Tuesday, July 08, 2008

Have the police gone barking mad?

A man’s best friend is his dog, unless you are a Muslim councillor in Scotland who found this advertisement so offensive he complained, received an apology, and was assured that no ‘unclean animal’ would feature again in such a campaign. Is this what the Lord Chief Justice had in mind when he advocated Shari’a law in the UK?

Cranmer was not going to bother commenting on this ridiculous story. He is acutely aware that such absurdities are driving most British Muslims to distraction. They are of the view that some of their British co-religionists are among the most intolerant in the world. The tolerant and sensible Muslims happen to believe that Britain’s accommodation of such people is appeasement and offensive to British identity and culture.

But now one police story has been overtaken by another of such startling absurdity that even the Lord Chief Justice must be regretting his ill-considered words.

Apparently, police sniffer dogs will have to adhere to Shari’a Law and wear ‘bootees’ (with rubber soles, no less) when searching the homes of Muslims so as not to cause offence. The Association of Chief Police Officers (Acpo) has drawn up ‘guidelines’ on ‘religious sensitivities’ when using dogs to search for drugs and explosives.

So, people who deal in drugs and explosives are to have their ‘religious sensitivities’ respected, such that, presumably, if Rex has forgotten to pack his little bootees, there shall be a delay in the recovery of evidence. And it is even more alarming that Muslims will have the right to object to Rex being in their house at all. Is this the real reason the Government needs 42 days?

The dhimmi police are effectively treating every Muslim home as a mosque; acknowledging that even a canine search warrant must respect the Dar al-Islam. As sure as night follows twilight, this will lead to demands that only Muslim police officers search Muslim houses and businesses, for the kuffar are all unclean.

And will the police view it as a crime to walk one’s dog in Bradford or Leicester, lest its mere presence in a ‘Muslim area’ might offend someone?

Cranmer awaits the protest of animal rights groups against the specieists and for causing distress to Rex by forcing him to wear bootees.

And Cranmer wonders, when the next Labour activist knocks on his door, if he may be free to declare the species unclean? And he shall insist, should the police ever wish to enter his humble abode, that they adhere to his sensitivities and custom of removing their shoes and donning slippers. And Rex shall be more welcome than they.

By the way, Peter Oborne and the Dispatches team may wish to note that this is not an Islamophobic article, but one that highlights the absurdity of policing guidelines which are not only patronising to Muslims, but serve to inflame the very tensions between religious groups which they are seeking to quell.

Dog bless.


Anonymous mickey said...

It is, apparently, not just a matter of uncleanliness. Black dogs are associated with the devil and, for the more religiously minded Muslim, should be killed on sight.

Churchill used to talk of his "black dog" - maybe there is some similar symbolism hidden away in our own 'cultural' heritage?

8 July 2008 at 08:47  
Blogger Homophobic Horse said...

Speciesism involves assigning different values or rights to beings on the basis of their species membership. The term was coined by British psychologist Richard D. Ryder in 1973 to denote a prejudice based on physical differences.

8 July 2008 at 09:32  
Blogger ultramontane grumpy old catholic said...

My first reaction to your Grace's post this morning was to rant, rant, rant. But on reflection it might be a good idea also to require police to wear overshoes when they tramp through your house. After all who knows where those size 12s have been?

And what does your Grace think of the other item in the news this morning where gay groups are protesting at the intention of Bristol council to trim back some foliage from an area used for late night gay sex, known (we are informed)as 'dogging'

8 July 2008 at 10:11  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

I was about to post something along the lines ultramontane grumpy old catholic has just contributed. I shall simply reiterate his first paragraph. He has taken the words right out of my mouth:

My first reaction to your Grace's post this morning was to rant, rant, rant. But on reflection it might be a good idea also to require police to wear overshoes when they tramp through your house. After all who knows where those size 12s have been?

I do like dogs, and dogs tend to like me. I have faced down a few large and aggressive dogs in my time and quelled their anger using a technique I can only say belongs somewhere in my battery of instincts. But, I have never owned one, and I would not wish to have an animal living inside my house with me. Those who allow their pets to even join them in bed leave me totally bewildered. It's a depraved habit -- but that's my opinion.

We Europeans have barbarian roots. Long ago, we used to live cheek by jowl with farm animals because our survival depended on it. That doesn't make the habit any cleaner.

There are societies in this world today whose members never enter their own homes, or that of another, before removing their shoes and socks. I have seen a Westerner enter such a home after simply wiping his shoes (as most do in Britain) and the natives inside were beside themselves with politely suppressed rage. Massive faux pas! It really is a no-no throughout most of East Asia.

So, if the police ever came a-knocking at my door with dogs, I'd be charging them for the cost of the carpet cleaners even before they entered!

So, this dog-bootee hoo-haa isn't really a Muslim thing. The uncomfortable truth is that many Muslims have a magical ability to hold up a mirror against our own stupidities and idiosyncrasies, and this naturally makes us very uncomfortable, and hostile. Remember, the Muslims didn't bring themselves here by subterfuge. Our Home & Foreign Office representatives invited them here because they became infiltrated (during the 1960s) by a minority who have long plotted to destroy Christianity and Anglo-Saxon identity!

8 July 2008 at 10:42  
Blogger Unsworth said...

Are there many Muslims in Korea? If so, how do they feel about eating dog?

Anyway, this Muslim incursion into British culture (if such a thing actually exists) is a repetion of the sorts of things which have happened with each wave of immigrants - Huguenots, Lombards, Jews, etc etc. The difference this time - I think - is that the Muslim community wishes to impose its laws and culture on that of the indigenous population, rather than compromise and integrate.

Political power has been fully understood by the Muslim community and is now being wielded to its fullest extent. We can expect to see things get much worse, unless our weak-minded politicians make a stand.

8 July 2008 at 16:39  
Anonymous Convinced Anglican said...

Your Grace. Unlike others here I do not believe this is a case for levity. It is merely another creeping Islamification of England/Britain. Another alien and dangerous precedent.

England needs leadership. WHERE can it be found? It is time to say NO to the manifestations of Islamic-creep in our society. Muslims are NOT persecuted in England, they intimidate by violence and misuse of Britain's freedoms.

English children have been punished by an RE teacher because they refused to don Arab clothes, kneel on a prayer mat and pray to Allah!! THAT is persecution. No teacher on these islands would DARE to suggest Muslim children learn about Christianity by kneeling before an altar and praying to God! It speaks for itself. The appeasers are guilty of treason.

8 July 2008 at 16:40  
Anonymous Stonemason said...

Larry Charles once said ..........

............... "The UK is so tolerant it tolerates intolerance"

but much earlier had Nietzsche written .........

............... "If you gaze too long into the abyss, the abyss will gaze into you" ...............

8 July 2008 at 16:57  
Anonymous hear o israel said...

I can only recall from experience on how different cultures regard there animals . I was lodgeing with a cypriot couple in the UK and he thought he would purchase a boxer dog , she was lovely and full of energy, but he kept her outside and when the relations came round she was kept out of sight .
the reason being that dogs were considered unhealthly / unhygenic , now in fairness you could well see the problems of an animal that has no access to tinned pet food (no doubt very common in some pre 80s countries).

over hear we have of course had many years of bodies like the RSPCA and the various protection leagues , adverts for loveable little pooches and of course sever judgements for dangerous animals.

i wonder i the muslims lack of knowledge of how we treat animal welfare in the uk is more of a problem.

in some russia cities they are now having to deal with a major feral dog problem , over here we seem to have a major feral morality/truth problem in the government.

8 July 2008 at 18:09  
Anonymous Stefan said...

Oh come on Mission Impossible, never mind what the dogs might have stepped in, a little bit of poo never hurt anyone.

8 July 2008 at 19:36  
Anonymous dilys said...

"So, people who deal in drugs and explosives are to have their ‘religious sensitivities’ respected, ..."

That rather presumes that everywhere the police decide to put a dog in they are already sure that drugs or explosives are to be found.
Are our police really that good? If so, why bother with the dogs at all.

8 July 2008 at 22:49  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

It's only dog saliva that is unclean for Muslims, not dogs themselves. Sounds like the PC police again. Useful idiots.


8 July 2008 at 22:57  
Anonymous hear o israel said...

i forgot RABIES is a good excuse if you dont have any science or controls

8 July 2008 at 23:22  
Anonymous some english bloke said...

"English children have been punished by an RE teacher because they refused...to pray to Allah!"
That teacher has been suspended.

This dog thing is another example of our authorities caving in at the least complaint, usually by guilt-wracked white left-liberals but in this case seemingly by a few Muslims themselves.

Reminds me of all the piggy-hate stories. Muslims do not find pigs offensive, nor representations of them in print or on film. What they dislike is the idea of eating them ( rather like us as per dogs and horses ).

I might sound old-fashioned but, you come to Britain, you obey Britains laws and accept our customs.

PS I am allergic to dogs, does that mean I can wave my inhaler prescription at the dog team searching for drugs and semtex to deny them entry on health'n'safety grounds ?
Thought not.

9 July 2008 at 04:54  
Blogger Mission Impossible said...

Aaaah ... Stefan [08 July 2008 19:36] ... Yes, it has been scientifically proven that dog poo has no sharp edges; but using it as a substitute shaving cream is taking your enthusiasm rather too far. Not for me, thanks. :-)

9 July 2008 at 12:38  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Going to the dogs?
Or just plain barking mad?
This is taking on pantomime proportions.

9 July 2008 at 21:55  
Blogger Miss Snuffleupagus said...

HA! You are hilarious Your Grace! And so is the story! It boggles the mind...

9 July 2008 at 23:26  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Newer›  ‹Older