Way late on this one today but had to blog on even so. This guy is unbelievable. Earlier I posted on Obama leaving out “Creator” from the Declaration of Independence while speaking at the Congressional Hispanic Caucus Institute’s 33rd Annual Award Gala.
In the very same speech he said:
Let me close by saying this. Long before America was even an idea, this land of plenty was home to many peoples. The British and French, the Dutch and Spanish, to Mexicans, to countless Indian tribes. We all shared the same land.
Yeah, thats right. The Mexico that didn’t exist until 1821 now existed in 1776….in Obamaland.
Even sadder….his audience probably believed what he was saying. We stole their land didn’t ya know? Screw the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo and the Gadsen Act.
I’m sure we will hear lots of “what he meant to say” excuses from the left in the days to come, as they did for the 57 States speech but come on…I thought he was the most intellectual President evah!
See author page
I know some people from some of the tribal areas of Mexico (what is NOW Mexico).
They are horribly discriminated against there.
They also say they have little-to-nothing in common with our local southern CA tribes.
In olden days they’d have fought like cats and dogs!
Poor Obama.
Maybe all that revisionist history is common in our public school text books, but that doesn’t make it true.
Obama is an asshole. There were no Mexicans prior to the formation of the United States. The Spanish, French and Germans had colonies in what is now Mexico. There were also various indian tribes living in the area. Obama must have the Mexicans confused with the muslims.
Never in my life have I heard a more vapid recitation of the Declaration of Independence. He intentionally omits “by their Creator” but gleefully says that Mexicans (Mexico established in 1821) were in America (established in 1776) before America was even an idea.
Educated Idiot…
or worse…an outcome based grad.
…
I… brain is bleeding… A United States President mistaking Aztec, Mayan and smaller empires as Mexican… Failed logic from the Commander in Chief making nose to bleed. I think I need to visit a doctor.
A very clever pandering moron.
Actually, President Obama’s use of the word isn’t incorrect.
The word “Mexicans” was understood by English-speaking people to refer to the inhabitants of what is now modern day Mexico long before “Mexico” became part of the official name of that country.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the term was in use in English at least as early as 1604. The OED cites an example from Joseph D’Acosta’s Naturall and Morall Historie of the East and West Indies, translated into English that year: “But heere the Mexicaines Idolatrie hath bin more pernicious and hurtfull then that of the Inguas…”
You can find the 1604 translation of D’Acosta’s work here:
http://olivercowdery.com/texts/1604Acos.htm#pg329a
The word appears several times on page 337.
Problem is, Aztec and Mayan societies were not “Mexican,” Spanish alienages and colonies were called Mexican settlements by the Spanish Imperium in the 1500’s up till the Mexican Revolution… Calling a Rose a Tullip does not make it a Tullip especialy so when the native empires of the land had vastly different names for their Nations they ruled and how quickly the Spanish sought to purge them by military docturines influcned by religous conflictions with the Natives in the name of forming what would become Mexico in the 1600’s.
A typical Mexican doesn’t worship Khorne or Ba’al, since they’re Roman Catholic and do not practice the ancient religons that once was the seat of Power in the lands we call Mexico. For that matter, Tenochtitlan was the capital of the Aztec Empire which was later conqured and renamed Mexico City by the Spanish… As I said before, calling a rose a tullip does not make it a tullip.
@ Nan G,
That’s a good point, . . . the whole country has evolved from very intrenched and culturally diverse groups, with a variety of languages, but it has principally remained the playpen of mostly abusive dictators and would-be kings.
The cities of this area of Central America have been red with blood for as long as history has bothered to record its never ending conflicts. Today’s slaughter around the drug business is almost business-as-usual.
BTW, is it me or does the President seem to have have consistently had a problem with the Founders, and acknowledging them and what they achieved? When you’re President of the country, it would be good to “get with the program,” at some point. . . . After all, it is claimed that he is an expert in the Constitution.
There were 13 original states, and one Mexican State, what was it called?
I wonder what the Mayans and Aztecs think ? Man you got yourself a dumb one from Kenya, hope he was cheap.
😆 Our president is an idiot – and an arrogant one at that! His high-toned (doubtless taxpayer paid for) education has made him think that he is smarter than we are when in fact he is the result of affirmative action and socialist manipulation – both run amok! He should keep his pie hole shut and his opinions and thought processes to himself until we can ride his skinny ass out of the White House on 1/20/13!
This post is slightly off topic . . . but IMHO it is so important that we can not afford to let it slide by. Perhaps it would be better to post this in the Weekly Open Thread, but since this has such an important perspective, I think it very important to bring to everyone’s attention: At the following LINK is OUR VERY OWN GOVERNMENTS EVALAUTION OF A THREAT:
http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/p18523.xml
Shariah: The Threat to America
From the report contained at the above link, I quote:
“As this study manifests, the shariah system is totalitarian. It imposes itself on all aspects of civil society and human life, both public and private. Anyone obliged actually to defend the proposition that shariah should be adopted here will find few takers and be properly seen for what they are – marginal and extremist figures. That, and only that, will strengthen true proponents of a moderate or reformist Islam that embraces freedom and equality.”
Located at the Center For Security Policy is the full report, some 177 pages of analysis that clearly indicates what the United States is facing.
Additionally there is a video, approximately 40 minutes in length.
I suggest that it is “REQUIRED” Reading and viewing.
Tallgrass, you probably missed it on another thread when drjohn tried to portray the latest annual terrorist threat analysis as an indictment of all Shariah. You are doing the same by cherry picking the excerpt here without providing the specifics found on pg 10 of the report, as I indicated in my comment response to his misleading portrayal.
Specifically, the “shariah system” they are discussing is that of the global jihad movement, not that of Islam as a majority.
Simply put, the CSP’s focus was solely addressing… as plainly stated… the jihad view of Shariah.
That said, the report was very interesting. Among their facts found was that the rising recruitment for jihad was done primarily thru Internet (not mosques), and that they were seeking non-Arab type profiles with higher education to recruit for attacks on western interests overseas. Also pertinent was that our current intel system does not allocate specifics to follow up on domestic homegrown risks… which is probably why Napalitano is whining about having a new department created. Yup… bigger and more efficient government, instead of reorganizing what we have.
The link to the report is in my original comment, linked above.
These Mexican’s playing the “we wuz robbed” victim card, are pathetic. They stole “mexico” from the myans, olmecs, toltecs, incas, and who knows how many others. Then treated those people far worse than we did… and they have the nerve to complain about us, annexing territory where the local population, Spanish and all wanted to leave the corrupt government in Mexico.
Typical of dedicated leftists speaking to the moron class of which they ALL consider us members. So according to Husseins’ argument, France should be given back to England because English Kings had a legitimate claim to the nation in the 14th century!!! People aren’t buying your drivel any longer, Hussein. Even the 24/7 assistance of your media scribes won’t help this time.
Mata;
I think that my major concern is exactly what is said in the video . . . “9/11 will seem like a day at the beach”.
Was there any specific attribute that you can “with Poltical Correctness” use to instantly identify Nidal Malik Hasan (Ft Hood Event) as a purp in a “Man Made Disaster”?
Was there anything that would do this for any of the terriorists attacks anywhere in the world . . . those events that have happened in the past week?
Call what I did “Cherry Picking” if you want . . . I think you might be drinking cool aid.
What gives the Muslims the right to conduct Prayer in the middle of the street in New York City? Is that “religious freedom” or is that “testing the waters”?
GZM . . . is that a test of our resistance to the invasion?
I could give you a thousand different examples, the difference is . . . Moderates on the surface don’t KILL PEOPLE . . . they use the “Ghandi Principal” . . . ultimately “They win”!
Tallgrass, I don’t identify Hasan with anyone but the global Islamic jihad movement… not the majority of Islam. You may accuse me of “drinking cool aid”… a very tired and schoolyard level insult anymore… but I shall return fire and accuse you of deficiency in reading comprehension. Nor are your tangents relevant to your comment, attempting to again portray the Center for Security Policy’s annual report as an indictment of all Islam when it clearly stated just what they were analyzing on page 10.
There is no doubt that the global jihad movements remain “the enemy”. But if that enemy were as you portray – fully a fifth of the world’s population – it would be a difficult war indeed. That enemy is the shared enemy of those like Jasser and others who are on the opposite divide. I want them for our allies… not a marriage of cultures, but our allies in fighting the small percentage of them with warped views. You seem to forget that most of those that die from jihad are fellow Muslims. And they are getting royally po’ed about it.
Again, in the study you cite to condemn all of Islam, they cite the four operational and four strategic weaknesses that trouble al-Qaeda… starting on pg 20. Increasing hostility by the Muslim world in general. Odd, don’t you think, that “your enemy” also considers the global jihad movement their enemy?
Quit watching pictures and videos, and get to reading.
As a decendant of one of those tribes that first the Spanish and then the Mexican Government tried to exterminate, we don’t recognize the Spanish or the Mexicans as owners of America. They conquered, took what they wanted any way they wanted, then they themselves were conquered and now have to accept the fact that they are no longer a viable nation. If they want to try and take back the lands they themselves stole from others they can expect the meet heavy resistance. The Pretender in Chief is nothing but a temporary resident and his wishes will not change the minds of over 80% of Americans who are proud of the nation they now live in.
Mata;
Reading comprehension is, IMHO, a very perspective based cognitive process. Simply because you choose to view the report as being based on “Militant Radical Jihaist” perspective is not necessarily the way that I read it. Clearly the term “Stealth” is used through out the report. Therein is the principal concern of invasion. Exactly how am I supposed to tell the subversive, hidden element from the militant terrorist? Does not “stealth” in and of its self indicate that “I will never know”? Can I afford to allow the “slow poison” that ultimately destroys my way of life? Just as we have seen the “slow invasion of the current political class” am I to set by and drink my kool aid.
I believe that your philosophy fails to recognize cost/benefit of the “triangle” of relationship that exists here. I am one corner of the triangle and I do not have to accept the philosophies of either of the two corners. I have the right to be cautious of both the other corners and to fail to recognize that one is instant death, while the other is slow death, is what makes me even more wary of getting involved to the point of self affliation with either.
I must say that in my heart, from the cultural heritage within which I was raised, I distrust the Islamic faith . . . I am sorry, but when the battle begins . . . I will certainly know who my enemy is.
Please note that on page 10 of the report . . . the term “stealth or stealthy” is used 4 times, the term “jihad” 6 times and the term “violent” is used 2 times, and the term “radical” not at all.
So it would appear to me, based on Page 10, the emphasis is “Stealth Jihad” a charteristic that fully unidentifiable from the “pacifist”.
I am sorry, but I just cannot accept the adage . . . “Enemy of my enemy is my friend” . . . it just does not fit the Western Culture.
I am a Native American and I KNOW what happens when a race succumbs to the lure of “mutual enemy” . . . ultimately the culture is destroyed.
Tallgrass… mea culpa for not providing the link to the annual Bipartisan Policy Center’s annual report on the threat assessment that I mentioned above. Also, a link to the BPC “about” page, where you can check out the founders, board of directors, and other details.
If you haven’t seen this, you are missing key ingredients as to what is going on in the Muslim world. It was on page 20 of that study (released four days before the jihad’s Shariah CSP study). It was written by Peter Bergan and Bruce Hoffman… neither of whom are “koolaid” drinkers as you would say. It is my suggestion you purge yourself temporarily of your preconceived notions and read these two together.
No matter which report you go to, you’ll still see that those who regularly work deep inside the jaws of jihad movements still recognize the difference between jihad and the majority of the Muslim population. We need the latter as allies… which certainly doesn’t have much of a chance if American conservatives are running around daily, eyeing them all as closet jihadists.
Do we need a way to pick out the bad guys from the good? You betcha… something that the Bergen/Hoffman report is quick to say is not being done in our current intel circles. However the government’s intel failings do not alter the fact that jihadists do not live behind every corner, and are some sort of a bad gene, begging to be awoken in every Muslim.
With your heritage, you should also recognize that you don’t necessarily have to lose your culture. The old ways certainly went by the way side with time and societal advancement, as did with my parents and grandparents when they immigated here and assimilated into a melting pot nation. But had the tribes simply decided to fight to the death individually, they would have been completely wiped out. Lives and culture, no more than a misrepresented page in history. And that would have been an even larger loss.
>>That enemy is the shared enemy of those like Jasser and others who are on the opposite divide. I want them for our allies… not a marriage of cultures, but our allies in fighting the small percentage of them with warped views.>>
So…doesn’t it seem likely that Jasser would welcome an aggressive attitude against those he considers to be his enemies? Why do we have to be so careful about declaring sharia based islam as our enemy?
@ Mata #15,
“Among their facts found was that the rising recruitment for jihad was done primarily thru Internet (not mosques), and that they were seeking non-Arab type profiles with higher education to recruit for attacks on western interests overseas.”
That one is disconcerting, but understandable. The whole world uses the same system of education, with variations on content, . . . we learn by rote. The fact that a few feeble minded individuals get converted should result in a wholesale negative declaration on the system, but it does show a weakness.
Strong minds and independent thinking should be an objective, and that will take a change in the system.
He’s apparently smart enough to have prevailed over the combined intelligence of his political adversaries. What do they suggest about themselves when they assert that the guy who bested them is totally inept?
@ Greg #22,
Salesmanship sometimes pushes the envelope and morphs into hucksterism. Outright lies, overstatements, and preaching often successfully sway the “buyer.”
The usual response is, “buyer beware.” . . . The buyers are now becoming aware.
Maybe the buyers are falling under the spell of somebody else’s sales pitch. That would hardly be surprising, since sales pitches are more a part of their natural line of work to begin with.
Greg;
I think you are a “Salesman” . . . but a not very good one . . . since no one here seems to be buying a damn thing from you.
Yes, we read what you post and we take it for what it is worth . . . A WARNING of what can happen to people when they fall under the spell of “Wormtongue”.
I have another question/s . . . When you took your oath of service . . . did you believe in the Constitution? Do you believe in it NOW?
Seuk;
The answer to your question, IMHO, is unequivocally YES, Sharia Law is our enemy, period. That and the philosophy of the Islamic faith, without doubt subvert the civilization of this country.
Page 12 of Sharia – “The Threat to America”; per the link above:
“To be sure, since 9/11, most in this country have come to appreciate that America is put at risk by violent jihadis who launch military assaults and plot destructive attacks against our friends and allies, our armed forces and our homeland. Far less recognizable, however, is the menace posed by jihadist enemies who operate by deceit and stealth from inside the gates. The latter threat is, arguably, a far more serious one to open, tolerant societies like ours. This report is substantially devoted to laying bare the danger posed by so-called “non-violent” jihadists, exposing their organizational infrastructure and modus operandi and recommending actions that must be taken to prevent their success.”
Mata has a posting that will also link you the original document.
Mata;
Please provide the page number where the below quote is contained:
“Among their facts found was that the rising recruitment for jihad was done primarily thru Internet (not mosques), and that they were seeking non-Arab type profiles with higher education to recruit for attacks on western interests overseas.”
I have not been able to find it. The term “Internet” returns NO hits when the report is searched.
Tallgrass, what you quote is my words summarizing. I provided the report link by the Bipartisan Policy Center in my above comment. Sorry I forgot to include it in the original comment. Space… the final frontier… :0)
The bit about the new profiles starts on pg 17 of that report… Please note that of the latest convicted recruits, the largest percentile are Somalians. And that ties in quite well with the problems at the Mexican border where they are crossing into the States.
Greg – Have been reading your comments here with some interest. Have one question for you. As a big Obama supporter and apologist; are you willing to lay your life on the line for this faux POTUS and his agenda or are you just feeding us typical liberal talkiing points? Inquiring minds want to know.
Mata;
Humbly, I submit to you that you have cross contaminated the results of two reports that have entirely different “executive intent”. At the highest level these two documents have entirely different objectives. One analyzes militantcy, while the other analyzes the impact of Sharia Law on Islamics, with subsequent impact on the US of A. Does this mean that the “experince factors” in the reports are mutually exclusive, no not entirely, but what it does mean is that the scope of the experience factors are different. For example, yes their is recruitment via the internet . . . does this recruitment have any impact on the detrimental impact of Sharia Law? Again humbly, I say NO it does not. From a militant perspective we are dealing with actually a very small number of people. Purely from the fact that Sharia Law is viewed and accepted by a large proportion of those that accept the Islamic Faith does not imply that all Somalia Muslims are radical or violent, what it does say is that a large percentage of the Somalia Muslims believe in Sharia Law.
Sharia Law is Anit-Constitutional . . . it is adverse in every respect to the Bill of Rights.
Thus, the large percentage of Muslims that believe in Sharia Law become disbelivers in the Constitution. They can not be both, it is against Sharia Law to do so. Therefore if they profess to be Muslims and are placed in position that they have to “put up or shut up” . . . Sharia Law is either “put up or die”, it is an offense punishable by death for a Muslim to disavow Sharia Law.
Simlarly to our own situation where a majority of US voters approved our “POTUS & political class” . . . the average person of the Islamic Faith Will jump right on to the band wagon to “Stealth Jihadism”. After all isn’t a NO DEATH invasion better than a mass genocide? With Stealth Invasion we see the full implementation of Sharia happens only when the “tipping point” is achieved. Only then would we see the distruction of our civilization in the name of Allah.
RE:#31, Tallgrass.
Your example of the Somali Muslims reminded me of a good historic, though recent, example in that same group.
A bunch of Somali Muslims had become cabbies in the Minnesota area around the Twin Cities airport.
They were all well assimilated and making a nice living for themselves.
But then a Muslim group from outside their local mosque came in and, through power plays, forced these cabbies to begin insisting the Minn/St Paul Airport begin making all sorts of demands on the Airport.
They wanted prayer rooms.
To get them they would stop their cabs in the middle of RED zones and lay out their rugs and begin long prayers.
They got the prayer rooms.
They wanted foot baths in the men’s bathrooms.
To get them they began washing their feet in the sinks, causing wet floors, slipping dangers and even breaking a few sinks off the back walls.
They got the foot baths.
Then they wanted the right to tell Western-dressed women, passengers with any bottles of alcoholic beverages and all passengers with dogs they could find a different cabbie.
In that demand they went too far.
The airport appealed to the law of the land regarding anti-discrimination and odrdered the cabbies to either take all passengers as they were in line of forfeit their cab license.
Haven’t heard another complaint from them since that hardball play.
But the one thing that came out during it was that these moderate or assimilated Muslims were being INTIMIDATED by Muslims desirous of imposing Sharia on ALL of us, not just these assimilated Somali’s.
Nan G, as the Bipartisan Policy Center study from a few weeks ago notes, and using the convicted or detained homegrown terrorists from the past couple of years (i.e. since Obama, per the study), the Somalis are the largest group of *not assimilated* Muslims in this nation.
Nan;
These experiences are exactly in line with the concepts of “Stealth Jihad”. No they are not militant, not even one life is in harms way, yet the process is of slow invasion, to stretch the daily limit.
As the limits go . . . “let the camels nose into the tent . . . in comes the whole camel”.
As the limts increase so does the militancy. What can we do, other than eventually when the “Civil or Criminal Law” of the locality, state or federal is broken, we punish them severly.
After just one or two examples are made, the tune will change and they will fall back, re-trench and come out with a new front of attack.
Is this “religious persecution”? NO if they have violated our law, they reap the benefit of such transgression.
MataHarley. Re:#34,
That may be so – as a group.
But that was NOT so as regards this group of men who felt they were forced into playing games with the airport administration after YEARS of doing their jobs and doing them just fine!
They did NOT un-assimilate over night.
Nor did they ”get religion” and all become fundamentalist Islamists desirous of Sharia over night.
What happened was, as they, themselves said, intimidation by Islamists who came in from elsewhere (I seem to recall them being
Egyptians).
I’ll see if I can search out an old source (it was at least one computer ago).
It will, of course, always come down to individuals. Just as the largest percentage of these homegrown converts are Somalis (and who knows if they’re legal, right?), that can also change. It’s never been a question about the bad boys (and lately, blonde blue-eyed girls), of Islam. It’s been about having a system that can separate the intel between the bad and the non jihad Muslims. All the examples you and I can banter back and forth all day long still means nothing more than it’s about those specific individuals.
That’s not enough for me to condemn a fifth of the world’s population.
I seem to remember the airport/prayer room/baths in the back of my brain from times ago. But it would be interesting to dig up the story. Question is, did they do in depth profiles on their presence here in the US, simply for demanding special religious amenities at airports? (which, if it’s your next question, absolutely NO… I don’t support that in the least) Somehow, I’m betting they didn’t check out their immigration status or details.
Unfortunately the Minneapolis Star Tribune does not keep articles as old as 4 years back.
So, here is the set of quotes from a secondary site:
Katherine Kersten, a columnist for the Minneapolis Star Tribune, digs deeper today in “Airport taxi flap about alcohol has deeper significance” to find where the taxi flap originated. She starts by hanging out with the Somali taxi drivers at a Starbucks, where they make clear the ban on alcohol-totting passengers was not their own idea.
Ahmed Samatar, described by Kersten as a nationally recognized expert on Somali society at Macalester College, confirms this consensus:
To solve the mystery, Kersten went to the source:
Kersten then quotes Omar Jamal, director of the Somali Justice Advocacy Center, who speculates why MAS should promote a custom without basis in Somali culture.
OK, Nan G… now I’m really confused. In most states, any open bottle of alcohol in any vehicle… cab or not… is illegal.
So I guess my question is, were these particular cabbies asking all fares (to airport or otherwise) asking if they were transporting UNopening bottles of alcohol??
… oh wait. Time delay here. I went back into Pipe’s archives. So this is all about 16 cabbies refusing to transport fares who were holding *visible* signs of a bottle?
hey… take another cab. Give the tip to someone else. Remember signs by private entrepreneurs that say “we reserve the right to refuse service to anyone”? If they are within their legal rights to refuse service, I won’t be arguing with them. Hang… as a business owner, I want the ability to serve, or not serve, whom I choose. If I’m not allowed to pick my clientele, I might as well work for the government.
I’m more interested in the airport renovations. Got anything on that?
Mata/Nan G;
Lets get this absolutely straight and clear. The fear of Islam is in no way or fashion a lack of “religious understanding” or a denial of rights. It is FEAR, it is founded on the principal that when someone KILLS people, that others of that same group or affliation so to have that same bent. The taxi drivers were not in the least worried that some Christian would KILL them, they were worried that the OUTSIDE group, no matter where the radicals came from, Egypt or Oz, would take a view of their failure to comply and therefore inflict bodily harm.
Mata;
If you think for one minute that a “Stealth Jihad” is not in progress in this country, then I think you should wake up, you are asleep at the wheel . . . or you are just NOT saying it. I am sorry that you will allow such clearly obivious things from escaping your understanding.
So now I have to ask . . . yep . . . call me a bigot . . . Mata are you a Muslim?
I am a Baptist married to a Mormon.
Nope, Tallgrass. Not a Muslim. Would never date or marry a Muslim man. Would never even consider converting to Islam either. Don’t have much love for that religion. But I sure have a love for allowing anyone to practice whatever faith they choose. And if I start clipping away at their rights, I’ll be clipping away at my own soon enough.
Never said fear of Islam is a denial of rights etc etc. But then, after almost two decades of living in LA, where crime stats for both blacks and Hispanics are high, I don’t have the blanket fear of them either. Known quite a few Hell’s Angels, Vagos and other assorted “1%’er” bikers in my time too. They’ve got quite a history of crime. Didn’t have a fear of them either… nor did I assume that every club member was bad juju. I guess I can see there are bad and good elements, often with much in common. Doesn’t mean I condemn them all. Life’s too short to live that paranoid.
PS: Have many friends that are either Mormon or jack-Mormon. Love ’em all dearly. Grew to respect their church’s “welfare system” too.
No, MH, none of the passengers had OPEN bottles.
They had bought bottles at Duty Free Shops at airports elsewhere.
They were bringing in French champaigne, brandy, Irish whiskey and so forth.
That was the stuff these cabbies were being told to refuse to transport.
Nope, the solution is NOT to wait for the next cab.
If your business is to pick up passengers at one of our nation’s airports the anti-discrimination laws say you have to pick them up.
Dog or no dog.
Drink or no drink.
Transgender or not.
Gay couple of straight.
Women in Western dress or bundled up.
The end result was if you refuse to pick up someone you were sent to the extreme back of the cab line so that you lost out for another 1/2 hour or so.
If you got sent to the back of the line more than once or twice a shift you lost your privilege of picking up fares at the airport.
Really, Nan G? What law is that? Must be some local MN law, because there’s been many a cab in NYC and other places that have refused fares. I can attest to that first hand. Surely you aren’t confusing things like fair housing with cab company obligations, are you? Because I’m darn sure that carrying alcohol doesn’t make you a protected class under fair housing…. nor for mandating service from any private contractor.
Like I said… take another cab. If the cabbie is sent back to the end of the line, or loses airport privileges, it’s his/her loss.
Mata;
What YOU know and are playing ignorant of is that evey airport, bus station and even some prime taxi stand locations in every major city, or even minor ones, like the city that I live near has “regulations” that the owner/operators of transportation services must agree to comply with. It is kind of strange that I even have to tell you this, since you say you live in LA. In some respects, I call that the “California” syndrome (more on that later if you will).
The parking locations or que from which the taxis operate may even be at a remote location and the taxi driver is called via radio or hand signal. The refusal to take a fare, means the taxi must make a huge circle back to the last place in the parking area. This contributes to the traffic congestion and does reflect poorly upon the city, from the perspective that many cities, especially here in fly over country, view the taxi operators as “ambassadors of goodwill”.
Come on, stop being the “California” girl and wake up, you are doing the FA bloggers no justice by saying these, perhaps sarcastically humorous things.
@Greggy,
So, was the term “America” also used at that time per your source? Your own reference counters your argument, now, doesn’t it?
As for being clever enough to overcome his political adversaries. I guess technically, all criminals (see ACORN voter fraud, black panther voter intimidation, federal job offers to influence primaries, peddling federal jobs for political favors, closing GM dealerships who supported GOP and transferring ownership to solid democrats, illegal campaign funds raised on line via untraceable credit cards, etc.) can be considered “clever,” that is, until they are held accountable. We’ll see how “clever” he is from here on out.
@ Greg…
Did it ever occur to you that some things cannot be bought or sold? Some concepts cannot be spun into some Political Agenda that some Americans see as dangerous to the Republic ?
You are trying to sell Me things that I do not need, a Pretender in the White House that is as economically illiterate as you are and I quite frankly ain’t buying any of it.
I pay more in taxes than you make in a year, I do not need any more over-regulation from the Parliament of Whores in DC, any Agency or non Senate vetted Czar from any Ivy League School or some Marxist crony that Obama smoked dope with in school.
Greg, you as an American are “off the Reservation” on so many points that I can’t count them up.
Thanks for your Service in the communist destroyed RVN. No thanks on your short sighted logic that you toss around at FA like a cow pie.
Some of US know better and will call you on it. Expect that. We have more invested in the outcome than you do. Think on that Bud.
@Greg:
Actually Greg, what Obie overcame was the intelligence and good judgment of the American voter.
A prime example of this would be you. You admit that you knew you were being lied to…yet you still voted for him.
What does that say about you? Nothing good, eh?
@ Aye Chihuahua, the really sad and stupid end of it all is that Greg clings to the fabrications and lies as if they were his salvation. He has a “Jack and the Beanstalk” fascination with the Obama Regime that will have some pretty dire consequences for the Nation and have been proven not to work so well where Socialism has been tried and failed.
The Obama Team in the last election sold Blind American voters a “rats bunghole” for a wedding ring as the old story goes. A guy with no paper trail but as Biden commented, “A Clean and articulate Black Man”…Sorry but I never bought that line or have Biden as credible on my list.
Let the chips fall as they may in November. How will I vote? I will be voting against more than I will vote for to save the Republic that I fought to defend for three decades. Islam is no threat to America by comparison, Socialism, Incompetence and Obama is the most dangerous threat.
How about then apples? Failed Domestic and Foreign Policy is the Obama Legacy. If American Voters wake up in time the Republic can be saved. If not, we can enjoy the same economy as Somalia and sit by a campfire telling our Grand Children about the America that was…
Obama had a a lot of help to overcome his “adversaries”. So if that is your standard of intelligent, it is lacking.
@Tallgrass, first off, I left California in the dust back in 2000. The state looks better in my rear view mirror.
Secondly, any cab company that allows drivers to refuse fares for bottles… even tho quite legal and cannot fall into discrimination protected classes… are business fools. They hurt no one but their own business, and the cabbies that do refuse the fares hurt their own personal income. Forgive me if I’m not sympathetic. Therefore, if they choose to slit their own fiscal throat (apt phrasing in this case, as I’m sure most of you would appreciate) by having to get back in line for a replacement fare, they aren’t hurting the waiting person nearly as much as they are hurting themselves. Another cab would reappear in minutes for the person with the bottle.
If the cab company has internal regulations, and the cabbie chooses not to follow them, then they are subject to whatever the cab company owners choose to do. Many cabs have regulations about smoking in their cabs. They can, and will refuse to transport someone who refuses to follow that regulation.
My comment to Nan G was her misunderstanding that cab drivers cannot refuse fares for discrimination laws. If I rent a home/apt and advertise no pets, you cannot sue me for discrimination because pet ownership is not a protected class. If I own a non-smoking restaurant with a dress code, and you refuse to extinguish your cigarette and insist upon wearing a tank top, I can refuse to serve you because smokers and tank top wearers are not a protected class.
Now, if you’re gay or a transsexual or transgender, and I refuse to transport you because you have a bottle of alcohol, you can try to sue me, claiming I was doing it because of sexual status because that *is* a protected class. But the onus will be upon you to prove it was because of sexual preference, and not because of the bottle. If I defend myself, proving I refuse all fares… regards of sexual preference… for the same reason, you lose and I sue your butt to recuperate my costs of litigation. Kapish?
Federally protected classes for discrimination cause are age, gender, religion, nationality, race, military veteran status and disability. When it comes to housing, you can add familia status (children). States can add their own classes as well. Oregon and many others add sexual preference. (added… that may even be federal now…)
Therefore transporting a bottle of alcohol is not a protected class and there is no discrimination lawsuit available to anyone for such. Especially since they’d be refusing anyone and everyone with a bottle… regardless of race, gender, nationality etc.
As I said. Take another cab. And I’d make sure it was one who wasn’t from the same cab company, as I’d boycott their services. But I will not question their right to refuse, tho I would question their business wisdom.
There was nothing “sarcastically humous” in my response to Nan G. Perhaps just shock and stun that she would consider this “discrimination” via federal, or state, laws. (like maybe she’d want to rethink the comment, in case she leaped to assumptions) Considering how long Fair Housing and Equal Opportunitiy Employment has been around, I would figure most people would know what protected classes are by now. Guess not.
Now a question for you… if a Muslim cab driver decided to refuse anyone transporting a bottle of alcohol, why the heck would you care if he went to the back of the line and shot himself in the foot for business?
BTW, Tallgrass, INRE your comment:
Personally I think if I’ve educated just one person to the difference between legally protected classes and simple just being “offended”, I think I’m doing the FA community a world of good. That way you won’t be wandering around trying for pie in the sky lawsuits, or misinforming others as to just what constitutes legal discrimination.
TALLGRASS you mention something very true regarding the immigrants tend to belong to a higher authority who dictate to them,specialy of a religion which is authoritarien over
their believers and possibly have help them immigrate or cross the border and possibly provide them with needed identification paper to find work, so they have to obey their radicals rules.
bye
OLD TROOPER 2: hi, I am sure you wont be alone doing that vote against rather than
pro candidate because many are known by their sponsor whom people trust to have chosen an electable person to do the right job,it’s my views. bye
Wow!
Thought this died a death…..
Mahmoud Ayoub, an Islamic scholar at Temple University, stressed that Islam bans drinking alcohol, not carrying it. “I know many Muslims who own gas stations [where beer is sold] and sell ham sandwiches. They justify it and I think rightly so, [saying] that they have to make a living.”
The Free Muslims Coalition announced it is “disgusted” by the Muslim drivers’ behavior, on two grounds:
First, “Most Muslims don’t agree that cab drivers are prohibited from transporting alcohol. Islam merely prohibits Muslims from drinking alcohol and those drivers are seeking to impose their religious values on others.”
Second, “When the cab drivers chose to drive a cab they entered into an agreement to perform a public service that is essential to the economy of any city. They have no right to refuse a fare because the passenger is holding a bottle of wine or other spirits.”
But the Free Muslims Coalition correctly argues that cab drivers who discriminate against passengers with bottles of alcohol, “should be banned altogether from picking up passengers at the airport” and their hack permits should be canceled.
Their ”hack” permits were not pulled completely.
Their cab companies were simply told to only send to the airport those cab drivers who would pick up all passengers needing transport.
The problem was never resolved legally.
An attempted terror attack using a baby bottle with one part of an explosive liquid and a shampoo bottle and an energy drink bottle with the other parts led to a new restriction on all air passengers in the USA.
No liquids more than 3 ounces.
Problem solved.
Mata;
You seem to be caught up in civil rights violations. The jest of this is not civil rights. It is compliance by the cabbie to certain local regulations or conditions of service. Airports are allowed to institute rules that govern the provision of a public service. These rules are dependent on the airport and in some cases regulated by city ordance.
The city government goes to the extent necessary for safe, reliable and good samaritan service. The provision of a service such as transportation are viewed in many cities as “ambassadors of goodwill”. This requires the cabbies to comply with such intent.
Clearly if the cabbie fails to provide this service in a goodwill fashion the cabbie may find himself restricted and that is what has happened at many of the airports and major taxi cues in cities throughout the United States.
Good, bad or indifferent . . . if the cabbie wants to make a living doing the job . . . he is asked to comply . . . if he chooses not to comply . . . then he can get another job or not provide service to a particular area.
The cabbie is given these choices . . . comply in providing a good service or get a new job!
Simple isn’t it?
Tallgrass, it is not me who is hung up on this being a “civil rights” violation. This was all about Nan G’s links about Muslim cabbies, refusing fares because the passengers had bottles of liquor from the duty stores at the airport. Got that? The specific is has to do with my answer.
Now perhaps you should reread Nan G’s comment #41 where she states:
No, no and no again. As I have corrected, no cabbie is forced to pick up a fare because of anti-discrimination laws, as she stated. This is my point, and remains my point. Instead, you decided to accuse me of being “sarcastically humorous”. I have a problem when people misrepresent what is protected classes and just blanket assume that such actions can be covered under anti-discrimination causes.
As to the rest, I could care less if a Muslim cabbie will, or will not transport me if I have a bottle of alcohol with me. I’ll give my fare and tip to another.
So I’ll repeat my question… if a Muslim cabbie refuses to transport you because you are carrying a bottle of alcohol, why the heck would you care if he has to go to the back of the cab line and wait a long time for another opportunity to make a living?
Wow!
Again?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
The whole thing is moot.
A couple of (MUSLIM) terrorists tried to take their baby onto a plane headed for the USA from the UK.
With them were three bottles of dual-use liquid chemicals that, had they been mixed together on the plane, would have caused a plane destroying explosion.
They were thwarted.
And, to this day, we cannot bring anything over 3 ounces of liquid onto a passenger jet.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Council on American-Islamic Relations has pressed government agencies and businesses to install the foot basins in restrooms.
As a result, in 2007 the Airport in Kansas City added footbaths for Muslim cabbies’ abulations.
Same year so did the University of Michigan-Dearborn at $25,000 taxpayers money /foot bath.
Also the Minneapolis Community and Technical College did it.
Stanford University, the University of Houston, Boston University, St. Cloud State and the University of Minnesota-Duluth all did, too.
In each case wet floors, people slipping while trying to wash their feet in a sink, and sinks being pulled off the walls preceded the expense of accommodating a Muslim religious obligation.
Muslim leaders have advised the college staff that washing is not a required practice for students under the circumstances.
At Henry Ford Community College in Dearborn, Mich., “halal” food — ritually slaughtered and permissible under Islamic law — is marked by green stickers in the cafeteria and “staff are well-trained in handling practices.”
Doesn’t sound like assimilation is valued at all.
Quite the opposite.
And we’re paying for it.
Mata;
I must appolgize for not seeing things as you do. In the good ole USA the almight dollar does speak loudly. Certainly in a superficial perspective it is certainly the major motovator in buiness. I do repsect what you are saying and totally understand that the needs to make money is a powerful socially controlling mechanism.
I appologize for having offended your perspectives and do hope that you will look at the deeper aspects of itimidation withing the social perspectives of the various races and cultures that make up the Islamic religion.
Tallgrass, no problem. Occasionally this two dimensional medium does make for easy miscommunication. No harm, no foul.
Aye, developments and communities advertised as “55+”, or “senior” (groan) communities are the only legal “no children” policy. To advertise any other such rental or real estate community as “no children” is in violation of Fair Housing laws.
I wonder if those who are interested in forcing cabbies to transport any/all fares would be equally as quick to demand that pharmacists dispense morning after pills against objections of conscience.
How about pro-life doctors who decline to provide abortion services?
You see, these issues are double-edged swords, capable of cutting both ways.
Personally, if a cabbie doesn’t want to take me somewhere, well, I’ll find a cabbie who will…and will pay him/her for the service that the other guy wouldn’t extend to me.
Much like any other business, the free market will level the playing field and the weaker players, due to business management ability or customer service policy, will be weeded out over time.
@MataHarley:
As a slight side point: If discrimination in housing due to familial status is illegal, how do developments get away with “no children” policies? I am thinking specifically of retirement type communities. What allows those developers to prevent a middle aged family with a brood of rug rats from moving in? I’ve always wondered how they could get away with that but never took the time to research it.
Back when the Seventh Day Adventists own a supermarket called ”AlphaBeta Stores,” they did not carry liquors of any kind.
But individuals working at other stores where alcohol is sold might have to check out (sell) alcohol.
IF they cannot do that due to religious restrictions they had to work elsewhere (either inside the store or by quitting and working in some other job).
We have seen supermarkets including WalMart bend over backwards to accomodate their Muslim checkers who, all of a sudden, get religion after years on the job, and claim they can no longer touch bacon.
A doctor can choose a specialty that does not put his conscience in conflict……geriatrics, for example.
No one is forced into becoming a pharmacist, either.
The Bible (I’m a bit hazy on whether this same teaching is in the Koran) promises believers that -if they sacrifice for the sake of God’s Kingdom – their heavenly father will bless them.
So, for the Christian, quitting the job that puts their conscience on edge is a wise and blessed course.
Muslims seem to be more intent on forcing the society in which they live to align itself to their standards rather than wait on their god.
Eventually, Nan G, it might finally dawn on you that there was nothing “legal” to solve.