According to a broadcast on Radio Farda November 19, “Iran’s parliament is floating legislation that would ban most household pets in the name of protecting the country from the dangerous influence of “unclean” animals.
Under the bill on the “protection of public rights against dangerous and harmful animals,” prepared by hard-line conservative lawmakers on November 17, Iranians would be barred from owning, breeding, and transporting dogs, cats, rabbits, and other common pets.
The keeping of “wild animals” such as snakes, lizards, crocodiles, mice, monkeys, donkeys, and turtles would also be barred if the legislation is approved, and violators would be subject to heavy penalties.
But in this Forbidden Menagerie, pride of place goes to dogs, for above all other animals they are feared and hated by devout Muslims, and have been for 1400 years, since the beginning of Islam. This is because of a famous hadith:
“The Prophet said, ‘Angels do not enter a house in which there are dogs or pictures.’” (Sahih-Al-Bukhari, 7.833, Narrated by Abu Talha)
I first posted at Jihad Watch twelve years ago (June 11, 2009) a piece about the fear and hatred Muslims harbor for dogs, and about the consequent mistreatment dogs endure from Muslims. The reports of such mistreatment, by Muslims, of precisely the animal that is most celebrated for his devotion and loyalty to humans, has for many been further confirmation that something is terribly wrong with Islam.
My post began with a few representative stories about such mistreatment, such as this from England:
In the Reading Evening Mail, for example, one story described a 71-year-old blind Englishman and cancer sufferer who was asked to get off a bus because of the hysterical reaction to his seeing-eye dog by some Muslims on the bus:
A driver told a blind cancer sufferer to get off his bus when a woman and her children became hysterical at the sight of his guide dog. George Herridge, 71, told how the mum flew into a rage and shouted at him in a foreign language. A passenger explained she wanted him to get off the bus during the incident on May 20.
Mr Herridge, from Tern Close, Tilehurst, said: “Her child was kicking and screaming and someone off the bus told me her child was frightened of my dog. The driver said, ‘Look mate, can’t you get off? I stood my ground. I had not done anything, my dog had not done anything and I was getting off the bus for no one.”
And a day after the latest bus incident a lady began screaming “I don’t like dirty dogs” at Mr Herridge at the Royal Berkshire Hospital.
A week earlier he faced further animosity from a couple at Asda in The Meadway, he said.
He is unsure what has provoked outbursts but said he thinks some have come from Asian [i.e., Muslim] people and that it may be due to religious or cultural differences.
Drivers have been re-instructed to convey the blind and the bus company has sought advice from the Royal National Institute for the Blind and hopes to speak with Muslim leaders. As part of a Muslim Council of Britain project, Mufti Zubair Butt, Shar’ia advisor to Muslim Spiritual Care Provision in the NHS, admitted Muslims “require some education” on guide dogs.”
I went on to mention, in that 2009 posting, similar reports about Somali cab drivers in Minneapolis who refused to pick up passengers with seeing-eye or service dogs.
These were offered as examples of the extreme Muslim reaction to dogs that so often occurs when they are asked merely to accept what for us is a matter of course, such as the use of seeing-eye dogs. For many Muslims, dogs provoke not quiet distaste, but rather a kind of fearful hysteria.
But where does this extreme hatred and hysteria come from? It comes not from the Qur’an, but from the dozens of hadith in which Muhammad expresses his opposition to dogs. But what is most interesting are those ahadith in which both dogs, and depictions of living creatures, whether as pictures or as statues, are essentially declared to be haram.
The most famous such hadith, which has been quoted above, is the one where Muhammad is reported to have said: “Angels will not enter a house in which there are dogs or pictures.” (Sahih Al-Bukhari, 7.833, Narrated by Abu Talha) There are other variants, in which the Muslim prophet says “Angels do not enter a house in which there are dogs or statues.” The point was to avoid all figurative art, whether paintings or statues, of sentient beings. Christian homes would invariably have pictures or statues of Mary, Jesus, and assorted saints. By stating that angels would not enter a house with pictures or statues, Muhammad — or whoever was responsible for those hadiths — signaled Muslims not to follow suit, distancing themselves from Christian practices and from Christians themselves. And from those slender beginnings arose the ferocious antipathy to idols, pictures, and, especially, statues, which has led, over 1350 years, to the destruction of vast numbers of pictures and statues – first those of Christians, and later those of the conquered Hindus and Buddhists, continuing right up to the present day, with the blowing up of the Bamiyan Buddhas and the ISIS destruction of Assyrian statuary.
One way to help Muslims fulfill their duty “not to take Christians as friends” was to discourage them from entering houses where such taswir (images, pictures, statues) might still be found. And Christians, in order to have members of the dominant, i.e., Muslim class feel able to enter their houses, which for some Christians could be a desirable thing (in order to curry favor with the Muslims who now ruled over them), might find themselves more willing to remove the offending statues, idols, and pictures from their own homes. Finally, the presence of such depictions allowed Muslims to easily distinguish the Christian from the Muslim households.
To understand the warning against dogs in the same hadiths, that explain the refusal of Muslim cab drivers in Minneapolis today to pick up passengers with their seeing-eye and service dogs, you need to go back to hadiths in which Muhammad instructs Muslims to avoid dogs as “unclean,” but the question remains: in Islam, why were dogs singled out as uniquely hateful? It has to do, I suggest, with the Muslim desire to distinguish themselves from the Zoroastrians whom they conquered when the Arab armies overran Sassanid Persia between 633 and 654 A.D.
The leading historian of Zoroastrianism, Mary Boyce, who lived in Iran from 1963 to 1964, offers an intimate view of the fiendish cruelty with which Muslim Iranians treated the dogs so revered by Zoroastrians. Boyce suggests that the cynophobia in Islam started in Iran, after its conquest by Muslim Arabs, and was “deliberately fostered in the first place in Iran, as a point of opposition to the old (pre-Islamic jihad conquest) faith (i.e., Zoroastrianism)”:
In Sharifabad the dogs distinguished clearly between Moslem and Zoroastrian, and were prepared to go…full of hope, into a crowded Zoroastrian assembly, or to fall asleep trustfully in a Zoroastrian lane, but would flee as before Satan from a group of Moslem boys…The evidence points…to Moslem hostility to these animals having been deliberately fostered in the first place in Iran, as a point of opposition to the old (pre-Islamic jihad conquest) faith (i.e., Zoroastrianism) there. Certainly in the Yazdi area…Moslems found a double satisfaction in tormenting dogs, since they were thereby both afflicting an unclean creature and causing distress to the infidel who cherished him. There are grim…stories from the time (i.e., into the latter half of the 19th century) when the annual poll-tax (jizya) was exacted, of the tax gatherer tying a Zoroastrian and a dog together, and flogging both alternately until the money was somehow forthcoming, or death released them. I myself was spared any worse sight than that of a young Moslem girl…standing over a litter of two-week old puppies, and suddenly kicking one as hard as she could with her shod foot. The puppy screamed with pain, but at my angry intervention she merely said blankly, “But it’s unclean.” In Sharifabad I was told by distressed Zoroastrian children of worse things: a litter of puppies cut to pieces with a spade-edge, and a dog’s head laid open with the same implement; and occasionally the air was made hideous with the cries of some tormented animal. Such wanton cruelties on the Moslems’ part added not a little to the tension between the communities.
At The Glazov Gang in 2016, Peter Hammond made the case that because the distinguishing features of dogs – loyalty, self-sacrifice, devotion – so obviously represent the Good, Muslims hate them for that very reason. It’s certainly not impossible. But following upon Boyce, I suggest it is more plausible to imagine that Muslim hatred of dogs had nothing to do with their canine virtues, and everything to do with the desire to distinguish Muslims from Zoroastrians. Had not dogs but some other animal — say, cats — been revered in Zoroastrianism, then the hatred of cats rather than dogs would have “been fostered” in Islam in the same way, with one hadith having Muhammad report that angels refused to enter a house with cats, and another with Muhammad saying that Muslim prayers lose their efficacy if said while a cat passes. Dogs were hated by Muslims not because, pace Hammond, of their innate virtues, but simply because Zoroastrians placed so high a value on them: Despise whatever the kuffar revere.
Would that those in power began, possibly with the assistance of one or more of Spencer’s vademecum guides for the perplexed, including his soon-to-be-published English version of the Qur’an, to familiarize themselves with Islamic texts and teachings, to understand what the mosques and madrasas inculcate, to grasp the Islamic division of the world uncompromisingly between Dar al-Islam and Dar al-Harb, to take note of the Arab supremacism that perdures within a faith that claims to be universal, and to figure out what the spread of Islam means for all of us, the world’s Infidels, for our arts and sciences, for our freedoms of speech and religion, for our legal systems, for our household goods and gods, for the survival of our paintings and statues, and yes — also sprach Zarathustra – even for our dogs.
revereridesagain says
A couple of days ago a story appeared about a police officer in Kansas whose 3 month old German shepherd puppy had been kidnapped from her yard, beheaded, then dumped back onto her property. There was speculation that it was a hate crime against her because she is a cop, but now I wonder, given the choice of victim and the method, if there might have been more to it.
gravenimage says
Here’s this horrible story, revereridesagain:
“Kansas police search for person who beheaded officer’s puppy in ‘senseless attack’
https://www.kansascity.com/news/local/crime/article256581996.html#storylink=cpy
I see from the picture that the puppy was also black–another reason that Muslims may have targeted Ranger. Whoever did this, it is terrible. I hope they catch the perp.
Infidel says
It’s amazing that dogs could tell muslims from Zoroastrians. Now if only dogs could tell jihadists from MINOs – maybe we wouldn’t need all that islamophobia. Just like you have bomb-sniffing dogs, you could have islam detecting dogs ?
One of my friends told me about someone’s pet dog that happened to be the same type of breed that Koreans eat. One day, its owner was in a group that included a Korean, and as soon as the dog saw the Korean, it got mad ?
gravenimage says
It doesn’t surprise me, Infidel. In the 19th century there were probably also cues like clothing–but I bet the main thing was affect. If someone seemed to like dogs they would act very differently from those bent on doing them harm.
This is so sick–I can see them not keeping dogs themselves, but this murderous hatred goes *way* beyond this.
Keith O says
The simple fact that mudslimes have an aversion to one of the creators greatest gifts to humanity is evidence enough for me that something is amiss with their cult.
I also wonder if their dislike of pictures extends to the pics on drivers licences, passports and government hand out cards?
john smith says
Absolutely spot on Keith, and yes, dogs are one of the creators greatest gifts to humanity.
Rufolino says
It’s sick. Paranoia under another name.
gravenimage says
Good exchange.
And this savagery in Iran is not new, even from the state. This story is from two years ago:
“Iranians Protest State’s Brutal Killing Of Stray Dogs”
https://www.rferl.org/a/iran-dogs-killing-strays/30119463.html
john smith says
Horrifying Gravenimage, just to listen to that poor defenceless dog screaming in agony. I was pleasantly surprised for such a good turnout at the protest, which only goes to show that many Iranians are not as cold and heartless as the mullahs that control them.
Having said that though, I doubt you’d have a turnout anything like that had it been left to the Palestinians.
gravenimage says
Agree, John. The only good thing here is the large turnout protesting this brutal treatment of animals. But now the Mullahs have decided to double-down on this with this barbaric law.
As for the “Palestinians”, there is similar vicious crap going on there:
“Hamas bans dog walking through the Gaza Strip to ‘protect women and children'”
The proscribed organisation has forced dog owners to keep their pets indoors because they are ‘against culture and traditions in Gaza’
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/hamas-gaza-strip-occupied-palestinian-territories-facebook-israel-dogs-dog-walking-a7746101.html
Of course, the idea that this has anything to do with protecting women and children is utter tripe.
john smith says
Gravenmage, it really pains me when I read such stories or watch such videos, but nothing shocks me anymore when it comes to muslims, nothing. Their cruelty and savagery know no boundaries, and I often ask myself questions that I find difficult to answer. But I keep coming to the same conclusion, and that is, their souls have been lost to something that is truly evil and demonic, and we both know what that is.
Thanks for the additional link,
gravenimage says
Thank you, John.
roberta says
Iran has had something like a 7 year drought. This act of piety should get them some rain soon.
gravenimage says
Ha ha
Mark Spahn (West Seneca, NY) says
Hugh Fitzgerald sometimes writes with a kind of mind-expanding, clauses-within-clauses prose. Especially puzzling here is his one-sentence paragraph at the end: “Would that those in power … and yes — also sprach Zarathustra – even for our dogs.”
I don’t get the “thus spake Zarathustra” reference; did Zarathustra say something about dogs?
But more importantly, what is the meaning of sentence that begins with “Would that” and is followed by a subjunctive clause? I cannot find an explanation under “would that” in a dictionary.
Infidel says
‘Thus spake Zarathustra’ is a book by Nietzsche which purported to be what he said. As for Hugh’s grammar, you missed the glory days when he’d write a thousand word sentence, and million word paragraphs ?
gravenimage says
Spot on on both counts, Infidel.
And Zarathustra is also known as Zoroaster, the Persian founder of Zoroastrianism. Dogs are much loved and revered in Zorostrianism, which before Islam was the majority faith in Persia.
There are not many Zorostrians left in Iran today–25,000 at the most optimistic estimate–but this law is probably aimed at them, as well as at comparatively modern and hip urbanites in places like Tehran.
jewdog says
The Mullahs hate and fear anything that they consider to be superior to themselves in intelligence. That includes quite a wide taxonomy.
spiro says
Maybe it’s because the dogs are smarter
tim gallagher says
Most human beings can see what wonderful animals dogs are, so the fact that islam finds such excellent animals something to be hated says a lot about what a sick ideology islam is. If any country wanted to get rid of the dangerous influence of an “unclean” thing, such as say a hate filled, evil ideology, one which is so sick that it actually hates dogs, then an excellent idea would be to ban poisonous Islam and join the more civilised parts of humanity, whose minds are not constantly being poisoned by all of Islam’s barbaric, hate filled crap..
Rafael says
I cannot go anymore. I feel like lost everything. I cannot tolerate it anymore. I’m like living in a nightmare. No one understands me. But, the dogs, even though I was afraid of them in my childhood and am still afraid sometimes, they are better friends for me than most humans. They understand me better. I never had a dog but I miss all of the dogs that I fed with food when I was out for a picnic with my parents and brother on a small forest town in old Turkey. Those old days were like heaven for me. I also had virtual dogs in video games, especially on Minecraft, they protected me from monsters. Maybe those monsters are monsters of the Jihadist kind. I only hope that I could continue.
gravenimage says
Thanks for that touching account, Rafael. What are the chances of your being able to leave Turkey?
Rafael says
I think there is always a chance, gravenimage. As it becomes more and more Islamic day by day, I could be forced to leave Turkey at some point. I guess it would be difficult for me to get used to another country, so I hope for now that things would change in the country, though I doubt it. As you wrote in a comment before, gravenimage, ever since the targeting of Christians before and after the World War I, it has been clear that non-Muslims have no place in Turkey. But, I’m continuing to fighting and staying strong I hope.
gravenimage says
I *do* hope things change in Turkey, Rafael. But right now the only changes there seem to be for the worse. Stay safe.
Carol the 1st says
You dog lovers seem to be overlooking this:
“Iranians would be barred from owning, breeding, and transporting dogs, cats, rabbits, and other common pets.”
Animals inspire heart and tenderness. Not good jihadi tinder and thus an undoubted subversive element against the big, sanctified mind trap. And, as I’ve theorized before, (and to be frank), any dog worth it’s kibble would’ve wanted a rip-roaring chunk of Muhammad’s filthy, semen-stained butt.
gravenimage says
Carol, I think most here understand this. More proof that there is no love in Islam.
Proud Islamophobe says
Interesting about their “desire to distinguish themselves from the Zoroastrians.” I always thought it was because mohammed attempted to rape a black dog and it (rightfully) bit him; I still believe that.
Personally, I would love to see every animal of every kind gone from all moslem countries. Knowing that they’re *all* being abused and tormented would give me one less thing to grieve about in this world. My only concern in that case is *how* they do it.
As a born-again Christian, I do find satisfaction in God’s perfect judgment: There are many Biblical Scriptures that are crystal clear that what evil people have done to others including animals will be done to those same abusers in the afterlife.
gravenimage says
Proud Islamophobe, there are a small number of actual animal lovers in Iran.
But I also worry about what is going to happen–I very much doubt that these animals will be sent to nice “no-kill” shelters in the Netherlands, say.
There is probably going to be a horrible bloodbath of animals in Iran–and likely presecution of anyone caught who doesn’t hand their pets over for immediate extermination.
However bad things are now for animals in Iran–and I *very much* take your point here–they are apt to become *far worse* in the coming months.
Bernice says
I think “would that” means ” it would be desirable if…” “I wish…”
Mike Ramirez says
Yes, exactly! Muslims have a superstition and indoctrinated fear of dogs that has been taught through the sayings of Muhammad’s Ahadith. I first wrote about this in my treatise published in 2002 and then posted a comment about the fear of dogs at Daniel Pipes’ blog, dated Feb. 21, 2008, titled “True Reason Why Muslims Dislike Dogs.” https://www.danielpipes.org/comments/120729
gravenimage says
Great posts from you on that thread, Mike–especially in reply to the mendacious Muslim apologist Masoor. I notice he never did bother to answer you when you noted that the “Angel Jibreel” was said to be scared off by a puppy–so much for his claim that the ban on dogs is just against dangerous animals. Ludicrous Taqiyya–obviously this is not what the unhinged Islamic hatred of dogs is all about.
gravenimage says
Why Iran Bans Dogs
………………..
Yes, this savagery is all perfectly Islamic. Islam *hates* dogs.
And they are going after cats, as well. You sometimes hear a supposed account of the “Prophet” Muhammed going to pray cutting the sleeve off his garment so as not to disturb his sleeping cat. The only problem with this is that this seems to appear *nowhere* before 1977, where it was published in the Cat Catalogue from the US, which included anecdotes about cats from history and all over the world. My guess is that there was nothing from the Middle East, and so some contributor decided to add this tale for “color”. In reality, many Muslims are hideously cruel to cats a well as dogs.
Perhaps the oddest thing on this disgusting list is donkeys–quite a few Iranians in rural areas still use donkeys to carry loads. Perhaps this will be aimed at those Iranians who actually like their donkeys and fail to beat them regularly…
From the first boy’s shoes and shirt this is obviously a pretty contemporary image:
https://res.cloudinary.com/twenty20/private_images/t_watermark-criss-cross-10/v1547240788000/photosp/c9f98350-064a-4d36-8400-8b8b2c9fe0f8/stock-photo-traditional-riding-donkey-boys-village-iran-narrow-street-iranian-traditional-village-c9f98350-064a-4d36-8400-8b8b2c9fe0f8.jpg
I fear what is going to happen to these animals, as well as the peiople keeping them.
God, I hate Islam.
OLD GUY says
I think I know why these muslim men hate these small animals, they can’t have sex with them like a camel or sheep or 6 yr. old child brides. Sorry but they are about that ridiculous.
Christopher Watson says
Why were these sub-humans on a bus in the first place? These muslims come to our country and then try to impose their Pre-historic ideology! How dare they! And we are willing to discuss their complaints? Perhaps we’d like to discuss their rules in Iran?
Carol the 1st says
Service animals will likely be tolerated, but many rejected donkeys and doggies may actually be getting a “reprieve” from too much “luvvin” – or is Iran any different from say Turkey or Pakistan?
Apostate Prophet and Miss Pakistan have made some revealing comments recently (about 49:50 plus):
Miss Pakistan Mahleej Sarkari’s Journey Out of Islam
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AMIwuvK_m8Q
gravenimage says
I doubt there will be much of a crackdown on animal rape–after all, the Ayatollah Khomeini himself condoned it. *Ugh*.