by Jack Lee
People of faith and good intentions will soon gather to protest the Congressional hearings on assessing the influence of global Muslim terrorism on the local Muslim community. The protesters are from the inter-faith council and represent over 100 non-profits and governmental organizations.
They fear that by asking questions about terrorism local Muslims we will be demonized and this will lead to alienating them from our mainstream society. Further, that this could push them towards identifying themselves more and more with Islamic radical’s and jihad and that could be big trouble for us given the millions of Muslims in America.
The protesters’ preferred plan is to turn the other cheek and a deaf ear. They want to ignore the relatively small numbers of radicalized Muslims and groups contributing to terrorism and in so doing downplay it’s impact in the US. On the other side of this controversial issue is the Chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Peter King, he warned that affiliates of al-Qaida are radicalizing some American Muslims and that he feels it’s absolutely necessary and appropriate they hold a fact finding hearing on the possible threat they pose.
“Muslims in the America aren’t cooperating enough with law enforcement to counter the radicalization of young followers by al-Qaida-linked groups, said King. He asserted that al-Qaida terrorists are targeting Muslim youth in this country, previewing his hearing Thursday on the extent of the problem and the Muslim community’s response.
“The overwhelming majority of Muslims are outstanding Americans, but at this stage in our history there’s an effort … to radicalize elements within the Muslim community,” he said in an interview broadcast Sunday.
The protest rally against the intended inquiries (hearings) is to begin today in Times Square today. Among the impressive line up of celebrity speakers criticizing US foreign policy and national security efforts is the Rev. Al Sharpton, Hollywood event promoter Russ Simmons and the Imam who sponsored the building of the New York Mosque near Ground Zero.
Later on this Sunday President Barack Obama’s deputy national security adviser will extend his support to Muslims at an Islamic center in northern Virginia.
The President’s passive, but influential outreach program, seeks to engage and empathize with Muslim groups that are increasingly frustrated with the who business of the American lifestyle and all its inequities as seen by Islam. The American lifestyle, is the basis for much of the Islamic unrest because it is at odds with the basic tenets of the Koran and Sharia law. The infidels living in America represents the evils of excessive freedoms. This has forces some Muslims living among the infidels to react violently in defense of their faith.
The more radicalized view that is increasingly being touted is, American democracy and capitalism have led this nation into a cesspool of corruption and it is an affront to the Nation of Islam. The US is full of dead souls unfit to coexist with Muslims who only seeking to purge the world of this great evil. They see themselves as soldiers fighting for Allah and the Nation of Islam. They either passively or pro-actively wish to win converts or eliminate the opposition.
The Administration and the inter-faith protesters hope they can find a middle ground and mitigate this growing feeling of antagonism in the Muslim world through open dialog. Eventually they hope this will shut down government officials meddling into possible homegrown terrorist activities and help relieve jihadist tensions.
The protest rally for Muslims is expected to number in the thousands, but it could be unpopular with some local New Yorkers still seething from the attack on 9-11 that claimed 3000 lives.
Question: Do you feel we are better off supporting the Muslim community and opposing investigation into their activities that may be tied to terrorism? If your answer is yes, please answer two more questions: Do you feel we would be better off if the Rev. Al Sharpton dictated our National Security Policy? And, would the entertainment event promoter, Russ Simmons be better positioned to know more than Chairman Peter King? And the bonus question, should Code Pink and Earth First replace the U.S. Marines and the Army as our lead combat forces?
It is the voices of protest that will move this examination into radicalization into the realm of “hate”. I saw Rev. Sharpton on TV this morning. He is incapable of making a distinction between a radicalized Muslim and a peaceful Muslim. To him all Muslims are the same and unless we also examine Christian radicalization, Hindu radicalization, Jewish radicalization, etc this is just a “witch hunt”.
How in the world have we managed to arrive at this place where so many in our population are incapable of acknowledging this threat? I see a group of people who can only think in terms of class and race warfare. They are incapable of stepping outside the multicultural, politiclly correct box to observe the obvious. God help us!
Radicalization and the terrorist threat to America should of course be investigated wherever they might occur. But not like this, and certainly not by a man who has a history of supporting terrorist organizations like the IRA:
http://www.salon.com/news/politics/war_room/2010/12/17/peter_king_terrorism
Barack Obama got a lot of flack for politically allying himself with Bill Ayers years after the charges against him were dropped. Can you imagine if Obama had actually been an active fundraiser for the Weather Underground, as King was for the IRA?
I eagerly await Sarah Palin’s “refudiation” of King for “palling around with terrorists.” Any day now…
The left has no credible voice when it comes to hypocrisy and terrorism. Leftist continually “reach out” to terrorists. Ted Kennedy was the biggest voice and supporter of the IRA:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/edwest/100007596/ira-sympathiser-ted-kennedy-was-no-friend-of-britain/
http://powerlineblog.com/archives/2005/03/009710.php
Comments by Mark Steyn quoted at same link:
http://www.cbsnews.com/8601-250_162-7098919.html?assetTypeId=30&blogId=#ixzz1FzSi1dlW
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9E0CE7D7143AF93AA25752C0A964958260&n=Top%2fReference%2fTimes%20Topics%2fOrganizations%2fS%2fSupreme%20Court%20
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/shows/ira/etc/script.html
New York is filled to the brim with Irish Americans. It was not at all unusual for New Yorkers of both parties to have sympathetic views and donate money, especially early on.
Tina, it was my mistake for playing the hypocrisy angle and turning what should be a common sense issue into yet another Democrat v. Republican pissing match.
Regardless of what Kennedy or Clinton have done in the past*, my main point is that a man who has a history of supporting a terrorist group–and has shown no remorse for doing so–should not be running hearings on counterterrorism. Surely if we can agree on anything, it’s this.
*Though I reiterate that I don’t want to change the subject, it’s important to point out that you are 100% wrong about Kennedy. Far from being “the biggest voice and supporter of the IRA,” he was actually one of the first Irish American politicians to speak out against them, and urged other Irish Americans not to donate to them:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/aug/26/edward-kennedy-northern-ireland
Here’s more about Kennedy’s repudiation of the IRA, from The Daily Beast:
“Kennedys longest connection with any foreign issue was over Northern Ireland. It began almost casually. He was taking a walk in a London park in 1971 when a woman came up to him and demanded to know why Kennedy, an Irish-American, was silent when the British locked up Irish Catholics without trial and stood by when Protestant paramilitary groups attacked Catholics. His first reaction was a simplistic Brits out message, demanding that the six Northern countries be united with Catholic Ireland. But after he met with John Hume, a Social Democrat from Derry, in 1972, he was quickly convinced that was impractical, and that he should support efforts for equal treatment in Ulster.
On St. Patricks Day, 1977, he joined with Tip ONeill, Pat Moynihan, and New York Gov. Hugh Carey to urge Irish-Americans to stop sending money to support the violence of the Irish Republican Army. And he persuaded the Carter administration to promise economic aid if a settlement could be reached in Northern Ireland. On subsequent St. Patricks Days, he would meet with leaders from all factions in Washington, urging accommodation.”
http://www.thedailybeast.com/blogs-and-stories/2009-08-26/ted-kennedy-global-hero/2/
Good for Peter King! The Pakistani’s refuse to admit to extremism within their government and their non-Muslim government officials are dropping like flies at the hands of terrorists. When the murders are done, they have public outpourings of support for the terrorists. No other officials will attend the funerals of these murdered civil servants and none will speak openly about the lack of civility in regards to outdated blasphemy laws and the peaceful coexistence of religions. Thank goodness the United States has a history of dialogue and King hasn’t been convinced to shelve this debate by knee jerk Muslims who insist that the debates are harming them while seemingly ignoring the fact that the terrorists are doing the greatest harm while they stand conspicuously silent and without a collective voice of disapproval of terrorist activities throughout the globe.
Atlanta Roofing, whatever you think of these hearings, you have to admit that Peter King is not the right man for the job. He has shown that he is perfectly fine with supporting terrorists as long as he agrees with them in ideology. To anyone who suspected an ulterior, possibly bigoted motive behind these hearings, King’s history with the IRA proves them right. He isn’t anti-terror. He is anti-Islam.
Tina, imagine what you would have said about an American politician who had ties to Hamas? Why are you silent on King’s funding of Irish terrorists, when you harshly criticized Imam Rauf merely for the POSSIBILITY that he worked with people who might have funded Hamas?
Chris: “Why are you silent on King’s funding of Irish terrorists, when you harshly criticized Imam Rauf merely for the POSSIBILITY that he worked with people who might have funded Hamas?”
I’ve been “silent” for personal reasons: 1. work load heavy, 2. illness – bad cold, 3. tech problem – temporary loss of internet at work, 4. dinner party for sons birthday.
King has done a terrible job of explaining his support of the IRA and has harmed these hearings because of it. The purpose for the hearings would have been better served had he expressed regret. Apparently he has no regrets based on what he perceived at the time. I will take his honest explanation over a false statement of regret. He isn’t trying to hide anything.
At the time most Americans saw this as a bitter and deadly dispute between local factions…not quite the same as global jihad with the intent of establishing a caliphate.
http://hotair.com/headlines/archives/2011/03/09/peter-king-on-why-he-used-to-support-the-ira/
Hot Air quotes King from a NYT article:
Peter King isn’t the only representative that will be present to ask questions during these hearings. Two prominent Democrats are also on the panel.
If a witch hunt is being conducted it is being conducted on the republican party/tea party…the next election cycle is in full swing and labeling of “the enemy” has commenced. (actually it never ends)
I was suspicious of Rauf’s motives based on his own words, demeanor and writings and I objected to the location choice. As for suspicions about the funding I believe that tracking such funding is part of our ongoing war on terror…oh, skeeeuze me…overseas contingency operations…and would be an appropriate consideration for anyone, including those in the Muslim community, who care about defeating radical activities that support terror.
You have the same right to be suspicious of King’s motives. Since the hearings will be public it won’t be difficult to asses his performance…and the performances of the dems on the panel as well. A sloppy effort to cover up and excuse could be quite damaging to dems.
Good response, Tina. Sorry for rushing you, and I hope you get over your cold soon.