No bacon for Police

One would think that anyone training to be a chef in the UK would be aware that at some point, they are going to have to cook pork or alienate 97% of their customers, but apparently not so for Hasanali Khoja.

Muslim chef sues Met police after being asked to cook sausages and bacon for ‘999 breakfasts’ | Mail Online

Hasanali Khoja accuses Scotland Yard of refusing to guarantee that he would not have to handle pork, which is forbidden in Islam.

This man isn’t running his own restaurant, he’s cooking for other people who have no option of eating elsewhere, which means that he will have to cook what he is asked to and at breakfast time that is likely to be an English Breakfast. Perhaps he should of thought about another career?

But why should he? In modern Britain it is a crime to discriminate against someone because of their religion, even if it means said religion prevents them from doing their job. Had the Met not given Khoja the job because he may have to handle pork, he more than likely would have sued then too.

For me it is the same as a vegetarian taking a job as a chef, then complaining that cooking meat is against their principles. They should chose a career that isn’t likely to comprise their principles or beliefs.

There seems to have been a lot of this lately in Britain where it is becoming increasingly common for ‘strict’ Muslims to only become strict when it suits them.

Take the female Muslim police cadet who refused to shake the hand of her potential boss, Sir Ian Blair, stating that it was against her religion to touch men that were not close relatives.

Odd then, that she was training to be a police officer, a job that involves handling, restraining and in some cases resuscitating strange men. Or did she just become a strict Muslim for that day? Are we now, after paying for her training, to expect her to also launch a case against the Met for forcing her to touch strange men, which is contrary to her religious beliefs? Or is she saving that one for when she fails to be promoted?

There was also the primary school teacher who refused to remove her veil when teaching children, claiming that it was against her religion. Aishah Azmi, apparently at the prompting of some local crusading cleric, suddenly decided that she had to wear the full face veil, otherwise know as the niqab (or ninja suit). Despite the fact that this is only required when coming into contact with strange men, not children. She refused to remove the veil, was dismissed and duly sued, unsuccessfully.

More recently there was the Tesco worker who claimed that he didn’t know his job involved handling alcohol, which he claims is against his religion. There is nothing in the Qu’ran that specifically prohibits handling alcohol, merely intoxication. By his warped logic he should never have set foot in a Tesco warehouse, as technically he was coming into contact with alcohol. Better yet, maybe he should never have left Saudi Arabia.

Again and again we are seeing these, almost made up on the spot, religious excuses for things, such as being unable to use handwash, or that dogs are offensive in any form. Recently a northern police force was made to pull a recruitment advert that featured a puppy, as Muslims would find it offensive. Remarkable then that they have dogs in the Middle East, but they do. It seems that things are only offensive when pertaining to a non Muslim.

Another interesting point from this article was the line:

Mr Khoja is being supported by the Association of Muslim Police.

So there is a Muslim Association of Police too, this of course goes hand in hand with the Black Police Association and no doubt many others, although I doubt that there is a White Police Association or Atheist Police Association. Then again perhaps a white atheist should attempt to join the Muslim Association and then sue for discrimination, but then that would not be very British.

Khoja’s lawyer stated:

“He has genuine and strong religious beliefs and expects that they will be accommodated,”

Why of course, this is Britain, where we bend over backwards to please everyone, even to our own detriment. This of course is the problem in multicultural Britain, immigrants arrive expecting Britain to change to suit their needs and make no effort to fit into British society and by and large make no contribution to British society.

If they believe that British culture or the British way of life may impede their magical journey to the one true mystic being, they should stop at the door and turn around. Britain has spent decades if not centuries disentangling itself from the last lot of religious nut jobs that came here and is now largely a godless land. The last thing we need is a new wave of nutters with magic books and mystical messiahs. Yet that seems to be all we attract.

5 responses to “No bacon for Police

  1. All aboard the muslim gravey train (non pork)

  2. This is called “taking the Michael”. If you don’t want the job, don’t apply, simple as that. If you want to live under sharia, there are plenty of countries that can accomodate you.

  3. This is precisely why our country is going to the dogs. If I go to another country as a visitor or to live, I learn to respect and adhere to their laws and cultural values. This type of situation is appalling. I also know many Muslims that will happily cook pork, but will not eat it, not scientific, but that would suggest to me that it is a matter for the individual. I think they used to call it democracy.

  4. There does seem to be a different opinion depending on what Imman is giving out the orders. The radicals claim that even the sight of a pig is not allowed, others that contact with pigs is not allowed and then still others that say only eating pork is forbidden.

    I think that this is one of the problems with Islam, they have no Pope or body to decide such matters and the whole Qu’ran is ambigious and open to interpretation. Part of the reason that extremists are able to twist it.

  5. re Charlie’s last comment,
    Yes, it appears things are done according to ‘the word of the Immam’, not necessarily according to ‘the word of god/ the prophet’. If it wasn’t for what we know already I might’ve said that this sounds a bit dangerous especially as most scriptures teach us of man’s falliabilty). Maybe the devote muslims should take their prompts more directly from The Books and apply that to modern life, themselves, rather than buying wholesale what some immam has to say.

Leave a Reply to Kris Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s