Our British correspondent JP sent a tip this morning about what I’ve been referring to since as the “dog jihad” video. The woman featured in the video — which was taken by her friend on a smart phone — was confronted by a culturally enriched Tower Hamlets Enforcement Officer (THEO), who accused her of violating the borough’s dog-fouling law while walking her dog in the park. She denied the charge — she had cleaned up after her dog — and demanded that he “show me the poo”, which he refused to do.
THEOs are not civilians, but they are not full police officers, either. This one had to call for police backup to handle these two dangerous women and their dogs. The real police decided that the woman had committed no offense, and did not charge her.
The “dog jihad”, like the parking jihad, the alcohol jihad, and all the other tactics employed by zealous Muslims in the neighborhoods where they dominate, is yet another aspect of block-busting. It serves to annoy and inconvenience the kuffar. It makes them uncomfortable and anxious in the streets and parks near their own homes. They learn to conform outwardly to sharia norms, or they move away to escape the harassment. Either outcome is satisfactory from the point of view of the sharia-compliance enforcers.
Many thanks to Vlad Tepes for leveling the sound and uploading this video:
Watch the original video here.
JP includes more information below, and speculates about other possible motives for the THEO’s behavior besides sharia-enforcement.
More on THEOs
Too easy to jump to conclusions after watching the dog-fouling YouTube video and rush to see it as a case of Islamic harassment of Judeo-Christian dog-walkers, which perhaps it is. But worth bearing in mind that the zealous enforcement officer might possibly be motivated to an equal or greater extent by performance-pay-driven targets — the more citizens he apprehends and fines, the greater his take-home pay. Perhaps. Still, it leaves an uncomfortable impression of the potential for abuse inherent in this political police force, a point hinted at in the Daily Express article from 2009 linked to below, and from which I have extracted the key points.
But then we have the Tower Hamlets Poop Scoop Law — is this not excessively zealous and might it not be evidence of an Islamic prejudice against dogs and dog-owners? Note the tone and language used at the council’s Poop Scoop Law webpage (key words emphasised by this writer):
- vigorous enforcement of the Dogs (Fouling of Land) Act
- clean up must be immediate
- plain clothes/vehicle patrols used to check whether owners complying with the law
- A team of four dog wardens patrol the streets seven days a week
- Average fine between 1 Apr 2007 and 31 Mar 2008 was £87 plus £88 costs.
Compare with Westminster Council’s Dog Fouling webpage — calm, reasonable, down-to-earth.
Recently, the Labour opposition at Tower Hamlets submitted a motion condemning Mayor Lutfur Rahman’s failure to crack down on crime. From the Show me the poo YouTube video we might get an inkling where Mayor Rahman’s priorities lie.
THEOs — Key points
- Growing trend by councils to assemble their own mini-police forces, accountable to politicians rather than the public.
- They have no powers of arrest but can demand names and addresses to issue fines. Refusal to comply can be a criminal offence.
- Paid for by council taxpayers, this “third tier” of policing raises money for town hall budgets by fining people at least £50 for dropping litter, offensive behaviour or allowing dogs to foul the pavement.
- Dermot Lineham, Croyden Council, told his enforcement officers to stay clear of anyone looking threatening, telling them instead: “focus activities on adults who are less likely to attack and more likely to pay fixed penalty notices.”