Interesting report carried by the BBC today on the news that Muslim police officers are being prevented from playing a role in fighting terrorism, according to a senior Muslim Officer. Supt Dal Babu was speaking at the first annual conference of the National Association of Muslim Police Officers. (Looking forward to the first conference of the National Association of Born again Christian Police Officers) Tony McNulty, the supernaturally inept Home Office Minister who attended this delightful exercise in victimhood naturally agreed with the views expressed by the Superintendent. Once again, the BBC delights in reporting how unfair our institutions are to followers of the Religion of Peace. But why is effective policing to be determined on a racial or religious head count? Shouldn’t it be a question of ensuring the most able officers be promoted to ensure that the Islamic Jihadists are tracked down before they can repeat what happened on 7/7? Are we really to believe that some sort of institutional bias is holding back all these intrepid Muslim officers? Why is is that this entire article pushes the one view – namely that Muslim police officers are being discriminated against? Isn’t this just more instance of the promotion of victimhood through the obliging BBC prism?

Bookmark the permalink.

56 Responses to MORE VICTIMHOOD?

  1. Mugwump says:

    David Gregory,

    I’m aware there may be arguments on both sides when it comes to public disclosure of the Balen report, but what irritates me is the suggestion that, since the report’s findings have thus far remained secret, one can safely assume it contains nothing particularly noteworthy or embarassing.

    I think one could just as easily argue that the fact the BBC has gone to such lengths to suppress the report suggests it is aware that revealing the findings would provide an enormous amount of ammunition to its critics.


  2. David Gregory (BBC) says:

    “The bbc have used on thousands of occasions the term asians when referring to just muslims. I didn’t hear you criticize this when it was reported by the bbc.”
    Well it would be wrong. Care to link to some of these “thousands of occasions” on the website for example?


  3. pounce says:

    Actually David, I find how the BBC hides the excess of a 2% of the British population by blending them behind the generalisation of “British Asains” or similar a bone of contention. Funny enough when I have asked my friends who are also British Asians but not part of that 2% I find the tone going through the roof. Boy do they object to been categorised along side those who pray towards Mecca. (You only have to watch Bend it like beckham to see a toned version) Muslims have made it very clear that they wish to stand out in the UK (never mind the world) If that is the case then reporting the negative aspects of the faithful is one of the rewards for being different. I mean lets be serious when was the last time you heard of a South Asian Mosque?


  4. David Gregory (BBC) says:

    Pounce: We shouldn’t do it. I can well understand why your friends don’t like it. If you find an example I’m happy to follow it up.


  5. Aussie Bystander says:

    Why aren’t there more Muslim police officers in the UK? Perhaps because they have to swear allegiance to the monarch who is also the head of another religion.

    Just a thought.


  6. BaggieJonathan says:

    Aussie Bystander

    No problem for atheists though.

    Or Jews.

    Or Catholics – who view the Pope not the monarch as the head of the church.

    Did you post that in a hurry without checking your own logic?

    Just a thought.