When I wrote recently that King was caving to political correctness and Islamic supremacist intimidation and smear tactics, and that his hearings were shaping up to be useless, many people on the anti-jihad side told me that I was all wrong, for he was calling Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and she would tell the truth.
So what now? All that's left is a man who, as the Times understatedly puts it, has "little following among Muslims," the Islamic supremacist obstructionist group MPAC, and Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Muslim Brotherhood). If anything good comes out of these hearings now, it will be by accident.
"Muslims to Be Congressional Hearings' Main Focus," by Laurie Goodstein in the New York Times, February 7 (thanks to Pamela Geller):
WASHINGTON -- The new chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee said Monday that he planned to call mostly Muslim and Arab witnesses to testify in hearings next month on the threat of homegrown Islamic terrorism.Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York, said he would rely on Muslims to make his case that American Muslim leaders have failed to cooperate with law enforcement officials in the effort to disrupt terrorist plots -- a claim that was rebutted in recent reports by counterterrorism experts and in a forum on Capitol Hill on Monday.
"I believe it will have more of an impact on the American people if they see people who are of the Muslim faith and Arab descent testifying," Mr. King said.
Pamela Geller points out what's wrong with this: "I imagine it will be quite difficult for Muslims to testify against their own community and then return to live in those very communities. One only has to recall the Muslim who called for a protest outside the arraignment of the Christmas Day bomber in Detroit, only to have a death fatwa issued against him the following day."
The hearings, which Mr. King said would start the week of March 7, have provoked an uproar from both the left and the right. The left has accused Mr. King of embarking on a witch hunt. The right has accused him of capitulation for calling Muslims like Representative Keith Ellison, Democrat of Minnesota, to testify while denying a platform to popular critics of Islamic extremism like Steven Emerson, Frank Gaffney, Daniel Pipes and Robert Spencer.As the hearings approach, the reaction from Muslim groups -- initially outraged -- has evolved into efforts to get Mr. King to enlarge the scope of the hearings beyond Muslims. They want to use the forum to reinforce the notion that the potential for terrorist violence among American Muslims is very marginal and very isolated.
"Our heads aren't in the sand," Alejandro J. Beutel, the government and policy analyst for the Muslim Public Affairs Council, a national advocacy group, said at a forum his group sponsored on Monday on Capitol Hill. "The threat clearly exists, but I also want to put it in perspective. The threat exists, but it is not a pandemic."
No, their heads are not in the sand. They know exactly what they're doing. The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) created a fraudulent database greatly exaggerating Muslim cooperation with law enforcement. And MPAC's vaunted National Anti-Terrorism Council focused less on rooting out jihadists from within American Muslim communities than on protecting Muslims from uncomfortable attention from law enforcement.
Fifty-one Muslim, civil rights and interfaith groups sent a letter last week to Speaker John A. Boehner, Republican of Ohio, and the House minority leader, Nancy Pelosi, Democrat of California, protesting Mr. King's hearings as modern-day McCarthyism. They said that if Congress was going to investigate violent extremism, it should investigate extremists of all kinds and not just Muslims."Singling out a group of Americans for government scrutiny based on their faith is divisive and wrong," said the letter, which was led by Muslim Advocates, a legal and policy organization in San Francisco, and was signed by non-Muslim groups including Amnesty International USA, the Interfaith Alliance and the Japanese American Citizens League.
Mr. Ellison said that while he would participate, "I'm going to make it clear that I challenge the premise of the hearings.
"If you put every single Muslim in the U.S. in jail, it wouldn't have stopped Jared Loughner," Mr. Ellison said, referring to the man accused of opening fire on an Arizona congresswoman and her constituents. "It wouldn't have stopped the young man who killed his classmates at Virginia Tech. It wouldn't have stopped the bombing in Oklahoma City or the man who killed a guard at the Holocaust Museum in Washington."
First, note Ellison's hysterical fearmongering: once again, an Islamic supremacist accuses his foes of doing exactly what he himself is doing. Neither King nor anyone else is talking about jailing "every single Muslim in the U.S." Note also the implication of Ellison's complaint: that to focus on Islamic jihad and Islamic supremacism is to imply that no one from any other group ever does anything evil. It's ridiculous, but it does confuse the easily foolable. King's hearings would not have stopped Loughner or Tim McVeigh, but would Ellison be complaining if King were holding hearings about "right-wing extremism"? (Which is not to say that Loughner and McVeigh were in any sense "right-wing extremists," contrary to media myth.) If King were holding hearings on "right-wing extremism," would Ellison be complaining that jailing "right-wing extremists" wouldn't stop Muhammad Hussain, the would-be jihad bomber in Baltimore, or Mohamed Mohamud, the would-be jihad bomber in Portland, or Nidal Hasan, the Fort Hood jihad mass-murderer, or Faisal Shahzad, the would-be Times Square jihad mass-murderer, or Abdulhakim Mujahid Muhammad, the Arkansas military recruiting station jihad murderer, or Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, the would-be Christmas airplane jihad bomber? What do you think?
But Mr. King dismissed this line of criticism, saying: "I totally reject that. That, to me, is political correctness at its worst. If we included these other violent events in the hearings, we'd be sending the false signal that we think there's a security threat equivalency between Al Qaeda and the neo-Nazi movement, or Al Qaeda and gun groups. There is none."Mr. King added, "I'm not going to dilute the hearings by including other extremists."
In fact, he said he planned to hold three or four more hearings this year on topics like the radicalization of Muslims in prisons and Saudi financing for American mosques.
He said the only witness he had settled on for certain of the three he would call in the first hearing was Dr. Zuhdi Jasser, a doctor from Arizona and an American military veteran who has little following among Muslims but has become a favorite of conservatives for his portrayal of American Muslim leaders as radical Islamists.
Mr. King said he had changed his mind about summoning as a witness Ayaan Hirsi Ali, a Somali-born feminist critic of Islam who became a member of Parliament in the Netherlands and then fled because of threats on her life.
The hearings, Mr. King said, would be organized into panels of witnesses, one of them to include members of Congress. He said Mr. Ellison would serve as a witness on that panel. He said he did not expect to call any of the local law enforcement or counterintelligence experts who he said had told him repeatedly that noncooperation by American Muslims is a "significant issue." He says they will say these things privately, but not in public.
And why is that, exactly? Maybe for the same reason that King has deep-sixed any witnesses who are likely to tell him anything useful?
How good a witness on the "radicalization" of Muslims in the U.S. will Keith Ellison be? Well, as I first noted in December 2008, Ellison's Hajj was paid for with $13,350 from the Muslim American Society.
The Muslim American Society is the Muslim Brotherhood's chief operating arm in the U.S.: "In recent years, the U.S. Brotherhood operated under the name Muslim American Society, according to documents and interviews. One of the nation's major Islamic groups, it was incorporated in Illinois in 1993 after a contentious debate among Brotherhood members." -- Chicago Tribune, 2004, via the Muslim Brotherhood's English-language website, Ikhwanweb.
And the Brotherhood's agenda in the U.S. is subversive: the Muslim Brothers "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," by Mohamed Akram, May 19, 1991.
So a man who took money from a group dedicated to "eliminating and destroying Western civilization from within" is now Peter King's chief witness on how much progress is being made toward that goal. If King had been a Congressman in 1943 and was holding hearings about Nazi activity in America, would he have called Fritz Kuhn to testify?
It is clear there is no body in the government to stand upto Muslims. These spineless leaders cannot investigate the vile religion of terror. Period. why are they going through the motions to fool the public. Just like the airport security where they pat down an eighty year old nun or a five year old boy looking for terrorists just to please the morns in our country, King is being asked to investigate all kinds of extremism, not the real Muslims extremism, aka terrorism,just to please Muslims. See how the presence of Muslims in the country has corrupted our leaders.
Who will save the country??? Not the present leaders!!!
No surprise. This is the same King that thought restricting our Second Amendmnent rights, after the Tuscon shooting, was a great idea.(He wanted a 1000 ft. barrier around all congesscritters.) The man is an idiot.
Muslim judge terrorism = Thieves judge robbers
lol.....
And just what were you expecting?
That muslims simply allow themselves to be introspected without murmer? Had they done that ..then that's a line in the sand which effectively labels only muslims as a security threat - and we all know that isn't the truth.
I'm not saying don't investigate....I'm saying that there should be several lines in the sand..so that a more through wide spectrum analysis is done.
King must have got a call from LA Sheriff Baca...
His hearings will be worse then non productive, they will be counter-productive...
"Categories:dhimmitude"
Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Muslim Brotherhood).
Ha. I like it. Have I mentioned that the Mpls Red Star, the major newspaper in the Twin Cities, tweeted his support to the protestors on the streets of Cairo? The Red Star was laudatory, and our Congressman Keith Ellison (D-Muslim Brotherhood), was bragging about his support for "democracy."
It is reported that the "protestors" went wild on the streets of Cairo when they saw Ellison's tweets (Keith is an international hero in dar al-Islam). Then the Egyptian gubmint shut down the Internet there.
*** 8:12 ***
A congressman getting directly involved with a foreign crisis comes pretty close to treason. Keith Ellison. Moslem. Impulsive. Disloyal. Treason.
Somehow all this makes sense. We must look forward to an era of congressmen taking direct action from their taxpayer-funded offices to support the Cause.
To me, Ellison's actions represent front page news. He broke new ground, and it is muddy shit-filled ground.
"If King had been a Congressman in 1943 and was holding hearings about Nazi activity in America, would he have called Fritz Kuhn to testify?"
Yes.
Also, he would have refused to call any Jews since they had received death threats.
I'm feeling embarrassed by the whole thing,and here not to long ago I was singing praises of Rep. Peter King---what happen peter, to many threats coming your way from the Muslim community? You of course new this was going to happen because they are masters of deceit and propaganda.
There are so many strong and credible witnesses and yet you are choosing to ignore their testimony. It is beginning to smell like a courthouse in the Hague that has a case with the name Wilders on it.
And just what were you expecting?
That muslims simply allow themselves to be introspected without murmer?
Yes as a matter of fact, that is what should be expected...
Honest people have nothing to hide...
But it is not just Mahoundians that need introspection, it is Islam itself, it is the Quran, it is the traditions of Mahound that need introspection...King will get none of that in his hearings, if he does not just cancel them out right...
If all you have is Islamo friendly witnesses all you will get is Islamo friendly testimony...
If tea party leaders cannot get a handle on this, the movement is bankrupt. Like I told my radio talk show a year or so back, if the only thing the tea party movement concerns itself with is the size and scope of government and government spending (admittedly these are important issues) in the end the movement will not be effective.
Although it will not be the public forum we wanted it is nevertheless beneficial to get a wide spectrum of US Muslim voices on the record blowing smoke. In the future these statements will be further evidence of those who can be trusted and those who can't. If the testimony of the speakers at the hearings conflict with the facts presented behind closed doors by law enforcement Mr. King will be left with one conclusion. Someone is not telling the truth and it is not law enforcement.
Ah, McCarthyism..that one size, fits all word that's used whenever someone has something to hide.
The left didn't hate McCarthy so much the way he used his office, but mainly for bringing to light the real subversive threat that existed, from the communists.
King has talked a good game in the past, but it is now clear that he is an empty suit.
Anyone with an elementary knowledge of Islam could shred his " reasoning " to pieces, in a matter of seconds.
Political correctness and dhimmitude, are marching arm and arm with even Republican politicians, these days.
Mr. Spencer,
Great article, but just wondering why you never include the DC sniper, John Allen Muhammad, amongst the jihad attackers in the US? He clearly was a jihadist, including writing with his apprentice, Malvo, odes to bin Laden and Islam as his motivation to murder, as well as his obvious conversion to Islam and name change. He murdered at least 13 people.
"And the Brotherhood's agenda in the U.S. is subversive: the Muslim Brothers "must understand that their work in America is a kind of grand Jihad in eliminating and destroying the Western civilization from within and "sabotaging" its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions." -- "An Explanatory Memorandum on the General Strategic Goal for the Brotherhood in North America," by Mohamed Akram, May 19, 1991."
The phrasing and ideas expressed in the memo are most likely Quranic (parenthetical insertions are those of the translators, Hilali and Khan):
59:2 "He it is Who drove out the disbelievers among the people of the Scripture (i.e. the Jews of the tribe of Bani An-Nadir) from their homes at the first gathering. You did not think that they would get out. And they thought that their fortresses would defend them from Allah! But Allah's (Torment) reached them from a place whereof they expected it not, and He cast terror into their hearts, so that they destroyed their own dwellings with their own hands and the hands of the believers. Then take admonition, O you with eyes (to see)."
61:9 "He it is Who has sent His Messenger (Muhammad SAW) with guidance and the religion of truth (Islamic Monotheism) to make it victorious over all (other) religions even though the Mushrikun (polytheists, pagans, idolaters, and disbelievers in the Oneness of Allah and in His Messenger Muhammed SAW) hate (it)."
(also see 48:28, 9:33)
I hope everyone is writing to Congressman King to state your disappointment with him. Most congresscritters only allow their constituents to email them via their website. Since all congresscritters will happily take donations from citizens outside their districts, I find this unacceptable so here's the workaround:
Determine the location of the Congresscritter's district and locate a town in the district. King's website has a handy list of zip codes that fall within his district. Go to www.upsstore.com and find a store that is in the congresscritter's district and use that as your mailing address. As far as the critter's website is concerned, you are a constituent.
Now go, write!
If tea party leaders cannot get a handle on this, the movement is bankrupt.
Wild, keep in mind that early in the last presidential campaign the RNC of North Carolina ran an ad criticizing then candidate Obama's friendly relations with known terrorists.
John McCain lambasted the committee for the ad, demanded thaat it pulled immediately as ad hominem trash (apparently terrorism was not a concern in back in 2010).
The ad got pulled, and I immediately knew two things:
1) McCain was tacitly declaring his intention to not do his duty and compete for the office by pursuing a reality-based campaign. And, being no opposition, he would certainly lose.
2) Then recently chosen VP candidate Sara Palin did not renounce McCain and quit the campaign in protest of his refusal to consider terrorism in the dialog. It was then that I knew Palin is more into fame than she is into national imperatives, and thsu was (and still is) a worthless politician.
My syllogism would be if the Tea Partiers don't renounce Palin based on her failure to renounce the always worthless "across the aisle" McCain, then the Tea Party is useless too.
But it WOULD have prevented the horror of 9/11.
... and the Ft. Hood massacre. And the murder in Little Rock.
Also from the article:
That means that a whopping 60% of those caught were NOT turned in by fellow Muslims.
Semper Vigilant
Nunquam Trado
What else to expect from a man who has always supported Pakistan?
King folds, won't call Ayaan Hirsi Ali in "Muslim radicalization" hearings
.........................
Ayaan Hirsi Ali's continued involvement in these hearings were pretty much my last hope that they would do some small good—I said exactly that in a posting about how King would not call such experts as Robert Spencer and Steve Emerson.
Well, they're pretty much useless now. I had hoped that even watered down that they might open a few eyes, but now it seems to be so much obfuscation, and they will likely be worse than nothing.
The few who pay attention may be lulled into a further false sense of security when the congressional hearings turn up "no credible" Islamic threat...
Not to let the coward off the hook but perhaps he received a call from one of the anointed one's aides?
As long as there are many muslims around,many hearings will be needed. How many will there be before normal people get sick of them is the question.And how much will these useless hearings cost?
At the rate this committee is setting up; it seems that there'll be the just the yawning introductory followed by the usual sucking silence.