SUBSCRIBE NOW WELCOME BACK. Do you want to continue reading where you left off? New Republic subscribers can pick up where they left off no matter which device they were previously using. SUBSCRIBE NOW

Go Home The Beginning Of The End

THE SPINE OCTOBER 5, 2006

The Beginning Of The End

BY TNR STAFF

Please take a look at my Spine of October 3, about the 300 Muslim taxi-drivers in Minneapolis-St. Paul who won't pick up passengers who they suspect are carrying booze. A small incident, containable, not a big deal. A pig's ass, not a big deal. This is the next tactic.

So, just in time and on target two days after, here is a report from London in The Jerusalem Post about a Muslim constable in the Metropolitan Police's Diplomatic Protection Group who has refused to guard the Israeli Embassy in Kensington. And his refusal has been sanctioned by his superiors.

John O'Connor, a former Flying Squad commander, observed that this is "the beginning of the end for British policing. The Metropolitan Police are setting a precedent they will come to bitterly regret."

Yes, police of Indian origin will not agree to guard the Pakistani embassy or legations of Muslim countries, generally. Are Muslims going to refuse duty at the embassy of Denmark? If where you do your guarding becomes a matter of personal choice, who but extremist Muslims would want to protect the Iranian embassy? Given the number of anti-American Muslims in Great Britain, don't you see trouble down the line for protecting the safety of the U.S. embassy in Grosvenor Square?

And, just as an afterthought about who feels in need of protection, The Daily Telegraph reported this summer that 53 percent of Brits feel threatened by Islam. The poll also showed that 18 percent agree that "a large proportion of British Muslims feel no sense of loyalty to this country and are prepared to condone or even carry out acts of terrorism." The populace may soon come to think that maybe Muslims shouldn't be permitted to protect anyone.

SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS

Show all 21 comments

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

21 comments

I would hate to be an Asian Muslim (with my sensibilities) when you have such knuckleheaded people as the Policeman and his superiors, eventually most white British are going to wash their hands of their Muslim minority telling them, in effect, to love it (English culture) or leave it. sad sad sad.

- blackton

October 5, 2006 at 4:31pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This is a retarded precedent; I can't recount how many times this past year that I've read about the incompetence and indifference of the British police. Apparently, their prisons are a revolving door, subject to arbitrary early releases (for no reason other than lack of space.). There have been many high profile murders committed by criminials that should have been in jail but were let go early. When you don't enforce even a weak assimilation, what do you expect from immigrants? They're going to live in their own communities and champion values no different from their own native land. It's called tribalism.

- jwl2672

October 5, 2006 at 4:48pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

... against terror groups operating on European soil. The UK government's approach is in effect the inverse of the French approach: strong and aggressive abroad, weak and confused at home. I don't see how this general cluelessness can avoid causing, at some point, a serious breach in our relations with the Brits.

- teplukhin

October 5, 2006 at 4:56pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

In what city? Can't see any mention of this. Wasn't there (also?) an anti-muslim riot the other day in front of a mosque in Lancaster?

- teplukhin

October 5, 2006 at 6:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

btw, cleary, is "I seen [x]" an Ulster-ism? Is that common across Ireland and Scotland? I always associated it with appalachia, the Ohio Valley... maybe it came over with the scots-irish settlers in hte 18-19c?

- teplukhin

October 5, 2006 at 6:37pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Re the bobby's excuse, OK, but presumably his family's safety might also be jeopardized if he were seen or photographed apprehending some radical imam or other noticeably muslim suspects? Isn't it a small step toward the problem we had in US inner cities in the late 1960s/early 1970s, when all cops were viewed by blacks as "pigs" and black cops as racial traitors?

- teplukhin

October 5, 2006 at 6:41pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"I'm so glad we don't have those problems here." That's only because Democrats are out of power. They will sell us down the river at the first opportunity. Joe Lieberman is one of the few exceptions. In most instances---it is foolish to trust the Democrats to trust the policially correct party of Howard Dean and George Soros. "It is a slippery slope but put yourself in his superior's shoes." Where's Winston Church when he is really needed? The left wing wimps run the show in Great Britain. We must make sure the same thing does not happen here.

- thomsondavid

October 5, 2006 at 7:15pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"In most instances---it is foolish to trust the Democrats to trust the policially correct party of Howard Dean and George Soros." This might sound better: In most instances---it is foolish to trust the policially correct party of Howard Dean and George Soros.

- thomsondavid

October 5, 2006 at 8:23pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

in Europe, Muslims are the new Jews.

- karmapolitics

October 5, 2006 at 9:10pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"...in Europe, Muslims are the new Jews." I fail to see the connection. Since when have Jews fire bombed cars and attacked police officers? Is somebody building concentration camps for Muslims? Please explain.

- thomsondavid

October 5, 2006 at 10:01pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

that discriminate against Muslims? In fact, the effort of the state (or, rather, states) is to support Muslims in both their civil rights and in the cultivation of their culture.

- peretz

October 5, 2006 at 10:36pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

actually in Britain and to some degree in France the effort has been to co-opt muslim "community leaders" by creating all manner of councils and parallel insitutions of governance (cf the French "muslim parliament") and staffing them with muslims who in many cases are actively hostile to integration and racial tolerance. This is like a bad parody of mussolini-style corporatism, with some ironic results: the corporate group in question becomes less, not more, controllable, and the public views the state and its feckless leaders with contempt.

- teplukhin

October 6, 2006 at 2:18am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

I don't suppose that anyone should be surprised by Britain's agreement to let Muslim police refuse to protect the Israeli embassy and still keep their jobs. (Not that any sane person, Israeli or otherwise, would ever WANT their security to be in the hands of Muslims.) After all, our own country has set our cousins across the pond a splendid example by telling Christian pharmacists that they are allowed to refuse to fill legitimate prescriptions for birth-control pills, on the grounds that it "offends their religion", with no fears for their job security. How about the West deciding to put forth the radical notion that if ANY person -- religious or secular, left or right -- can't or won't fulfill the demands of the job that they hold, that they be (gasp!)FIRED for willful insubordination? Or is that too commonsensical a position for this deranged era in which we find ourselves?

- helios

October 6, 2006 at 8:11am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

This must set a new record for exaggeration of a non-event. Let's all take the opportunity to use one police officer's situation to leap onto every available soap box. And make sure we do that before the facts are even investigated/reported. There is ample precedent for this sort of thing in the UK, based mainly in the Catholic/Protestant conflicts. And in other countries for different reasons, even the widely used approach of having community officers resemble their communities. The guy claims he was worried about his welfare, and if you think Muslim violence in the UK is a problem, maybe he has a right to be worried about what extremists would do to him or his family. Or maybe it was just a loopy request and the manager who approved it will be called out for it after the investigation. There are many other more serious things to discuss that relate to the issues raised here.

- redemption438

October 6, 2006 at 8:28am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

"Or is that too commonsensical a position for this deranged era in which we find ourselves?" Just curious - which era would you prefer to find yourself?

- redemption438

October 6, 2006 at 8:31am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Mr. Peretz should understand that there is a clear difference between the discipline and responsibility of a police officer and that of a taxi driver. He probably would in any other context, but he clearly has a "thing" about Muslims. Police officers are uniformed public servants, with a great deal of power, including the power to arrest and, on occasion, to shoot to kill (even in England). That's why they must be held to strict, impartial discipline. If a taxi driver doesn't want booze in his cab, I'm not bothered. If a cop won't do his basic job, I am bothered.

- bkinfo

October 6, 2006 at 8:56am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Okay okay, it's not a one to one analogy. No, you won't be seeing Muslims being assaulted after the annual "Passion" play, and there are no laws on the books that explicitly prescribe against Muslims (although the French headscarf ban comes close). Muslims are the new Jews in Europe because they're a significant minority in Europe which who suffer from widespread cultural isolation. Why do you think the Muslims in France rioted last year? perhaps it was the fact that they are now in de-facto ghettos? That even in third generations they aren't being assimilated into the local cultures? Before WWII, the Jews were a significant minority in Europe. They were also a prominent scapegoat. After WWII, their populations were destroyed. Who's the new significant minority? Who's the new prominent scapegoat?

- karmapolitics

October 6, 2006 at 9:42am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

There is ample precedent for this sort of thing in the UK, based mainly in the Catholic/Protestant conflicts Is this true? Can a catholic lad serving in Her Majesty's armed forces in Ulster refuse to patrol the West Falls Road in Belfast? in other countries for different reasons, even the widely used approach of having community officers resemble their communities Huh? How does this apply here? What is the "community" in this case? Are you suggesting that the potential perpetrators of violence, and their victims, are both likely to be israelis?

- teplukhin

October 6, 2006 at 11:35am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

Teplukhin, I made the community reference as an analogy, not as a direct correspondence to this situation. My only point was that there are cases in which an officer's ethnicity is taken into consideration. For example, when deciding which officers will be effective and not rouse hostility, and not wanting to make an officer's position more dangerous than it already is. To some extent, such approaches are "caving in" to prejudice, but they can also mean more effective policing. I don't have all the information on this particular case, but like John Cleary said, it is being reported in two ways: 1) the man made the request on moral opposition to Israel's policies, as the initial post suggested, or 2) he feared how he would be viewed in the Muslim community and that he or his family might potentially be in greater danger than a non-Muslim officer. Danger from Muslims, not Israelis or Jews. I think #2 would be a valid reason to station him somewhere else. I would not agree with sanctioning #1, and if that is found to be the case, then his boss should be reprimanded. My main point was to complain about the knee-jerk reaction that seems to accompany any story like this, no matter how minor.

- redemption438

October 6, 2006 at 12:55pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

So acc to your logic in #1, a similarly "principled" catholic soldier in your view would be justified in refusing to defend a protestant neighborhood against catholic thugs. As would a devout evangelical FBI officer who refused to investigate the bombing of an abortion clinic. Please tell me how permitting these supposedly morally superior state officials to defy their sworn duty to uphold the law furthers the causes of integration/assimilation, equality before law, public safety, public confidence in government?

- teplukhin

October 6, 2006 at 5:43pm

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

No that is not my logic. Obviously I need to write more clearly. As I said, I don't think this would be justified purely on the grounds of moral objection to the people/place/thing being guarded. If that's the case, the man should quit his job, and the request should not have been approved in the first place.

- redemption438

October 7, 2006 at 11:16am

You must be a subscriber to post comments. Subscribe today.

SHARE HIGHLIGHT

0 CHARACTERS SELECTED

TWEET THIS

POST TO TUMBLR

SHARE ON FACEBOOK

Close