Police hampered by further poilitically correct policies!!

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by Undertaker, Jul 21, 2004.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. The Mail today ran a story about a Police Operation that has just taken place. Operation Iowa was supposed to find out where 1 million pounds of benefit money had dissapeared following an audit.

    The investigation pointed to a number of Muslim families in the area who where suspected of benefits fraud. In true Police fashion, a dawn raid was organised to arrest the suspects. Nothing unusual there you may think. However.....

    The Police taking part were told that during the raid the following guidlines had to be followed:

    1. Shoes had to be left outside of the house as it was offensive to Mulims to wear shoes within the house.

    2. Dogs were not allowed to be used as some Muslims considered them 'Unclean'.

    3. Copies of the Koran were not allowed to be touched by 'Unbelievers'.

    In general, a softly softly approach was to be used as to not upset their sensibilities.

    Where will the lunacy end? Why do the authorities continue to pander to the whims of these minorities? I bet if the Police were raiding the house of Joe Bloggs, suspected burglar, the place would get a right good trashing.

    The average law abiding citizens of this once great Country continue to bare the brunt of this Government's policies whilst criminal and suspects get treated with kid gloves. Even if these people are found guilty, you can bet they they will not be made to pay the money back (they will claim to be broke or will have sent it to relatives abroad) and will then get to stay in a 5 star prison tailored to pandering to their religious needs!
  2. But was this an official policy - or some weak minded neo-PC drivel from a spineless official in their chain of command? I'd really be interested in knowing who it was that issued these guidelines - and whether they've ever done any police work in the real world. Or even stepped out from behind their Guardian "newspaper".
  3. I wonder if benefit-fiddling is against the teachings of the Koran?
  4. I tried to find a link to the story but could not find it within the on-line version of the Mail. You will have to find the hard copy to see all of the details.
  5. Definitely not. You've heard of the Satanic Verses which got Salman Rushdie into all that trouble... well this comes under the 'Shifty Verses' :D
  6. i've got a mate in bedfordshire police , which covers Luton , and he was telling me that it's just becoming a f*cking joke to try and deal with muslims , due to "diversity awareness" what happened to good old "crime awareness" i make no bones on here about my feelings to some NOT ALL sections of the muslim and immigrant communities , but doesn't this government realise that by alienating any group of individuals they are playing right into the hands of extremists , and the group i'm talking about is white heterosexual non muslim british citizens , who are starting to feel like visitors in their own f*cking country. :evil: :evil: :evil: :evil:

    end of rant.............aaaaaaaand breathe.
  7. Here, Here
  8. X-Inf

    X-Inf War Hero Book Reviewer

    I hope Plod did the decent thing and dropped off their latest Giro. The poor wee souls will be so traumatised by the big bad Plods that they would not be able to make it all the way to the Benefits Agency on their own.
  9. Purple_Flash

    Purple_Flash LE Moderator

    And then drive them to the legal aid office to file their claim for religious persecution no doubt!
  10. or simply adopt a muslim type judgement , which would be much more to their liking , find them guilty without trial and chop their thieving f*cking hands off.

    i'm free next wednesday ..... i'll do it :twisted:
  11. This sounds like a rammped up story from a newspaper at the vanguard of the anti police movement. Do not be taken in by its right wing stance on other issues, the mail spouts rubbish about the police (and the MET in particular) at all times.

    I know nothing of OP IOWA but I can assure you

    1) Wearing shoes on a search operation is a Health and Safety issue and I cannot imagine it being optional

    2) I cannot see a role for dogs in an operation involving benifit fraud. If dogs were needed their would be an overwelming officer safety need that would over rule diversity issues. Having said that the co-operation of the occupiers would be sort if at all possible (eg I have heard of dogs being taken into a mosque to find suspects on premises and the imam was totally in agreement with this.) the invovlement of local community leaders would hopefully negate any harm this may do.

    3) If it was neccessary to move a koran I would take a muslim officer to do it. If their was an urgent reason for "an unbeliever" to do it, then I would do it. No problem.

    We have been castigated for our insensitivity for so long by the Mail that it annoys me they have the gaul to print such a story. Whilst we do our best to be sensitive to all cultures rules that does not override our need to do our job.

  12. I read that. Pretty scary, if true.

    One of the scary things about it is the thought that an airline stewardess could be that indiscrete, and disinclined to follow regulations, in a matter of life-and-death importance.

    For instance, pointing out, to a passenger, and presumably total stranger, who are the armed sky marshalls.
  13. Cutaway

    Cutaway LE Reviewer

    Bloody 'Klefti Verses' more like !

  14. worrying story, raises several issues:

    1. Why aren't better security arrangements in place if people are so worried about terrorists?

    2. How can you have a sensible security policy when the rules state that you can only search two people of a particular ethnic grouping per flight?

    3. Is this just american paranoia, if a group of 14 white americans were acting this way would it have been noticed?

    4. Sky Marshalls are supposed to be discreet, undercover agents, how/why did the stewardess act this way?