The drunk, the taxi driver, and a spy camera.

[McDuck]

A fairly entertaining, (hidden camera) video, of a drunk; expressing his concern over a taxi driver’s possible connection to extreme religious fundamentalism. It may not be eloquent, but it conveys the basic idea.

It’s sort of sold by the media as a racist rant, but it seems more like religious or cultural friction to me. (As far as I’m aware, “Islam” covers (several variants) of a philosophical movement, not a “race”).

Anyone have a video link to the very start of the trip?-(to see what kicked the whole thing off).

See here for report.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/article.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10904714

[speights boy]

a fairly entertaining, (hidden camera) video,

you cannot be serious !

Totally unacceptable, no ifs, no buts.

[McDuck]

[B][SIZE=3]you cannot be serious !

Drunks are generally hard to take seriously; my judgement is on hold until I see the whole conversation. How do I know that the drunk isn't matching BS with BS?

[grip]

Being drunk is no excuse. Totally unacceptable. Gregory Shuttleworth deserves to be publicly named and shamed, and prosecuted.

Here we have 4mins and 33secs of footage filled with abuse.
What scares me more is the fact that some Kiwis are making excuses for him by saying he's drunk and it's only BS and it's Invercargill etc etc.

[McDuck]

Being drunk is no excuse. Totally unacceptable.

And you’re not even curious about what happened in the previous four minutes? I am. The way the conversation runs in, leads me to suspect that there’s more to this.

[Leftette]

You're implying the driver did something to provoke him. 1. It's still no excuse. 2. Why would a businessman, in this case a taxi driver, do/say anything to annoy his customers (first)?

[McDuck]

You're implying the driver did something to provoke him. 1. It's still no excuse. 2. Why would a businessman, in this case a taxi driver, do/say anything to annoy his customers (first)?

I’m saying, I want to see the whole event - from the start of the pickup.

[Learning]

Hidden camera? I thought all NZ taxies had to have an active camera by law now?

[speights boy]

I’m saying, I want to see the whole event - from the start of the pickup.

Let's just assume for a moment that Mr Humayun is without fault in this incident.

Would you still find the video "fairly entertaining" ?

[grip]

It's not a hidden camera.
The customer was informed there was a video camera running and YET he abused the taxi driver
He even insisted that the driver was threatening him with the video camera.

If you review the footage, it's clear this is not an argument or a case of the passenger being provoked. The conversation seemed casual and almost entirely one-sided abuse by the passenger.

Unfortunately some people need to be publicly shamed to learn their lesson.
Just pity his wife and kids who will now be tarred with the same racist brush.

[Mark_B]

There's no excuse for that sort of behaviour, drunk or not.

I don't buy excuses like "such and such is only like that when they're drunk", or "it is only the alcohol talking". Nup. My own personal theory is that if you're a loudmouth a-hole when you're drunk, chances are you're really a loudmouth a-hole when you're sober - you're just more circumspect about it.

[Keys]

I’m saying, I want to see the whole event - from the start of the pickup.

Totally agree with this standpoint on the matter.

[Leftette]

Interesting that the man himself isn't touting that viewpoint. He's all apologetic now (but still has issues with Muslims).

[grip]

Interesting that the man himself isn't touting that viewpoint. He's all apologetic now (but still has issues with Muslims).

Even if the customer was provoked, there's still no excuse for this attack.
But if there's any reason for him to behave like an idiot, the customer would've said so.
The customer did not proffer any explanation for his behaviour.

There's a huge difference between having an opinion (we should have fewer immigrants) and being abusive ("F*** off back to where you come from'').

[Leftette]

That's what I meant, grip. Keys and McDuck both wonder what the preceding minutes contained, wondering if there was a lead-in or some kind of antagonising remark by the cabbie. That's no excuse, as I said in an earlier post. What I meant above was that IF the preceding minutes proved the guy was provoked, he'd be shouting that from the rooftops, but is not. Therefore I'm willing to bet in the minutes leading up to his rant there was just more effing and blinding and general all-round arseholeishness from the man in question.