Muslim bus drivers refuse to let guide dogs on board? *UPDATED*
Posted by 5cc
July 20th, 2010
It’s not often that we’ll open a post on MailWatch by talking about the local press, but there’s always room for an exception.
Early in June, getreading.co.uk published ‘Blind passenger hounded off bus because of his dog‘, a story about George Herridge, who was asked to get off a bus last year because his guide dog had apparently caused ‘a woman and her children’ to become ‘hysterical’.
Mr Herridge says that this is not the first time someone has had a bad reaction to his guide dog, and tells of three more occasions involving people at the hospital, Asda and another bus the previous year. It seems this latest was the second time a bus driver asked him to get off the bus because of a distressed child.
He explains:
He is unsure what has provoked outbursts but said he thinks some have come from Asian people and that it may be due to religious or cultural differences.
So, he’s not sure, but some of these reactions may have come from Asians. He doesn’t say which ones. The paper explains:
If the people who were upset were Muslim, they consider dogs to be ritually unclean.
So, if the people upset were Muslim, which is by no means clear, the reaction might have been because of their beliefs.
The Daily Mail, naturally, picked up this story yesterday. The paper has given it the headline ‘Muslim bus drivers refuse to let guide dogs on board‘. Given that Mr Herridge wasn’t even sure if some of the people in his four stories were Asian or not, and the paper only surmised that they might have been Muslim, quite where the Mail can be so certain that the bus drivers were Muslim is a mystery. As is the plural to ‘guide dogs’, since we’re only talking about one dog here.
The rest of the story is set up nicely by the opening line:
Blind passengers are being ordered off buses or refused taxi rides because Muslim drivers or passengers object to their ‘unclean’ guide dogs.
Now the paper has introduced taxi rides, the entire story could be talking about bus passengers rather than drivers. Or even taxi passengers. The original story doesn’t seem to suggest that the bus drivers were Muslim at all. It seems to suggest that the passengers who over-reacted might have been.
If the paper were being dishonest, and attempting to beef up a weakly supported claim about bus drivers, this would be an excellent way to go about it.
The article goes on to say:
The problem to carry guide dogs on religious grounds has become so widespread that the matter was raised in the House of Lords last week, prompting transport minister Norman Baker to warn that a religious objection was not a reason to eject a passenger with a well-behaved guide dog.
Here’s the actual Written Question, from Lord Monson in Hansard:
To ask Her Majesty’s Government whether bus drivers can prevent would-be passengers with well-behaved dogs from boarding on the ground that one or more individuals on the bus may object to dogs on cultural or religious grounds.[HL936]
The first thing to notice is that it does not mention guide dogs at all. The second is that it specifically references other passengers, not drivers. Only the reply mentions guide dogs.
The plural to ‘guide dogs’ in the headline is supported by this:
Yesterday both the Guide Dogs for the Blind Association and the National Federation of the Blind confirmed the problem was common, and, according to the latter organisation was ‘getting worse’.
But what problem? The problem of Muslim bus drivers turning passengers away, other passengers causing drivers to turn passengers away, or Muslim cab drivers refusing to pick up passengers with guide dogs?
Curiously, although the article name-checks Guide Dogs, there isn’t a single quote in the story attributed to the organisation. So how to we know what Guide Dogs was talking about?
I contacted the press office to find out, and they kindly sent me a copy of a statement they’d released over the weekend. It opens:
Guide Dogs is appalled when a taxi, minicab or bus driver refuses to transport a guide dog owner because they have their guide dog with them…
It goes on to point out that this is illegal, and that the organisation had worked with the MCB and that the Islamic Council had issued a fatwa to allow guide dogs in mosques.
You’ll notice that it says nothing about the bus drivers being Muslim and rejecting the dog for that reason. Nor does it confirm that this is common.
The National Federation of the Blind (and you have to wonder why the paper would eschew mentioning the much larger RNIB than a smaller organisation, which probably has a less experienced press officer) provides quotes about being refused service by cab drivers. Nothing at all about bus drivers. The press officer is unavailable today for comment, but I hope to follow this one up tomorrow.
In any case, neither organisation talks specifically about Muslim bus drivers turning away passengers with guide dogs because of the driver’s beliefs.
Still, remembering that Mr Herridge thought some of the people who objected to the dog might have been Asian but he wasn’t sure, this is how the Mail covers both bus incidents (it completely ignores the other two):
Mr Herridge, who lives with wife Janet, 69, in Tilehurst, Reading, said that on the first occasion two years ago, he got off at the request of a Muslim driver because some Muslim children on board were ’screaming’ because of the dog.
So now every person in the story is definitely a Muslim! How did that happen?
And the second bus story goes:
He found himself in a similar scenario in May last year, when a Muslim woman and her children became ‘hysterical’. Mr Herridge this time refused the driver’s request to alight.
Notice how this doesn’t actually say that the driver is Muslim. Fancy that. The one person in the two bus stories who has been reprimanded and is therefore identifiable has not been described as a Muslim. It’s been heavily implied with the headline and the lead in that includes reference to a House of Lords written question, of course, but that’s all. Hey, you don’t think he maybe wasn’t actually a Muslim do you?
The best evidence that the Mail has that ‘Muslim bus drivers’ are ‘refusing to let guide dogs on board’ is that one bus driver who asked a man to get off his bus might have been one of the people Mr Herridge thought might have been Asian. Possibly. Well, possible-ish. And the only quotes the paper can get about guide dogs being refused entry to vehicles involves cab drivers, not bus drivers.
The evidence that bus passengers objected on religious grounds is that they might have been Muslim. Maybe. Well, one spoke to him in a foreign language at least. Still, both were in the company of hysterical, frightened children who didn’t like the dog. Maybe the screaming, frightened children are what made the drivers ask him to get off the bus, rather than religious sensitivities.
I’m just wondering. I know it’s far fetched.
**UPDATE**
Phil Coleman in the comments points out that this story made the front page of the Sunday Times. The Mail story seems to have been lifted from there rather than the getreading story.
See what you think. Here’s a passage from the Sunday Times:
The refusal, for religious reasons, to carry even guide dogs has become so widespread that it was raised in the House of Lords last week by Lord Monson, a crossbench peer.
Last night Norman Baker, the transport minister, signalled to bus companies that a religious objection was not a reason to eject a passenger with a well-behaved dog.
And here’s a passage from the Mail:
The problem to carry guide dogs on religious grounds has become so widespread that the matter was raised in the House of Lords last week, prompting transport minister Norman Baker to warn that a religious objection was not a reason to eject a passenger with a well-behaved guide dog.
The Mail sentence is very similar indeed, and where the Times says ‘the refusal to carry’, the Mail includes ‘the problem to carry’, which doesn’t make grammatical sense. That suggests that the passage has been clumsily rewritten.
The Times version ‘Muslims eject ‘unclean’ guide dogs from buses’ does not claim that any of the bus drivers were Muslim. It does imply that with a similar ‘drivers or passengers’ sentence, and in mixing the bus stories up with cab stories, but goes no further than that.
It does include more details about the earlier of the two incidents, with a quote from Mr Herridge:
“A few months previously I was coming home on the bus and there were some children screaming,” he said. “They were Muslims. The driver pulled over and told me to get off.”
The detail that the driver pulled over and told Mr Herridge to get off, showing that he was already allowed to board and was on the bus after it drove away was curiously absent from the Mail’s version, which claims that Muslim bus drivers refuse to even let guide dogs on buses in the first place. Also absent in this quote is any claim that the driver asked him to leave the bus because the children were Muslim rather than because they were screaming.
How did he know the children were Muslim? Perhaps probing this is what let the getreading reporter know that all he could say with confidence is that they might have been Asian, but we can’t say that for sure.
There is no quote from Mr Herridge that suggests the driver or passengers in the first incident later incident were Muslim.
Categories: Political correctness | Tags: Muslims
This also made the front page of the Sunday Times this week. Online link which is locked behind the daft paywall : http://www.thesundaytimes.co.uk/sto/news/uk_news/Society/article348172.ece
Jeez. It made the front page of the Sunday Times?
I couldn’t even find it at all on the Sun website. And they say the Times hasn’t gone downmarket.
(Still, heres a clue as to where the Mail might have churned the story from).
The story was indeed on the cover of the ST. I was surprised to see it there but then the ST is rather a different paper to The Times. It’s almost as if Rupert takes control on the Sunday edition.
Hi there….
My cousin who was recently blinded in an industrial accident was refused by transport in Rochdale. He got onto the bus and a Muslim mum with kids protested to the driver. There was such a fuss that he decided to get off the bus and and walk the 3 miles to his home…a difficult journey accross many big junctions which his dog didn’t know.
This is a severely disabled man with no religous animosity who I doubt has ever read the Mail.
Shame on those who allowed this to happen. Where is the compassion or understanding?
His sister reported the incident to the local authority who said they were investigating similar reports.
I have not read the Mail story as it is not a newspaper I buy, but was shown the article in yesterday’s Sunday Times.
Best wishes
Carol
Hello Carol.
The situation you describe is unfortunate and I don’t believe anyone on here would wish it on anyone. But one sentence did draw my eye: “There was such a fuss that he decided to get off the bus”.
So he wasn’t asked to leave, nor did he get thrown off?
No-one was holding a (metaphorical) gun to his head?
If it were I in that situation, I’d have stood (sat?) my ground, because I would be in the right – both morally and legally.
“Shame on those who allowed this to happen” I don’t mean to be harsh, but the only person who ALLOWED this to happen is your cousin.
Hi Carol,
Thanks for your story. It must have been horrible for your cousin, and a difficult situation for him to be in.
Whether or not the bus driver ejected him from the bus, it’s clear from the rules quoted by Guide Dogs that he should have been allowed to remain on board.
But this is a story about a passenger objecting. In the stories the Mail quotes, both mothers had screaming, frightened children with them, which would have made the decision difficult for the driver if he didn’t know the proper regulations.
If the children in your cousin’s story were making a similar fuss, that would have been far more likely to have influenced the driver than the woman merely saying she was a Muslim. If not, you have a bus driver making a mistake.
Still, in neither story is there evidence of a ‘Muslim bus driver’, which is the worst of the Mail’s claims.
Um.. I’m assuming you know the one about the RNIB legal officer, the Muslim cab driver and the BBC. (She – Jane Vernon – appears on BBC News 24; BBC books a cab to take her home; cab driver won’t let her guide dog in the car because his religion says dogs are unclean.
You don’t have to trawl very hard to find stories of guide dogs and their owners being refused entry to cabs and restaurants so maybe – and I know it’s far fetched – just maybe there is a real issue here.
Moooooooot!
The piece is about the Mail’s coverage of the bus story. “You don’t have to trawl very hard to find stories..” Not if you work for the Mail, or so it seems.
Yes there is a problem with guide dogs being denied entrance to various public places, but religion isn’t really the main reason for it happening. Its usually on the grounds of public health. So why make it so?
This is about the Mail simply making up a story that falsely portrays Muslims as irrational, incapable of fitting into ‘western’ society. Its a disgrace.
Karlo:
“You don’t have to trawl very hard to find stories of guide dogs and their owners being refused entry to cabs and restaurants so maybe – and I know it’s far fetched – just maybe there is a real issue here.”
Maybe you don’t have to look far for cab driver stories, although yours is four years old and the cab driver was fined because it’s, you know, illegal.
The real issue here is wheter bus drivers are willy-nilly throwing blind people off buses and whether this Mail story shows that they are, since the headline of the story is about how bus drives are refusing to allow guide dogs on buses.
As I said in the original piece, if you wanted to mislead your readers into thinking bus drivers were commonly doing this, mixing the issue up with taxi drivers would be a good way to go about it.
As I have pointed out elsewhere (and I am not a Muslim) working dogs are not deemed to be unclean – this includes guide dogs. As well, nowhere in the Koran does it say that dogs are unclean. This comes from one of the Hadiths of Muhamed (no idea what they are, further sayings of Muhamed possibly) and there are many where he is very pro-dog and a handful where he is anti-dog. In fact, one says “kill all the dogs”.
That said, if a person with a guide or hearing dog is challenged by a Muslim, that Muslim has no idea about their own religion and should be politely pointed towards the nearest cleric for a bit of further education.
My son used to get very distressed when a dog came near him. He still gets nervous. He’s autistic, but like almost all people with autism, you can’t tell that from his appearance. I’m a Muslim convert, but my son’s autism is so severe he doesn’t know what Islam is. No doubt the Mail would put his fear down to me being Muslims, as do some of the professionals who deal with him, no doubt, thanks to this kind of fuckwitted tabloid journalism.
[...] less so than he used to be. However, as a result of recent tabloid lies, ably unpicked by Mail Watch and 5CC, you may have put two and two together, made five and a half, and jumped to the erroneous [...]
Not sure what Islam says about tins of paint, but Transdev Yellow Buses certainly seemed to have believe that they’re unclean and have refused a man service just because of the colour of his paint – and because it was paint. Maybe – and I know it’s far fetched – just maybe there is a real issue here.
When I read quotes like “he thinks some have come from Asian people” I wonder if this was in response to a leading question from a journalist fishing for a specific reply, e.g.
Journalist: “Were these people Asian?”
Reply: “Possibly, now you come to mention it.”
I think the comments clearly came from cat people.
The bigger problem, is, that muslim passengers also demand the guide dog be ordered off the bus. There are 1000s of muslim passengers on our buses, but why should our blind people be embarrased like this because of alien religions? It’s not just the Bus Driver (he probably allowed the guide dog on in the first place), it’s the many muslims who object.
I had an enlightening conversation with a Syrian friend last night and mentioned the issue being debated here.
According to him many Muslims, both Sunni and Shia, believe the dog to be unclean and it would be entirely normal for them to ban a dog (even a guide dog) f rom a bus, taxi, shop or whatever They do not treat dogs well and consider them more than unclean.
However….. he told me more enlightened and less fanatical Muslims have few problems. For example progressive Jordanian royal family have and love dogs, as do many Syrians. I can also testify that dogs are also common and often loved in Palestine and not just by the Christian population there.
As you will know, Syria is the first predominantly Muslim, Arab country to ban the full-face Islamis veils. Its government is fighting against the kind of extreme views that have taken root in some parts of the UK and cannot understand the attitude of some folk in the UK.
I have not read the Mail article, but my Syrian pal told me that the story was covered in the Sunday Times, who one assumes double check stories. Whether true or not it is good to have a debate about these issues and perhaps look towards progressive countries like Syria and Lebanon. Britain seems to be cowed by extreme Muslim views!
‘This is about the Mail simply making up a story that falsely portrays Muslims as irrational, incapable of fitting into ‘western’ society. Its a disgrace.’
Er…..the Mail didn’t so much make up the story as copy it from getreading (or the the Sunday Times). According to getreading the bus company was hoping to ’speak with Muslim leaders’ about the matter. Can anyone suggest why they might have wanted to do that?
It’s only a couple of years since the Muslim Council of Britain issued a fatwa which allowed a guide-dog to enter a Mosque for the first time. Maybe we should recognise that some Muslims do have a problem with dogs
I don’t have a Ray-like knowledge of Islam (so do correct me if I’m wrong) but my understanding is that Muslims consider doggy habits such as licking dead things and rolling round in poo to be more than a wee bit unhygenic. Is that really irrational?
5cc – I picked that particular story because of its RNIB connection – there are plenty of more recent examples of taxi drivers who would rather pay a fine than have a dog in their car. Why do you think that is? (um…I’m fairly sure it’s not because cab drivers earn more money than they know what to do with)
I’m not sure the Mail was claiming that bus drivers were ordering guide dogs off busses willy-nilly, only that it had happened and there were cultural issues involved. Is it really that hard to believe?
Sue C:
“…the Sunday Times, who one assumes double check stories”
It’s probably best not to assume best practice in UK national newspapers. See Nick Davies’ ‘Flat Earth News’ for more.
I haven’t seen the Sunday Times version – may have to bite the bullet and pay Murdoch a quid, but I really don’t want to do that.
Karlo:
“I picked that particular story because of its RNIB connection – there are plenty of more recent examples of taxi drivers who would rather pay a fine than have a dog in their car.”
Do you have evidence that ‘they would rather pay the fine’ and are not just simply ignorant of the rules? And how many do you have?
“I’m not sure the Mail was claiming that bus drivers were ordering guide dogs off busses willy-nilly,[...]”
The headline, with its plural on ‘bus drivers’ and ‘guide dogs’, and the story mixiing the incident in with examples of cab drivers suggests otherwise.
“only that it had happened and there were cultural issues involved,” and the evidence that it had happened seems really weak. This may be the fault of the Sunday Times, but the Mail should have checked before publishing the story.
“Is it really that hard to believe?”
What, that it had happened? With only evidence that some people in four incidents (two of which are not included in the Mail article) might have been Asian, yes it is.
“The bigger problem, is, that muslim passengers also demand the guide dog be ordered off the bus. There are 1000s of muslim passengers on our buses, but why should our blind people be embarrased like this because of alien religions?”
Are the 1,000s of Muslim bus passengers demanding that guide dogs get off buses, or just a few? Is there strong evidence that they’re doing so because of their religious demands and not because they have screaming, frightened children with them?
If so, why didn’t the Mail cover those stories instead of this one, which is far from clear?
Seriously, this article is very poor eviidence that either bus drivers or passengers are regularly having passengers with guide dogs ejected from buses.
I’m not Muslim (atheist, since you didn’t ask) and my daughter isn’t either.
She’s five and a year ago she had a terrible experience with one of those pitbull types that idiots seem to like dragging around. Since then she has been very scared of dogs.
If we were to get on a bus and have a guide dog sat next to us, there is every chance she would react very badly.
Some kids are scared of dogs. If the mail is going to claim that frightened kids are all defacto Muslims then it’ll not be long before they will be announcing planned bans on the dentist and the first day at big school!
I bet all the passengers kicking up a stink were Muslims though. No, I can’t prove it but I bet they were. Call it a hunch on my part. The bus drivers may not have been, but just appeasers of Muslim intolerance. Which kind of strikes me as symbolic of liberal Islam-appeasers in general. And 5cc makes a lot of the hysterical, frightened children angle. Er, excuse me 5cc, the driver could just have told the complainers to move to another part of the bus. Or if the bus was crowded he could have asked for volunteers to swap places with the complainers. A civilised British compromise.
Or, Neander, maybe the bus driver doesn’t give a flying f*** about anyone’s religion, but just wants a quiet bus so he can drive it without being distracted. Just a hunch…
So according to the Mail, Mr Herridge can apparently identify not only a person’s ethnicity, but also their religion, despite being visually impaired to such an extent that he requires a guide dog………?
Neander:
“I bet all the passengers kicking up a stink were Muslims though. No, I can’t prove it but I bet they were. ”
That doesn’t actually matter. The issue with the Mail’s coverage is that it claimed that Muslim bus drivers refuse to allow the dogs on.
Even though some of the passengers were Muslim, there is nothing to suggest that the driver asked Mr Herridge to leave because of religious objections rather than screaming children.
‘ and the evidence that it had happened seems really weak.’ -
er..are you saying that george wasn’t ordered off the bus at all and has made the whole thing up, or that he was ordered off a bus but not by muslims (then by who and why? )
In any case you’re telling us that – just because he’s blind – George is too stupid to know why people are making a fuss about his dog; and that he could not possibly recognise the ethnic background of someone he spoke to (or was spoken to by). Some people (like me) have distinctive accents and it’s possible to guess their ethnicity or home town just by listening to them.
‘If the mail is going to claim that frightened kids are all defacto Muslims’ – and just where did the Mail say that Jimmy ?
And Jimmy the guide dog is only going to sit beside your little girl if you’re in the seats reserved for disabled people – that’s not very nice is it?
If it was me – I would take my hysterical child off the bus rather than force an elderly disabled man to get off – but each to his (or her) own.
Rather than denying there is an issue why don’t you all have a wee look at some of these sites which give some background to the issue. (Then we might have a clue what we’re talking about eh?)
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GPX-74-KRdc. It talks about Mahomed Khatri and his guide dog but also talks about overcoming Muslim concerns about having a dog in the house.
http://www.mobilise.info/infopoint-dogs-and-taxis/
http://www.danielpipes.org/blog/2005/11/muslim-taxi-drivers-vs-seeing-eye-dogs
http://www.islamicconcern.com/dogs.asp
http://www.islamonline.net/servlet/Satellite?cid=1190885985004&pagename=IslamOnline-English-Ask_Scholar%2FFatwaE%2FFatwaEAskTheScholar
More on Islam and public transport:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-10728912
Will it make the Mail?
“More on Islam and public transport…Will it make the Mail?”
Probably. Under the headline “QUICK THINKING DRIVER AVERTS TERROR ATTACK”
“More on Islam and public transport…Will it make the Mail?”
I haven’t spotted that story yet but I did notice a news item from February about buses refusing to stop for Muslim schoolgirls. The headline was : ‘Racist’ school bus drivers ‘refusing to stop for young Muslim girls who are wearing the hijab’
er… not quite as catchy as your headline Phil. It’s kind of funny that the Mail always seems to be more accurate and less prejudiced than most things I read in Mailwatch
Karlo:
“er..are you saying that george wasn’t ordered off the bus at all and has made the whole thing up, or that he was ordered off a bus but not by muslims (then by who and why? )”
No – I’ve explained that already. I’m saying that he was ordered off the bus by the driver in reaction to screaming children. These children may or may not have been Muslim, and the driver was more likely to have asked him to get off the bus because they were screaming rather than because they were Muslims.
Karlo:
“The headline was : ‘Racist’ school bus drivers ‘refusing to stop for young Muslim girls who are wearing the hijab’”
That’s actually quite an interesting story to compare to the one we’re talking about here. Look at the scare quotes around ‘racist’ and ‘refusing to stop…’
The article istelf is full of word like ‘accused’, ‘claimed’, and ‘allegedly’, which are all absent from the story this post is about despite how weak the evidence for what the paper is making definite claims about.
The real reason is probably because of phobic reactions of some children (and adults)… Dog phobia can be just as disabling as blindness… As already noted, it can affect people with other disabilities such as autism. So it’s not disability rights vs religious prejudice but rather, disability rights vs disability rights. I’m not sure how it can be resolved but it’s an important problem that’s being dressed-up.
Anyone not comfortable sitting near a guide dog should get up and leave the bus themselves. Anyone even suggesting that a blind person should leave the bus should themselves be ejected from the bus, and be banned from public transport for a month.
The daily mail is hated by the left and I’ve always wondered the real reason why. I have a theory. One thing I do know is that when you hate someone so intensely its usually because you see something in them that you hate about yourself. Now the daily mail champions middle class values and is very proud of that. Most of the left-wingers that despise the daily mail tend to priviliged middle class types who possess what i call a “guilty conscience”..they hate the fact that they are very middle class and priviliged. This, to me, explains why they hate the daily mail so much…they see that it champions the very ideas and values that they hate so much about themselves…these leftist idiots think you should be ashamed to be middle class and guilty…the mail on the other hand loves the idea of being middle class.
I’m sorry but that is, i think, the real reason why the left hates the mail, just a bunch of self righteous middle class left-wing suckers with a guilty conscience
Can’t understand why so many Brits are so comfortable defending Islamic extremism.
Liberal muslims, like the brilliant journalist Yasmin Akibhai-Brown (who recently spoke out about niqab and herself a victim of oppression) and now the Syrian government, are trying to fight ignorance and oppression and yet there are people out there trying to defend it or deny it doesn’t exist.
Of course there are many extremists here in UK who demand that their women be fully covered and consider it a dishonour worthy if they marry out of the faith (often resulting in honour killing). a Considering dogs unclean is just a tiny part of this illogical thinking. The worst is the denial of the extraordinarily brutal Ottoman genocide of the Armenian Christians in 1915, a denail which is perpetuated by the Turkish Government today…why are we not discussing that rather than what the Daily Mail publishes. Why are we not fighting for the human rights of those who have suffered at the hands of fanatics.
Keesha
Let;s talk about something more serious!
[...] that suggests the driver or passengers in the first incident later incident were Muslim. source. I came upon this excellent piece of research whilst following up, to see if anyone had yet [...]
Karlo: Linking to Daniel Pipes – probably the world’s leading advocate of all-out world war to eliminate Islam, and someone who apparently spends almost his entire life gathering any and all negative stories about Muslims in order to incite others to hate them too – when attempting to convince even marginally sane people of your point of view is probably unwise.
“Even though some of the passengers were Muslim …”
Where was this proved?
Nowhere.
Martin
July 23rd, 2010 at 12:26 pm
“More on Islam and public transport:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-10728912
Will it make the Mail?”
Talking of double checking stories – http://lydall.standard.co.uk/2010/07/truth-about-muslim-students-forced-off-bus-for-wearing-veil.html
Odd that a story about Muslim girls being thrown off a bus doesn’t generate the same level of scepticism from the OP and contributors to this site.
If one wasn’t a man of the cloth one might conclude that you are a bunch of racist fucknuts.
“why are we not discussing that rather than what the Daily Mail publishes” – please see your current URL for further details.
“The daily mail is hated by the left and I’ve always wondered the real reason why. I have a theory.”
I can’t speak for the left, but I can tell you why I don’t like the Mail – actually, I already have. Please click the ‘Five Chinese Crackers’ link on the right hand menu.
Terry Coleman:
““Even though some of the passengers were Muslim …”
Where was this proved?
Nowhere.”
You’re right – but I have perhaps naively given the Sunday Times and Mr Herridge the benefit of the doubt.
Martin
July 23rd, 2010 at 12:26 pm
“More on Islam and public transport:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-10728912
Will it make the Mail?”
Talking of double checking stories – http://lydall.standard.co.uk/2010/07/truth-about-muslim-students-forced-off-bus-for-wearing-veil.html
Odd that a story about Muslim girls being thrown off a bus doesn’t generate the same level of scepticism from the OP and contributors to this site.
My son is autistic and has a service dog because of it. There’s a school for autistic children in California which uses dog training as a way to reach autistic children. Of course, they don’t take children who are afraid of dogs. My son is also afraid of the color yellow [xanthophobia]. Should we make people wearing yellow get off the bus? If riding the bus is too overwhelming for an autistic person, there are alternatives available. In the States there are low cost ride services for people too disabled to take the bus. That’s what my son uses.
I quite like the fact that I was born in one of the richest countries in the world with the freedom to do and say what I like. I find it a bit offensive that the tabloids abuse that freedom so badly. I don’t feel any guilt about being richer than 90% of the world – why should I? However I’d like Mail readers to realise how extraordinarily lucky and privileged we Brits are to live here and to stop being so damn negative about this quite frankly wonderful country. I’ve been to the immigrant-, crime- and crap politican-free paradises of Spain, France and Australia and to be honest I’d much rather live here.
Yes, Uk is the best place to live, probably in the world in terms of human rights. So why do people keep knocking it?
Do some of you guys really want an extreme muslim state here that condones: stoning of women, female genital mutilation; the niquab, banning of dogs; banning of alcohol etc. Go live in Saudi then or in Afghanistan. Go be a woman in those countries, like my mother was. Maybe even a fate worse than reading the Daily Mail! Why do you guys get so worked up about a newspaper! Go read some of the Arabic newspapers and see what you think. See how they think of Westerners as pigs. Why are Muslims tarred with this brush? Why are Brits such naive people about what is happening in the rest of the world. Get real. Think about important things, not your narrow political agenda.
And talk about David Cameron’s despicable toadying to Turkey. A country which surpresses the Kurds brutally, and still the Armenians after genocide. 20,000 political prisoners…and no one in UK says a thing….just whinging about the f…….Dail Mail. Britain is soft and naive.
Keesha:
Umm, yes. Could you let me know how what any of what you just said has anything to do with whether or not the Mail was being misleading about bus drivers banning guide dogs?
Seriously. Saying that a paper has exaggerated or invented something is not equal to wanting an extreme Muslim state that condones teh eevils.
Just to add:
Perhaps it’s the existence of newspaper stories like these that make the connection between Muslims and evil plots to take over easier for some people to swallow.
I don’t need to read Arabic newspapers to know that I want newspapers in my country to be better than what you say Arabic ones are.
Holly:
Sorry if I wasn’t clear enough about this in the OP or comments – I don’t think the man with the guide dog should have been told to get off the bus. I think that the Mail has exaggerated a story about bus drivers who probably asked a man with a guide dog to get off a bus because his dog was upsetting children, which created the problem.
I don’t think anyone here (and feel free to jump in here anybody) is arguaing that the driver should have told the man to get off the bus. I’m certainly not – not least because of the ability these stories have of spreading and making bus drivers think they are supposed to not let guide dogs on a bus if there are Muslims on board.
I’d also be iinterested to see if these stories had anything to do with the driver refusing two Muslim women, mentioned earlier in the thread.
Keesha
A few deeply personal thoughts.
Yes, I think you’re right, the UK is one the best places to live in the world.
I don’t think I’ve ever knocked it personally, unlike the supposedly patriotic tabloid press who constantly report it in a negative way. The people I disagree with are those who think the country is in some way effortlessly superior.
I’m sure the Mail et al would love to represent all foreigners, including people born here but descended from immigrants, as pigs, but this would be crossing a line so they are more subtle about it.
Why are Muslims tarred with this brush? Partly because of the way the tabloid press misrepresent them I should think.
Why are Brits such naive people about what is happening in the rest of the world? I don’t entirely agree that they are, but there’s only so much you can take it even from more conscientious news organisations.
Personally I have no political agenda. I’m quite willing to listen to extreme views and can sometimes see their point, I just don’t necessarily agree with their conclusions or methods.
“Anyone not comfortable sitting near a guide dog should get up and leave the bus themselves” – if someone is dog-phobic and the dog is at the front of the bus, this is simply not possible.
“If riding the bus is too overwhelming for an autistic person, there are alternatives available” – increasingly not so. There are no special buses here, the only real alternative is to use taxis, which are expensive, and of course the government is trying to kick people with psychological problems off mobility allowances. Unfortunately many parents will also insist on taking their children places they really shouldn’t be, which is where some of the screaming children come from. Dog-phobic people and blind people should both get to use buses, but obviously can’t use the same buses – I don’t see why blind people should automatically have first choice over dog-phobic people, a disability is no less real because it’s psychological. Maybe the bus company should be required to pay for a taxi if someone can’t ride because of two incompatible disabilities, with some kind of subsidy for this eventuality.
PS: yes, there are some rare phobias which are very hard to manage, and some autistic people will never be able to use buses for reasons of sensory input, but dog phobias are common, dogs on buses are rare (dog phobic people would not normally avoid using buses) and it seems to me very arbitrary to say that people with one disability should have allowances made and not people with a different disability. Actually there’s a lot which could be done – and needs to be done to make public spaces more accessible, particularly in terms of sensory input and anxiety, and even today with something as basic as wheelchair access – we can’t start down the path of saying “if someone has a disability and can’t cope with public spaces they can’t use them” because that negates the argument for letting guide dogs in any places that dogs aren’t usually allowed in (if they can’t cope with it without taking a dog in, they should use “other options”). Yellow-free might be too tricky (presumably this can happen with other colours too), but so are a few physical disabilities, e.g. electromagnetic hypersensitivity. This is no excuse for ignoring things which *can* be enabled.
PPS: Britain is *not* one of the best countries in the world, on several rankings – see especially the Privacy International world map, the global subjective happiness map, the Human Development Index, rankings for CCTV density and DNA coverage, percentage in prison, and human rights reports. It isn’t really fair to compare with poor Third World countries because the situation is entirely different (the state may be more repressive but its reach is much less); out of the bracket of rich countries, Britain does not do at all well on a number of indicators. Don’t get me wrong, on one level I love Britain, but I can’t stand the way the authoritarians have ruined it.
Sorry, meant to say: IF one starts arguing “if someone has a disability and can’t cope with public spaces they can’t use them”, THEN we would logically have to say “if they can’t cope with it without taking a dog in, they should use other options”… my own view is guide dogs should be able to go everywhere, with the proviso that proper allowance has to be made for people with dog phobias or allergies.
The Muslim thing is a total distraction: if a Muslim was touchy enough about supposed uncleanliness to not want to share a bus with a guide dog, they’d also be touchy enough to not want to share a bus with unveiled women, people playing forbidden music on their headphones, and people who might have pork sandwiches in their bags, and they would probably take a rather Amish approach to life.
maybe Mr Herridge was made to feel like he had to get off the bus ………
in addition to this ,, i am a muslim sunni and I AM TRAING A GUIDE DOG PUPPY for the Guide Dogs For The Blind Association UK , and to be honest they are Clean and th prophet MUHAMMED (SAW) was PRO Dog , and guide dogs are now ALLOWED in mosques !!!! and im telling you ,, that it feels great to know the dog im training is going to make a change to someones life !!!!
Rev Samuel Ham-Pole:
Apologies, but email notification of your comment only just arrived in my inbox. Anyway:
“Odd that a story about Muslim girls being thrown off a bus doesn’t generate the same level of scepticism from the OP and contributors to this site.”
Three things.
1. The OP was written three days before this BBC report, so it would be impossible to show skepticism of it in the OP.
2. That report was on the BBC, not in the Daily Mail. This is MailWatch, and we look at news reported in the Daily Mail here.
3. The BBC report includes important things like quotation marks around claims, the word ‘claimed’ to make clear that the report is not saying this definitely happened and full quotes from the people making the claims. The Mail does not put any claims in quotation marks, says outright that something happened that the person in the story didn’t even claim and includes only partial quotes fom him and other people, which could lead readers to believe that they’ve backed up the headline’s claim when they haven’t.
There is no need to be skeptical of the BBC report, because it is only reporting that some people have claimed something hapened and that it is being looked into. (The Mail actually made the same precautions in a similar story about bus drivers not pickiing up Muslim students).
The Mail actually says something happened with nothing to back it up, not even a quote from Mr Herridge. He may not even have made the claim in the headline at all.
Do you see the difference?
Apart from the obviously bad journalism, I believe the issue here is our placing the desires of children above the needs of a blind man. Many children I encounter on public transport are selfish and over indulged, the children and their overindulgent mother should have been told that they should get off and catch the next bus. I know I’m sounding like a Mail reader but when I were a lad, I would never have sat (particularly in preferrential seating) whilst an adult, any adult, would have stood. I don’t think teaching children manners will stunt their development and it would sure make life more pleasant for the rest of us. Before anyone thinks I am having a go at Muslims, I find the parents of what appear to be anglo middle class children some of the worst when it comes to pandering to their little darlings.
I just had a thought. Perhaps if the family were obviously Muslim (and there’s only vague hearsay that they were) the driver felt the possible kerfuffle after asking them to get off the bus would have been worse than the objections of a blind man.
Hi guys….just touched on the website again and interested to read all your comments…good stuff and I don’t knock anyone’s opinions. But please do not (as someone did) equate Musilms with Arabs. Many Muslims are non-Arab (the Iraqis and Turks for example) and many Arabs are not
Muslim. There are many Arab Christians in the world (like the Copts in Egypt and Lebanese people). Sadly many of them are persecuted as most of us know….But to get back to the dog scenario….who knows whether the story in The Mail and The Sunday Times was accurate or not but it is absolutely possible that it was….all I know is that most extreme Muslims do not like dogs or pigs for reasons which can easly be sourced in the Koran. In Aleppo (Syria) once I saw a guy torturing and slaughtering puppies in front of the mother and a group of boys laughtng and say this would please Alah. It was not nice sight. i think in UK people do not realize how things happen in mainly Muslim countries. Would you like Shiria law here in UK? Many asylum seekers here in Uk have come here to escape these attitutes, do what’s wrong with Daily Mail exposing them?
Hi guys….just touched on the website again and interested to read all your comments…good stuff and I don’t knock anyone’s opinions. But please do not (as someone did) equate Musilms with Arabs. Many Muslims are non-Arab (the Iraqis and Turks for example) and many Arabs are not
Muslim. There are many Arab Christians in the world (like the Copts in Egypt and Lebanese people). Sadly many of them are persecuted as most of us know….But to get back to the dog scenario….who knows whether the story in The Mail and The Sunday Times was accurate or not but it is absolutely possible that it was….all I know is that most extreme Muslims do not like dogs or pigs for reasons which can easly be sourced in the Koran. In Aleppo (Syria) once I saw a guy torturing and slaughtering puppies in front of the mother and a group of boys laughtng and say this would please Alah. It was not nice sight. i think in UK people do not realize how things happen in mainly Muslim countries. Would you like Shiria law here in UK? Many asylum seekers here in Uk have come here to escape this kinda stuff
To Sue C:
Forgive me, but I wouldn’t be too quick to praise Syria. It’s a Ba’athist, one-party dictatorship with a decidedly dodgy human rights record. It is highly debatable whether or not we should take our moral cue from them on these issues.
Thanks JB. Appeciate your words on Ba’athist party and human rights, but at least they have let Christians and other minorities into their government and have even sanctioned a memorial to the Armenian Genocide (which they have always abhored as the remaining Armenian population took refuge in their country, mainly Aleppo). I agree we shouldn’t take our moral cue from them, but I think in the context of Middle East politics some Ba’thists are moving in the right direction. It is so difficult for us in western democrities to judge, but to me the Syrians are more liberal and enlightened than the Turks and always have been. Turkey should never be admitted to the EU until it recognised the terrible atrocity it committed in 1915 – 22 and the human rights abuses which still exist today.
At the moment we still live in a free society, was the Mail right or wrong? Let ten dogs, get on ten buses in a Muslim area and report the findings.
Look this website seems to be so left and so overly liberal and politically correct to such an extent that you have totally barred the truth or common sense. If the Daily mail says that Muslim taxi and bus drivers are refusing dogs on board full stop including obviously guide dogs then some actual investigation into why that may be so is in order. you can’t just have the attitude that Islam is a nice religion so it can’t be true. That would be ridiculous. So here is some evidence that their is a strong possibility that they might be refusing guide dogs on religious grounds. I got this from an Islamic website.
AHADITH ON DOGS
Malik Al-Muwatta . Hadith 54.13: Malik related to me from Nafi from Abdullah ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, “Whoever acquires a dog other than a sheepdog or hunting dog, will have two qirats deducted from the reward of his good actions every day.”
Sahih Muslim. Hadith 551. Narrated byAbdullah Ibn Mughaffal: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) ordered killing of the dogs and then said: What about them, i.e. about other dogs? – and then granted concession (to keep) the dog for hunting and the dog for (the security) of the herd, and said: When the dog licks the utensil, wash it seven times, and rub it with earth the eighth time.
Malik Al-Muwatta. Hadith 31.68: Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab from Abu Bakr ibn Abd ar-Rahman ibn al-Harith ibn Hisham from Abu Masud al-Ansari that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade the sale price of a dog, the earnings of a prostitute and the earnings of a fortune teller. By the earnings of a prostitute he meant what a woman was given for fornication. The earnings of a fortune teller were what he was given to tell a fortune. Malik said, “I disapprove of the price of a dog, whether it is a hunting dog or otherwise because the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade the price of a dog.”
Al-Tirmidhi. Hadith 4102. Narrated by Abdullah ibn Mughaffal: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said, “Were dogs not a species of creature I should command that they all be killed; but kill every pure black one.” AbuDawud and Darimi transmitted it. Tirmidhi and Nasa’i added, “No family attaches itself to a dog without a qirat of their good deeds being deducted daily, except in the case of a hunting dog, a farm dog, or a sheepdog.”
Sahih Al-Bukhari 3:515. Narrated Abu Huraira: I heard Allah’s Apostle (saw) saying; “Angels (of Mercy) do not enter a house wherein there is a dog or a picture of a living creature (a human being or an animal).”
Sahih Muslim. Narrated ‘Aisha: Gabriel made a promise with Allah’s Messenger (saw) to come at a definite hour; that hour came but he did not visit him. And there was in his hand (in the hand of Allah’s Apostle) a staff. He threw it from his hand and said: Never has Allah or His messengers (angels) ever broken their promise. Then he cast a glance (and by chance) found a puppy under his cot and said: Aisha, when did this dog enter here? She said: By Allah, I don’t know. He then commanded and it was turned out. Then Gabriel came and Allah’s Messenger (saw) said to him: You promised me and I waited for you, but you did not come, whereupon he said: It was the dog in your house which prevented me (to come), for we (angels) do not enter a house in which there is a dog or a picture.
“Look this website seems to be so left and so overly liberal and politically correct to such an extent that you have totally barred the truth or common sense.”
Why thank you!
“If the Daily mail says that Muslim taxi and bus drivers are refusing dogs on board full stop including obviously guide dogs then some actual investigation into why that may be so is in order.”
Nope. The first thing to find out with the Daily Mail is *whether* what the paper says is true. It often isn’t.
If you can find any concrete evidence that any of the bus drivers in the stories in this article refused guide dogs because they were Muslim, feel free to share it here. I can save you some time though – there isn’t any. The paper is making a fanciful leap from a blind man saying some passengers *might have been* Asian to saying the drivers were Muslim that has no foundation anywhere in the article.
“you can’t just have the attitude that Islam is a nice religion so it can’t be true.”
Please show where I’ve said that. My attitude is that the Mail story sounds unlikely and has no evidence to back it up.
“So here is some evidence that their is a strong possibility that they might be refusing guide dogs on religious grounds”
This is just evidence that some Islamic texts say nasty things about dogs, and the opening bit suggests leeway for working dogs. (Remember, very few people take their religious texts literally. It’s why Christians don’t stone adultresses to death and they’re allowed to eat prawns if they like).
It is not evidence that Muslim bus drivers are refusing guide dogs. Remember, the MCB has worked with Guide Dogs, and the Islamic Council allows dogs in mosques. Plenty of Muslims don’t take that Hadith literally.
If you’ve got actual evidence that Muslim bus drivers are routinely refusing to allow guide dogs on buses (and remember – a blind man saying some passengers who objected to his dog *might* have been Asian does not count as evidence that the *driver* was a Muslim at all) please show it here.
Just a thought?
If the man was blind, how would be know what nationality or religion the bus driver or passengers were!!!