The story, by Ameet Sachdev of the Chicago Tribune, opens with the following two paragraphs:
CHICAGO - Every day for nearly 30 years, Walid Elkhatib has sold doughnuts. Glazed, chocolate frosted, Bavarian Kreme and other varieties. As a Dunkin' Donuts franchisee, he expanded the menu to include breakfast sandwiches, such as egg and cheese bagels.
But he drew the line at serving sandwiches with sausage, ham or bacon because his Muslim faith forbids him from eating or handling pork -- a departure from company policy that led Dunkin' Donuts in 2002 to threaten it would take away his two Chicago-area franchises.
So here is the gist of the matter. For 30 years Walid Elkhatib has been a voluntary participant in a franchise owned and controlled by Dunkin’ Donuts. He has been enabled to establish a business and build a clientele using the name owned by Dunkin’ Donuts. He agreed to operate by their rules. But now that the company has grown and has added menu items that Mr. Khatib discriminates against according to his racial and religious tenets, now he wants to force the company to abide by his beliefs. He wants the US courts to force this company to accept Islam’s discrimination as company policy.
Now Mr. Elkhatib has every right to operate his own business and practice this Muslim discrimination against those who do not believe that pork is forbidden. He has every right to own and operate a donut shop that practices according to Islamic rules and commandments. He has every right to hold to his racial and religious tenets in his business practices.
However, he is not content to do this. He wants the US courts to intervene and to give him the power to violate his contract with Dunkin’ Donuts. He wants the US courts to step in and take over Dunkin’ Donuts to make it comply with the religion of Islam.
This is very disturbing, even frightening. According to the article his anti-American and unconstitutional case has been permitted to continue in the courts for FIVE YEARS.
This case should never even have made it past his attorney’s desk, let alone to be entered into the legal process.
This is how Islam wars against peace loving people who are well established as a people so as to be indomitable by force. When able, Islam advances upon weaker people by force. But when a people is too strong, they make treaties and contracts that present the facade of peaceable relations, until by little bites they chew their way into a position of dominance. Then they force their ways upon the people.
Lying and deceit are not forbidden to Muslims who are dealing with non-Muslims. In fact, their god himself declares that he leads people astray according to his own pleasure, and permits his people to do likewise in their dealings with non-Muslims. Actually, this strategy is commanded when it appears to be expedient.
This court case truly should cause Americans to be alarmed. For unlike the practices of the Bible upon which the Declaration of Independence and the US Constitution are constructed, Islam is not tolerant of others. While the biblical tenets incorporated into the Constitution forbid actions that do harm to others and also militate against stealing away the rights of others that do not injure the commonwealth, Islam only protects those who embrace Allah as their god.
Walid Elkhatib demonstrates no concern whatsoever for the well-being of Dunkin’ Donuts and his fellow franchise owners. If Dunkin’ Donuts is forced by the courts to allow Walid Elkhatib to violate their policies, their company will no longer have any control over how the franchise participants operate. Menu items will no longer be consistent throughout the company. Ingredients will no longer be uniformly used. Soon the name of Dunkin’ Donuts will become nothing more than a reflection of what once was.
As Mr. Elkhatib is fully aware, the name is what makes a franchise valuable. It is the reason that he purchased franchise rights rather than using his own name. How many people would be enticed to stop at a restaurant named, Elkhatib’s Donuts?
No, he knows the value of a franchise name. He knows the power of national recognition, power gained through the united efforts of those who produced the same menu items made of the same ingredients according to the same standards and offered at the same prices throughout the company. Now he wants to steal that name from all the others in the company. He wants the courts to take what Dunkin’ Donuts represents and force it into conformity with the nation of Islam.
The really frightening reality of this matter is that Mr. Elkhatib will probably get his way. After all, this has been the pattern of the US courts since at least the 1960's. This has been the way that much of America has adopted for a very long time.
Just look at the names that are used on the many churches that claim to be Christian. How many are there? Yet they all claim the name of Christian. Even the YMCA and the YWCA still use the name of Christian, but it really has no part whatsoever in what these organizations do. Most churches are of that same mold. They use the name of Christian, and then perhaps also some denominational name, but the practices of the local congregations do not hold to any consistent form.
Since, then, so many Americans have permitted the name that supposedly is of everlasting importance to them to be misused and disenfranchised in such ways, who will object if the same is done to Dunkin’ Donuts? Moreover, who will stand up and say “No” to the Islamic war machine that is being established in the nation, little by little edifying the fortresses that will be used to destroy the “Liberty and Justice for all” that our pledge of allegiance has declared in conformity with our founding documents?