“Police chiefs [in the Netherlands] have admitted to changing duty rotas to accommodate officers who have ‘moral objections’ to protecting Jewish events and buildings such as the national holocaust museum.”
… Justice minister David van Weel said it was ‘unacceptable’ for officers to refuse to go on duty for reasons of conscience.
‘I can’t stop what people think, feel or believe,’ he said. ‘But you should leave it at home. As a police officer, as soon as you put on your uniform you have a job to do, and that job is totally neutral.’ “
QuestGalaxy on
Any police officer refusing to guard a Jewish building or any other minority/religious building or honestly any type of building or people should be fired. The Justice minister is completely correct here.
HappyLemonNL on
It’s the equivalent of Ukranian immigrants that have integrated and made it into the force, opting to not be included in protecting a Russian event, so there’s less harm in taking the individual policeman’s opinion into consideration, than there is in forcing them to do something they’re not comfortable with, especially if there are other policemen who don’t mind
Large-Sheepherder-66 on
I don’t know , never seen anyone harm the Jewish building , but I have seen a Muslim man hanged brutalized by Zionist radicals.
Confident_Resolution on
“We take moral objections into account when we make the rotas. But if there is an urgent job to do they go on duty whether they want to or not.”
In other words, its an absolute non-story.
Middle_Trouble_7884 on
Are they truly unwilling to guard Jewish sites, such as synagogues, or are they refusing to guard places like the Israeli embassy?
If it’s the former, it would indeed be antisemitism, with no excuses; if it’s the latter, it might simply reflect differing views and opinions regarding the socio-geopolitical context and a disagreement with the measures that the state, whose embassy they are refusing to guard, is adopting….
Gold-Instance1913 on
Having moral objections to performing duties should be grounds on immediate release from service, with social rights equal to serious dereliction of duty / not showing up for work.
PricklyPierre on
I guess it’s better that they reveal their biases so they won’t be assigned to a duty they won’t fulfill. Remember cops in Washington escorting the insurgents past barricades. Best not to Jewish people relying on security detail that will just stand back during an attack.
8 Comments
“Police chiefs [in the Netherlands] have admitted to changing duty rotas to accommodate officers who have ‘moral objections’ to protecting Jewish events and buildings such as the national holocaust museum.”
… Justice minister David van Weel said it was ‘unacceptable’ for officers to refuse to go on duty for reasons of conscience.
‘I can’t stop what people think, feel or believe,’ he said. ‘But you should leave it at home. As a police officer, as soon as you put on your uniform you have a job to do, and that job is totally neutral.’ “
Any police officer refusing to guard a Jewish building or any other minority/religious building or honestly any type of building or people should be fired. The Justice minister is completely correct here.
It’s the equivalent of Ukranian immigrants that have integrated and made it into the force, opting to not be included in protecting a Russian event, so there’s less harm in taking the individual policeman’s opinion into consideration, than there is in forcing them to do something they’re not comfortable with, especially if there are other policemen who don’t mind
I don’t know , never seen anyone harm the Jewish building , but I have seen a Muslim man hanged brutalized by Zionist radicals.
“We take moral objections into account when we make the rotas. But if there is an urgent job to do they go on duty whether they want to or not.”
In other words, its an absolute non-story.
Are they truly unwilling to guard Jewish sites, such as synagogues, or are they refusing to guard places like the Israeli embassy?
If it’s the former, it would indeed be antisemitism, with no excuses; if it’s the latter, it might simply reflect differing views and opinions regarding the socio-geopolitical context and a disagreement with the measures that the state, whose embassy they are refusing to guard, is adopting….
Having moral objections to performing duties should be grounds on immediate release from service, with social rights equal to serious dereliction of duty / not showing up for work.
I guess it’s better that they reveal their biases so they won’t be assigned to a duty they won’t fulfill. Remember cops in Washington escorting the insurgents past barricades. Best not to Jewish people relying on security detail that will just stand back during an attack.