Muslims are at the heart of a dog-fighting epidemic in the UK

I FIND the idea of organised dog-fights utterly despicable, and regard those who engage in this horrifying pastime as savages who deserve nothing less than having their nuts crushed in the jaws of a grumpy pit-bull terrier.

So it was with gritted teeth that I forced myself last night to listen to a BBC Radio 4 programme uncovering the facts behind a 400 percent surge in dog-fighting in the UK in last three years.

And the culprits are overwhelmingly Muslim – but the politically-correct BBC studiously avoided the “M” word, choosing instead to describe these barbarians as “British Asians” from a Pakistani background.

These men are relishing a dog-fighting event in Pakistan

These men are pictured relishing a dog-fighting event in Pakistan

The programme – The Report – used as its foundation the breaking up of a dog- fighting ring in the mainly-Pakistani enclave of Alum Rock in Birmingham two years ago.

Twenty-six men were eventually convicted for taking part in the largest illegal dog-fight uncovered in the UK.

The RSPCA had long regarded dog-fighting as the preserve of white working class men attending fights in the countryside.

What the fight in Alum Rock revealed, said the BBC, was the first glimpse of organised dog fighting in the Asian community taking place in urban surroundings, wuth tens of thousands of pounds gambled on the result.

Subsequent raids have revealed that dog-fighting has become a problem in some sections of the Asian community, said the BBC

Ian Briggs, chief inspector of the RSPCA’s Special Operations Unit said dog-fighting is up 400 percent:

Out of all the work we do 98 percent is Asian.

Mr Briggs said the organisation believes there is a dog fight nearly every week nationally from a small fight in the park to the bigger organised events such as that uncovered at Alum Rock.

Information about one fight we uncover leads to another but certainly we are scratching the surface.

A youth worker from Handsworth said the goal among those engaged in dog-fights goal was to create a perfect fighting specimen.

They’re looking for a more exotic dog, more jaw pressure, one which has got more stamina, the drive just to kill, that’s what they are looking for, them characteristics people will pay money for. That’s where the money’s at.

Dog fighting is part of life in rural Punjab and Kashmir and there are fears that its acceptability could be increasing among a new generation of young Asians in the UK aware of fathers, uncles and cousins attending fights in Pakistan.

But forensic psychologist Dr Vince Egan, of the University of Leicester, believes this creates real dangers of a tolerance of cruelty and of lowering ideas of “what is acceptable”.

The RSPCA says it is keen on tackling this problem in the British Pakistani community but is finding it hard to penetrate the gangs.

And while the majority of the community find the fights abhorrent, there is among others – as one Asian youth worker explained – certain apathy.

People say ‘the dog wants to fight’. I don’t believe that at all because it’s the human being that’s taking the dog to fight. They haven’t got a choice about being in that ring.

You can  listen to the programme via the BBC iPlayer after broadcast or download the podcast.

On June 29, the BBC reported that man described as a key player in a major dog-fighting scene was sentenced to four months in jail and banned from keeping dogs for life.

Barkat Hussain, 44, from Unett Street, Smethwick, West Midlands, trained pit-bull terriers for fighting and kept related medical supplies.

He admitted keeping and training pit-bulls dogs in breach of a court order.

He had previously been jailed and banned from keeping dogs, following involvement in a mass dog fight.

62 responses to “Muslims are at the heart of a dog-fighting epidemic in the UK”

  1. Dan says:

    It's also worth pointing out that Punjab is where Sikhism was founded. So is dog fighting more or less common among those with a Sikh background than those from a Muslim background? We don't know, do we?

  2. GNG says:

    So Ian and David. My position is embarrassing is it? And I've gone over the top? I don't think so. Bleat to Barry all you want David, but this is an area for people to air their views and these are mine. Let's see what you have to say here.

    "Aren't we familiar enough with empty arguments such as "Atheists have no morals", "Atheism leads to dictatorships", etc., to know better than apply similarly fatuous arguments to our opponents?"

    Why is it wrong for people to say "Atheists have no morals", "Atheism leads to dictatorships", etc.? Because it's simply not true – that's why. Atheists, as we all know, have no doctrine to follow therefore whatever an Atheist does, comes from his or her own mind and not from some book which tells them how to behave. Someone who does not believe in god and who may label themselves as an Atheist, may well be a mass murderer for instance, or a dictator, but not because an Atheist doctrine tells them that this is the correct way to behave.

    So you seem to be implying that we should extend this same line of thinking to religious people – muslims for example. I strongly disagree! Muslims behave as they do precisely because of their doctrine and if you have ever read the koran or anything about the life of mohammed, you will know that he was an evil retarded paedophile and islam is no more than an evil death cult, concocted by him in an attempt to gain power and wealth and to enable him to get to shag as many women as he could while he was at it – and of course, little girls too.

    Muslims, including Yasmin Alibhai-Brown I'm sure, consider mo to be the perfect example of the perfect man. Is this not evidence enough that, even if as you suggest, they do have a moral compass, it's pointing way in the wrong direction? Due to the actions of this vile, nasty piece of work, paedophilia is rife in islamic countries and communities and is not even considered paedophilia but perfectly acceptable behaviour, as long as you marry the poor unfortunate little victims first. This and many other crimes against humanity are the doctrine of islam. If you can think of a crime against humanity, it's probably in the koran as acceptable behaviour as long as it is acted out against non believers – or muslim women. So what the fuck are 'decent' people like Yasmin Alibhai-Brown doing following this evil death cult then?

  3. GNG says:

    I do not say what I say because I'm a biggot, but through EXPERIENCE. I used to be the first to jump to the defence of islam up until about 18months ago when I started to discover the truth for myself. I had been going out with a muslim woman for a few years and she had 'taught' me all I knew up until then. I knew other muslims too. She and they were all people who you would consider reasonable, decent people but I have to admit that I made allowances for them at the time though I didn't realise it then. There really isn't room to expand on this here, but now that I understand more about islam, I see what was going on with these 'nice' people.

    With most muslims, all it takes is to scratch the surface a little and something else is revealed. I did this with this woman I was going out with. We'd split up by then because she was veering more and more towards her religion and I was not interested by then in converting in order that we could take the relationship further, though I have to say that I had considered converting for that very reason. But the more I looked into it, the more I realised that I was getting into something which was just not for me. I just don't believe in god or religions and I never really have.

    We did discuss islam later and she denied even any MENTION of the word hell in the koran!!! To cut a long story short, when I said that I thought that islamists, given the chance would turn the UK into another Iraq, with thousands being slaughtered every month, without missing a beat she barked back instantly "Why should you people get a way with it!?" Get away with what exactly? This is the thing. The victim mentality and the overriding belief that non muslims are the enemy. They started this, or rather mo did when he made those claims about non believers being "the vilest of animals" and gave out instructions from god that we should be destroyed.

    Even an organisation like hizb ut tahrir, who go to great lengths to try to convince us that they are non violent, clearly have division between muslims and non muslims in mind. Just go and take a look at the tripe on their website. Apparently, everything that the west does, even when it's appeasing muslims, is a conspiracy to undermine islam. They incite hatred against the west amongst muslims and this is the acceptable face – according to our government and western islamic apologists – of islam. The non violent truth. These people have political aspirations and want to take over the west. Let's see if embarrassment is all you feel when you are living as dhimi's in your own country – if it ever comes to that – and believe me, if they get their chance (and they're working on it now) it will be.

    Also, when you're talking about nice muslims, don't forget taqiyya.

    Godless not gormless

  4. Godless and gormless, it appears that bitter personal experience has led you to swallow whole the paranoid Jihad-Watch ideology of imminent Muslim invasion and takeover, where “even” (!) Hizb ut Tahir are seeking to sow division. I could spend a lot of time telling you exactly why this is bollocks, but your propensity to go off on wild tangential rants is indicative of a mind that is set in its own irrational ways, and experience tells me that it is really not worth the effort.

    So I will limit myself to saying that yes, your words are acutely embarrassing, and your lack of personal insight only serves to make them more so. For future reference, phrases of such ignorant bigotry and hatred as “Muslims are barbaric. They are happiest when they are killing” are not acceptable here. I am the administrator of this website, and if you come up with any more shit like that, you will be banned. Got it?

  5. GNG says:

    I don't consider it to be bitter personal experience, just experience. And I don't consider there to be a threat of an imminent muslim invasion, this is already happening and has been for some time now. I can't believe that you would consider hizb ut tahir as being anything other than typical divisive muslim retards hell bent on the destruction of the west and the civilised way of life. I can read too David and it's all there for all to see on their website.

    I'm sure your muslims friends will be proud that they have taught you well and will be happy to see that you take your dhimmitude seriously. Go ahead and ban me then. That's what islam is all about isn't it? Oppression! You are just proving me right.

    So much for free thought and freedom of expression! You're a muslim in the making! Just as well really isn't it, since that way you might just be able to keep your head on your shoulders – for all the good it's doing there!

    Godless not gormless

  6. GNG says:

    If you're the administrator of this website, why did you allow this 'grossly unfair' article to get on here then?

  7. Dan says:

    If we don't welcome incessant evangelisation on our comments boards, I don't see why we should welcome venomous prejudice either.

    We want our stuff to be read. If people come here and just see a load of sub-Nazi crap disfiguring The Freethinker name, they won't read it, and they won't tell their friends. Unless their friends are similarly prejudiced.

    I don't want people like that to feel that The Freethinker is a comfortable home for them, and I don't want to end up like "The Truth Seeker" (founded in 1873) did for so many years, hijacked by racism and prejudice.


  8. Leosia says:

    If we consider dog-fighting to be illegal, for which prosecutions should take place, then it is useful to know that the majority of the increase in dog-fighting is taking place in the muslim communities. This is simple cause and effect. One of the reasons why the UK and the rest of Europe is not effectively tackling terrorism and the rise of religious violence in general is because the media and the government uses politically correct language which fails to describe the cause of the blame.

    For instance, to call a terrorist a terrorist or extremist is a big mistake, because it separates them from the group to which they really belong – which is muslims. We should be calling terrorists muslims, and asking the wider muslim community why they are not doing anything about it.

  9. mr c says:

    it is indeed a typical scenario nowadays that even the supposed freethinker website (supposedly endorsing the delight of free speech) is moderated by someone who has an inclination to protect and groom the muslim people yet without (supposedly) being one.

    Perhaps with the name of this site it is so much more ironic that the total freedom of opinion is actual not so – well not so if you are opposed to the islamic torrent.

  10. Nada chance says:

    Whether or not these men are Muslims, it’s clear from this article that it is nothing to do with their religion that they are into dog fighting.

    Bull crap. Islam teaches hatred of dogs in particular. You can bet that these savages find it completely in line with their religion to abuse these animals. And they will continue to use Islam as a justification, if they are stopped. They will cry “Islamophobia!” and “religious oppression” until the libtards give them the right – without legal interference – to commit whatever violent heinous crimes they wish against ALL animals, including humans.

    You are naive if you believe otherwise.

  11. Kabir says:

    Islam does not teach cruelty or hatred of dogs.
    It is the sliva of the dog that must be washed off a persons body,clothes or any bowl or utensil a person wishes to use to eat with.
    The Quran (islamic book) mentions the dog going to heaven.
    It mentions a lady who had committed awfull sins and then helped a thirsty dog,she too would go to heaven.
    It mentions the people of the cave who asked for refuge and were shown a safe place in the cave, they stayed their with their dog and all of them would go to heaven.
    Cruelty towards any living being is strongly apposed in Islam.

    Please don’t make judgements on an entire religion from a news story or an article on the internet or even the acts of terrorists. It is not Muslims who are terrorists.
    Study the Quran thoroughly to get the full facts.

    At one time all dogs were ordered to be killed in a particular region, this was due to the spread of rabis.
    Remember foot and mouth? how many animals were killed in the uk?

    The prophet mohammed (PBUH) actually liked dogs and even ordered his people to take a d-tour when they were on horse back so that they would not disturb a pregnant bitch.

    It is true many asian people will walk away from a dog, won’t stroke it or entertain a dog in any way. This is because of the passing down of knowledge from elders who themselves were told by word from someone who had interpreted something that someone else had interpreted instead of actually reading up from the Quran themselves.

    Just like many of us have done on this thread by saying Islam teaches cruelty towards animals and is a barbaric religion. Because of media, terrorism, and our ignorance for not studying the subject (religion) properly ourselves.

    The people from brumy were not punjabis,they are mirpuris.
    Dog fighting is not acceptable in pakistani law. It is the corrupt police who let it go on.
    Dog fighting was here in the uk a long time before the asian community started getting involved.
    Infact it is possible that it was introduced in india by the British in the first place, who knows…

  12. Simon says:

    Surely linking this barbaric practice to Islam is the same as linking fox hunting to Christianity.

    I woudn’t let Muslims or members of any religion off the hook if they were acting in a certain way because of their faith. And some of them often do. I don’t believe this to be the case here. The fact they are Muslims is purely circumstantial.

    What I love about Atheism and Freethought is that I believe it will eventually prevail. This is because it is based on truth and not superstitious gibberish. Freethought is based on facts and science provides us with more and more of them on a daily basis. Therefore it is vital that we don’t resort to totally unfounded ad hominem attacks as this makes us look like bigoted simpletons and does nothing for the cause.