# Muslim policewoman refuses to shake chief's hand



## GAP (22 Jan 2007)

Muslim policewoman refuses to shake chief's hand
TARIQ PANJA  Associated Press
Article Link

LONDON — Police said Sunday that a Muslim woman officer had refused to shake hands with London's police chief during a graduation ceremony last month due to her religious beliefs, fanning a debate in Britain over the assimilation of Muslims into society.

The woman — whose identity was not revealed — asked to be excused from the customary handshake with Metropolitan Police Commissioner Ian Blair during the ceremony, saying her faith prohibited her from touching a man other than her husband or a close relative.

Commissioner Blair immediately questioned the validity of her request, said a Metropolitan Police spokeswoman, speaking on condition of anonymity in keeping with force policy.

“Ordinarily the (police force) would not tolerate such requests. This request was only granted ... to ensure the smooth running of what is one of the most important events in an officer's career,” the spokeswoman said.

She said the incident was still being looked into by the force, but she declined to say whether the officer could face punishment.

Muslim groups defended the police officer who refused to shake the commissioner's hand, saying her beliefs would not affect how she carried out her job and calling for greater understanding of different cultures.

Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the London-based Islamic Human Rights Commission, said the “overwhelming majority” of practising Muslims avoid physical contact with members of the opposite sex unless they are closely related. But he added that those employed as police officers or doctors are routinely exempt from the rule in order to fulfill their duties.
End


----------



## Sig_Des (22 Jan 2007)

How in the hell is she supposed to do her job.

She'll only police women? And didn't she have to practice take-downs and arrests during her training?

She's become a police officer...She'll need to touch things much worse than men.

GAH


----------



## DiverDownDee (22 Jan 2007)

Hmmmm .. How would she effecively arrest male individuals? .. Interesting

 :threat:


----------



## 211RadOp (22 Jan 2007)

GAP said:
			
		

> Massoud Shadjareh, chairman of the London-based Islamic Human Rights Commission, said the “overwhelming majority” of practising Muslims avoid physical contact with members of the opposite sex unless they are closely related. *But he added that those employed as police officers or doctors are routinely exempt from the rule in order to fulfill their duties.*End



I think this answers it.


----------



## Sig_Des (22 Jan 2007)

211RadOp said:
			
		

> I think this answers it.



It would, as it says it's a routine exemption. But IF she's taken that exemption, the whole shaking of the Chiefs hand, well, that just seems fickle to me.

Either you commit yourself, and have your exemption, or get out of the job.


----------



## Journeyman (22 Jan 2007)

211RadOp said:
			
		

> > *But he added that those employed as police officers or doctors are routinely exempt from the rule in order to fulfill their duties*
> 
> 
> I think this answers it.



No it doesn't - - not even remotely. 
The graduation was a _ceremonial duty_ of those police members. She is already choosing which "duties" she will fulfill. 

I have no heartache with those who choose a different path; if you don't like the conditions of employment, pick something else. I do, however, feel nothing but pity for her partner - - never knowing when this new police officer will decide not to fight crime/back her partner due to the precedence of a supposedly contrary belief.


----------



## geo (22 Jan 2007)

well... good chance this will be one very short career in the Police force.


----------



## 211RadOp (22 Jan 2007)

Journeyman,

My response was with regards to the questions posed by Sig_Des and Canadian MP. As the training requirements and the actuall arresting of people are part of her job, she would be exempt. Shaking hands with the Chief of Police, which can be construed as a cerimonial duty, has nothing to do with the actual practice of training or arresting people.

I never said I agreed with her decision not to shake his hand, I was pointing out the part of the news article that answered the question posed by these two individuals.


----------



## beach_bum (22 Jan 2007)

Makes me questions how she made it through the recruiting selection.  This MUST have come up during the interview.  Yet they still decided to enrol her?   ???

In response to 211RadOp.  There is more to a Police Officer's job than just arresting people.


----------



## Sig_Des (22 Jan 2007)

In 211's Defense, I was not very clear in my original post on the matter.

I understand that the article states that certain people can receive the routine exemption, and had read that in the article. The article though, does not state wether she took said exemption. What she did in her training.

I also believe that if she did take such an exemption, it should apply to all her duties, including those ceremonial ones. Policing does just involve more than arrests, and I am sure that there will be situations were non-violent physical contact is required.

I'd like to hear from some of the LEO's on the board on the matter.


----------



## geo (22 Jan 2007)

makes you wonder how she would come with goodwill visits to certain neighborhoods.  Refusing to offer a handshake is not a good thing


----------



## niner domestic (22 Jan 2007)

Geo: You got me thinking, I work with police officers all day long and I don't recall any of them shaking hands much with the public.  I'll have to pay attention tomorrow to see if I am recalling correctly.  As well, my mum was a Mountie and I don't recall her shaking hands much either.  Her reason was threefold, she didn't want some tough bruiser of an idiot to try and break her hand (which I can appreciate as I have quite often had an idiot or two try to give me a death grip), and being that close with one hand occupied put her at a slight disadvantage should someone try to grab her weapons and usually she was far too busy to pay attention to the niceties of a polite society to stop and shake hands.  Most of the time when she was doing goodwill stuff, she'd just nod and keep her hands to herself especially if she was armed.  

I just don't see the shaking hands to be a big deal as far as her job is concerned and I would say the same about a male cop as well.


----------



## dynaglide (22 Jan 2007)

beach_bum said:
			
		

> Makes me questions how she made it through the recruiting selection.  This MUST have come up during the interview.  *Yet they still decided to enrol her? *   ???
> 
> In response to 211RadOp.  There is more to a Police Officer's job than just arresting people.



Maybe the decision came from higher?...  Although I know that filling quotas based on race, gender etc.  would be totally unheard of... :


----------



## zipperhead_cop (22 Jan 2007)

By and large, I don't shake hands either.  More of a germ thing, though.  But to not shake a colleagues hand?  That is crap.  
So she is saying she is too religious to touch another man?  So is she too religious to wear the uniform?  Strap the belt over the burka and go to it?  And I though the religion was not big on women's education?  Going to be a tough go at police college.  What about walking behind men?  So if she has a male partner, she won't ever be up with him on a call?  Guess driving the cruiser is out too, and she will look kind of funny riding around in the back seat.  
And if she can make allowances for all those restrictions, then why not show basic courtesy to her Chief?  I am highly confident she could have achieved the same thing with use of gloves, or special permission from her husband or ANYTHING other than play the race card and disrespect the Service.  
I seem to recall the stink about the first Sikh on TPS and wearing his turban.  What ended up getting the feathers to settle was that he was a decent guy and got along with people.  This one here doesn't seem to be too concerned with that.  
Just out of curiosity:


			
				niner domestic said:
			
		

> Most of the time when she was doing goodwill stuff, she'd just nod and keep her hands to herself especially if she was armed.


What sort of "goodwill stuff" did the Canadian Cowboys have your mom doing while she had a weapon at hand?


----------



## geo (23 Jan 2007)

well, I accept 9Ds comments on the handshake thing BUT, what is she going to do if she is paired with a man - muslim or otherwise?


----------



## Thompson_JM (23 Jan 2007)

sounds like someone is just trying to get their 15 minutes of fame..... taking a stand on a useless platform too.....

sheesh.... i could care less about turbans on cops, or soldiers.... but this is just plain stupid. I can see her career being a less then stellar one.


cheers.
 Tommy


----------



## zipperhead_cop (23 Jan 2007)

Tommy said:
			
		

> sheesh.... i could care less about turbans on cops, or soldiers.... but this is just plain stupid. I can see her career being a less then stellar one.



Yeah, should be a real crowd pleaser when she is in a foot chase but has to break it off to get out the prayer mat and face towards Mecca.   :


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (23 Jan 2007)

The handshake thing. I was once told by a policeman that they don't do it much when in uniform as it might imply that the cop has taken a favour or is overly familiar with the person he/she is shaking hands with. I'm not saying it well but you get my drift.
I too wonder how she is going to function in a predominately male profession. She has taken the decision to be non-traditional in working outside the home I'm wondering which other customs she's going to pick and choose.
My bro in law (retired OPP Staff Sgt) reports that when he was a constable in Marathon ON he had to break up bar fights most Fri and Sat nights in which he was assaulted and spit upon...how's she going to get over that kind of contact with "strange males?" ???


----------



## GO!!! (23 Jan 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> The handshake thing. I was once told by a policeman that they don't do it much when in uniform as it might imply that the cop has taken a favour or is overly familiar with the person he/she is shaking hands with. I'm not saying it well but you get my drift.



Not really.

When you are a police officer, and the Chief wants to shake your hand as part of a ceremony, that's part of your job, it is not showing favor. As to the whole familiarity thing - I watched the MND shake a half dozen Corporal's hands at a ceremony a couple of days ago - overly familiar or cultural standard greeting?

This is a joke. What is she going to do when she has to break up a bar brawl? "I could'nt go into the bar because I would not want to be seen in a place of alcohol, and I could'nt help my partner when he was being swarmed by that Jamaican gang, because my religion forbids contact with another man"

Can we expect a similar act (and make no mistake, it is an act) here? 

This person is trying to launch a public career with a carefully planned PR move, a la Francisco Juarez, specifically designed to discredit the institution she was working for, force public debate in which all dissenters could be labelled racists, and make the individual in question a household name.


----------



## geo (23 Jan 2007)

Hmmm.... wonder what kind of headdress this constable has chosen to wear.
Bobby helmet
Forage cap
Baseball cap
Chador
Chador & Veil (yes I know that there is a name for it but.........)
Burkha

This has pert much no choice but to go to silly places no one wants to go.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (23 Jan 2007)

I agree it's pretty ridiculous. In Britain last month they had a case of a teacher's assistant who refused to take off a full burka while teaching children. The kids were a. intimidated and b. couldn't understand her but she launched a civil rights case to win the right to teach kids in a full burkha and she won.
What next?


----------



## Brad Sallows (23 Jan 2007)

>What next?

Other people tire of trying to accommodate stupidity and counter it with their own brand of stupidity.  Adding unnecessarily to the transaction costs and friction of basic intercultural social interaction is a two-way street.


----------



## geo (23 Jan 2007)

The Quebec press was full of statistics and studies last week about how Quebeckers are / are not "racists".

One of the things that did come out was the, immigrants are, for the most part, against all the accomodations given to religious and ethnic groups (to which they belong).


----------



## zipperhead_cop (23 Jan 2007)

GO!!! said:
			
		

> When you are a police officer, and the Chief wants to shake your hand as part of a ceremony, that's part of your job, it is not showing favor. As to the whole familiarity thing - I watched the MND shake a half dozen Corporal's hands at a ceremony a couple of days ago - overly familiar or cultural standard greeting?



I think he means when dealing with the general public.  And I was told pretty much the same thing.  If I give a guy a break on a traffic stop and he wants to shake my hand just to be polite and respectful, I'll usually politely decline with some lame excuse about having a cold, just in case someone happened to be watching and felt I was giving the guy unreasonable favoratism.  Illusion over substance is paramount in police.


----------



## geo (24 Jan 2007)

Hmmm.... Remember a number of years ago, was "tossed" onto the receiving line for a service flight coming back from Bosnia.  Was waiting to greet some members coming back from mission when Bde RSM added me to the line - near the Bde Commander.  I shook the hand of every single man that came off that aircraft.  Wonder what the reaction would have been - had I declared religious beliefs and refused to shake anyone`s hand OR look em in the eye while doing so.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (24 Jan 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> I think he means when dealing with the general public.  And I was told pretty much the same thing.  If I give a guy a break on a traffic stop and he wants to shake my hand just to be polite and respectful, I'll usually politely decline with some lame excuse about having a cold, just in case someone happened to be watching and felt I was giving the guy unreasonable favoratism.  Illusion over substance is paramount in police.



Exactly what I meant


----------



## portcullisguy (24 Jan 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> I agree it's pretty ridiculous. In Britain last month they had a case of a teacher's assistant who refused to take off a full burka while teaching children. The kids were a. intimidated and b. couldn't understand her but she launched a civil rights case to win the right to teach kids in a full burkha and she won.
> What next?



I would've loved to be in that class as a kid... I was such a **** disturber when I was a lad, I could have really had fun with that one at her expense... but seriously, sometimes you really need to see someone's mouth moving to comprehend what they are actually saying, so I can understand how kids would have trouble being taught be someone wearing a burka.

I find a lot of this "it's my religion, that's why" stuff goes by the wayside when people finally decide they want to integrate a little bit and be normal.  At my work place, we've had female customs officers wearing the hijab (head scarf) and eventually decide to not wear it.  We have sikhs, who don't wear the kirpan (although no one would say boo if they did) and most of them don't grow facial hair or wear a turban, although again, no one would bat an eye if they did.  I think once the novelty of being different wears off, people eventually decide they want to be the same as every other bloke.


----------



## geo (24 Jan 2007)

I think the point is.... Intergration............


----------



## zipperhead_cop (24 Jan 2007)

On the topic of unwilling hand shakes, this photo is a classic:






"picture shows that this soldier has been thru Survival School and learned his lessons well. He's giving the sign of "coercion" with his left hand. These hand signs are taught in survival school to be used by POW's as a method of posing messages back to our intelligence services who may view the photo or video. This guy was obviously being coerced into shaking hands with Hillary Clinton. It's ironic how little she knew that he would so inform us about the photo---perhaps because she's never understood our military to begin with."


----------



## JackD (25 Jan 2007)

With this integration thing, about ten years ago - hell... twelve years ago, I worked in agricultural research in a western Canadian university and would visit research plots scattered amongst the farms in no-wheres-county, no-wheres-district, endless-prairie. My partner for awhile was a Muslim woman from Iran. In accordance with her beliefs, I could not actually speak with her directly. Now think about this, the prairies, if her window was open and i wanted it closed, I actually had to find some woman on the road and say "Excuse me, can you tell my partner to close her window".Try to find someone walking along the back roads of the prairies... Now you can imagine what it was like driving for something like 12-14 hours - the need to pee if you know what i mean... not to mention trying to stay awake. Don't we push accommodation too far?


----------



## geo (25 Jan 2007)

JackD..
couldn't you have slipped her a note?.. seriously

(also, admit it, women don't want to talk to you - any)  (JK)


----------



## JackD (25 Jan 2007)

I never thought of a note... On the other hand I lost that job - believe it or not - for having been in the army - a baby killer: "the students were afraid to go out in the field with you...". You gotta love places of higher education. Actually now, as an instructor in two teacher's colleges within eastern Poland ( a combined monthly salary of about a thousand dollars Canadian), most of my students are rather enchanting ladies 1/4 my age who insist they love me as I am just like a grandfather to them. Arrrrrrgh.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (26 Jan 2007)

JackD said:
			
		

> With this integration thing, about ten years ago - hell... twelve years ago, I worked in agricultural research in a western Canadian university and would visit research plots scattered amongst the farms in no-wheres-county, no-wheres-district, endless-prairie. My partner for awhile was a Muslim woman from Iran. In accordance with her beliefs, I could not actually speak with her directly. Now think about this, the prairies, if her window was open and i wanted it closed, I actually had to find some woman on the road and say "Excuse me, can you tell my partner to close her window".Try to find someone walking along the back roads of the prairies... Now you can imagine what it was like driving for something like 12-14 hours - the need to pee if you know what i mean... not to mention trying to stay awake. Don't we push accommodation too far?



Well this is along the same lines as the policewoman isn't it? They have chosen to work or research outside the home which is a non-traditional thing to do, yet they cling to the stupidity of not having direct contact with men. Something has to give. You either are traditional and stay at home with your burkha on and go out in the company of your menfolk or you step out and learn how to survive in the workplace....which means talking with your co workers.


----------



## 1feral1 (26 Jan 2007)

Time to come out of the dark ages and assimilate in western society, and stop using their religion as a crutch. That will never happen will it. I ask just one question, whats wrong with being British first and foremost, a citizen rather than a just another muslim living in England.

Quite frankly I've had a dirty great big giant gutful of this mentality, but its too late to honestly do anything about it now.

All she has accomplished is widening the gap between us and them. Lets put our hands together for her.

Shakes head,

Wes


----------



## Exarecr (26 Jan 2007)

She could come live in Canada where her plight would elevate her to new heights of imagined slights and multicultural hissy fits, only this time the spray of spittle from lips baying outrage would be thankfully smothered by her( hell i can,t think of the name of that cloth they put over their mouths). Take care over there .


----------



## Belce (28 Jan 2007)

I don't see why this is a big deal.  As part of the ceremony she would have saluted the Chief Ian Blair.  She would then accept his verbal congrats.  This says nothing about her ability or willingness to fullfill her job as a police officer.  With out doubt she completed her training which would have involved physical contact with men successfully.  I think she would make a good police officer.  Its not like she refused to shake hands when it came up, she indicated beforehand this situation.  And the most important thing is she has decided to become a police officer enforcing British laws as they are now.  Respecting her religion is important.  This is a sitaution of a Muslim that wants to be part of our society and she deserves our respect.  

Shaking hands is our cultural element to this ceremony and a minor bit at that.  Would we be having this talk if a Jew, Shikh, Hindu or aethiest refused to swear on the Bible?  The only reason this became news is because someone involved in a request to respect religion leaked it to the press.  What most likely really happened here was she indicated she couldn't shake hands because Ian Blair was not family or her husband and also not suspected criminal or job related since it was a ceremony.  The response certainly was then, okay, how can he properly congratulate you?  Reply: in this manner, response: sure.  

Religious freedom is an important right we Canadians fight for.  I am really ashamed to read the comments here so far, I hope that you all would take a moment to reconsider, you are wrong.


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Jan 2007)

Opinions are like AH's, everyones got one, including you (and me). If you feel ashamed of people's opinions on here, I am sure you can find another site to suit you.

We're NOT wrong (as you suggest), we just have an opinion, and that too is worth fighting for. 


Wes


----------



## Belce (28 Jan 2007)

You have a right to an opinion.  Also part of that is that your opinion could be wrong.  "Its my opinion!" is not a valid defence against reason, it is a very poor argument.  The opinions expressed against someone whose faith does not allow something is something we respect.  

I did not think that my conservative thinking regarding individual rights would draw a suggestion I go elsewhere.  A person has the right to have their religion respected.  This isn't someone that grew up in Britian and can't speak English, its someone that wants to be in. 

There are always wrong opinions, you just have a right to be wrong, like now.


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Jan 2007)

Are you trying to start some kind of a flame war here pal? Sure sounds like it to me.

If ya wanna have a go at me mate, PM me, but if you want to flaunt yourself on here at me in this manner, you better put on your kevlar. Its your credibiltiy on here not ours.

An "8 post wonder (Oops, EDIT: 9 posts)", and your doing well so far : 

I don't give a fat rats arse about if you think I am wrong, as I said its an opinion and yours is different to mine. So what. End of story.

Suck it up and soldier on, or move on if you can't take the heat.


Wes


----------



## Trooper Hale (28 Jan 2007)

Like my countryman said Old boy, best put on the Kevlar if your going to run that line. Its kind of ironic/moronic to come onto a forum and tell the people who actually do the fighting for your right to opinion that they'r wrong. You could have said it a thousand other ways and each one would have been nicer and more respectful. Instead you rock on and insult these blokes. Do you realise the man your having a crack at is posting from Baghdad? That he's putting his life on the line everyday for our freedoms and your acting like your holier then all of us.
Bit bloody rough old mate.
I'm with Wes for this, i went to school were "Hallas" and "lebo pride" were all over the walls. For someone to come to a country they must work by that countries rules. I know it sounds bad, but if they want to follow the "my culture is better then yours" ideal, they can do a snappy about turn and head back to where they were born. PC be stuffed.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (28 Jan 2007)

Belce. I have to agree with my comrades here. You've come wading in passing judgement and that isn't a good way to start. They are stating their opinions and you are stating yours. that's the way dialogue takes place. We don't have any PC police here so let's not start playing those cards...most of us are fed up with that kind of debate in our society at large....i.e. declaring whole areas out of bounds due to a social engineering agenda.


----------



## Fishbone Jones (28 Jan 2007)

Belce said:
			
		

> You have a right to an opinion.  Also part of that is that your opinion could be wrong.  "Its my opinion!" is not a valid defence against reason, it is a very poor argument.  The opinions expressed against someone whose faith does not allow something is something we respect.
> 
> I did not think that my conservative thinking regarding individual rights would draw a suggestion I go elsewhere.  A person has the right to have their religion respected.  This isn't someone that grew up in Britian and can't speak English, its someone that wants to be in.
> 
> There are always wrong opinions, you just have a right to be wrong, like now.



So anyone can have an opinion......................as long as it's your's? It's not your place to decide who's right and wrong, because you don't agree. You may find here, that sticking to that line of reasoning, is like pushing a wet noodle uphill.


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Jan 2007)

EDIT: You know, I really was not going to comment on this, but I think I'll take a nibble to set things straight.

Belce is just going to accuse us all of being rightwing racist rednecks. We've all seen his type come and go on here, so no skin off my arse.

At the end of the day, regarding to one's religion and beliefs, well repect is a two way street, and when one's way of life with a 13th century mentality, where laws condone stoning of women, and the right to place a child's arm under a SUV for theft, well that outragous. Now we find ourselves victims from this behaviour from 'over there' and its now starting to be interfering with our own customs and traditions. Sorry Belce, thats where I draw the line.

Our countries our ours, not some satellite outpost of theirs, but sadly, thats what our countries have become. You won't find this in BF Saskatchewan, but in the larger urban centres in any large western city. So now our society has to deal with their unwanted baggage full of their centuries old hatred for others thye have hated, and their heartless criminal way of life brought to our shores.

I base my opinions on life experiences from myself and people I know, not text books or media sources. I was sheltered in Saskatchewan (its a great place to live), lead a pretty decent life where foreigners were tourists or  assylum seekers were sponsered by a church, waited til they got their shyte together, and headed for, yes a large urban centre, away from the cold and to ghettos created by others from whence they came.

I bet he (Belce) has never had his girlfriend spat at because she wore a bikini on a beach in his own neighbourhood, or a group of had race riots where islamc youth gathered at a mosque, headed to the south of sydney areas in convoys of over 300 vehicles, smashed cars at random (Maroubra Sydney) attacked people in their homes (Wolloware and Caringbah, Sydney) and stabbed people of WASP Australian appearance in a quiet neighbourhood. Where terrified elderly people were attacked because they were not muslims. 

Its a pretty sad state of affairs when people party in streets in your own city after 3000 people were murdered (this included Canadians and Australians plus others) on 11 Sep 01, and local so called 'Australian' islamic clerics still publically currently denounce the holacaust, call white Australians liars, and stake claim that muslims have more of a right to live in Australia then anyone else (Skeik Alhilaly of Lakemba Mosque Sydney).

Where did these riots take place? Think I am pulling your chain? Cronulla Sydney, NSW Australia, 04-06 Dec 2005. Google Cronulla riots if you wanna know more.

Winnipeg (BTW I love the place) is also a sheltered city from the realities of routine ethinic violence and God forbid, ethic cleansing. Better we're here on his shores, stirring the shyte, sorting things out then on our own.

I've lived in places where the Australian flag had to be removed because it offfened muslims, and was causing unrest in the nieghbourhood. That request came from the NSW Police, who told a home owner to do so, because he feared for their safety. That was in Sydney Australia, not here in Shyteland (Iraq). The "offended" people were youth from an islamic backgorund. Its a pretty sad state of affairs when you are asked to take down your own country's flag in your own country, because others are threatening violence if you don't.

Well Belce, you make up your own decision on that, and keep your head burried in the sand! At the ripe ole age of 43 with all that Cadet experience to back you up, you'll be safe in your own private PC world.

Nibble over.


Wes


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jan 2007)

Belce said:
			
		

> There are always wrong opinions, you just have a right to be wrong, like now.



Belce, you are out of line.  Pretty much everyone here is very in tune with religious freedoms and has no issue with anyones choice of worship.  Where the annoyance comes in is when you get these people (of all denominations, not just this one) who pick and choose which laws they will adhere to.  You even said it yourself, there is no way she was able to get through her training without touching a man at some point.  And even if they made special accommodations during training, it will be impossible to accommodate on the street.  Unless she is planning on only arresting women, and then that makes her a poor officer who isn't doing her job.  But if we accept that she did have male contact in training, why couldn't she shake her Chiefs hand?  All of a sudden her lofty principles kick in and she is too pure now?  I call bullshit.  She could have if she wanted to.  And as pointed out, if you are going to be SO religious that some of the pickier points are going to be followed, then follow all of them.  Whatever allowed her to ignore the concepts of not being educated, not being a housewife and having a job should have her able to shake hands with someone.  Hell, she could have gotten permission from her mosque, worn gloves, prayed for forgiveness after.  But instead, she played the religion card and alienated her entire Department before she has even worked her first shift.  A big part of being a police officer is being able to serve the needs of your community.  She doesn't get to pick which subsection that she wants to help.  I personally find smoking a filthy and disgusting habit and would never allow it in my home.  But I still have to go into smokers houses, try to conduct an investigation through the blue smoke and smell it on my uniform for the rest of my shift.  An officer has a job to do on the street, and religion has nothing to do with it.  She is going to get herself (or worse, her partner) killed.  
No one is going to want to work a car with her.  All she has to look forward to is grief and peoples backs.  If she is lucky, some of the other Islamic members of the Metro will pull her aside and sort her out.  THEN she can go to the Chiefs office, apologize for being such a tool, and shake his hand like she should have in the first place.


----------



## 1feral1 (28 Jan 2007)

On shaking a muslim woman's hand. This can be done as long as she first puts her hand out, and then her hand is shaken lightly touching her fingertips only.

Thats right from the book, and something I have practised on occasion here, in their world, so it can be done. 

From the USMC Guide for Communication and Culture MCIA 263Q 003-04.

Cheers,

Wes


----------



## GO!!! (28 Jan 2007)

Belce said:
			
		

> You have a right to an opinion.  Also part of that is that your opinion could be wrong.  "Its my opinion!" is not a valid defence against reason, it is a very poor argument.  The opinions expressed against someone whose faith does not allow something is something we respect.



Depending on which branch of islam she adheres to, her faith demands a whole series of restrictions that prohibit her from even having a job outside the home. These "requirements" are routinely dismissed my imams and mullahs of this century, who recognise them for what they are, reasonable when viewed in the context of their time (600 years ago).

As zipperhead said, if she was really that devout a muslim, she should do it all the way - a female circumcision, arranged marriage to a polygamist when she was 12-14, a full burkha, complete isolation within her home, and a life of servile deference to her husband. Instead she chose to pick which aspects of the faith she adhered to, to be as public and visible as possible.



> I did not think that my conservative thinking regarding individual rights would draw a suggestion I go elsewhere.  A person has the right to have their religion respected.  This isn't someone that grew up in Britian and can't speak English, its someone that wants to be in.



Mastery of language and understanding of culture are not synonymous. I think that this woman has an excellent understanding of British culture and politics though, which is why she orchestrated this the way she did.



> There are always wrong opinions, you just have a right to be wrong, like now.



That is the difference between soldiers, police and the other uniformed services, and people (like you) who have lived under the umbrella of protection that these services provide their entire lives. The difference is that decisions made in my world have very real and lasting impacts on a number of fronts, from my life, to someone elses. Yours don't. You don't make life or death decisions, and as such, can afford to have a counter-logical opinion, as it holds no consequence for you either way.

I see it differently. The uniformed services are based not just on uniformity of appearance, but on uniformity of action. These actions are not optional, or up to the individual to ascertain a need for, they are guaranteed responses, applied under a strict set of rules and regulations. When one person in the uniformed service believes themselves above or exempt from these sets of rules, there is really no point having them, because the uniformity of response no longer exists. 

Think now, could a criminal expect a different response from this constable? I think so! Will she only search females for weapons or drugs? Only restrain women from violently assaulting another? Will she converse with her partner without her brother or father present? The fact that we have to ask these questions should be unsettling enough.

She knew the rules and what was expected of her when she applied to become a police officer - she is using her faith to make a statement.


----------



## Neill McKay (28 Jan 2007)

Belce said:
			
		

> Shaking hands is our cultural element to this ceremony and a minor bit at that.  Would we be having this talk if a Jew, Shikh, Hindu or aethiest refused to swear on the Bible?



There's a big difference here: shaking hands is not a religious practice -- it's the practice of all sorts of people, religious or not, throughout the Western world.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jan 2007)

Piper said:
			
		

> And thats what she's probably trying to accomplish. Reality will catch up with her eventually and she'll either have to loose her 'religious convictions' or loose her or her partner's life.



Yeah, when she is alone on straight midnights doing foot patrol in the dock district, she might want to try to cultivate some better relationships.


----------



## IN HOC SIGNO (28 Jan 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Yeah, when she is alone on straight midnights doing foot patrol in the dock district, she might want to try to cultivate some better relationships.



Do you seriosly think she'll ever draw that shift?


----------



## TCBF (28 Jan 2007)

Not now...


----------



## Shamrock (28 Jan 2007)

From the BBC:

The woman, who wore a uniform hijab, also refused to be pictured with Sir Ian at the event on 21 December as she did not want a photo used for "propaganda purposes", the paper said.


----------



## Thompson_JM (28 Jan 2007)

Shamrock said:
			
		

> From the BBC:
> 
> The woman, who wore a uniform hijab, also refused to be pictured with Sir Ian at the event on 21 December as she did not want a photo used for "propaganda purposes", the paper said.



I was gonna say something, but it might have been deemed offensive.... so i'll sum that statement up with this one:

I can Smell the BS from here.....

obviously the services must be hurting for members if this useless heap made it through the filters......  I dont think she has any intention of accually serving her community, she just wants to rock the boat...... I say throw her off it.


----------



## vonGarvin (28 Jan 2007)

As a public service in the CF: if the man wants my photo posted, then my photo is posted (for whatever reason).  Don't like it?  Don't join!


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jan 2007)

IN HOC SIGNO said:
			
		

> Do you seriosly think she'll ever draw that shift?



If I was the shift Staff Sergeant, hell yes.  She got her little moment in the sun.  She got to shame her Chief, refusing his handshake and suggesting that to be photographed beside him would be "propaganda".  She gets the first round.  But she is on probation, and a year can be a really long time.


----------



## Thompson_JM (28 Jan 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> If I was the shift Staff Sergeant, hell yes.  She got her little moment in the sun.  She got to shame her Chief, refusing his handshake and suggesting that to be photographed beside him would be "propaganda".  She gets the first round.  But she is on probation, and a year can be a really long time.



Win the Battle, Loose the War  ;D


----------



## Kat Stevens (28 Jan 2007)

How did she manage to interact with male recruiters, administrators, and instructors during her training?  Was she not required to speak to them?  How will she acknowledge understanding of direction given by a male superior in the field?   If tasked with riot control, can she be effective in an NBCBurkha?  Cool how The Yard is allowing her to choose which of the requirements of her religion to snub or embrace, as convenience dictates.   Load of old bollocks, put her in the canteen.


----------



## niner domestic (28 Jan 2007)

Kat: I see her being put in as a matron to the female lock up in the Old Bailey, a zebra crossing guard, point duty on Marble arch roundabout or the ladies loo keeper at the Arsenal game, maybe even pigeon spotting in Trafalgar Sq.


----------



## Kat Stevens (28 Jan 2007)

No such luck, niner.  You know she'll get the plum assignments.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (28 Jan 2007)

Kat Stevens said:
			
		

> No such luck, niner.  You know she'll get the plum assignments.



I'm not so sure.  If she had played the game, she would have had it made in the shade.  But this crap, this will have long lasting bitterness.  They probably would have a hard time firing her, but they can sure make it so she wants to quit.  
And what was this part about:



> The Mail on Sunday said the Pc, described as a "non Asian Muslim", was among recruits who had competed 18 weeks of basic training.



Would that mean that she was not born Muslim, and is a convert?  I realize that there are lots of Muslims that are not Asian/Arab, but I wonder if that was the news agency's way of implying anything.  Like when you hear the phrase "was known to the police" it means "was a criminal POS".


----------



## old fart (28 Jan 2007)

This new policewoman was trying to do one thing, and that was insult Sir Ian Blair.

The likely reason probably has much to do with the amount Islamist's that he and the police force he heads up he have stuck behind bars.  Many for a significant period or others while awaiting trail.

She used the lamest of excuses knowing that it would become a news item......She is undoubtedly a Wan_ker.

Old fart out.


----------



## George Wallace (28 Jan 2007)

Actually if she is a British convert, it may have nothing to do with Religion, but of that part of British society who believe that anarchy rules.  She may have been making an age old British insult to authority, democracy, and the position that the Chief held in the House of Lords.  She just may be that part of British society who feel that it is not proper for anyone to better themselves and earn or own property.  She may have been making this political statement against Sir Ian Blair.


----------



## niner domestic (28 Jan 2007)

There's a very large Albanian muslim community on the east side of London and down through Dartford.  IMO, the reference to a non-asian, is to distinguish that she is not a visible minority.


----------



## TCBF (28 Jan 2007)

"I've lived in places where the Australian flag had to be removed because it offfened muslims, and was causing unrest in the nieghbourhood. That request came from the NSW Police, who told a home owner to do so, because he feared for their safety. That was in Sydney Australia, not here in Shyteland (Iraq). The "offended" people were youth from an islamic backgorund. Its a pretty sad state of affairs when you are asked to take down your own country's flag in your own country, because others are threatening violence if you don't."

- An even sadder state of affairs when middle-Australia doesn't pull 1,000,000 Lithgow SMLE's out of their closets and re-take their neighbourhoods.

Tom


----------



## Belce (30 Jan 2007)

First the reason why I read and post here is because I am a supporter, I and my family have a military background that I am very proud of.  

To be frank, I think this story about this woman was brought forward by the press in England because it would sell copy and not because it was ever an issue for Ian Blair before or during.  It does seem to be now though.  Really this non event has more to do with other things in Britain than this.  

I stand behind what I said, without reservation. I bear no ill will to anyone here, when I say you are wrong, I hope you will reconsider your view with what I have said.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (30 Jan 2007)

Belce said:
			
		

> I stand behind what I said, without reservation. I bear no ill will to anyone here, when I say you are wrong, I hope you will reconsider your view with what I have said.



Why should anyone give any credence to anything you said.  You just ignored several pages of comments and points.  And just because you say we are wrong, we are supposed to think differently?  :

So it is your opinion that other cultures can just waltz in to a country and run roughshod over the traditions and values in place?  
There is a thread about "The Curse of Cultural Awareness" that you might find interesting.  Maybe you could get a bit of insight there.


----------



## 1feral1 (30 Jan 2007)

Belce said:
			
		

> ...when I say you are wrong, I hope you will reconsider your view with what I have said.



A predicted response, and why am I not suprised.

Yip, like I said, just stay in your private PC world, and you'll be fine.

Wes


----------



## Good2Golf (30 Jan 2007)

Belce said:
			
		

> I stand behind what I said, without reservation. I bear no ill will to anyone here, *when I say you are wrong, I hope you will reconsider your view with what I have said*.



Belce, 

This would be the part where you are stating your _opinion_.  That's all it is, an opinion -- not fact.  One person's opinion does not force another person to change theirs.  Furthermore, your stating that you are a supporter does not somehow give you the right to tell other people that their personal opinion is wrong.  

If, on the other hand, someone stated something as fact and you had evidence to the contrary, we would hope that you would present it in a respsectful, factual manner, not an ignorant drumming out of the other person in public. 

Consider this as your freebie warning to improve your tone in order to meet the both the word and the spirit of the Army.ca CONDUCT GUIDELINES.  Belligerence to others will result in an introduction to the Army.ca WARNING SYSTEM.  Please also give consideration to the article Wording and Tone Advice.

Regards,

The Army.ca Staff


----------



## geo (30 Jan 2007)

> The town of Herouxville, Que., wants immigrants that fit in with its citizens
> Published: Monday, January 29, 2007 | 3:31 PM ET
> Canadian Press
> 
> ...


In the UK & Canada & Australia... you will find that there are more and more citzens who are getting sick and tired of accommodations.  Give an inch & they'll take a yard.

How far are you prepared to go in welcoming the immigrants who'd like to move next door?

  ???  ???  ???


----------



## George Wallace (30 Jan 2007)

This is also being discussed here:  http://forums.army.ca/forums/threads/55553/post-519659.html#msg519659  in "The Curse of Cultural Awareness".


----------



## Centurian1985 (30 Jan 2007)

I seem to recall discussing this subject in the middle of last year on a different thread.  Time for a 'superthread' on the impact of external influences on our Canadian culture?


----------



## zipperhead_cop (31 Jan 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> How far are you prepared to go in welcoming the immigrants who'd like to move next door?



I think I could be pretty welcoming, since if they live in this area they would have to have their sh*t dialed in fairly tight.  Unless they had some issue that they foisted (or tried to) on me.  
It's strange, though.  Windsor seems to be a great big no-BS zone.  We hear about the crap the big centers put up with, but we don't here.  It's always funny to spot the GTA people when you are on the street.  I've had a few play the race card on me and when they get boarded for being out of line, they have no idea what just happened.  Like when you are dealing with someone elses spoiled kid.  You tell them "No", and it is like it is the first time they ever heard it.  But you can also tell that they know they were out of line, and usually they drop it pretty quick.  More people need to tell special interest groups to pound it up their arse.  And if you see someone taking a stand, be verbal in your support of that person.  If there is no enforcement of social mores, then they will simply cease to exist.  
Its your society, folks.  Feel free to take it back and fix it at your leisure.


----------



## geo (31 Jan 2007)

too true zipp
Major centres attract the lion's share of ethnic immigrants who have fled their homelands for a better life for them & their kids.... then they gravitate together into ersaltz ghettos.  Having created for themselves an ethnic critical mass, they expect each other to behave along the same norms they have escaped the old country.  they then press the local population for understanding & accomodation - let them live the way they are used to living...... (which is what they were trying to escape in the 1st place)....

Self fulfilling prophecies.

I tend to agree with Herouxville & their resolution.  This is want we are.  If you are prepared to live by these ground rules, you are most welcome to join us.... else, pound pavement...


----------



## old fart (31 Jan 2007)

I'll echo that GEO....and add that multiculturalism is a pile of hogwash.  Money for nothing, except that it is Canadian tax money being wasted to finance infringements on the average Canadian way of life as it exists for many particularly in small town Canada.

Canada needs immigrants of all colours and creeds, but if you desire to start a new life here it should be based on the expectation that you will have to accept the country as it is, not as how you think it should be. 

If an immigrant does not like the place....they can leave the same way they came and go back to all that's good in the old homeland, pandering needs to stop and now.

I am an immigrant myself; I left the UK having grown up there in the 60's and 70's.  The UK to be blunt has changed so drastically and unfortunately for the worse. It is not the same country and why, not immigration but multiculturalism vice integration.  Numerous visits just reinforce that opinion.  And having just spent 4 years there (my family are still there also) I can tell you that many folks I worked with have had enough and are also looking to move on.  Now that's a pity. 

Successive UK governments that have presided over the eradication of the British way of life could still learn something from the folks of Herouxville, Que.


----------



## Kat Stevens (31 Jan 2007)

old fart said:
			
		

> I'll echo that GEO....and add that multiculturalism is a pile of hogwash.  Money for nothing, except that it is Canadian tax money being wasted to finance infringements on the average Canadian way of life as it exists for many particularly in small town Canada.
> 
> Canada needs immigrants of all colours and creeds, but if you desire to start a new life here it should be based on the expectation that you will have to accept the country as it is, not as how you think it should be.
> 
> ...



  Been up my old manor lately, Kev?  It should be made a training area for troops deploying to Baghdad.  To hear English spoken on the streets is as rare as rocking horse poop up there now.


----------



## old fart (31 Jan 2007)

Kat, I know this...if they don't start playing soon, I will have to retire....my WHU mug...


----------



## Kat Stevens (31 Jan 2007)

Heartbreaking, but we killed three giants this year.


----------



## Shamrock (31 Jan 2007)

geo said:
			
		

> Major centres attract the lion's share of ethnic immigrants who have fled their homelands for a better life for them & their kids.... then they gravitate together into ersatz ghettos.  Having created for themselves an ethnic critical mass, they expect each other to behave along the same norms they have escaped the old country.  they then press the local population for understanding & accomodation - let them live the way they are used to living...... (which is what they were trying to escape in the 1st place)....



If only that were the full truth.  People will, however, emigrate not to pursue another way of life, but rather to preserve their current one (and make more money while doing so).


----------



## FastEddy (2 Feb 2007)

Belce said:
			
		

> There are always wrong opinions, you just have a right to be wrong, like now.




Well my opinion is, I think you might be more comfortable else where also.

Just remember, that many of the Members here that you belatedly criticize, are Fighting and Dying for the Same Shi...t Pile that a great number of you Holly-er than Thou created in the first.


----------



## zipperhead_cop (2 Feb 2007)

FastEddy said:
			
		

> Just remember, that many of the Members here that you belatedly criticize, are Fighting and Dying for the Same Shi...t Pile that a great number of you Holly-er than Thou created in the first.



Were you talking about Winnipeg?   ;D


----------



## FastEddy (2 Feb 2007)

zipperhead_cop said:
			
		

> Were you talking about Winnipeg?   ;D





Not Geographically   

Cheers


----------

