We have previously discussed violence and legal measures targeting dogs by some Muslims who view canines as “unclean.” Even postcards with dogs and service dogs (and here) have raised the ire of some Muslim groups. Now this issue is getting some long-needed attention in Iran after a short film that showed stray dogs being tortured and killed by having acid injected into them.
The video was taken an industrial area of Shiraz, 900 kilometres south of Tehran. The animal activists claimed that those responsible paid $4 for each dog. As with environmentalists in China, I have always had overwhelming respect and admiration for secularists and animal (particularly dog) advocates in Muslim countries. This is more than an impressive commitment to principle but putting your actual life on the line for those principles.
The good news is that the Iranian government is acting on the video. While there was an effort to criminalize the ownership of dogs under Sharia law (and subject dog owners to up to 74 lashed last year), Vice President Masoumeh Ebtekar has called for an investigation into the video. While she referred rather mildly to the practice as “an immediate end to unconventional population control method[] for stray dogs,” she did call upon the interior ministry to “deal with the criminals responsible”.
Some Iranian celebrities like Ali Karimi, once a star on Iran’s national football team, posted a picture with his two dogs on Instagram and the message “Dogs are the kindest domestic animals. I hope those who, under any excuse, did this to these animals get what they deserve.”
I disagreed with the actions of the Yearning for Zion leaders, which were specifically rooted in their religion. See? I can apply logic and reasoning to other religions than extremist Islam. And as I’ve said before, I have zero problem with peaceful Muslims living here in America. I’ve known a Muslim family who arranged their daughter’s marriage. But since she was OK with it, I support her right to do so.
Karen has summed up my feelings on animals as food. I also abhor inhumane treatment of ANY animal. This includes farm animals as well as animals that are considered pets (in the US at least)
We also buy a shares of cattle and hogs from local farmers. Once a year we get a quarter share of beef, half share of lamb and half a hog. I would LOVE to have chickens, but due to the predators where we live (coyote, fox, raccoon, mountain lion to name a few) it is impractical so we buy from a local producer. There is also a woman who raises rabbits for meat and several times a year we buy from her.
We also have a large vegetable garden and a very nice orchard. We trade our surplus produce with others to round out the production. Plums for pumpkins. Apples for corn or tomatoes. Last year we traded two full wheel barrows of pears for some painting on our outbuildings. Life is good in the country 🙂
I am under no illusion that the meat in our grocery stores just magically appears in neat plastic wrapped trays. And living in farm country I am quite aware that someone is going to kill and butcher each and every one of those animals.
The reality is that IF the American public were to insist that all production animals be raised as if they were pets, the cost of food would be unaffordable for most people.
In Ca the new laws regarding commercially raised chickens have raised the cost of eggs to sky high prices. I have seen them as much as $4.50 a dozen and the price of chicken has soared. I can afford these prices because we are frugal in our other food purchases and buy mostly locally, however, there are many who can’t. I DO agree with the rules that the chickens should be humanely raised. BUT……people need to realize that there is a trade off and be willing to make it.
You can’t have it both ways. Chose one. Cheap food in the stores or treating farm animals like pets. (This doesn’t mean treating them in torturous inhumane ways is good either ).
I have also said that I believe hunting is the ultimate natural, organic feed.
I used to hunt. At my age now, I don’t. But if I had to, I could certainly do it again.
I have hunted and cleaned: duck, goose, pheasant and other upland game. Quail are too small and not worth the work. Currently, there is no limit on the amount of Eurasian Doves that can be taken. I haven’t shot those, but I would imagine they could be quite good. I can field dress a deer. It is NOT pleasant and takes quite a bit of work and strength. I’m too old to tramp through the high desert and pack a deer. But…again. Should it happen that it is necessary, I can.
Of course…..non of this above has anything to do with the deliberate torture of dogs or any other animal on the behalf of sicko psychopaths or religious extremists. It is a false equivalence to make a comparison between the sick people who get pleasure from hurting animals (and people) to industrial production of food.
Po:
“You are being both hypocritical and less than honest for claiming that I have issues with anyone saying anything about Islam or extremism. As I said before I accused bam bam of islamophobia ONLY after he made it an islamic issue. Then as usual, YOU pop up with the unavoidable mention of shariah law.
This dog issue has nothing to do with shariah law or islam, it has to do with stray dogs running around and whose population needed to be controlled, just as it happens here and EVERYWHERE else around the world.”
Po, you’ve already admitted that the Middle East considers dogs unclean because of their interpretation of Islam, an interpretation you disagree with.
So, although you disagree with how it is applied, it is specifically Islam that is the motivation behind the plight of dogs in the Middle East. Dog ownership is not banned in Iran because of stray dogs; it is because of the interpretation of Islam. 32 members of Parliament voted in favor of the law that came before Parliament, which would have added up to 74 lashes specifically under Sharia Law to the fines already in existence for owning a dog. I did not bring up Sharia Law. Professor Turley did in his accurate summation of the Sharia Law proposal brought up last year. THAT makes the connection to Islam. Don’t be mad at me. Be mad at people in Iran.
If people in Iran fight about their favorite soccer teams, that has nothing to do with Islam. If someone accidentally hits a dog with his car, that has nothing to do with Islam. Outlawing dogs because they are “unclean” based on various Hadith IS because of Islam. I agree with you that moderates love and keep dogs here in the US. Great. Please tell the millions of people in the Middle East that they are doing it wrong and there is a better way. This needs to be reformed from within.
Bob Stone – your article on Officer Wilson was excellent. Thank you for providing a link. I wish I’d found it months ago!
Aridog – what is your opinion on the various colored GSDs? I love the European lines, with their strong, flat toplines. I prefer that to the rake that seems to be preferred by the American shows. I have to admit the silver, white, and black coat varieties are just lovely, but when someone breeds for color, you can lose quality. I wish that all coat colors were allowed, so they wouldn’t be novelties that tend to be too inbred. Have they relaxed the rules yet on coat colors? Are they still favoring that angled top line?
Karen, this is the problem I had with Turley and you subsequently.
His posts NEVER tell the whole story, he always obscures something in it so to frame it in ways that demonize the person targeted. I am suspicious of any story he offers because I have found them to be highly biased.
You are being both hypocritical and less than honest for claiming that I have issues with anyone saying anything about Islam or extremism. As I said before I accused bam bam of islamophobia ONLY after he made it an islamic issue. Then as usual, YOU pop up with the unavoidable mention of shariah law.
This dog issue has nothing to do with shariah law or islam, it has to do with stray dogs running around and whose population needed to be controlled, just as it happens here and EVERYWHERE else around the world. Here is a better article than the one Turley offers:
“Animal abuse is unacceptable under any condition and we are pursuing the case.”
(By the way, when are you or Turley going to show your outrage about big agra’s treatment of cattle, and about gestational cages for pregnant pigs? Why do you Karen support it? What joy do you get in seeing this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_vqIGTKuQE? what kind of person finds joy in this?
Torn From Their Mothers and Mutilated
The piglets are taken away from their mothers when they are less than a month old. In nature, they would stay with their mothers for several months. The mothers are impregnated again, and the cycle of forced breeding and imprisonment continues.
The male piglets have their testicles cut out of their scrotums. Both males and females have their tails cut off, many of their teeth clipped in half, and their ears mutilated, all without any pain relief. They are crammed into pens crowded with many other piglets, where they are kept until they are deemed large enough for slaughter. The animals are given almost no room to move, because, as one pork-industry journal put it, “[O]vercrowding pigs pays.”
————————————
Iranians protest killing of stray dogs
Iranians held protests in major cities across the country after a gruesome video surfaced online of the killing of stray dogs in an industrial park in Shiraz. The three-minute grainy video with audio shows men in masks injecting a number of dogs with a syringe. Some claimed the dogs were injected with acid or poison. None of the men were wearing government uniforms, but Iran has long had a problem with stray dogs and many cities have outsourced the task of collecting strays to private contractors.
One of the largest protests was held April 19 outside Tehran’s Environmental Protection Organization (EPO), where dozens of animal rights activists asked EPO head Masoumeh Ebtekar to pursue the case. Ebtekar addressed the protesters, saying, “Animal abuse is unacceptable under any condition and we are pursuing the case.” She added: “The general director of Fars Province for the EPO said that syringes have been found but some of the issues of the case are not clear because the municipality [of Shiraz] denies the story.”
Ebtekar said EPO “has laws for wildlife but does not have laws that pertain directly to dogs and cats. Therefore, we are trying to specify a framework of laws to support animal rights so that in such a case as this, responsibilities are clear.”
Majid Kharazian Moghaddam, EPO’s director of biodiversity and wildlife, said that if the case is related to dogs with infectious diseases, it would then be the Interior Ministry’s responsibility. He added that laws for animal control of dogs with diseases were passed in 2008. “If a veterinarian concludes that the dog has an incurable disease, the manner of the death of the dog has to be with mercy,” Moghaddam continued.
Ebtekar also wrote an open letter to the Interior Ministry saying that the dogs in Shiraz were killed with “poison or acid in an irregular way” and said that the EPO is ready to cooperate in any manner so that the law and animal rights can be observed.
Seyyed Ahmad Nabavi, an EPO official, said that they had also written a letter to the Shiraz prosecutor’s office asking that the individuals in the video be identified and punished.
There is some confusion as to which government body is responsible for handling the case. Ebtekar said “the entire responsibility” is with the municipality and the city council and that the EPO “does not have direct legal responsibility for such an issue.”
Qassem Akbar, the mayor for District 5 of Shiraz, said that the industrial park where the killing of the dogs took place is under the supervision of the Waste Management Organization and the “responsibility of the killing of the dogs in this industrial park is not with the municipality.”
Rohollah Khoshbaght, general director of waste for Shiraz, said: “Industrial parks are in no way under the management of the municipality or the waste management and each industrial park is legally managed through its related department.”
Jaffar Omidi of the mayor’s office in Shiraz said that the industrial parks are under the supervision of the municipality and that they are looking into the case.
Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2015/04/iran-protest-dog-animal-cruelty.html##ixzz3Y3cKiRJN
po – you need to own a farm or ranch before you start complaining about how they treat their animals. The first thing you learn is; If you are going to eat it, don’t name it.
I forgot to add that killing an animal as humanely as possible to eat is different than torturing and killing dogs, whose bodies are completely wasted.
I do not think poultry, cattle, or swine are “unclean” nor do I loathe them.
Po:
“Now that I answered your question, karen, would you mine? What do you think about gestation crates?”
Sure, Po. I oppose inhumane treatment of livestock. That is why I have a flock of pampered, organic hens. They live in the Cluck Mahal, and I let them out in my backyard almost every day, guarded by my faithful cattle dogs. They play in the garden with my little boy. They have fresh air, sunshine, and an abundance of room, even inside their run. They tested negative for salmonella. They only eat organic layer feed, organic table scraps, and the insects and plants they glean from my yard. I have a variety of breeds, so my egg basket has brown, blue, sage, and mint green eggs. Their egg shells are so hard they are sometimes difficult to break. I only use them for eggs, however, as I could never kill a pet that comes to me when I call and sits in my lap. I am happy to finance their retirement after they go out of lay because they are also pets. But many people have dual use flocks, and don’t have my squeamishness.
Raising meat is expensive, so to keep prices competitive, farmers use intensive crowding. Chickens are debeaked, and kept in very stressful, cramped quarters, or they are crammed together with one square foot of space allotted to each bird in “free range” pens, oven in warehouses without a beam of natural sunlight. That is inhumane, and the meat is unhealthy. Plus diseases spread and require the use of antibiotics. People say they oppose inhumane treatment, but how many people shop for meat, poultry, and eggs based only on price? Too many by choice and by necessity.
Gestational crates are used in intensive hog farming. It allows the sow to eat adult food, which would be inappropriate for the piglets. It also keeps her from crushing them. It is used in very crowded conditions, similar to the above poultry example, and I oppose it for the same reason.
I know a farmer nearby who sells hog shares. You can buy half a hog and get it in bulk. Her animals are fed organic hay, she does not use gestational crates, and they are allowed to roam in a blind canyon to get exercise and fresh air. She says they only have “one bad day” in their life. I’ve been looking for a source for humane pork, and will give hers a try. I have toured the farm and the conditions are as she says. She also has accompanied her animals to the butcher, and confirmed for herself that the end is quick and as humane as possible, nothing like those videos released by PETA of slaughterhouses.
I already belong to a grass fed beef coop, which is not finished in a crowded, filthy feed lot being fed a diet of corn which makes the meat nicely marbled, and unhealthy.
I have also said that I believe hunting is the ultimate natural, organic feed. We have hunters in the family, although I’ve never tried it. Those animals live wild and free, have a natural diet, and if it’s done right, never know what hit them.
I have never killed an animal for food, but I cannot be a vegetarian. I have tried it, and I gained weight, was exhausted all the time, and felt very unhealthy. You have to really know what you’re doing to have a healthy vegetarian diet, more so to be vegan, because plants do not provide all the amino acids we need to survive. So although I don’t have the heart to kill my own food, I have no assumptions that meat is born in a plastic shrink-wrapped container.
Po:
“Karen
It is true that dogs are deemed unclean in many arab countries based on a couple of hadith. However, there is another hadith where the Prophet promised paradise to a prostitute who quenched the thirst of a dying dog. he also rerouted his whole army for a dog was giving birth along the path.
However, rather deceptive the way you framed your comment so as to make it seem like Iran did indeed pass a law banning dog ownership… slick move there…pretty dishonest too.”
Thank you for confirming that the Middle East as a region does, indeed, hold dogs to be unclean based on Islam. That is what makes this fundamentally different from isolated, condemned instances of dog abuse here in the US. As a nation, we do not loathe dogs, and we do not outlaw them as pets. Moderates will hopefully be able to reform the region and, among other things, reduce this hatred of dogs. There are certainly passages in the Quran which would soften this stance, which was based on other passages condemning dogs. Even if all they do is thoroughly wash their hands or change their clothes before prayer after coming into contact with dogs, that is a vast improvement over killing them or banning their ownership.
Neither I nor Professor Turley said that the law sentencing dog owners to 74 lashes passed. I specifically said that 32 members of Parliament voted for it (so it’s not some lone, deranged lunatic agitating for it) and that currently, the law fines dog owners and their animals are confiscated, assumedly to be euthanized. The law that came up would have stiffened the fine and added the lashes.
As I’ve said before, we may not dictate the laws of another nation. But we sure can speak out loudly against them. Someone needs to speak up for animals.
Dang it…where I said “V1 title” I meant “VA1 title” which means “Excellent Select” and rated only at national or international shows and trials.
Bob Stone … I’ve seen and been around the larger affable GSD’s you mention, the Shiloh Shepherd for one example. Another breeder in W. Virgina I believe just breeds long haired GSD’s without seeking a distinct name for them…I spoke to her some time ago before we got “Ari” but there was a problem…she insisted on keeping breeding rights to all intact dogs, preferably close by her place of business…or otherwise offering only a modified sales contract where you do not get full title or registration for her pups. Lovely dogs, but unacceptable terms to me…reminds me of many of the AKC “show dog only” breeders who do the same thing….and I generally find them pompous jerks, some who inbreed (inside of 3 generations) now and then. When the time comes I will again look at the large longhairs, but I suspect their terms are still non-starters for me. If you know of any who aren’t so unreasonable, please let me know.
“Ari” was over sized and wouldn’t have met conformation requirements at the withers, but he never weighed over 105 lbs in his prime. “Dera” is a “square backed” 80-85 lb dog with powerful hips and hip muscles that can yank you off your feet if she choose even at 10 years old. Most of the old line (Pohranicni straze & Chmelovy-kvitek kennel origination) Czech and DDR dogs are built like that if bred for working….today of course they also breed for angulation/conformation for show classes for working dogs…e.g., for a V1 title the dog must meet show conformation and be ScH III or IPO III titled as well.
I probably sound like a GSD “snob” by now, but that really isn’t the case…I look for solid conformation and powerful muscles and find them where I can by observation and pedigree review. My interest when younger was trials, not shows per se. I also did not join the group who for a while insisted on handler hard beasts derived from the same kennel lineages I favor. I always want an affable all around dog…ideally not line breed inside 4 generations. The SV registration certificates have the line breeding history printed on them.
@Mike A
Since you mentioned Prosser, and were not happy with the Mackinac Center’s short and accurate recitation of the history, I present the following. I had some extra time, so I searched where I could find a cuttable and pastable section that would let you see how Prosser viewed the development of strict product liability. (PSL) I found one, and after downloading, and running it through my word processor, here is the applicable cite, with bolding for emphasis. Remember that I used the evolution of PSL this only as an analogy for the short putt it would take to get from established law on the subject religious issues, to my proposed “significant religious overtones” and RMT. Sooo, this is off topic, but since you are interested, from page 870 at the link:
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
@Mikle A
Why don’t we just agree to not discuss the development of modern strict product liability because it is off topic???
Squeeky Fromm
Girl Reporter
Squeeky:
I realize that you are not a lawyer, and I’m not going to get in a debate with you over products liability. I’ve never heard anyone argue that any legal theory springs out of nowhere. That’s not how the common law works. But if you want to understand how strict liability developed, it is necessary to study tort law. It is also necessary to understand the history of industrial development. Studying tort law means reading bona fide scholars in the field, people like William Prosser and Leon Green. Bona fide tort law scholars are not found in the Mackinac Center or other Koch funded advocacy groups. What you cited to is a position paper written strictly from the perspective of the insurance industry and lacking the benefit of historical context.
Well, I thought that one commentator might be in favor of a war against the dog haters in Iran or elsewhere. We dogs are here on Earth to give counsel to humans. On this blog I see no hope of giving counsel or discussing things. You are all no longer in the realm of being civil, dog friendly, or receptive to dog advice. Bye bye Miss American Pie, drove my Chevy to the levee but the levee was dry, good old boys drinking whiskey and rye, saying bye to the Turley pile.
Screw you guys.
Thanks for the referral, Paul. I have a broad brush and will travel.
Bob, the DOJ report did NOT disprove whatever Dorian said, “credible evidence” is NOT a proof.
Now, you did not wait or all the evidence to come in before you deem Dorian a liar, Mike Brown a thug, WHILE blaming the mob for reacting before the facts came to light, did you?
Some may call it hypocrisy….
As for your claim I called Darren Wilson a racist murderer, are we putting that one to bed or do we need to burp it first?
You want to watch a scary mob interview check out Anthony “Gaspipe” Casso on 60 minutes. This is one of the hardest, scariest mobsters I’ve ever seen…his eyes are almost science fiction like behind his coke bottle spectacles…he sounds totally detached, cold, distant…a human shark…with dead eyes, like a dolls eyes…this guy would have scared Kuklinski
Po: “Bob blames the “mob” for wanting to lynch Darren Wilson, attacking them for not waiting for the facts to come to light. Meanwhile, he is calling the protesters mob, demonizes them alongside Mike Brown, works very hard at exposing both the mob and Mike Brown as thugs, and makes the case that Darren Wilson was right to shoot Mike, all of which without waiting for the facts to come to light.”
Po,
You didn’t even bother reading the DOJ report; did you? Because if you did you wouldn’t have made such an asinine statement like that.
BTW, remember your infatuation with the PBS story on the witness statements –that “half the witnesses” saw Brown being shot with his hands up?
DOJ: “Given that Wilson’s account is corroborated by physical evidence and that his perception of a threat posed by Brown is corroborated by other eyewitnesses, to include aspects of the testimony of Witness 101 (aka Dorian Johnson), there is no credible evidence that Wilson willfully shot Brown as he was attempting to surrender or was otherwise not posing a threat.”
“Above all, don’t lie to yourself. The man who lies to himself and listens to his own lie comes to a point that he cannot distinguish the truth within him, or around him, and so loses all respect for himself and for others.” — Dostoyevsky
Aridog,
I grew up with GSD’s. When I was two years old, I busted out of my play pen in the backyard and went for a stroll through the neighborhood accompanied by my pal Senta. When the construction workers building the house down the block brought me back home, they said she never left my side.
Over the last 15 years I’ve come to appreciate a more affable breed of GSD; gentle giants (125-135 lb) with square backs. But in the last four years I’ve learned that there’s something even more special about the long haired GSD.
The one thing I’ve noticed you can do with a long haired GSD that you can’t do with a regular coat GSD is rub their belly for hours. As you know, a regular coat GSD’s belly is wiry and tough on the hand. You can only really rub it for a few minutes before returning to the scalp where the hair is softer. But on a long haired GSD you can let him lay across your lap and rub his belly till he falls asleep while you’re watching television or whatever.
I did that with Brody since he was a puppy and I have to tell you it’s a totally different dynamic than I’ve ever had with any other GSD — a much stronger bond.
Bob and Ari – I like my dogs to have a tail that curls over the back and stays out of the way. 50 lbs is about my max.
Ari
Your input would be greatly welcome at FSS.
Bob’s essay was very good….though mortally flawed!
The problem with it can be summed up thusly: Bob blames the “mob” for wanting to lynch Darren Wilson, attacking them for not waiting for the facts to come to light. Meanwhile, he is calling the protesters mob, demonizes them alongside Mike Brown, works very hard at exposing both the mob and Mike Brown as thugs, and makes the case that Darren Wilson was right to shoot Mike, all of which without waiting for the facts to come to light.
These were my first 2 comments, neither of which call Darren Wilson racist:
———————
po says:
September 12, 2014 at 10:26 pm
Bob, very eloquent and thorough post.
i must point out my discomfort at reading the part where you chastise the media and others for demonizing Darren Wilson, the killer, only to turn around and demonize the victim, Mike Brown.
You make the good point that none of us know what happened, yet went out of your way to offer a narrative that seems to counter what the overwhelming narrative is, supported by most if not all the witnesses.
The bottom line is actually quite simple: black men are being killed at the drop of a hat, and the reason advanced are always ones that blame the victim for doing something he is little likely to do.
The other bottom line is this: when a cop kills an unarmed civilian, the burden of proof is on the cop, and the burden of the punishment should be on the cop.
Additionally, the reaction in Ferguson and around the world is quite natural. People are sick of their children being snuffed without any reason at all. At all! How many black kids were killed this month alone by the cops?! How many?
I wanted to digest your post further before responding to it, but I think this take on it on the Daily Show says it all.
http://thedailyshow.cc.com/videos/ufqeuz/race-off
————————————
Then this:
This country has now a great number of people ignorant of their extended history and detached from their recent history and its consequences who see any attempt to extend necessary protection to those in need of it (blacks, gays, women, religious minorities, the poor) from their abuse or those of the society at large as inherently unfair and political correctness gone amok. Then again, how could it not be the case when the supreme court itself is exemplifying it at the highest level?
This has translated into this state of being where , just as we assume that the battered woman has somehow brought the beating upon herself, the rape victim was too drunk or too slutty, the gay victim was too flamboyant, and the Mike Brown was too dangerous, too big, too strong, too loud, armed (when he wasn’t), lunging (when he wasn’t), had priors, had just robbed a store (when the cop did not know that…)
It is rather fascinating that not only is it on the dead man to prove his innocence (which is what the crowd reacted to mainly, they saw this as another case where the unproven cop’s narrative would be allowed to stand against the loss of a life), but it is also now established that a cop armed to the teeth, with the ability to retreat and call for backup, with the full force of the law and of the system at his disposal, has no choice but to empty his clip into an unarmed civilian because he somehow feels threathened by said civilian! Stand your ground applies to cops too? The parallels with the Trayvon Martin case are uncanny!
po – I had forgotten your ill-written defense of the Thug of Ferguson. I know a couple of liberal journals that would love your style of painting with a broad brush. If you are interested I will send you names.
Whoops…I messed up the html it seems. Oh, well. 🙁