Obviously, Peter King’s Islamist Hearings Are Like McCarthyism
The Left is pulling out all the stops in order to make sure that the role of “extremist Islam” in America is ignored, and that the hearings are marginalized, if not prematurely ended. They’d be much more comfortable if King was investigating what America did wrong, or Christianity or Judaism. Remember, if a Christian or a Jew (or a Tea Party attendee) do something wrong, the whole is indicted, even though the act was not done in the name of the whole. If an Islamist does something heinous, then America did something wrong, and it had nothing to do with religious teachings. There have been many, many delusional writings from liberals about the hearings, and The Politico’s Laura Murphy is apparently today’s designated hitter
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) is due to hold a hearing Thursday about the “radicalization” of U.S. Muslims and whether they are sufficiently cooperative with U.S. anti-terrorism efforts.
This may be the first of a series on this subject. But holding a hearing based on a flawed radicalization theory that conflates religious practices with preparation for terrorism and focuses exclusively on Muslim-Americans is misguided, discriminatory and counterproductive.
Because it is obviously wrong to understand what is going on with extremist Islam, and how they convert Americans to become extremists.
King’s hearings in essence question the Muslim community’s loyalty to the United States. This calls to mind the McCarthy hearings – an unfortunate, and widely condemned, exercise in guilt by association.
Now, if just one Tea Partier holds a sign that equates Obama with Hitler, that means, in Liberal World, that the entire Tea Party is hateful and raaaaacist, and it is A-OK to engage in that exercise in guilt by association. If a doctor goes on a killing rampage in the name of Allah, a doctor who had shown extremist Islamic tendencies for years and told people with war trauma to read the Koran, well, he’s just misguided and it’s isolated, has nothing to do with the radicalization of Muslims across the United States and the world.
And then we get the McCarthy reference. I know Liberals hate hearing this, but, McCarthy was a Senator, and the hearings were held in the House. Oh, and that McCarthy was actually proven right. There were actually Americans with Communist ties and leanings, many working for the government!
The message behind the King hearings also undermines basic First Amendment freedoms. It is unlikely to keep us safe and may well be regretted as a dark moment in our nation’s history.
Because we all know that the First Amendment protects Americans when they shout Allahu Ackbar and go on a killing spree to protest some grievance.
These hearings stand for the proposition that all Muslims are a threat because of the actions of a few. That is wrong. When a tax protester flies a plane into an Internal Revenue Service building, our government does not then cast an investigatory blanket over all who oppose taxes. When a few religious anti-abortion advocates bomb a women’s health clinic, the FBI does not, and should not, hold hearings about why churches are not more cooperative with law enforcement.
Our government might not, but, Liberals sure did, in blaming Conservatives. All sorts of editorials and stories were written in the media, blaming Conservatives and the Tea Party as a whole. Then we found out he was a Lefty.
Anyhow, when someone bombs an abortion clinic, we know why they are doing it, and the Christian church, while opposed to abortion, is also opposed to fire-bombings, and doesn’t condone the actions. Quite a few Muslim mosques and leaders do support jihad, sharia law, and killing the unbeliever, and attempt to convert people into that mode.
Time and again, law enforcement has been successful in preventing terrorist plots over the past few years by using facts and evidence. It does not aid counterterrorism efforts to stigmatize an entire community as “suspect.” It may only undermine the crucial bonds between communities and the government.
Quite frankly, if the Muslim community doesn’t want to be “stigmatized”, then maybe, instead of protesting the hearings, they should be out in the streets and protesting the “hijacking” of their supposedly peaceful religion by killers. They could speak out and say “not in our name.” Yet, they don’t. Surely, most Muslims are peaceful themselves. But, are they radicalized? How does one go from just a Muslim to ending up in Afghanistan fighting for Al Qaeda, or a killing spree here in the United States?
Liberals do not want to know. They decided shortly after 9/11 that America was at fault (remember, Obama wanted to reflect on what America did wrong, as well), and that the religion of Islam was not to blame, just a few bad characters. There is something to say about looking for the best in people, like, say, that not all illegal immigrants are killers, rapists, pedophiles, drug dealers, and gang members. But, like with illegals, there are bad people stuck in with the good, and we should root them out and find out the causes before we have another Ft. Hood on our hands, rather than stick our heads in our, well, you know, and sing Kumbaya.
Liberals didn’t like all the flags that spontaneously appeared after 9/11. Now that Osama bin Laden has finally gotten what
As the State of Connecticut went through the process of gearing up to push more gun bans and bans on
This is my first vlog (that’s video blog for the uninitiated) using my new HD camera. I see I have