Emirati Man sentenced to 90 days of community service for feeding a live cat to his dogs

[Natan]

A sentence for feeding a live cat to dogs makes sense, but what about feeding a live mouse to cats?

 

[Hell hound]

Bhai meray maano billi ki

duniya kay system say jo ek bayzuban ko jitna insaf mil sakta tha woh mil gya par rab ka insaf or us ki lathi abhi baqi hay meray dost

A sentence for feeding a live cat to dogs makes sense, but what about feeding a live mouse to cats?

pest vs pet
your comparison makes no sense

 

[Blue Marlin]

why didn't they just feed that particular human to the dog ?

 

[~Phoenix~]

They need to be shoved into a rabid dog's cage , look what they did with that poor cat @RealNapster @Hell hound @Levina @~Phoenix~ @B+ Dracula

"Arabs"

 

[SherDil]

crime
Man who fed cat to dogs ordered to clean Dubai Zoo for 90 days

The Emirati man and his two employees have been ordered to clean Dubai Zoo for four hours for 90 days

Ali Al Shouk, Staff Reporter

d15:27 March 15, 2017

https://twitter.com/x/status/841985112623456257

Zoo


The man has been ordered to clean the zoo for four hours for 90 days

Image Credit Dubai Media Office






Dubai: The Emirati man who uploaded a gruesome video showing a live cat being fed to his hungry dogs has been ordered to clean Dubai Zoo for four hours every day for 90 days.



The punishment was ordered by His Highness Shaikh Mohammad Bin Rashid Al Maktoum, Vice-President and Prime Minister of the UAE and Ruler of Dubai, a day after the man and his two employees were arrested by Dubai Police at a farm.



Dubai Media office said: “By orders from Mohammad Bin Rahid, the men involved in cat cruelty incident to clean Dubai zoo facilities for four hours daily for three month as community service because of their savage and cruel behaviour which is against our values and Islam that always courage to be mercy on animals.”



On Tuesday, the three men were arrested by Dubai Police after the Emirati man posted the gruesome video of feeding a cat to dogs.














On Wednesday, Major General Abdullah Khalifa Al Merri, Dubai Police chief, praised Shaikh Mohammad’s order for community service punishment.



“Shaikh Mohammed keen to protect the Emirati values which emphasise on mercy and reject any form of violence even against animals. The inappropriate conduct is not acceptable and punishable by the law,” Major General Al Merri said.



“The community service orders the person to serve the society and also helps to raise awareness about the negative side of such offences. The punishment will act as a deterrent for all.”



On Tuesday, he had identified the man behind this horrible video and arrested him for killing the cat.



The shocking video, that showed a man holding a live cat in a cage and feeding it to two dogs, outraged residents and officials from different departments.

@Signalian @Doordie @Djinn @SherDil @war&peace

Hun Araaam ay??? A very honest & noble punishment.

 

[Luffy 500]

And what makes this worse is all of these values are really subjective and are the subject of much philosophical and ethical debate.

What is freedom of expression? where does it starts and where does it is end. If there's no agreement on this subject but you, as different western countries, WENT AHEAD regardless and decided for yourselves. And with each country having their own view on where the line ends and where it starts, how dare you condemn us for attempting to draw our OWN line in this spectrum.

An example is bullying laws in the Canada or holocaust denial in the EU.

Let's examine holocaust denial for example. In the U.S. it is a matter of freedom of expression, but in the EU that expression is not protected and is punishable by law. "They draw the line here" as they say. Why then they are not condemned? does it hurt anyone? is "hurting" someone with your word is the criteria?! who gets to decide which speech "hurts" and how much and who is the subject of that pain?! doesn't false propaganda aiming to undermine an elected president considered "hurt"?! why can't it be protected by same such laws?


It's not just freedom of expression, but other subjective concepts also, such as dress codes. Where they condemn middle eastern societies for "subjugating" women, just for following their traditional clothing norms. When many western societies are ridden with "indecent" exposure laws and gender discrimination when it comes to exposing different parts of the body. THIS IS SUBJECTIVE, and is something inherent in YOUR culture and is no by any means a universal standard!

They give themselves the freedom to decide how much is "too much" and still be free of condemnation, but they deny other cultures and societies that freaking SAME privilege.

Why is it okay for you but not for us? Does that make the EU, US or even Japan autocratic and undemocratic?!

NO. Because westerners are a selective bunch of hypocrites. And we are DONE trying to appease to them and their illogical and biased views.

Nice to see another brother having the same views as mine in these issues. The problem with Muslims whether in east or the west is that, we after coming out of an westernized education mill, starts to take western ideas and social constructs as the default standard and a norm. This is where we are still in a colonized (intellectually colonized) state. The more Muslims think like you the the quicker we would come out of this position and would grow a spine and learn to think for ourselves. All the social turmoils we have in the muslim world can be traced back to this intellectual colonized condition we are in.

In essence you're rejecting the way in which 4 rightly guided khalifah were accepted ?

The system of monarch is doomed to fail. Because the whole land belongs to one person and the resident are just subject. He can legally withdraw their nationality as done in Bahrain protests. Its really a 16 century system which has no place in modern society


Although Saudis has most stable monarchy system that seeks to support its local population well. Its only how after the Arabians were tricked by Some eastern treacherous country into Yemen war, other than that it was indeed the most stable country in whole of gulf or arabuan peninsula

With all due respect brother, the 4 khalifas were chosen in different ways. Eg. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) appointed Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). Usman (may Allah be pleased with him) was elected by a council of senior sahabas etc. NO they were NOT elected via popular vote as there were NO such concepts then but they did have the consent of the masses and the masses gave them baya (allegiance). One of the greatest & pious of the post-rashidun kalifas in islamic history is Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (may Allah have mercy on him) who inherited power via dynastic system. Taking power by force (as long as the ruler upholds islamic values or does NOT force muslims to go against their religion) is also accepted in Islam and both the Abbasids and Ottomans took power by force. One of the pious & successful Mughal emperors Aurangzeeb (may Allah have mercy on him) also took power by force. And then you have the example of mamluks, where a group of military generals exercised effective power but had a symbolic khalifa with 0 powers as the head of state.

What these all proves is that Islam did NOT stipulate a rigid structure for governance. It emphasized consensus and consent of the masses but that Islamic stipulation can NOT be reinterpreted to suit western notions of "democracy" or "anti-monarchy" both of which is strictly European development shaped by their unique culture and history. Such reinterpretation would be intellectually very shallow and short-sighted without taking long term consequences in perspective IMHO.

And who decides what a modern society should be like? Definitely Harvard and princeton academics and political scientist can NOT decide that for the Muslim world. Do you know that the term modernity it self is a western construct - where the notion of modernity is synonymous with western socio-cultural development and values. I as a Muslim do NOT want my society and Muslims world to ape the west to get the certificate of modernity.

And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion.
[Quran 2:120]

Look at turkey where westernized kemalist forced secularism on it and blindly aped the west for a century but since the self-determined and self-conscious Muslims of anatolia did NOT give up their religion they have been rejected by the west and is virulently attacked. Erdogan is formulating a system that suits Turkey's current socio-political climate but since its NOT in line with western interest the west is virulently against it , even though the system Erdogan is proposing is democratic and republican in nature.

Do NOT get me wrong, I am NOT saying Muslim countries should have slave mentality dictatorships like Egypt, Bangladesh, Syria, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan etc. Infact given the current divided socio-political structure of the Muslim world - its vital to have elected governments that rule by consent of the masses for the sake of stability. BUT no need to call that using western term "democracy" as that carries a lot of anti-islamic ideological baggage. And in the same breath there is absolutely NO need to criticize or condemn Muslim monarchies that are stable and enjoy consent of the masses. Due to historical development Pakistan can NOT have a monarchy that have consent of the masses BUT the saudis can. Why criticize the monarchy based on our own biases shaped by western notions. Consider this fable in a alternative historical development for example - if subcontinent had a Muslim dominated demography, most likely subcontinent would have been a united constitutional monarchy like Malaysia, with a Muslim mughal emperor at the helm and the muslim demographics could have very well been like that of malaysia or nigeria (60-40 in our favor). Remember the princely states - many monarchs of the princely states were highly respected by the masses.

We should judge Muslim governments (whether elected OR monarchs) based on Islamic principles and parameters of right & wrong and see if they are providing an environment where society is growing and developing in an islamic way or not. And most importantly we should be consistent in our judgement.

I humbly apologize if my post gives a rude vibe. I just expressed my deeply held views on such issues to a fellow Muslim brother. I hope you would not take it in any negative way.

No, we were not tricked by anybody. Houthi is an amred non-state actor. Houthis seized power in Yemen, and Houthis are a proxy of Iran. Houthis have had support from terrorist groups like Hezbollah for quite some time.

This selective reasoning trying to appease to you and others like you is also done. If you think AlQaida is dangerous and is bad and must go (we do to) then their Shite counterparts must go and be dealt with in the same way.

Hezbollat
IRGC
Houthis
Quds force
Al Jahsh al shabi
the other+50 militias in Iraq
etc etc

Anything that is bad in the so-called "Sunni" groups, Hezbollat invented in the 80's. From self-detonating into attacking foreign embassies and compounds.

JUst because they're shite you view them differently?

Did you notice the west is NOT as virulent and critical of these pro-iranian groups as they are to the sunni groups (whether extremist/terrorist or NOT). The civil war in syria is a case point. Rebels are painted with the same brush as ISIS, whereas Hezb'saytan & Assad is given a free pass and their inhuman unprecedented atrocities are whitewashed by the western press.

 

[salarsikander]

Nice to see another brother having the same views as mine in these issues. The problem with Muslims whether in east or the west is that, we after coming out of an westernized education mill, starts to take western ideas and social constructs as the default standard and a norm. This is where we are still in a colonized (intellectually colonized) state. The more Muslims think like you the the quicker we would come out of this position and would grow a spine and learn to think for ourselves. All the social turmoils we have in the muslim world can be traced back to this intellectual colonized condition we are in.



With all due respect brother, the 4 khalifas were chosen in different ways. Eg. Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) appointed Umar (may Allah be pleased with him). Usman (may Allah be pleased with him) was elected by a council of senior sahabas etc. NO they were NOT elected via popular vote as there were NO such concepts then but they did have the consent of the masses and the masses gave them baya (allegiance). One of the greatest & pious of the post-rashidun kalifas in islamic history is Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (may Allah have mercy on him) who inherited power via dynastic system. Taking power by force (as long as the ruler upholds islamic values or does NOT force muslims to go against their religion) is also accepted in Islam and both the Abbasids and Ottomans took power by force. One of the pious & successful Mughal emperors Aurangzeeb (may Allah have mercy on him) also took power by force. And then you have the example of mamluks, where a group of military generals exercised effective power but had a symbolic khalifa with 0 powers as the head of state.

What these all proves is that Islam did NOT stipulate a rigid structure for governance. It emphasized consensus and consent of the masses but that Islamic stipulation can NOT be reinterpreted to suit western notions of "democracy" or "anti-monarchy" both of which is strictly European development shaped by their unique culture and history. Such reinterpretation would be intellectually very shallow and short-sighted without taking long term consequences in perspective IMHO.

And who decides what a modern society should be like? Definitely Harvard and princeton academics and political scientist can NOT decide that for the Muslim world. Do you know that the term modernity it self is a western construct - where the notion of modernity is synonymous with western socio-cultural development and values. I as a Muslim do NOT want my society and Muslims world to ape the west to get the certificate of modernity.

And never will the Jews or the Christians approve of you until you follow their religion.
[Quran 2:120]

Look at turkey where westernized kemalist forced secularism on it and blindly aped the west for a century but since the self-determined and self-conscious Muslims of anatolia did NOT give up their religion they have been rejected by the west and is virulently attacked. Erdogan is formulating a system that suits Turkey's current socio-political climate but since its NOT in line with western interest the west is virulently against it , even though the system Erdogan is proposing is democratic and republican in nature.

Do NOT get me wrong, I am NOT saying Muslim countries should have slave mentality dictatorships like Egypt, Bangladesh, Syria, Kazakhstan, Uzbekistan etc. Infact given the current divided socio-political structure of the Muslim world - its vital to have elected governments that rule by consent of the masses for the sake of stability. BUT no need to call that using western term "democracy" as that carries a lot of anti-islamic ideological baggage. And in the same breath there is absolutely NO need to criticize or condemn Muslim monarchies that are stable and enjoy consent of the masses. Due to historical development Pakistan can NOT have a monarchy that have consent of the masses BUT the saudis can. Why criticize the monarchy based on our own biases shaped by western notions. Consider this fable in a alternative historical development for example - if subcontinent had a Muslim dominated demography, most likely subcontinent would have been a united constitutional monarchy like Malaysia, with a Muslim mughal emperor at the helm and the muslim demographics could have very well been like that of malaysia or nigeria (60-40 in our favor). Remember the princely states - many monarchs of the princely states were highly respected by the masses.

We should judge Muslim governments (whether elected OR monarchs) based on Islamic principles and parameters of right & wrong and see if they are providing an environment where society is growing and developing in an islamic way or not. And most importantly we should be consistent in our judgement.

I humbly apologize if my post gives a rude vibe. I just expressed my deeply held views on such issues to a fellow Muslim brother. I hope you would not take it in any negative way.



Did you notice the west is NOT as virulent and critical of these pro-iranian groups as they are to the sunni groups (whether extremist/terrorist or NOT). The civil war in syria is a case point. Rebels are painted with the same brush as ISIS, whereas Hezb'saytan & Assad is given a free pass and their inhuman unprecedented atrocities are whitewashed by the western press.

Excellent post ! Something to learn from. I'm very pleased by members who give their genuine attempt yo educate rather than lookmdown upon because of ones lack of understanding. And your tone was also humble. You sir are added to my fav list of people from who I can genuinely learn .

God bless you

 

[Tps43]

I swear to Almighty , if I ever got a chance , iam gonna personally throw these ****** in front of Alaskan malamutes for a good 5 minutes

@Max @tps77 @Areesh @PaklovesTurkiye @2800 @haman10

What a *****

 

[jamahir]

I swear to Almighty , if I ever got a chance , iam gonna personally throw these ****** in front of Alaskan malamutes for a good 5 minutes

@Max @tps77 @Areesh @PaklovesTurkiye @2800 @haman10

If I had the authority I would have personally shot that two-legged dog.

A sentence for feeding a live cat to dogs makes sense, but what about feeding a live mouse to cats?

Among other things, the cat is a wise animal.

 

[Hack-Hook]

to putting his life into risk while entering the cages of dangerous animals...

nobody enter the cages when they are inside it

With democracy, you have a choice in the next and a limited time to enjoy or hate him... meaning you state could survive... while full monarchy you can't...

no you don't have a choice in democracy , you have illusion of having a choice

 

[Dai Toruko]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1181483310154956800

 

[war&peace]

nobody enter the cages when they are inside it


no you don't have a choice in democracy , you have illusion of having a choice

Congratulations... you opened a 2.5 years old thread..

 

[Hack-Hook]

Congratulations... you opened a 2.5 years old thread..

but Jamahir opened it

 

[jamahir]

no you don't have a choice in democracy , you have illusion of having a choice

You are correct. In a Representative Democracy system, which most of the West has, and so do others who have adopted the Western model, as you said, one only has an illusion of choice.

On the other hand, a Direct Democracy system, like what Switzerland has ( to an extent ) and what Libya had until 2011, it is real democracy. The people have a choice in selecting the issues that affect them and directly removing the problems they face even at neighborhood-level.

In India, there are two political movements - the AAP party and the Swaraj Abhiyan movement - which propagate Direct Democracy.

Congratulations... you opened a 2.5 years old thread..

but Jamahir opened it

I was extremely saddened by what that psycho had done to the cat.

 

[war&peace]

but Jamahir opened it

No problem but what did you mean by "nobody enter the cages when they are inside it"

I was extremely saddened by what that psycho had done to the cat.

ohh you softy.. yeah I was also horrified by this act as well.