So I'm sitting here counting down to when the ACLU is going to step in and end this blatant discriminatory profiling.
Much less having their airport privileges yanked by the airport authority for refusing legitimate customers.

/crickets

This is an issue that should be solved by the market.

Specifically, cab companies should fire the drivers that refuse to drive people with booze, and independent cabbies should lose their airport taxi license. Then they can find other jobs.

Absolutely. I'm surprised that the airport authorities are going along with this. We're not talking about open containers. These are bottles in people's bags, and most were probably purchased in an airport duty-free somewhere.

Perhaps the free market will...as seen in the comments on LGF.
"Hundreds of Muslim cabdrivers at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport may soon be required to put different colored lights atop their vehicles after refusing to take customers they know are carrying alcohol." "...and airport officials hope to have the lights ready by year’s end."
Soon enough 'customers' will be able to ID the Muslim cabbies, and avoid them like the plauge.

Not all passengers debarking in M/SP will be from there to know the deal. If the bottles are in the luggage or in a bag, are the pointers going to ask passengers if they are "carrying"?
Maybe they can put up stands that say 'alcohol' and 'no alcohol'.

Ridiculous. And I don't even drink alcohol.

Exactly. And ...

"...and airport officials hope to have the lights ready by year’s end."

... is ridiculous accomodation. Those lights cost money. The airport. Money.

Ayup... public funds used to identify a religious minority that is refusing to assimulate into American society and is instead trying to impose their belief system on us. Its not really accomodation, more like surrender, to Sharia Law...Islam.
Just another small step down the path to assimulation, into the Caliphate.

That's a bit dramatic. But yes, it's stupid.

I call them the way I see them Bill.
Tell me why the airport authority in capitulating to the muslim cabbies religious belifs is not surrendering their authority and consequently letting the muslims dictate that their religious laws be obeyed by non-believers.

Tell me why the airport authority in capitulating to the muslim cabbies religious belifs is not surrendering their authority and consequently letting the muslims dictate that their religious laws be obeyed by non-believers.

Well, I can't tell you that. Though there is an argument to be made that if the airport is hard up for cabbies and has a labor shortage, they are simply forced into a crappy market solution.

BUT:

#1 I doubt that that is true.

#2 I do agree that they are letting bs cultural sensitivities cause them to ask "how high" when these unassimilated cabbies say "jump."

But the rest of your comment, talking about surrender to Sharia and steps to the Caliphate, is a little dramatic. We are not Europe. 10% of our population is not unassimilated Muslims. Our Muslim population is a little over 1%, and most of them are more assimilated. And there are enough "live free or die" hardasses - including the proprieter of this blog and probably you - left in this country that we won't come anywhere close to Sharia.

Therefore, your comment is a bit dramatic, is all I'm saying. There are plenty of Muslims in DC, be they cabbies, store clerks, pedestrians, etc. I've never had a problem or been told to "submit" to them regarding anything. And if I was, I'd share some colloquial English that advises them how to fellate themselves, in the spirit of cultural understanding.

Creeping dhimmitude.

Please explain to me how this situation is any different than that of the pharmacist who refuses to provide birth control prescription to a customer because of his or her personal religious convictions against birth control? Or the medical professional who refuses to provide medical treatment to a patient they think is gay, again, under the pretext of personal religious convictions?

There is NO distinction. Its the same And its wrong.

What happens when the Muslim cabbies decide they'll no longer provide service to people who 'look like Jews' because of their own personal convictions? Shall we continue to accomodate their anachronistic 7th century religious doctrines?

Sheesh.... http://www.dhimmitude.org/

You're right Bernie. However, if a doctor refuses to perform abortions because of his religious beliefs, I don't believe the government should try to force him to do so. It is hard to draw the line, sometimes.

So where exactly is the difference between these idiots and their "choice", and the pharmacists' "choice" to deny service for women wishing to fill birth-control prescriptions?

what is that noise?...ohhh, it's the Wahhhh-bulance

Ya, perhaps a tad dramatic but still spot on.
They made the demand and the airport authorities that issue taxi licenses capitulated.
Labor shortage or not if it was up to me they'd be getting fares anywhere else but the airport.

Free market my ass. If I didn't let them into my cab because they were carrying goat meat, I'd lose my hack license for discrimination. If I have to legally rent them my apartment regardless of their cultural quirks, then I am legally entitled to rent their cab for transportation regardless of my own.