It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Muslim policeman excused guard duty at Israeli Embassy in London

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 09:54 AM
I heard on a debate on TV that this guy was possibly set up by racist co-workers. He was infact ill and couldn't guard the embassy? Anyway, the media has seized this in the sudden wave of anti-muslim crap that's gripping this sorry country. It makes me fing sick. Protestants were excused from guarding Catholics in Northern Ireland anyway.

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 10:02 AM
You guys should read what actualy happend.

Dep Comm Stephenson said: "At the height of the Israeli/Lebanon conflict in August this year the officer made his managers aware of his personal concerns.

"These included that he had Lebanese family members. A risk assessment was undertaken, which is normal practice.

"It was as a result of this and not because of the officer's personal views - that the decisions was taken temporarily not to deploy him to the Embassy."

All the officer did was say 2 things, 1 his viewpoint on the situation (freedom of speech anyone?) and 2 that he has Lebanees family. He didn't say "I'm not going".

Anyone here ever heard of conflict of interest?

This officer actualy did his duty by reporting these things, so his superiors could decide to send him or not.

If I ever get a dosier on my desk that has the name of one of my family members on it or even someone I know, I have to inform my superiors about this and they'll decide if I'll be the case handler for the dossier or not.

This guy did his duty.

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 10:52 AM
People here cite the fact he has family members in Lebanon, so this is a valid reason not to do his job. Thats bull.

How on earth is it putting his family at risk? I do not see the connection. If the Met just said that it was a possible conflict of interest, ie, if his family got killed then he may well be deemed a security risk (understandable), that would make sense. The reasons cited though do NOT say that, instead they cite poilitical and moral grounds, which is total BS and paddering to someone who did not want to be seen by his peers as a "Muslim guarding Jews", which is what it boils down too.

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 10:57 AM
stumanson: seems your one of the few people thats actualy getting what the story tells (and from what I'm hearing now, this entire story might be straight from lalaland)

This man didn't decide not to go, his superiors did.

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 03:05 PM
I think many here are assuming that the officer was already stationed at the Embassy, which is not correct. When he heard that he was being moved to the Embassy, the officer requested that another goes in his place, and that he be excused, to which his superiors agreed to.

[edit on 7-10-2006 by DJMessiah]

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 03:44 PM
THis is obviously been made into a huge event over nothing. The article linked below states that he was willing to take up his post but brought up some concerns to his superiors. He has a responsibility to take these concerns to his superiors ... his father is a Syrian (they're accused of supporting Hezbollah) and his wife is Lebanese ... if something were to happen at this embassy while he was on duty don't you think they would question why he took the post and never told them of these facts.

Also, this whole thing is over a 2 hour post that was not part of his normal duties. Sounds like someone was on vacation or called in sick and they needed some extra coverage at the emabssy, he was assigned and he brought up his concerns to a superior who assigned someone else.

As far as people who are accusing him of abandoning his public duty, that's a little extreme. He didn't stand by and watch some get stabbed/kicked/punched because of his beliefs, if he did then there would be criminal charges.

Senior Jewish figures called it a "grave error" and said police officers had a moral responsibility to protect all British citizens.

However, others described the story as a "ridiculous fuss over nothing". Sources said the officer, who has a Syrian father and a Lebanese wife, had not refused the posting on moral grounds.

He was apparently willing to take up the posting but was concerned about the safety implications for his family if he was spotted guarding the embassy. It also emerged that the incident related to just one two-hour slot outside the embassy, which was not on the officer's usual duty rota, on one particular day.

UK Yahoo News article

Also here's another thread discussing the same topic:

Muslim police officer can choose who to protect on the job!!

[edit on 10/7/2006 by SmallMindsBigIdeas]

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 03:58 PM

Originally posted by magicmushroom
EiS the police officer should be congraulated on the fact that he was standing up for his rights as an individual to express his views. His race or religion has nothing to do with the issue, its you yourself who's making it an issue.

People in a democratic country have the right to express their views and opinions if they do not agree with something, a right you seem to want to deny. The fact that this person was a Muslim and a policeman dossent mean his rights should be removed anymore than your right to post on ATS.

Please, racism and bigotry is bad! .. unless it furthers ones own personal agenda right?

Whats that word...

Oh, ya, Hypocrite!

posted on Oct, 7 2006 @ 04:37 PM
Rockpuck, show us where race was the factor here.

new topics

top topics

<< 1   >>

log in