Manchester Police forced to apologise for "Racial Stereotyping" during mock attack

Mynight said:
Pretty sure creating such a unofficial fatwa would be a crime in our own courts who have the power to do something about it.

Although lets test the theory;

I do not believe in the afterlife, nor do I believe in Muhammad, I regularly consume alcohol, gamble and am alone with non blood members of the opposite sex.

Bring it on draggers.

No muslim I've ever met has taken offense at my apparent blasphemy.

Yeah after hearing this if I saw an Irish guy with a bomb it wouldn't matter. Its only when they utter a certain phrase I get worried.
Click to expand...

It would be a crime but it wouldn't stop someone taking matters into their own hands for saying Mohammed was a [insert true comments here] and then being attacked.

Try going and saying it in a few select neighborhoods... By Finsbury Park mosque for instance
 
Rroff said:
I'm not bothered by it but there wasn't really a need to have someone running along shouting Allahu Akbar in quite that manner really heh. Ultimately there is a need to train for that kind of stuff with relatively realistic parameters so people need to get over themselves and stop being so overly sensitive about things where clearly there was no intention of causing offense.
Click to expand...

Why? That's what they do before they murder people. Seems perfectly reasonable to replicate that for the purpose of an exercise.

There is zero reason to apologise to Muslims.
 
OldCoals said:
They were training for a specific type of attack.

What other threats are we facing?
Click to expand...

The point being made though is Allahu Akbar is not specifically or solely related to an ISIS terrorist attack, which this scenario was imitating, but is a generic religious exclamation used by everyone with Islam.

This scenario was designed to give the Emergency services experience of dealing with a terrorist attack such as this, ie : after a suicide bomber has gone off, not about a SWAT team stopping anything.

So, because the pertinent part of this is dealing with the after effects of close quarter bombing with potentially armed attackers still in the vicinity, needing to shout "Allahu Akbar" is pretty irrelevant, since it's not exclusive to these guys.

That being said, it seems another case of faux outrage and tbh, is pretty much a non-story and is not worth getting wound up about as an indication of the fall of the Great British Empire
 
RaohNS said:
It would be a crime but it wouldn't stop someone taking matters into their own hands for saying Mohammed was a [insert true comments here] and then being attacked.

Try going and saying it in a few select neighborhoods... By Finsbury Park mosque for instance
Click to expand...

But why on earth would you want to walk into a Mosque and say Muhammad was a xxxxxx....that isn't freedom of speech that's just being a **** :p and probably classed as illegal....and if you got a kicking for doing that I think most people would tacitly think you deserved it :p
 
Freakbro said:
But why on earth would you want to walk into a Mosque and say Muhammad was a xxxxxx....that isn't freedom of speech that's just being a **** :p and probably classed as illegal....and if you got a kicking for doing that I think most people would tacitly think you deserved it :p
Click to expand...

By Finsbury Park Mosque

It could be argued so. But what would happen is I would be then charged for racial/religious abuse and the attackers, well vigilantism would be par for the course?
 
Freakbro said:
But why on earth would you want to walk into a Mosque and say Muhammad was a xxxxxx....that isn't freedom of speech that's just being a **** :p and probably classed as illegal....and if you got a kicking for doing that I think most people would tacitly think you deserved it :p
Click to expand...

You could always wear a suicide vest and give them a taste of their own medicine. Perhaps screaming "How do you like those apples?" at the top of your voice before letting go of the dead man's switch...
 
The Mad Rapper said:
You could always wear a suicide vest and give them a taste of their own medicine. Perhaps screaming "How do you like those apples?" at the top of your voice before letting go of the dead man's switch...
Click to expand...

Yes, because we correctly want to criticise the barbaric behaviour of this extremist fringe, then aim our lofty goals to emulate them :rolleyes:

Or we could act like the civilised people we are, which is what makes us better than this destructive ideology that is currently blighting the world - and by that I do mean the minority militant group that are using a distorted view of modern Islam to further their pseudo political/religous agenda
 
The Mad Rapper said:
My comment was tongue in cheek, you took it seriously, posted like a patronising douche and ****** me off. I'm not the plonker.
Click to expand...

Well I'm sorry your tongue in cheek comment wasn't funny or obviously ironic and I interpreted it incorrectly :p especially when the follow up comment is not to explain that but accuse me of being a hippy :confused:

Anyway, if you can't tell this is light hearted banter, go have a beer and chill out ;)
 
Did the complaint come from a Muslim or a non Muslim terminally offended do gooder offended on their behalf?
 
Last edited:
I'm left wondering who has 'forced' the Police to issue this apology.

It reads very much like it's bosses within the Police that have made the Manchester Police apologise, as they can see negative implications. If so, then as you were. This isn't PC, this is senior officials telling their subordinates what to do.

As you were.
 
Gilly said:
I'm left wondering who has 'forced' the Police to issue this apology.

It reads very much like it's bosses within the Police that have made the Manchester Police apologise, as they can see negative implications. If so, then as you were. This isn't PC, this is senior officials telling their subordinates what to do.

As you were.
Click to expand...

The senior officials were being overly PC, no?
 
Roar87 said:
The senior officials were being overly PC, no?
Click to expand...

Maybe, maybe not. If they can see that the act carried out my the team on the ground was damaging to their overall strategy (thinking along the lines of private business rather than public sector here) then perhaps they were just acting as their strategy outlined.

We'll never know why they made that decision, but it wasn't necessarily 'PC' in the truest form.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom