"Muslim groups . . . called for greater understanding of cultural differences."

Fine, I agree. But the bottom line is "when in Rome, do as the Romans do". Isn't it about time that Muslims understood the cultural differences that make England different from, say, Saudi Arabia or Pakistan?

Posted by: JFGR at January 22, 2007 7:31 AM

A state within a state, complete with its own police force. Next, the Muslim cops will declare that the only laws they will uphold will be sharia laws. This insanity is getting out of hand.

Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at January 22, 2007 7:44 AM

I have a RC religious upbringing. In my "culture", there is a commandment that instructs us Catholics that "Thou shall not kill."

That being said, there are many people in the police force with religious affiliations. Since membership in the force is VOLUNTARY, it is understood that the participants put aside their personal beliefs and take an oath to uphold their secular duties as prescribed by their authorities.

This is just one of many examples, we see on a daily basis, of Islamists attempting to infiltrate and subjugate the existing laws and cultures that they supposedly immigrate into.

Islam is compatible with Islam, and little else in this world. This Islamist woman should be fired summarily. If she has problems shaking hands with her superiors, there is little doubt that her ability and effectiveness to perform her required secular duties will be compromised.

Posted by: awake at January 22, 2007 8:56 AM

I don't think that this issue is important in itself. Compare it to the few Sikh coppers I've seen wearing a type of turban with a badge on it rather than a normal helmet. Their special requirements are being catered for. The difference between Sikh police officers and Muslim ones however, is that there is, as far as I can see, no real reason to question the overall loyalties of a Sikh PC, unlike a Muslim one.

Posted by: Elephant at January 22, 2007 9:04 AM

Off topic:

Forceful campaign by CAIR to silence the free speech

Ummah News Links

Posted by: ummahnewslinks at January 22, 2007 10:45 AM

The British need constables that will protect and defend British citizens in agreement with British sensibilites and customs.

The idea that the British police force should accept alien customs and ways of seeing the world should be automatically rejected. Would the United States allow immigrants from North Korea to join the police force and then stand by as those North Koreans began systematically arresting ACLU employees because the lawyers were a 'threat to the great father, George Bush'?

I don't think so. Britons should understand that promoting persons who still believe the precepts of alien cultures are in fact allowing the alien cultures to rule over them. Britons will not have the same level of support and protection they have come to expect from the police force. It is a grave error to allow those who follow alien customs to have any authority in a paramilitary organization like the police.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at January 22, 2007 11:01 AM

Does this mean she won't arrest men, either? Will she have someone else apply the cuffs? How on earth is this woman supposed to do her job?

Posted by: ladykatie at January 22, 2007 11:01 AM

Ummah,

It's dicey; but maybe the guy should be arrested, charged, and tried.

Appropriate Canadian human rights organizations could (and should) provide for his legal defence.

The goal should be to end the charade.

Of course, there is the possibility such a tactic and strategy could backfire.

Questions, questions, questions...

Posted by: PRCS at January 22, 2007 11:25 AM

"Mother Ecclesiastica at January 22, 2007 07:55 AM"

What Mother said is ALLLLRRIIIGGHHTT with me!

Posted by: allat at January 22, 2007 11:58 AM

"I have a RC religious upbringing. In my "culture", there is a commandment that instructs us Catholics that "Thou shall not kill."

Gosh, we all had that upbringing. Cathokics didn't get it from nowhere, you know.

I can claim that christians got it from the Jews and the Jews got it from the Ancient Egyptians. Yeah, the Egyptians. Moses wasn't a Prince in Egypt for nothing. Every Prince of Egypt was trained in the Priesthood. Check out the Book of Coming Forth by Day:

I have not lied
I have not defrauded others.
I have not spoken against other
I have not taken a life.

etc.

Posted by: allat at January 22, 2007 12:02 PM

Compare and Contrast to the Muslim FBI agent who was said to have refused to wear a wire to tape another Muslim.

"Muslim FBI agent" wire

Jihad Watch "Muslim FBI agent reinstated"

Michael Isikoff and Mark Hosenball

Newsweek presents agent's side

Gamal Abdel-Hafiz reinstated. Note that FBI agent Mark Wright's allegation that Abdel-Hafiz wouldn't wear a wire was not the reason for dismissal nor was it reviewed apparently in the reinstatement.

Judicial Watch and FBI agent Michael Vincent

Judicial Watch and FBI agent Robert Wright

Something about that JW combination. Maybe Jihad Watch should start a law firm.

Posted by: Old Atlantic at January 22, 2007 12:27 PM

Which set of laws will she apply in her duties? British or Islamic?

Will she stone women who are not fully covered?

Will she require 4 male (muslim) witnesses before taking a rape report?

Will she ever arrest a muslim for a crime against a non-muslim?

I think its pretty obvious where her loyalties lie.

Posted by: CrazyFool at January 22, 2007 12:31 PM

Sec. of State Rice reminds me of those Stepford Wives from the old horror movie: a well groomed, well mannered, well spoken conformist robot to her boss's agenda. She is a PC mouthpiece for President Geo Bush. We had an independent thinker in that position before, remember? He was shown the door when he argued his conscience.

The only thing I think we can blame Sec. Rice for is a lack of independent thinking and a complete public ignorance of the issues ( like Intelligence Committee member Rep. Silvestre Reyes (D-TX))

Those two failings are horrible in themselves for a person holding her title, but she's not the source of the false assumptions.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at January 22, 2007 12:53 PM

Whoops - the op/ed on Sec. Rice should be in another thread. My apologies.

Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at January 22, 2007 12:55 PM

"Gosh, we all had that upbringing. Cathokics didn't get it from nowhere, you know."
Posted by: allat at January 22, 2007 12:02 PM

Allat,

I fail to see your point here. Can you please clarify?

Regards,

awake

Posted by: awake at January 22, 2007 2:13 PM

"Muslim groups said her refusal was in line with common Islamic practice and called for greater understanding of cultural differences."

.....what about our practices such as no veils or face coverings on driver licenses, or no face coverings when going to banks,or standing in line to be searched at the airport, ....when things like this happen we are out of line for standing up to our cultural practices....

The blade has a double edge, nes pa.....

Posted by: exsgtbrown at January 22, 2007 2:46 PM

A rather scary letter has appeared on the letters page of the BNP website (titled World's fastest growing religion - can't be wrong)
http://www.bnp.org.uk/democracy/lettersmain.php

maybe some here would like to reply or send this lost soul a copy of Roberts PIG to islam book (which you can buy on the wesite bty)

Posted by: TrueBrit at January 22, 2007 3:24 PM

Sorry should say website

Posted by: TrueBrit at January 22, 2007 3:26 PM

The weirdness of this case continues to confound me, and makes me want to rant.
Her Muslim supporters say of course she will have physical contact if it is needed to save a 'precious' human life (what about contact with infidel blood?), or to arrest a criminal (really ?), she just does not want to shake her boss by the hand. (Nor kiss him - I am not a big fan of Sir Ian either, but was that ever part of the plan ?). How are they, or we, to know what she will decide to do, or not to do, next ? I doubt that he has knows that herself.
It is not we who need to understand her culture, it is she who needs to understand ours, including the significance of a handshake and a group photograph at would should have been a proud and happy event. That should have been simple enough, surely ?

Posted by: M Al-Content at January 22, 2007 3:35 PM

TrueBrit,

Respond and ask the gentleman two questions, if you can.

What age was Aisha when Muhammad married her?

What age was Aisha when Muhammad consumated the marriage?

If he responds, ask him for the source.

Cheers-

Posted by: awake at January 22, 2007 3:36 PM

Elephant refers to Sikh policeman wearing turbans. That they be permitted to wear turbans, is, as far as I am aware, the only grounds on which Sikhs have asked for special treatment in law or in practice in the UK. I am not aware of any requests of this nature from Jews and Hindus. Perhaps we shjould quietly point this out to Muslim leaders and ask them to consider whether it is surprising, in view of their ceaseless demands, that we find them rather difficult and are not entirely convinced that just want to get on with their own lives and leave others in peace. If we were racist there would be just as much criticism and 'intolerance' of Hindus and Sikhs, wouldn't there? It is their behaviour, and simply their behaviour, which we find out of order.

Posted by: kevin at January 22, 2007 3:51 PM

She volunteered! Why should she be granted any special privileges or considrations. She should have to conform to the requirements of the Metropolitan Police, not demand that the Metropolitan Police conform to her personal requirements. How would you like to be assigned as her partner?

Posted by: MP at January 22, 2007 4:09 PM

RE: Forceful campaign by CAIR to silence the free speech

From the Web site of Walid Shoebat - http://www.shoebat.com/

A short Biography of Zachariah Anani

Here is a 20 minute video of 3 former terrorists --Zachariah Anani (attacked by CAIR), Walid Shoebat, and Ibrahim Abdullah (born in Dearborn, Michigan)-- interviewed on CN8, a New Jersey morning program.

http://www.shoebat.com/media/cn8_2006_01.wmv

Posted by: Webler at January 22, 2007 5:01 PM

Hey I just posted about this on jihadwatch, I guess I should have checked here first.

This recruit should have been fired on the spot. She just admitted that she could not do her job, as she will undoubtedly have to arrest many males that she does not know.

What's next, burqua'd Police Officers? What a freaking joke, one more nail in the coffin of Britainistan.

Niv

Posted by: The fanatic at January 22, 2007 6:27 PM

Interesting. Muslim groups call for "Greater Cultural Understanding". Should we "Understand" this culture when the newly sworn police officer refuses to prosecute, apprehend, or investigate a fellow muslim whose 'Inner Spriitual Struggle' involves violence or threats to Kuffaar ? Would the duly sworn officer be bestowed additional rights often demanded as a result of this "understanding" ? Would she patrol with men or enter a pub if required the course of duty? Will I soon encounter policewomen wearing full Hajib ?
It's high time to demand that Islam learn to practice "Cultural Understanding"

Posted by: Dave fromSB at January 22, 2007 9:56 PM

This entire fiasco sounds like a deliberate and well-planned scheme to test the waters. If this obviously unsuited candidate for the police force is fired or punished in any way for refusing to shake hands with the chief, more islamophobia for the persecuted ones to lament. She wanted and intended to make a scene, a disturbance, a POINT---"I'm a muslim and and I don't have to comply with your traditions." It was a calculated and arrogant maneuver to establish islamic superiority by deviating from the traditional ceremony. Her lack of consideration and respect for her peers and superior make it quite clear that she considers herself to be a cut above them and established police department protocol.

Her behavior was rude and defiant, deserving of immediate dismissal. She (and the police department) should have carefully considered any potential religious conflicts with this job before she underwent training. If she can't shake hands with her superior, I don't see how she can possibly venture out into the streets and arrest criminals. That was never her intention; she expected to be fired and probably will be fired long before the probationary period is over, at which time she will file a discrimination suit or the British equivalent thereof.

Posted by: Susanp at January 23, 2007 1:20 AM

Where do these people get OFF???

Whenever I see one of the fat, headscarved matrons, I feel like saying 'yeah sure, you're so amazingly attractive that any man glimpsing your silky locks will be unable to control his passion!'

No doubt she was fully aware that the Commissioner would dishonour her on the spot if he grasped her luscious flesh!

Meanwhile it's summer here (NZ), and most of us are wandering around amazingly safely and without a second glance in shorts, little tops and with our hair merrily flowing...

Posted by: Lili at January 24, 2007 2:55 AM

Susanp

If so she will probably get a big cash handout whatever happens.

Why?

About 4 years ago in the course of a "Diversity" training course a detective of 10+ years experience was invited say what he knew about minorities. In the course of a light hearted talk he remarked that as Muslims did not have sex during Ramadan he "Would not like to be one of them". A muslim officer present reported him for "Racism", he was suspended for over a year.

To be fair Tariq Gafur the muslim police commissioner who investigated the affair concluded the allegation was ridiculous but nevertheless the detective’s career effectively ended.

The point is the “Offended” muslim officers present got cash compensation for their pain and hurt. If I remember rightly £30,000 each - that’s about $45,000. For that sort of money they can insult me anytime!

Posted by: Fred at January 24, 2007 12:17 PM