Mark Steyn and his publisher were hauled up before a kangaroo court (a.k.a. Human Rights Tribunal) in British Columbia by Muslims “upset” at a quotation from a Muslim imam that appeared in an extract from Steyn’s book that was published in Macleans. That is a high profile case that will be fought in a real court room if the kangaroo court does not dismiss the charges.

The little people have less of a chance standing up to Muslim demands. Take this case in Britain, that Solomonia picked up on. A hair salon owner advertised for an assistant stylist. A Muslim woman applied. She wore a headscarf that covered all her hair to the interview. She wanted the job but she wouldn’t take off the scarf while working. From the Mail report:

A few days later, Bushra duly arrived at the salon.

‘I have to say I didn’t take to her,’ says Sarah. ‘She waltzed into the salon and hung up her coat as though she already had the job.

‘Naturally, I noticed her headscarf. But I presumed that, as she’s a hairdresser, she’d take if off when she was working. In 16 years, I’ve never known any stylist cover their hair with a headscarf. And this particular headscarf came all the way down to her eyebrows and covered her entire hairline.’

Sarah broached the subject with Bushra, who said she would not be removing the garment.

After ten minutes, with the interview complete, Sarah said she would come back to Bushra about the vacancy.

‘As she left, Bushra turned to me and said that she’d been turned down for jobs before,’ says Sarah. ‘And I admit I thought: “Well, what do you expect?”

‘It was not a religious matter. If she’d come in wearing a baseball cap and saying she wouldn’t take it off for work, then she wouldn’t have got the job either.’

This sounds like that old Peter Cook/Dudley Moore skit about a man applying for the part of Tarzan:

Peter: I noticed that, Mr. Spigott. When you have been in the business as long as I have you come to notice these things almost instinctively. Now, Mr. Spigott, you, a one-legged man, are applying for the role of Tarzan — a role which, traditionally, involves the use of a two-legged actor.

Dudley: Correct.

Peter: And yet you, a unidexter, are applying for the role.

Dudley: Right.

Peter: A role for which two legs would seem to be the minimum requirement.

Dudley: Very true.

Peter: Well, Mr. Spigott, need I point out to you where your deficiency lies as regards landing the role?

Dudley: Yes, I think you ought to.

Peter: Need I say with overmuch emphasis that it is in the leg division that you are deficient.

Dudley: The leg division?

Peter: Yes, the leg division, Mr. Spigott. You are deficient in it — to the tune of one. Your right leg I like. I like your right leg. A lovely leg for the role. That’s what I said when I saw you come in. I said ‘A lovely leg for the role.’ I’ve got nothing against your right leg. The trouble is — neither have you. You fall down on your left.

Dudley: You mean it’s inadequate?

Peter: Yes, it’s inadequate, Mr. Spigott. And, to my mind, the British public is not ready for the sight of a one-legged ape-man swinging through the jungly tendrils.

The British public (the non-Muslim, at least) aren’t ready for an alternative hair sylist who won’t show her own hair. But the PC police have done their best to destroy Sarah. She may well lose her business and livelihood over this case. Common sense has gone out of the window in Britain and Canada.

Steyn’s “America Alone” looks more and more like a roadmap to the future.