British police excuse Muslim cop from guarding Israel embassy

London's pathetic Metropolitan police allowed police constable Alexander Omar Basha to decline guard duty at the Israeli embassy during the Lebanon invasion because of "his personal concerns which included that he had Lebanese family members."

This claim unleashed a fierce debate about the duties of a police officer. But representatives of the Muslim Police Association denied the decision was based on moral concerns, suggesting it was a “welfare issue.”

No one explained the welfare issue involved for Constable Basha in guarding the embassy, presumably since the explanation would have been embarrassing for the British Establishment's reigning multi-culti pushers: other Muslims might have taken revenge on Basha's relatives.

Not surprisingly, some of London's cops took issue with the decision to allow the policeman to decide for himself whom he would and would not protect. Typically, though, even the critics had to find a politically correct formula to justify their complaint. Said one: "If they can allow this, surely they’ll have to accept a Jewish officer not wanting to work at an Islamic national embassy? Will Catholic cops be let off working at Protestant churches? Where will it end?"

Yes, I'm sure the Met has been inundated with requests from Jewish police officers to be exempted from guarding Islamic sites, and Catholics from protecting Protestants. According to the moral-equivalence rules of discussion in modern Britain, you can't criticize anyone or anything Muslim without making it clear that you're only talking about a general principle and a problem that any other group is just as likely to present.

Once the facts came out, the head of the Met, Sir Ian Blair, should have instantly started proceedings to dismiss both Constable Basha and the superior officer who allowed Basha to set his own rules for doing the job he had sworn to do and was paid to do. That is part of his job as top cop — to knock heads until every police officer in the country can entertain no doubts that he is to serve all equally, and not only those he likes.

Instead, Sir Ian's response was typical of the shrinking nature of the uniformed bureaucrat. He asked for a review and report. Meanwhile Constable Basha will no doubt be reassigned to duties he finds more congenial. I suspect the review will be a protracted business, certainly long enough so that public recall of the incident evaporates. Eventually the Met lawyers will find some wiggle room that will allow the force to avoid setting a precedent, except by default. So the next British Muslim who wants to go by the laws of his own state-within-the-state can be confident that it will fall into a legal gray area.

I have very little hope anymore that Britain will stand by its traditional principles of fair play and rule of law as its guest hijackers demand their own way.