What a burka! Police chief says he could let officers wear full-length veils to attract more ‘ethnic minority officers’… but even Muslims think it’s a mad idea

One of the largest police force’s in the UK was today mocked after saying it would consider letting Muslim officers wear burkas in an attempt to boost diversity.

West Midlands Police said it will discuss allowing the traditional Islamic dress – which covers the entirety of a woman’s face and body – to become part of Muslim female officers’ uniform.

At a recent meeting, Chief Constable David Thompson, said he would consider employing staff who wear a burka as he looks to increase black and minority ethnic (BME) officers in the region to 30 per cent.

But today, even the Muslim Council of Britain said they would be against female officers wearing full-face burkas or niqabs.

The organisation said they would find it ‘very surprising’ if the force allowed full-face coverings to be used.

A spokesman said: ‘In the media the term burka is used to describe the full face covering but the veil with the slit for the eyes is actually the niqab.

‘The burka is actually the full gown which goes from shoulder to ankle with the face remaining clear.

‘It would be very surprising if West Midlands Police were in favour of full-face coverings.

‘The actual percentage of women wearing a niqab is very, very small and the women who do would probably not want to be in the police.’

And a source at West Midlands Police even criticised the idea of female officers wearing full-face veils, adding it would be ‘mad’.

September: Islamist Awareness Month By William A. Levinso

Islam Awareness Week is a project of the Muslim Student Association, a frequent source of disruption and anti-Semitism on college campuses. The organization also helps shill for Palestinian terrorists through Palestine Awareness Week (PAW). This article will respond by designating September as militant “Islam” (or Islamism) Awareness Month, a reminder of this depraved ideology’s 1,400-year assault on civilized humanity.

September 2, 1898: Battle of Omdurman

On January 25, 1885, Muhammad Ahmad, the self-proclaimed mahdi, or messiah, overran Khartoum in Sudan and massacred the garrison and inhabitants, including General Charles Gordon. The Mahdi died of natural causes shortly afterward, but his followers continued to wage violent jihad throughout the region. They were met on September 2, 1898, by an Anglo-Egyptian army under the command of Herbert Kitchener. The collision between Islamist fanaticism and European military science, including the new machine guns – “Whatever happens, we have got / the Maxim gun, and they have not” – was essentially a one-sided massacre of the former. The only significant Anglo-Egyptian losses were suffered by the Twenty-First Lancers, who paid roughly a quarter of their strength dead and wounded for three Victoria Crosses. Winston Churchill rode with the Twenty-First during the attack, and he used a Mauser “broomhandle” pistol because a shoulder injury made it difficult for him to wield a saber.

September 5, 1972: The Munich Massacre

The Munich Massacre began on September 5, 1972, when Palestinian terrorists took Israeli Olympic athletes hostage and subsequently tortured and massacred them. They also murdered a German police officer. Hillary Clinton later kissed the wife of terrorist leader Yasser Arafat, who is believed to have been complicit in the Munich Massacre.

September 11, 2001

Americans are most familiar with September 11, the anniversary of the terrorist attacks on New York and Washington. Nineteen deranged terrorists hijacked four airplanes full of innocent people, brayed “Allah akbar,” and crashed three of the planes into buildings filled with more innocent people including law-abiding Muslim citizens and guests of the United States. The passengers on the fourth aircraft attacked the terrorists, who decided to crash the plane into a field rather than risk letting the passengers regain control. Here is a video of militant “Islam’s” contribution to world history on September 11, 2001, which by itself makes September the ideal month for Islamist awareness.

Colonel Ardant du Picq explained more than a century ago why the passengers did not fight back sooner even though the able-bodied ones outnumbered the hijackers. “Four brave men who do not know each other will not dare attack a lion. Four less brave, but knowing each other well, sure of their reliability and consequently of mutual aid, will attack resolutely.” The passengers did not know whom among their neighbors they could rely on for support, so none dared to make the first move.

What Happens When Trump Departs? By Robert Weissberg

Donald Trump’s so far successful presidential run has raised a heretofore unnoticed irony. On the one hand, the GOP establishment has long called for a “Big Tent” strategy to attract African Americans, Hispanics, even gays plus other “minorities” currently in the Democratic camp. Ironically, Trump has indeed embraced the outreach strategy but his target has never been on the “official” GOP outreach list, namely lower-class whites, typically with only a high school degree or, to be a bit crude, Hillbillies, trailer court trash, rednecks, yahoos, hicks, and others who Trump correctly calls the “forgotten men” of American politics (perhaps the least offensive name would be Appalachians).

Now the politically critical question: if and when Trump holds his farewell election — in 2020 for his second term — will the GOP establishment continue to mine, courtesy of Trump, this newly energized voting bloc? Or, with the iconoclastic Trump gone, revert to the more familiar outreach directed at blacks, Hispanics, gays, and women. Will all those animated white folk filling up auditoriums to hear Donald return home when Trump finally departs the stage?

Let me suggest that even if Donald wins in a landslide, the GOP movers and shakers (including it’s affiliated “donor community’) will shun those who recently waited hours to attend a Trump rally. The doormen at the heralded GOP Big Tent will find a way to send his enthusiasts to the end of the line.

There are two reasons for this upcoming divorce. First is social compatibility: the well-educated, sophisticated folk who comprise the Republican Establishment barely acknowledge the existence of these “rustic” white folk, let alone have any intuitive feel how to appeal to them politically. A visit to the RNC website displays multiple outreach programs but nothing for poor, white high school graduates (the closest targets “America’s faith-based community”). This neglect is no accident.

Actually, though blacks reliably vote nearly 100% Democratic, I’d guess that the GOP elite believes it has a better finger on their pulse than on the Weltanschauung of poor whites. Given a choice of hustling votes at a black Baltimore church, surely a low-yield operation, versus pressing the flesh at a weekend gun and knife show, the choice is no contest. Upscale Republicans have the black church script down pat — reiterate historical injustices, celebrate the strength of black congregations, quote The Reverend Martin Luther King, and propose a Marshall Plan of federal assistance to re-build inner cities. Indeed, the RNC probably has that generic, often borrowed speech on file.

Is It Time to Turn the Tables on Iran? By Stephen Bryen and Shoshana Bryen

On April 24, 2004 the USS Firebolt, a Cyclone-class coastal patrol boat in the Persian Gulf, launched a rigid-hulled inflatable boat (RIB) when its crew observed a dhow — a traditional boat, in this case likely owned by Iran — fast approaching the Al Amaya oil terminal in Iraq. Suspecting an attempt to destroy the terminal, the RIB’s seven-man crew pulled alongside the Dhow in order to board it. The dhow blew up in a blast intended for the terminal. Two sailors, Navy Petty Officers Michael Pernaselli and Christopher Watts, were killed instantly. Coast Guard Petty Officer Nathan Brukenthal died when the RIB turned over in the water. Brukenthal was the first Coast Guardsman killed in action since the Vietnam War.

Last week, the USS Firebolt was back in the news.

On September 4th a swarm of seven Iranian fast boats, armed with guns and missiles and belonging to the Iranian Revolutionary Guard naval force, harassed the Firebolt and forced it to divert from its heading to avoid a collision. In an incident that lasted some eight minutes, three of the Iranian boats maneuvered within about 500 yards of the Firebolt and then pulled away. Another Iranian boat sped in front of the Firebolt and blocked its path. From what can be ascertained, the Firebolt sent radio warnings that were not answered and then -– closing in at about 100 yards -– the Firebolt turned away to avoid the “parked” Iranian attack craft. The Firebolt did not fire warning shots or blast its foghorn.

The Iranians were once again clearly testing swarm boat techniques and seeking to provoke the United States. It was the fourth time in less than a month. American official said there have been 31 similar events this year, almost double the same period last year. This incident follows other recent harassment of vessels including the guided missile destroyer Nitze, the patrol ships Tempest and Squall and the destroyer, the USS Stout.

General Joseph Votel, commander, U.S. Central Command, said the Iranians are conducting “unsafe maneuvers” to exert their influence in the Gulf. He is correct.

There are major political, psychological, and military gains for the Iranians from these provocations.

On the military level the Iranians are learning a lot about the speed of the U.S. Command Structure –- how long it takes for a warning to be made and what happens when the first radio broadcast, foghorn, or gun is fired. One can imagine the Iranians with stopwatches. A successful swarm attack that can do real damage to major U.S. naval assets needs to be correctly sequenced, as the Iranians surely know. Even though U.S. warships are poorly equipped to deal with swarming fast attack boats, they are not without resources. And air power can be called in to augment U.S. ships under attack. If Iran’s objective in such a situation involving a real attack is to cause serious damage to a U.S. aircraft carrier or a guided missile cruiser, by now they know pretty much what they have to do and what price they will pay.

Dangers Rise as America Retreats Fifteen years after 9/11, the next president will face greater risks and a weaker military to combat them. By Dick Cheney and Liz Cheney

Fifteen years ago this Sunday, nearly 3,000 Americans were killed in the deadliest attack on the U.S. homeland in our history. A decade and a half later, we remain at war with Islamic terrorists. Winning this war will require an effort of greater scale and commitment than anything we have seen since World War II, calling on every element of our national power.

Defeating our enemies has been made significantly more difficult by the policies of Barack Obama. No American president has done more to weaken the U.S., hobble our defenses or aid our adversaries.

President Obama has been more dedicated to reducing America’s power than to defeating our enemies. He has enhanced the abilities, reach and finances of our adversaries, including the world’s leading state sponsor of terror, at the expense of our allies and our own national security. He has overseen a decline of our own military capabilities as our adversaries’ strength has grown.

Our Air Force today is the oldest and smallest it has ever been. In January 2015, then-Army Chief of Staff Gen. Ray Odierno testified that the Army was as unready as it had been at any other time in its history. Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan W. Greenert testified similarly that, “Navy readiness is at its lowest point in many years.”

Nearly half of the Marine Corps’ non-deployed units—the ones that respond to unforeseen contingencies—are suffering shortfalls, according to the commandant of the Corps, Gen. Joseph F. Dunford Jr. For the first time in decades, American supremacy in key areas can no longer be assured.

The president who came into office promising to end wars has made war more likely by diminishing America’s strength and deterrence ability. He doesn’t seem to understand that the credible threat of military force gives substance and meaning to our diplomacy. By reducing the size and strength of our forces, he has ensured that future wars will be longer, and put more American lives at risk.

Meanwhile, the threat from global terrorist organizations has grown. Nicholas Rasmussen, director of the National Counterterrorism Center, told the House Homeland Security Committee in July that, “As we approach 15 years since 9/11, the array of terrorist actors around the globe is broader, wider and deeper than it has been at any time since that day.” Despite Mr. Obama’s claim that ISIS has been diminished, John Brennan, Mr. Obama’s CIA director, told the Senate Intelligence Committee in June that, “Our efforts have not reduced the group’s terrorism capability or global reach.”

The president’s policies have contributed to our enemies’ advance. In his first days in office, Mr. Obama moved to take the nation off a war footing and return to the failed policies of the 1990s when terrorism was treated as a law-enforcement matter. It didn’t matter that the Enhanced Interrogation Program produced information that prevented attacks, saved American lives and, we now know, contributed to the capture and killing of Osama bin Laden. Mr. Obama ended the program, publicly revealed its techniques, and failed to put any effective terrorist-interrogation program in its place.

We are no longer interrogating terrorists in part because we are no longer capturing terrorists. Since taking office, the president has recklessly pursued his objective of closing the detention facility at Guantanamo by releasing current detainees—regardless of the likelihood they will return to the field of battle against us. Until recently, the head of recruitment for ISIS in Afghanistan and Pakistan was a former Guantanamo detainee, as is one of al Qaeda’s most senior leaders in the Arabian Peninsula.

As he released terrorists to return to the field of battle, Mr. Obama was simultaneously withdrawing American forces from Iraq and Afghanistan. He calls this policy “ending wars.” Most reasonable people recognize this approach as losing wars.

When Mr. Obama took the oath of office on Jan. 20, 2009, Iraq was stable. Following the surge ordered by President Bush, al Qaeda in Iraq had largely been defeated, as had the Shiite militias. The situation was so good that Vice President Joe Biden predicted, “Iraq will be one of the great achievements of this administration.” CONTINUE AT SITE

Islamic State Guided Women in Paris Terrorist Plan, Prosecutor Says Three suspects held after car with gas canisters found near Notre Dame By Matthew Dalton and Noemie Bisserbe

PARIS—Islamic State militants in Syria directed a group of women who gathered materials for a car bomb left near Notre Dame Cathedral, French prosecutors said Friday, highlighting the group’s apparent ability to command homegrown terror cells from afar.

One of the women, identified as 23-year old Sarah H., had ties to French nationals who killed three people in recent terror attacks on French soil, Paris Prosecutor François Molins told a news conference.

Sarah H. had promised to marry Larossi Abballa, 25, who died in a raid in a Paris suburb after killing two police employees and taking their infant hostage in June, Mr. Molins said. She then pledged to marry Adel Kermiche, a 19-year-old who would die in a hail of police bullets in July after slaying a priest as he celebrated Mass in a small town in northern France, he said.

Those alleged ties suggest Islamic State managed to cultivate a homegrown network of radicals capable of hiding from French intelligence for months as its members carried out attacks.

Mr. Molins said Sarah H. was one of three radicalized women—including two women identified as Amel S., 38, and Inès M., 19—who were detained Thursday night after a violent clash with police, in which two officers were stabbed. The three met over the internet, Mr. Molins added.

Inès M. was taken into custody carrying a note in which she swore allegiance to Islamic State, he said.

“The young women were remotely controlled by individuals located in Syria within the ranks of the terrorist organization Daesh,” Mr. Molins said, referring to Islamic State by another name.

None of the three women has been charged, and their lawyers’ identities weren’t known. CONTINUE AT SITE

Donald Trump Speaks Out Against Iranian Ships Harassing U.S. Sailors Republican candidate has emphasized his support for the armed services at campaign stops in swing states By Beth Reinhard

http://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-speaks-out-against-iranian-ships-harassing-u-s-sailors-1473477999

PENSACOLA, Fla.– Donald Trump said in this military-friendly town that Iranian sailors who make inappropriate gestures at American sailors would be “shot out of the water” if he were president, apparently referring to an incident about two weeks ago when four Iranian ships harassed a U.S. destroyer near the Persian Gulf.

The Republican candidate’s remarks were followed by roaring applause from the nearly sold-out crowd at the 12,000-seat Pensacola Bay Center and chants of “USA! USA! USA!”

As he spoke about building up the armed forces, Mr. Trump added: “By the way, with Iran, when they circle our beautiful destroyers with their little boats and they make gestures at our people that they shouldn’t be allowed to make, they will be shot out of the water.”

On Aug. 23, a U.S. guided-missile destroyer was in international waters near the Strait of Hormuz when four ships from Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps approached at high speed and failed to respond to numerous warnings, according to a military spokesman. After two of the Iranian vessels came within 300 yards of the destroyer, the four ships departed. The incident was one of many interactions between Iranian and American ships in and around the Persian Gulf in recent months but one of the few that the U.S. Navy has deemed unsafe and unprofessional.

At Friday’s rally, minutes after Mr. Trump made the hawkish comments about Iran, he described Democratic nominee Hillary Clinton as “trigger happy.” He said, “Personally, I think she’s an unstable person.” CONTINUE AT SITE

Taking Nuclear Korea Seriously The rogue regime will soon have an arsenal that can hit Chicago.

North Korea conducted its fifth nuclear test Friday, following three missile tests on Monday and about 20 so far this year. The accelerating pace of the Kim Jong Un regime’s nuclear and missile testing shows its determination to threaten Japan, South Korea and the U.S. homeland with nuclear weapons. The question is whether the West is capable of a more determined response.

Every nuclear test leaves forensic clues, and analysts are suggesting this was Pyongyang’s most successful, with an apparent yield of 10 kilotons. This is the North’s second test this year, suggesting it has an ample supply of nuclear material from its restarted plutonium reactor and enriched uranium.

The North said it tested a miniaturized nuclear warhead that could be placed on a missile. True or not, we know its scientists had access to a Chinese design for a partially miniaturized weapon through the proliferation network of Pakistani scientist A.Q. Khan. The U.S. believes the North already has small enough warheads to fit on short-range missiles aimed at South Korea.

The North’s workhorse Nodong missile now has a range of more than 600 miles. In June it launched a medium-range Musudan missile from a road-mobile launcher, which makes it hard to detect and destroy. North Korea recently launched a missile from a submarine into the Sea of Japan at a range of 300 miles. This means Pyongyang now has a second-strike capability if the world tried a preventive attack to destroy its nuclear weapons.

A growing worry for the U.S. is the North’s new KN-08 intercontinental missile with the range to hit Chicago. In February the North used a similar rocket to launch a small satellite into space. Significant challenges remain, including a warhead that could withstand the vibration and temperature changes of a long-range missile flight. But the North has repeatedly solved technical problems more quickly than expected.

All of this means the window to prevent the North from becoming a global nuclear menace is closing while the proliferation risks are growing. The North has cooperated with Iran on missile development in the past and may share its nuclear secrets.

Right on cue, the world’s powers condemned the missile launch. And President Obama promised “additional significant steps, including new sanctions to demonstrate to North Korea that there are consequences to its unlawful and dangerous actions.”

Yada, yada, yada. Why should Kim and company fear such words?

Sanctions get passed as a ritual but are never enforced enough to matter. Earlier this year China began to enforce new sanctions, but Beijing let trade with the North resume after Seoul decided in July to deploy the U.S. Thaad missile-defense system. Only sanctions that imperil the regime will force the North to freeze its nuclear program, and Beijing has never been willing to risk undermining its client state. CONTINUE AT SITE

Coming full circle on 9/11: Ruthie Blum

Sunday will mark the 15th anniversary of 9/11. On that fateful day in 2001, the “land of the free and home of the brave” was brutally violated on its own soil. Americans, previously insulated from war and terrorism within the confines of their country’s borders, were suddenly faced with the realization that their sense of security had been false for quite some time.

This shock was not exclusive to citizens of the United States. The entire world watched the unfathomable footage of the collapse of the Twin Towers from television sets at home and in shop windows with shock. Even those who celebrated the humiliation of the world’s only superpower at the hands of rogue actors were incredulous.

Indeed, for that moment, there was universal global consensus that a seismic shift had occurred in one fell swoop, and that life as we knew it would never be the same again. It was like witnessing a chapter — or prediction — of the Bible.

But it was a very different book that became the focus of heated public debate, even before the dust in lower Manhattan had settled. Was the Quran behind such evil, or had it been hijacked, like the planes-turned-bombs? Were all Muslims to be held accountable for the act of a few radicals, or would they join in the fight to root out their bad seeds?

Israelis were just as horrified as everyone else by the scale and scope of the mass murder. We also understood the significance of the targets of the meticulously planned atrocity — key symbols of American financial and military prowess.

But we were not surprised by the event itself. Nor did we concern ourselves with the extent to which the tenets of Islam were to blame. We were in the throes of our own suicide-bombing war, which had been launched against us a year earlier by the Palestinian Authority. The only casus belli for what came to be called the Second Intifada was our utter and repeated capitulation to the demands of PLO chief and arch-terrorist Yasser Arafat. The more we groveled, the more empowered the Nobel Peace Prize laureate, whose aim all along was to annihilate the Jewish state, became.

Yes, we Israelis were spending our days trying to calculate which buses might blow up on our way to school or work; which cafe, restaurant or discotheque was too risky to frequent; and which packages, backpacks and sidelong glances were suspicious. As heads were literally rolling in seas of Jewish blood on the streets, our concern was not with the Quran, but with our leaders’ ability to put a stop to the carnage perpetrated by enemies in our midst.

We did not care whether Islam had been “hijacked.” We just wanted to eradicate the phenomenon, by any means necessary. Those naive enough to have believed that the way to do this was through diplomacy were provided with a wake-up call, courtesy of Palestinians wearing and detonating explosive belts. The rest of us already knew that, in the language of Fatah and Hamas, “peace” is a code name for “death and destruction.”

VICTOR SHARPE: GONE WITH THE WIND

Perhaps we should replace Winston Churchill’s warning to the British Nation, which he delivered six months before that terrible and fateful act of appeasement towards Hitler at Munich, and apply it to our own American Nation today; particularly during these last eight years under Barack Hussein Obama.

We soon will mark the 15 year old anniversary of that other fateful day in September, 2001; the day when a horrific atrocity in the name of Allah was perpetrated against two of America’s icons: the Pentagon and the World Trade Center.

Churchill’s words ring eerily true for all of us now as we face the rising peril of Islamic supremacy. They ring unnervingly true as we witness the appalling political correctness and appeasement by the Obama regime – and by so many Western democracies – towards the barbaric Islamic scourge of jihad and terror that threatens to destroy what is left of freedom and Judeo-Christian civilization.

It is desolating to witness the descent of the United States of America; a victorious nation that truly has been a shining beacon in an often dark and frightening world and now is fundamentally being changed for the worse by a foreboding presence in the White House.

The atrocity of 9/11 was an act of utter evil. But how an enfeebled world, shackled by the unholy trinity of political correctness, multiculturalism and diversity, has failed to confront that evil will haunt us for years to come and give historians bafflement and much to contemplate.

Here are Churchill’s words that now can so sadly be applied to America: