi drivers, follow in their august footsteps—and yet, I remain uneasy about this.

POSTSCRIPT: Individual taxi drivers are innocent until proven guilty. Culturally different styles do not always rise to the level of a crime—although rudeness and arrogance in public life is always quite disheartening and intimidating. But, as a group, taxi drivers know city routes; convenience stores and gas station owners control the city’s food and gasoline supply. Were even a small group of drivers and shop owners united for an Islamist purpose—we would be vulnerable in these specific ways. Muslim citizens would be as vulnerable as non-Muslims.

———————————————-

Dr. Phyllis Chesler is the well known author of classic works, including the bestseller Women and Madness (1972) and The New Anti-Semitism (2003). She has just published The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan), as well as an updated and revised edition of Women and Madness. She is an Emerita Professor of psychology and women’s studies, the co-founder of the Association for Women in Psychology (1969) and the National Women’s Health Network (1974). She is currently on the Board of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and lives in New York City. Her website is www.phyllis-chesler.com.
We are delighted to have Dr. Chesler as a contributor to the Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog.

Original Link.

Muslims Enraged at Wikipedia

Tuesday, February 5th, 2008

More rage from the Muslims. This time over a picture on the Wikipedia article about Muhammad. The picture was made by a Muslim in the 15th century. Now it is a source of rage to the ever enraged Muslims.
Charles Johnson at Little Green Footballs says this:

Apparently there are a whole lot of Muslims enraged and offended at Wikipedia, because there are … gasp … drawings and images of Mohammed in his Wikipedia entry.

Blasphemy!

So they’re demanding that Wikipedia stop violating their delicate sensibilities and remove the offending images, with an online petition that’s already gathered 82,783 signatures: Care2 : The Petition Site : Removal of the Pics.

The petition has a little “lolcats” flavor to it.

Removal of the Pics of Muhammad from Wikipedia
Target:To tell wikipedia editors to respect other peoples religion
Sponsored by: Faraz Ahmad

In Islam pictures or Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) and other holly figures are not allowed, but on wikipedia they has published some pictures that are showing not only a body with white face but an image that has a complete face.. that is even not allowed by SHITAT fact of Islam.
i request all my brothers and sisters to sign this petition so we can tell wikipedia to remove them.

UPDATE at 2/4/08 11:32:39 am:

Good for Wikipedia on this one: Talk: Muhammad.

Please note that discussion on this talk page has determined that pictures of Muhammad will not be removed from this article and any removal of the pictures without discussion here first will be reverted on sight.

That makes them braver than 95% of the world’s media organizations.

And since we are going to enrage the Muslims about something all the time anyway, here is the horrible Wikipedia Image of Blasphemy.

Wikipedia Image of Blasphemy

Original Link.
Little Green Footballs Post.

“The American Election is All About… Islam” by Dr. Phyllis Chesler

Tuesday, February 5th, 2008

C’mon, whom are we kidding? How big does the elephant have to be before we’ll agree to discuss it? This coming American election is not just about universal health care—it is also about the survival of the free world as we have come to know it. And therefore, all about Islam.

If we say we are for women’s rights or for human rights, then a candidate’s gender, skin-color, or age may not be as important as their ideas about Islam.

Do our candidates understand that we are really at war and that we cannot talk our way out of it? That charm, even of the spellbinding variety, is not enough, nor can we “take a meeting,” Hollywood-style, or Tammany-Hall style, to set things right. Nor is simple, old-fashioned heroics the answer to the kind of Orwellian propaganda and guerilla-terrorism that America and our allies will continue to confront in the 21st century.

Does our next President understand that we have to fight with everything we have and risk losing it all in order to hold onto any of it?

Does our next President understand that a western concept of human rights is a universal vision and that America cannot protect such rights only for American women and then turn our backs on women in the Third World? Isolationism is cowardly, interventionism is both dangerous and almost doomed to failure; we need a new dialectical method to resolve these two seemingly intractable opposites.

Certain burning issues require immediate, not gradual solutions. Our dependence on Arab oil (a tragic addiction) must end. Alternate sources of energy must be found in a very short period of time. (Watch the Israeli electric car project). We must enact effective legislation to combat human sexual slavery/trafficking—but this is a global, not merely a national problem. While we may not be able to do so for the whole world, America must, finally, ameliorate the terrible suffering due to economic disparities at home.

Here is a question that an American President needs to answer.

Is revealing the truth about a particular religion or about its followers—be they Muslim, Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, or Jewish, tantamount to insulting or reviling someone else’s religion? If not—or rather, if only one group experiences the “truth” or any criticism, both valid and invalid, as an insult, what is the remedy? Sensitivity training about Islam for the presumably “Islamophobic” or sensitivity training about western standards of tolerance for too-easily injured Muslims?

This particular question will (or should) play a major role in the forthcoming American election which is not only about two individuals or two political parties but is also about defending the free world from barbarism, intolerance, and apartheid.

It’s bigger than World War Two. Bigger than Vietnam. Even bigger than the Superbowl.

Yes, I know, America is far from perfect—but compared to Iran or Sudan we are….better. Live with it.

In my last post, I wrote about Muslim taxi drivers whose private religious beliefs about wine, pork, and dogs led to behaviors towards passengers which were considered, at trial, to be crimes in North America. I also described a network of Muslim taxi drivers in the UK which, according to a government report, tracks and returns Muslim girls and women who are in flight from abuse and from being honor murdered. I did not indict all Muslim taxi drivers. Indeed, I was careful to write that many Muslim taxi drivers are also polite and courteous and that many non-Muslim drivers are not.

It wasn’t enough. The politically correct police turned out, not in droves, but with great passion. They thought I was saying things that I had not said. They were afraid that “people” would use my words to restrict Muslim immigration, profile or imprison Muslims, bar Muslims from working as taxi drivers, etc.

But I did not write any of this nor do I think it.

This issue is another thorny one, just like the Islamic headscarf.

Here’s what you must remember when you fear that your most creative or practical ideas might be “racist” : Repeat, as a mantra, that Muslims and people of color are also being victimized by Islamist suicide killers and tyrants; and that to date, it is Muslims who suffer most from Islamic gender apartheid.

But, we must wrestle with certain questions over a long period of time. There are no quick or easy answers. Do we ban the headscarf—and keep angry-and-intolerant Muslim men out of the service professions? Isn’t that profiling? And isn’t profiling racist? Just realize: If the “good” people do not start wrestling with these difficult questions, the “bad” people will step right in and do it for us.

———————————————-

Dr. Phyllis Chesler is the well known author of classic works, including the bestseller Women and Madness (1972) and The New Anti-Semitism (2003). She has just published The Death of Feminism: What’s Next in the Struggle for Women’s Freedom (Palgrave Macmillan), as well as an updated and revised edition of Women and Madness. She is an Emerita Professor of psychology and women’s studies, the co-founder of the Association for Women in Psychology (1969) and the National Women’s Health Network (1974). She is currently on the Board of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East and lives in New York City. Her website is www.phyllis-chesler.com.
We are delighted to have Dr. Chesler as a contributor to the Jesus is Lord, A Worshipping Christian’s Blog.

Original Link.