Muslim Removed From Diplomatic Protection

A Muslim firearms officer was sacked from his position on the Diplomatic Protection Group. He failed to pass a counter-terrorism check. One of the reasons, who knows what others there were, was that his children "had attended their local mosque for religious studies when the building was associated with an iman whom the police suspected of links to an extremist Islamic group", according to The Independent.

He is suing the police for unfair dismissal. His lawyer said, "Muslims are labelled guilty by association. Doubt is insufficient to save them. They are assumed guilty before being proven innocent."

Time for a reality check for both the newspaper and the lawyer. Firstly, his children did not just "attend" that mosque, they were sent there by their father i.e. by this police officer. That means that the officer in question, who presumably was well aware of the outlook of the mosque, was happy to have his kids educated there with that outlook. That reflects his own outlook on the world. So, it isn't guilt by an association that is happenstance, it is an association that he sought out for himself.

Lastly, this man is not on trial, he is applying for a job. One of the qualifications for that job is that there can be complete trust in the applicant. In this case there cannot be complete trust because he has chosen to associate with a radical Imam. He is therefore not qualified to do this particular job. It isn't a question of him being "guilty" of anything, it is him not being as squeaky clean as is required for this post.