| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Jihad Watch | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Raymond Ibrahim | Robert Spencer |  |
|
|
|||||||||||
|
|
Ruh-roh.
"Philip Davies, Tory MP for Shipley in Yorkshire, said: 'Another way for people not to have their cells searched for drugs is not to commit crime in the first place'."
"Muslim inmates get new clothes if dog sniffs cell," from the Daily Express, October 9 (thanks to Twostellas):
Muslim prisoners are being given fresh clothes and bedding after sniffer dogs search their cells – because they view the animals as unclean.
The inmates say their bedclothes and prison uniforms must be changed according to Islamic law if they have come anywhere near dog saliva.
Government rules mean warders are having to hand out replacement sets after random drug searches to avoid religious discrimination claims.
The dogs have also been banned from touching copies of the Islamic holy book the Koran and other religious items.
Prisoners are handed special bags to protect the articles.
Now some staff and other prisoners are incensed by what they claim is special treatment.
A source at Dover prison said: “It seems ridiculous that staff have to go out of their way to treat these prisoners differently.
“Some of the other inmates are not happy that they have to make do with the same old bedding.”
John Midgley, co-founder of the Campaign Against Political Correctness, added: “If people think others are getting different treatment, they are bound to be upset. Perhaps the only fair way to do this is to allow everyone to have their bedding changed.”
Philip Davies, Tory MP for Shipley in Yorkshire, said: “Another way for people not to have their cells searched for drugs is not to commit crime in the first place. If you commit a crime and go to prison, there are certain things which you expect to happen.”
The jail policy emerged after an illegal immigrant awaiting deportation at Dover prison asked its bosses to clarify the rules on sniffer dog searches.
In reply to the letter in prisoners’ magazine Inside Time, the Ministry of Justice’s Rosemary Hanna wrote: “We are aware that if dog saliva comes in contact with the clothing or religious artefacts of a Muslim, it renders these items defiled. As such, a prisoner must be allowed to change clothing if this occurs.”
She added: “Dogs used to search cells should not be allowed to touch holy books and artefacts.
The prisoner should be allowed to identify and remove religious artefacts from their cell so that the supporting staff can search them by hand before the cell is searched. It is also good practice to issue prisoners with a clear plastic pouch to cover holy books and artefacts.
“Also, bedding should be changed where the prisoner feels that it has been defiled.”
A leading imam, Ibrahim Mogra, said the policy was “very sensitive and sensible”.
He said: “We would expect the religious requirements and needs of all our diverse religious communities to be accommodated.”
Just like Sharia law doesn't.
The row comes after some Muslims argued they should not be touched by sniffer dogs trained to spot terrorists at railway stations.
Last month it was revealed that the Association of Chief Police Officers proposed that police dogs wear bootees on their paws when searching Muslim suspects’ homes.
Posted by Marisol at October 9, 2008 12:16 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Oh please give me a break. But I got a better idea, pigs have a much better sense of smell than dogs so they should use pigs instead so they don't get the poor Muzzies' clothes all full of dog spittle.
Posted by: MorrisMinor![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/dhimmiwatch/nav-commenters.gif)
at October 9, 2008 2:32 AM
In cases such as these, why does no-one ask the simple question to all parties concerned:
"If islam is so important to these pious muslims, why do none of them ever demand to be punished according to sharia law?"
Posted by: Celsius at October 9, 2008 2:56 AM
I regard Muslims as unclean since they screw their cousins, lick the ground 5 times a day, and don't believe in soap because it didn't exist in 7th-century Arabia. Do I get new clothes every time I have to attend class with them now?
Posted by: jdamn at October 9, 2008 3:51 AM
well...can the new clothes at least be PINK?..
Posted by: pulsar182 at October 9, 2008 5:54 AM
This is not just bending backwards to appease.
This is bending forward and grabbing the ankle.
at October 9, 2008 6:03 AM
The row comes after some Muslims argued they should not be touched by sniffer dogs trained to spot terrorists at railway stations.
Well, that's logical: the section of the community most likely to be involved in terrorist activity demands to be exempt from having dogs fingering them.
Posted by: watling at October 9, 2008 6:29 AM
this is stupid the should have a spare prison coverall and they can wash the bedding and clothing
Posted by: ISLAMSNOTFORME at October 9, 2008 6:31 AM
"The jail policy emerged after an illegal immigrant awaiting deportation at Dover prison asked its bosses to clarify the rules on sniffer dog searches."
Lunacy. I have been banned from posting at The Daily Express, which used to be a reasonably fair newspaper. But when I went to read the feedback on this article, I noticed posting comments was "unavailable" for this story.
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at October 9, 2008 7:46 AM
"The inmates say their bedclothes and prison uniforms must be changed according to Islamic law if they have come anywhere near dog saliva."
I don't remember that sura in the the Qur'an.
at October 9, 2008 7:59 AM
More trouble and expense and way too much extra work for whoever does the laundry.
These guys are convicted criminals.
If they freak out at the idea of dogs sniffing themselves, their books, clothes, bedding etc then it should be presumed they have something to hide.
The dogs should go in at once - big, black, drooling dogs - exactly as they would do in the case of any other prisoner, whether atheist, Jew, Catholic, Sikh, Hindu or calathumpian.
No muzzle on the dog. No 'booties'. The dog, properly supervised by its handler and protected if necessary by a large armed guard, does its job. If dog regards prisoner as an interesting subject, Muslim gets sniffed from head to toe; and if he freaks out, too bad, he can damn well wait till it's officially shower time.
If minute droplets of dog spit get on Muslim, Qur'an, clothes or bedding - too bad! The clothes and bedding get changed when the prison rules say they get changed. If it's next week...too bad!
Note: who wants to bet that if the Qur'an is allowed to be exempt from being searched or sniffed, or handled by dirty Infidel guards, it will become (or for that matter, it probably already is) *the* hiding place of choice for needles, bullets, improvised knives, drugs stash, etc?
at October 9, 2008 8:26 AM
I don't remember that sura in the Qur'an
It's in between the one explaining how to control your laughter when yet another concession has been made for you and the one explaining how the West will be fully Islamified by 2050.
Posted by: watling at October 9, 2008 9:11 AM
"The dogs have also been banned from touching copies of the Islamic holy book the Koran and other religious items."
So then what's to prevent prisoners from concealing drugs in a Koran or other religious item?
Posted by: Bigshaker at October 9, 2008 10:21 AM
Do you know what's funny?
Apparently the symbol of "The Daily Express" is a Crusader. Red Knight's Templar cross and everything.
Posted by: darcy at October 9, 2008 10:36 AM
Perhaps bedding made FROM dogs and pigs would be more appropriate! More bending over by the dhimmis in britainistan. I would search them TWICE a day with several dogs and make sure they urinate towards mecca. Harsh, not at all when one considers all the death, subjigation of women, and zero tolerance level for all us infidels that islam has shown and acted out over hundreds and hundreds of years. The bedding should NOT be changed until these islamist criminals drop their
demands for special treatment. If they do not, oh well they can all smell like the pigs that they really are. Perhaps some bacon scent could be added to their bedding or where they slobber on the ground five times a day.
at October 9, 2008 11:49 AM
Fine.
I understand they can train ferrets to do the same thing, and believe me, they can wriggle themselves into drug-hiding places that a dog simply can not.
Use the ferrets, bust the thugs, and save on laundry costs.
Posted by: Lori B. at October 9, 2008 1:18 PM
In reply to the letter in prisoners’ magazine Inside Time, the Ministry of Justice’s Rosemary Hanna wrote: “We are aware that if dog saliva comes in contact with the clothing or religious artefacts of a Muslim, it renders these items defiled. As such, a prisoner must be allowed to change clothing if this occurs.”
She added: “Dogs used to search cells should not be allowed to touch holy books and artefacts.
There should be an audio laugh track available for prisoners who demand this, and emergency mental health counseling for any administrator who considers being "sensitive" about it.
They can call for all sort of disgusting violence, as "Allah's will", but dog saliva defiles them?
What a bunch of crap. And politicians wonder why they aren't taken seriously.
Posted by: RalphInfidel at October 9, 2008 2:12 PM
“Also, bedding should be changed where the prisoner feels that it has been defiled.”
Our nations are being defiled by the presence of such vermin. Apparently, THAT is not a problem.
Posted by: "Islamophobia"=BS at October 9, 2008 2:45 PM
Of course they are going to get full backing from the Ministry of Justice no that the traitorous unelected Prime Minister Gordon Brown has made the Israel hating BNP basher Shahid Malik the new Minister of Justice
The Dewsbury moslem MP from northern England in a statement said he hoped to make Britain “a more just society” in his new role as a Minister in the recently formed Department for Justice
Britian was just before the likes of Malik arrived in Britain
By the way, this is the same Shahid Malik who belittled the holocaust with this bile
“I think most people would agree that if you ask Muslims today what do they feel like, they feel like the Jews of Europe,” he said. “I don’t mean to equate that with the Holocaust but in the way that it was legitimate almost – and still is in some parts – to target Jews, many Muslims would say that we feel the exact same way.
“Somehow there’s a message out there that it’s OK to target people as long as it’s Muslims. And you don’t have to worry about the facts, and people will turn a blind eye.
As a footnote, MOSLEMS SHOULD NOT IN JAILS AND OVERCROWDING THEM, they should be given a pack of ham sandwiches and bible then sent to Saudi.
Posted by: InfidelK9 at October 9, 2008 3:07 PM
Yet again I see a mainstream British tabloid with a Muslim story, having its comments section disabled. This is becoming more common, especially where we are presented with a ludicrous PC development like this one. Another recent one would be The Scotsman newspaper which covers the vetting of jury members in the failed terror attacks in London and at Glasgow airport. I get the impression that the editors know only too well what the reader response to issues like these would be and it certainly will not be very PC, I’m thinking more along the lines of venom, hate, spite and malice, or at the very least disgust. In the case of the jury members being vetted in the terror trial I would suggest that it matters very little in the real world what 12 good men and true might hand down as a verdict, irrespective of their PC view or naivety concerning Islam or its followers.
It is in the ‘court of public opinion’ that the verdict will be found and judging by the prior censorship of these newspaper articles and the obvious need to vet jury members where Muslims are involved, it looks like public opinion is not well disposed to Islamist issues. It could even be said that any rage or disgust vented in comments sections may not be directed at Muslims at all but at the lunatics who are allowing and even encouraging special status to a religious minority, who after all give us so much with the love and fraternity, whilst integrating so well.
at October 9, 2008 3:37 PM
Unbelievable this British kow-towing to criminal Islamic Barbarians.
Hey Pooches - SLOBBER ALL OVER THE PRIMITIVE HUMANS AND THEIR EVIL KORANS! THAT A BOY! AND THAT A GIRL! SLOBBER-AWAY!
Posted by: darcy at October 9, 2008 6:32 PM
gIVE THEM NEW CLOTHES MADE OF pIGKSINS!
Posted by: Kepha at October 10, 2008 2:37 PM
In reality the dogs are defiled by coming in contact with Korans, artifacts, anything Muslims touch, and the ground upon which they spread their million strains of mosque foot fungus with their hands and faces five times a day.
Posted by: jdamn at October 11, 2008 7:59 AM
In reality the dogs are defiled by coming in contact with Korans, artifacts, anything Muslims touch, and the ground upon which they spread their million strains of mosque foot fungus with their hands and faces five times a day.
Posted by: jdamn at October 11, 2008 7:59 AM
Double post. Ruh-roh.
Posted by: jdamn at October 11, 2008 8:00 AM
These people need to go back to their tents and take their quran and antiquated laws with them.
They simply cannot function in any modern society and the only reason that they insist on living amongst normal people is because they intend to "takeover" the places they inhabit.
Their ignorance is exceeded only by their lack of personal hygiene. One day the public will rise against Islam and Muslims and there will be ugly civil wars all over the world. Thank god they are easy to detect by sight or smell!
Posted by: Rocky at October 11, 2008 9:26 PM
Comments are turned off and archived for this entry.
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)