A commentator on the previous post sends me this link:
It's from a chap called Ifran Yusuf, who's an Australian 'diversity lawyer' and commentator. It's well worth checking out. Ifran tells us that Pipes misrepresented Australia's HR Commissioner Graeme Innes, the Commissioner saying in effect the expulsions had 'nothing to do with Islam'.
And our diversity lawyer is correct. Innes does agrees that he was turfed out of taxis on about 20 occasions on account of his dog. He also adds that no driver ever mentioned Islam as the reason.
And here's the good bit.
Based on this he concludes that Islam was not the cause!
So all over the West we have Muslim taxi drivers refusing entry to guide dogs, we don't seem to have non-Muslim drivers doing it, yet Graeme Innes seems unable to discern a pattern, simply because he wasn't directly told why.
Isn't this the ultimate in supine dhimmitude? Has this craven capitulation become so internalised even the most blatant facts are shoved under the carpet?
Far from undermining Pipes' comments, this development only underlines the extent of the challenge we face.