| FrontPageMag.com | Articles By Robert Spencer | Articles By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog | Robert Spencer Bio |  |
|
|
|||||||||
|
|
In the featured article at FrontPage this morning, I discuss Keith Ellison's comparison of 9/11 to the Reichstag fire, and ask the Congressman a few questions:
Upon assuming office, United States Congressmen swear to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) is on the job, zeroing in on a large-scale plan to subvert the Constitution, led by none other than George W. Bush. Speaking last week in Minnesota to a meeting of a group called Atheists for Human Rights, Ellison said of the September 11 attacks: “It’s almost like the Reichstag fire, kind of reminds me of that. After the Reichstag was burned, they blamed the Communists for it, and it put the leader [Hitler] of that country in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted.”The Nazi regime staged the fire at the Reichstag, the German Parliament building, on February 27, 1933, and blamed it on German and foreign Communist agents. The German Communist party was swiftly outlawed, thousands of Communists were arrested, and Hitler and his henchmen were able to bully the other parties in the German Parliament to grant him dictatorial powers, allowing him to legislate without approval from the assembly. But in making this comparison Ellison emphasized that he wasn’t saying that the Bush Administration staged the 9/11 attacks, because, “you know, that’s how they put you in the nut-ball box -- dismiss you.”
Ellison didn’t entirely avoid the “nut-ball box,” however. He went on to assert that Vice President Cheney’s behavior when he refused to answer questions put to him by Congress was “the very definition of totalitarianism, authoritarianism and dictatorship.” Such a “definition” may come as a surprise to those who may think that concentration camps, rule by fiat, and violent suppression of dissent are more reliable hallmarks of totalitarianism, authoritarianism and dictatorship than declining to respond to inquiries. And Ellison’s overall point was no more successful at avoiding “nut-ball” territory. To suggest that since 9/11 Bush has been “in a position where he could basically have authority to do whatever he wanted” ignores not only the Democrat-controlled Congress and the mainstream media’s unstinting hostility to the President, but the fact that Ellison himself was speaking freely, without fear of retribution – while if someone like him had said similar things in National Socialist Germany, he would have faced arrest and torture.Meanwhile, as someone who has sworn to “support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic,” Ellison has more to answer for than just hysterical anti-Bush rhetoric. Ellison has taken money from the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), a group that has been named as an unindicted co-conspirator in a case involving funding of the terrorist group Hamas. The mainstream media has been silent on this; would treat the specter of a congressman taking money from the Ku Klux Klan with similar indifference? CAIR co-founder Nihad Awad has declared his support for Hamas in the past, although he now disavows the group. And as for the Constitution, CAIR spokesman Ibrahim Hooper has said: “I wouldn’t want to create the impression that I wouldn’t like the government of the United States to be Islamic sometime in the future.” And Omar Ahmad, co-founder of CAIR with Awad, has declared that “Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant,” with the Qur’an “the highest authority in America.” Ahmad now denies having said this, but the original reporter of his remarks stands by her story.
Such statements don’t require forced and hysterical comparisons with Hitler to be recognized as explicit threats to the U.S. Constitution. Will Ellison, now that he has sworn to defend that document and appears so solicitous to fend off threats to it, now disavow CAIR, return the money he has received from that organization, and repudiate any attempt by Muslims in the United States to impose Islamic Sharia law here?
When Ellison was elected, some of his supporters shouted “Allahu akbar!” at his victory party, while the victor himself looked on with obvious embarrassment. But he had no need to be concerned. In a gushing piece on his victory, the New York Times never mentioned CAIR once – and dismissed concerns about his record as coming from “Muslim-bashers in the blogosphere.” It noted that some “Muslim American activists” have compared Ellison’s candidacy to “John F. Kennedy’s breaking the taboo against a Roman Catholic’s being president.”
The big difference, of course, is that in Kennedy’s case he addressed those concerns – which were in any case baseless, since the Pope had in fact no plans to rule the United States through a Catholic president. But concerns about Ellison’s views on terror groups and Islamic supremacism are hardly baseless: they stem from amply documented statements and activities of the CAIR officials whose support he has never disavowed. Nevertheless, these concerns are dismissed as “bigotry” and left unanswered, while the congressman himself compares the leader of the world’s oldest and largest republic to the most notorious dictator in history. If he would tone down the hysteria and instead answer some pointed questions about his own associations and views, Americans would rightly be reassured.
Posted by Robert at July 16, 2007 9:30 AM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
|
So glad that our First Muslim congressman has blown an incredible opportunity for smooth taqqiya and spin. Islam's image is of a semi-literate hate filled imam wagging his finger and spewing hate and lies.
Ellison, one would think, would distance himself as far from that image as possible.
Posted by: poetcomic1![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at July 16, 2007 9:49 AM
Ellison emphasized that he wasn’t saying that the Bush Administration staged the 9/11 attacks, because, “you know, that’s how they put you in the nut-ball box -- dismiss you.”
Sorry, Keith, but you were already in the "nut-ball box" long before your Reichstag Fire speech; your joining the Nation of Islam put you there.
Incidentally, I looked at the Wikipedia article on Ellison. The general article doesn't mention the N of I at all, it just says he's moslem. The more-detailed section on his life just says he converted to Sunni Islam, and again doesn't mention the N of I at all. Also, a header says the article is closed to editing. So much for Wikipedia.
at July 16, 2007 10:01 AM
Ellison emphasized that he wasn’t saying that the Bush Administration staged the 9/11 attacks, because, “you know, that’s how they put you in the nut-ball box -- dismiss you.”
Sorry, Keith, but you were already in the "nut-ball box" long before your Reichstag Fire speech; your joining the Nation of Islam put you there.
Incidentally, I looked at the Wikipedia article on Ellison. The general article doesn't mention the N of I at all, it just says he's moslem. The more-detailed section on his life just says he converted to Sunni Islam, and again doesn't mention the N of I at all. Also, a header says the article is closed to editing. So much for Wikipedia.
at July 16, 2007 10:04 AM
I urge everyone to go to Ellison's website and offer your opinion on his "comparison." I did.
Posted by: darcy at July 16, 2007 10:16 AM
That's exactly right,he been a "nut-case" long before the "N of I".Just review his sordid past.SHAME on Minnisota for electing this fool.
Posted by: billybob at July 16, 2007 10:20 AM
The Somali immigrants elected him.
at July 16, 2007 10:26 AM
I read this earlier. Seems fitting for this thread.
Faithful Muslims believe that sovereignty belongs to Allah. They believe the only important “constitution” is the Quran, and before allegiance to a nation comes fidelity to Allah. Islam of all sects demands obedience to Islamic law, not the laws of men or political institutions. A Muslim will never abide by an oath of office when Islamic principles are at stake. When they swear an oath on the Quran, it is to show Islamic supremacy, not to prove they are telling the truth.
Taken from here
http://www.amilimani.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=71&Itemid=2
at July 16, 2007 10:39 AM
I've always been puzzled by what "mainstream" Arab Muslims think about the Nation of Islam, which is primarily composed of poor, semi-literate American blacks.
Years ago, when I read "The Autobiography of Malcolm X," I recall that he spent a lot of pages explaining why he became a Muslim while he was incarcerated. At the time, my reaction was that his reasoning was illogical, and that he was reaching out for any identity other than that of white Christians, for whom he had contempt and anger, and whom he blamed for his station in life.
Of course, when he recognized the organizational corruption and personal venality of Elijah Muhammad, he broke with the NOI and was subsequently assassinated for his pains and the bad PR he caused.
The question remains: Wouldn't one think that Muslim Arabs would have only opprobrium for the Nation of Islam and its crackpot founder and disciples, all the way to crazy Louis Farrakhan? Also, the fact that this group is comprised primarily of blacks would seem to militate against any Arab respect, since Arab racism seems to trump feelings of Islamic ummah --witness present-day Darfur.
The NOI might merely serve as a convenient recruitment tool, however, for jihadists in prison environments. And CAIR is always eager to take advantage of Keith Ellison types for its own ideological propaganda purposes.
It also seems apparent that NOI theology is far removed from traditional Qur'anic teachings.
If Robert or anyone else has any ideas on these points, I would appreciate your thoughts.
Posted by: prman at July 16, 2007 10:43 AM
This is an outrage! Ellison must be removed from public office.
I have contacted his office to express my dismay and let his staff know that I will be posting the only working email address for his office online, so that upstanding Americans can join me in calling for his immediate resignation.
Since Ellison does not currently have a working email address himself, all correspondence is going through his executive assistant, Ms. Trayshana Thomas.
Please send all email for Congressman Ellison to trayshana.thomas@mail.house.gov
I do not have the resources to distribute the contact information for Congressman Ellison, but please help me get it out to our fellow Americans.
Thank you.
Posted by: JasonTX1 at July 16, 2007 10:44 AM
Keith "Nut Ball Box" Ellison.
Has a nice ring to it.
How clever of Bush to have Saudi passports scattered among the debris at the crash site in NYC to link the attacks to innocent Muslims.
And how evil of Bush to keep claiming Islam is a Religion of Peace.
Just to confuse people like Ellison.
Posted by: profitsbeard at July 16, 2007 11:01 AM
Yeah, 9/11 is like the Reichstag fire. That's why we see Muslims with yellow crescents sewn to their clothes out on the streets and stripped of all rights-those that haven't been thrown into concentration camps that is.
What a crackpot. But then again, I'm from his district so I'm not too surprised that this idiot got elected.
Posted by: ISLAMSFORLOSERS at July 16, 2007 11:01 AM
I also blogged on this a couple of days ago and the links I provided should supplement well:
The Sounds of That Ellison Victory Party
Muslim Congressman Ellison Compares Bush to Hitler
Posted by: Foehammer at July 16, 2007 11:11 AM
This might be pretty obvious, but nothing is too obvious to go unsaid these days:
Not only would Ellison have been arrested for daring to criticize Hitler, but he never would have been in office to begin with. In fact, he likely would have been robbed of his possessions, his family, and thrown in Dachau simply because of his race.
Posted by: Jan Sobieski at July 16, 2007 11:13 AM
So Ellison's concern for the victims of 9/11 by the Islamists pales by comparison to his fear of governmental totalitarianism following the act itself?
Imaginary "Muslim backlash" syndrome at work here. Not disimilar to the narcissistic leftist Dems we have all throughout Congress.
He practically indicted Bush as a 9/11 conspiracist. A dangerous "nut-ball box" he is, although quite expected.
Posted by: awake at July 16, 2007 12:09 PM
awake-
What was disappointing about Bush, right after 9/11, was his own tactic acceptance of this baseless myth that there would be a violent backlash against Muslims by Americans.
Hence his instant Muslim-inclusive multi-faith meetings, and claims that Islam is a Religion of Peace, and his entreaties we shouldn't target anyone just because they wear Muslim garb, etc., as he tried to "head off any reprisals".
None of which came. (I think one drunken idiot in Texas shot a Sikh, thinking a turban meant a jihadi.)
Bush should have known from post-Pearl Hardor WW II, and the treatment of the Japanese in America, where there were no riots against them or lynchings. (Internment was a rational security measure.)
We're civilized. And both Bush and Ellison insult us.
Posted by: profitsbeard at July 16, 2007 12:34 PM
The Kuran orders Muslims to kill non-Muslims. It is as simple as that. All anyone need do is open a Kuran and read the blood-curdling contents for himself or herself. I've done it.
All non-Muslims everywhere absolutely must take it upon themselves to monitor any and all Muslims they come into contact with as it is never certain when and how they will fulfill the Kuran's commands to kill non-Muslims.
Keith Ellison can NOT hide this fact, nor can he convince us otherwise. I couldn't be less moved by Mr. Ellison's remarks and I am sure the informed bloggers here feel the same way.
Mr. Ellison's subterfuge (tired as it is) proves one thing: NEVER LISTEN TO ANYTHING A MUSLIMS SAYS (especially if you're a non-Muslim).
Posted by: pythagoras at July 16, 2007 12:55 PM
Greetings:
Sounds like Mr Ellison is campaigning for the Muslim Al Sharpton Award.
Posted by: 11B40 at July 16, 2007 12:55 PM
“you know, that’s how they put you in the nut-ball box -- dismiss you.”
That, and converting to Mohammedanism. That'll get you there too.
at July 16, 2007 1:01 PM
Just google "nation of islam" for a number of informative articles. Skip Wikipedia.
Posted by: ebonystone at July 16, 2007 1:05 PM
Just google "nation of islam" to find a number of articles. Skip the ones from Wikipedia.
Posted by: ebonystone at July 16, 2007 1:12 PM
I've always been puzzled by what "mainstream" Arab Muslims think about the Nation of Islam, which is primarily composed of poor, semi-literate American blacks.
Posted by: prman
As originally formulated by Wallace Fard in 1930, Black Muslim teachings were a mixture of 7th-Day Adventism, various Christian heresies, and a bit of Islam. Arab moslems regarded the sect as something between a joke and an insult to Islam. However the group has split more than once, and at least one of the splinter groups has brought its teachings more in line with orthodox Sunni Islam.
at July 16, 2007 1:13 PM
If I may make my own comparison with the Reichstag fire...
After the harmless Danish cartoons failed to stir the desired anger in middle eastern countries, various offensive cartoons that were NEVER published by the Danes, were circulated amongst the same countries by islamic agencies to achieve their desired effect...
a far more accurate comparison, in my humble opinion.
Posted by: MrTommyAtkins at July 16, 2007 1:18 PM
I was recently in the food court of a shopping mall in downtown Toronto. Seated at the other end of the table were two well-dressed young men, obviously of Somalian ethnicity. They were looking at handwritten notes and whispering earnestly to each other. I stole a glance at the stack of small newspapers on the table next to the man doing most of the talking. The newspaper was called, "The Final Call", and the front-page article was, "Birth Control Death Plot". Based on the headline, I knew they must belong to some sort of cult. I thought about asking them for a copy but I didn't want to have to listen to their baloney or donate money to their cult.
When I got home, I searched the internet, and learned that this is a Nation of Islam paper.
I wonder if Keith Ellison ever peddled that piece of trash? He must have a free, lifetime subscription now, though.
Boy, oh, boy.
Posted by: Josephine at July 16, 2007 1:27 PM
I would like to see Ellison living in a real dictatorship for a while, one that doesn't subscribe to his views. Then maybe he'd see the immense stupidity and offensiveness of his remarks. He should be recalled from office.
The fact that he could so fudge the distinction between the U.S. on the one hand and Nazi Germany or Communism on the other, shows he really doesn't give a damn about liberal democracy.
Anyone who gave a damn would, by Ellison's age, know at least roughly what distinguishes the institutions of freedom. (I'm not talking about some perfect ideal of freedom that no government could ever achieve. I'm talking about the imperfect approximations to freedom achieved through liberal democratic institutions.)
Ellison is a driver steering the U.S. government toward a wreck, either intentionally, or through his sympathies with dictatorship. His views on this matter deserve to be reviled. Within legal boundaries, he should be given hell until he apologizes and shows he has a better understanding of the difference between the U.S. and the Nazis.
Here is contact information for Keith Ellison. Polite messages will be the most effective ones.
1130 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4755
Fax: (202) 225-4886
District Office:
2100 Plymouth Avenue North
Minneapolis, MN 55411
Phone: (612) 522-1212
Fax: (612) 522-9915
at July 16, 2007 1:47 PM
Ellesin, the subversive traitor, the seditious pretender, the treasonous, does not need GWB to put him in the nut-ball box; he is plainly already there (with allah-loving murderers.
Posted by: angryeagle at July 16, 2007 1:57 PM
Ellesin, the subversive traitor, the seditious pretender, the treasonous, does not need GWB to put him in the nut-ball box; he is plainly already there (with allah-loving murderers.
Posted by: angryeagle at July 16, 2007 1:59 PM
ellison is a 9-11 denier.
I put 9-11 deniers in the same class with holocaust denials.
at July 16, 2007 2:19 PM
"I would like to see Ellison living in a real dictatorship for a while, one that doesn't subscribe to his views. Then maybe he'd see the immense stupidity and offensiveness of his remarks. He should be recalled from office."
Traeh,
I agree with the sentiment but Ellison will never live in a real dictatorship for one reason: he doesn't know what freedom is.
He's up for reelection next year. We'll see then just how much he offended his own constituents and also the Democratic Party. If 9/11 was even one tenth of what he claims it is he never would have been elected to Congress in the first place but he can't understand that because he has a warped view of freedom.
at July 16, 2007 3:07 PM
I give you all the Taqiyya Mockingbird: Keith Ellison!
Posted by: pythagoras at July 16, 2007 3:22 PM
Amazing that in the 21st century a U.S. Congressman does NOT have a valid e-mail address.
Posted by: MP at July 16, 2007 3:42 PM
Keith Ellison is just another poster boy for stopping Muslim immigration. As Muslims are required by the Koran to put Islam first and country second, I see no reason at all to let Mr. Ellison keep his job as an American politician. He needs to be "WISHED INTO THE CORNFIELD" as soon as possible as he cannot, nor will not put America first. He is a smoldering fire waiting to burst into flames and we are the water that will put him out. Do not think for one minute that he will put your rights and freedoms first. Either recall him now or vote him out next election. As with Obama (Barak) muslims should not be allowed to hold office, period! We are opening the door to a future none of us wants, except Islam.
"Islamophobes of the world, Unite!"
"Stop Muslim immigration now!"
at July 16, 2007 3:51 PM
MP - does rep.ellison@ellison.house.gov work?
District Office
The Honorable Keith Ellison
2100 Plymouth Avenue North
Minneapolis, MN 55411
Phone: (612) 522-1212
Fax: (612) 522-9915
The Longworth House Office Building
Washington Office
The Honorable Keith Ellison
1130 Longworth House Office Building
Washington, DC 20515
Phone: (202) 225-4755
Fax: (202) 225-4886
at July 16, 2007 4:01 PM
rep.keith.ellison@house.mn
Posted by: A_Plague_on_Both_Houses at July 16, 2007 4:01 PM
profitsbeard wrote:
"What was disappointing about Bush, right after 9/11, was his own tactic acceptance of this baseless myth that there would be a violent backlash against Muslims by Americans."
The Saudi puppet does dance when his strings are pulled by his masters.
Posted by: awake at July 16, 2007 4:03 PM
Ellison is only doing what all Muslims do,they project themselves as being on the side of freedom, democracy and tolearnce, as if they're opposed to Hitler and the Nazis.
The truth is that they are one and the same. Islam is no more moral than Nazism.
He shouldn't be sitting in the Congress of the United State. He's only there because our stupid leaders won't say no to Muslim immigration.
Posted by: rational
at July 16, 2007 4:50 PM
With all of this 'Nazi' and 'Hitler' comparisions to Bush and our military, has anyone ever asked the Nazi's of today what they think?
Todays National Socialist Movement,the Nazi Party, the Aryan Race, the Anarchist.....someone should officially ask them for a official comment.
Each one of these organizations support the Islamic Jihad Movement, they DO NOT support Bush or our military.
So could someone clear this up once and for all, and show that the organizations that they label against Bush and our military are actually on THEIR side and not OURS.
Someone also point out that the Republican Party did not try to defend Hitler leading up to and during WWII (that was the Democrats) and it was not our conservatives or our military that was fighting in the German Army during WWII(that was the muslims).
Germans that I know are regularly approached in their international travels by Iranians. And when they are they say the Iranians call them 'Aryan Brothers' and that the Iranians identify theirselves also as 'Nazi Brothers' and the Iranians comment on how 'they are still fighting the fight'.
Can someone point out that someone has skeletons in someones closet. And it is not Bush or our military.
Can Keith Ellison comment on any of that?
Posted by: alaskan1000 at July 16, 2007 5:01 PM
I dont really want to defend this guy Ellison, but it seems to me that almost everyone, including Robert Spencer are missing his point. Reading his commment he is making the argument that Bush used 9-11 to forward policies that went beyond the need to combat Islamic terrorism. In that sense the Reichstag fire is a passable analogy to what happened in this country after 9-11. You may not agree with that statement, but many people belive that 9-11 has been used repeatly by this adminstration for rank poltical purposes. Now before everyone jumps down my throat, anyone knows that when you start comparing someones acts to that of the Nazis, you are intentionally attempting to tar your opponent with a broad odious brush. To put Bush (who I do consider to be the worse president perhaps since Bucannan) in the same breath as Hitler is not only false but wildly unfair to Bush. Awful president yes, satanticaly evil no.
Posted by: esquared at July 16, 2007 5:13 PM
I'm surprised that any musselman would reference Hitler with opprobrium. After all, his coreligionists refer to "Hitler of blessed memory" and "Mein Kampf" continues to sell well in the chamber pot of the Middle East.
Most musselman only criticize Hitler for failing to finish the job (the Holocaust). Mr. Ellison, you are a disgrace, and maybe even the liberals of Minnesota will see it yet.
Pray for this man's conversion to truth.
Posted by: NavyMom at July 16, 2007 5:44 PM
"esquared" - You can't even spell "Buchanon," LOL!
James Buchanon - 15th President of the U.S.
Learn how to spell, why don't you?
Posted by: darcy at July 16, 2007 6:58 PM
New character on Hamas children's show: "We will take revenge upon the enemies of Allah, the killers of the prophets and of the innocent children, until we liberate Al-Aqsa from their impurity"
Maybe Ellison will eventually replace the bee.
at July 16, 2007 8:28 PM
Esquared...
No one here missed the point.
The problem with conspiracy theories that you point out that could be true, is that they are like a$$holes....everyone has one.
Conspiracy theories only make one point, 'it is possible'. Anything is possible.
The conservatives are not sitting around pointing out that there are as many Liberals, Countries, Presidents of other countries, and organizations like OPEC that all of the above would have benefitted and could have made billions, gained power, or advanced their ideology by orchestrating 9/11. Have you noticed that even muslims have gained more religous freedoms in this country since 9/11? While other religions are being suppressed.
How much money has George Soros made since 9/11 and most of it on defense stocks....but isn't he anti-war? The liberals could have done it to make Republicans bad.....haven't the Democrats gained power?
OPEC could have done it...how much money have they made since 9/11?
Here is a conspiracy theory....maybe the truth is that we were attacked by a religion that declared war on us. And that religion has attacked us repeadidly and our media and politicians just kept ignoring it. They used our taxpayer money to continue to bribe the bossmen (Arafat). Until it was on prime time TV and the politicians could not explain it away and had to finally point a finger. The Conspiracy then lies in the fact that WE HAVE BEEN AT WAR and no one is telling the American people.
Where does your faith lay? In the media, in man, a political party, an organization like the U.N. these are all immoral and cannot be trusted.
The problem with an immoral society is that after a society is so use to moving away from morals they no longer know when to recognize the truth.
If Bush would have stopped 9/11 on the 10th of September, then all of the conspiracy people and the Democrats would be screaming that it was all orchestrated by Bush to gain power.
So, when a society cannot recognize the truth, or wants to question the actions of all with deceit then that society needs to get back to morals. Problem is....it ain't gonna happen and it is going to get worse.
Posted by: alaskan1000 at July 16, 2007 8:40 PM
esquared,
The comparison is invalid for many reasons: Congress was not disbanded. Whatever you think about the Patriot Act and other legislation passed in the wake of 9/11, all of it went through the legislative process and it was reviewed in the courts when people sought to have it overturned.
Executive orders are nothing new.
You can point to the wiretapping, but even that was done with the knowledge of select members of Congress (both parties) who were regularly briefed. No one has been able to prove harm, as far as I know.
The banking transactions were monitored in order to track terrorist financing.
Muslims in America were not put in concentration camps and they were not blamed for 9/11. If anything, they became a protected class after 9/11. Congressman Ellison was elected in the wake of 9/11 and he needed some non-Muslims to vote for him.
The analogy is apt only if you truly believe that Bush instigated 9/11 deliberately and falsely blamed it on Islamic terrorists. This would go against the many messages left by the terrorists and the Osama video where he boasted about how it was done. Do you believe that video was also a fabrication? Was Khalid Sheikh Muhammad framed?
In order to sign on to Ellison's theory, you would have to believe that it was done with the acquiescence of at least some members of the Clinton administration, who knew of the activities of some of the hijackers. Most of the advance planning and flight training happened on Clinton's watch.
As for the Nazis: Muslims supported the Nazi cause and they were the only non-Communist countries to align with the Soviets during the Cold War. They are the last ones who should talk about dictatorship.
Posted by: PMK at July 16, 2007 10:09 PM
esquared,
A lot of us would call Bush an awful president. I await the end of his term with great anticipation. That doesn't mean I would ever go along with anything Keith Ellison says and I would never give such remarks as he made any credibility. He is a disgrace to the position he holds. He has shown himself unworthy of the office. It is up to his constituents to do something about it, however. The rest of us, President Bush included, still respect the rule of law. That is another reason for the invalidity of his statements. Nazis would have had him shot for such remarks about der fuhrer.
at July 16, 2007 10:21 PM
All I am saying that if you hold out the Reichstag fire as an example of an attack on a country’s institutions which is then seized on by a politician to justify a political agenda, then there is some basis for his comment. Of course I recognize that I am sidestepping the issue that the Reichstag fire was set by the Nazis themselves to generate the outrage that permitted them to take their actions without opposition. Ellison seems to want to go there, by dropping hints that 9/11 might have been an “inside job”, making the analogy complete, but he then pulls away from that point. (Not shocking, since only a real nut job would hold that view) Again, I think the point worth thinking about is this: Is there any validity to the charge that Bush used 9/11 to push political goals outside of what could reasonably be considered a response to the attack? I would have to answer yes to this question. Of course nothing Bush did comes close to what the Nazis did, but the general analogy I think holds. [ Sorry about the misspelling of James Buchanan. For my money he is the all time worst president, seeing that he was an actual traitor to the United States.]
Posted by: esquared at July 16, 2007 10:48 PM
LMAO
Posted by: jcom972 at July 16, 2007 11:26 PM
esquared....
You did not address that it could have been OPEC, the Democratic Party or George Soros.
You admit that Bush has done a terrible job, so most likely he could not have pulled off a 'fantastic' operation and then screwed up everything afterwards.
So maybe someone else pulled it off and he has been delt a bad hand and still has to play that bad hand.
You also did not admit, that we could actually be at war with our enemies. Is that also a possibility that the left won't even visit and could you agree with?
Posted by: alaskan1000 at July 16, 2007 11:34 PM
esquared is desperatley missing the M and the C for his point to hold any validity. Youth and liberalism are not excuses to defend the already tenuous position of the likes of Ellison, a sitting senator who made a point to swear in on the Qur'an as opposed to the Bible.
Bush, for all his faults, and rest assured, he has MANY, didn't use 9/11 for anything. He reponded to it initially, as any sitting President would do to an unprovoked attack of civilians on US soil, an attack that even exceeded the dubious historical nature of Pearl Harbor, the precedent for US involvement in WWII. The last time I checked back into reality, the US was not imposing it's imperial will on any Middle Eastern country at the time of the 9/11 attack.
Just for grins and giggles, replace Ellison's statements with those of Charlie Sheen or Rosie O'Donnell...no big deal... quite expected of the anti-American left who continually bite the hand that feeds them. The noted exception, however, is that neither of the two aforementioned are sitting US senators like Ellison...There's a rather large distinction there, don't you think?
Sanity lesson for the evening is over and hopefully, well-received.
Posted by: awake at July 16, 2007 11:52 PM
One of the more interesting people in Ellison's life is Saif Ishoof, a Miami lawyer and board member of the AAAB. The AAAB has possible links to Islamic radicals as well as CAIR. He's a contributor to Ellison but not noted in most of Ellison's CAIR links. There is more evidence pointing to Asad Ishoof as having radical connections, unknown relationship to Saif, but they share the same address.
Here is some advice Saif gave to Guyanese Muslims on their upcoming election in Nov. 2000:
The Muslim world view does not include a divergence between society and religion, yet within the Guyanese context our political masters have forced Muslims into these compromises of convenience for far too long.
Muslims do not believe in "rendering unto Caesar, what is Caesar's and render unto God, what is God's".
They require our political institutions to be equally accountable to us as the leadership within our mosques.
Progressive nations such as Singapore have such sophisticated mechanisms as allowing for Islamic Law Courts to operate in a parallel manner to their civil courts, so as to handle legal issues involving Muslims.
Yet within the Guyanese context, no political regime has taken steps to even have a political officer responsible for handling issues pertinent to the Muslim community.
Maybe it is because Muslims are not considered important enough to warrant such an officer.
Some very interesting statements he added:
"In this recent U.S. election, the four largest national Muslim organisations (AMC, CAIR, ISNA and ICNA) issued an endorsement of candidate Governor George W. Bush.
This endorsement was based upon extensive research on what the candidates' positions were on the most pressing issues for Muslims, and it was followed by intensive meetings with both staffers and the respective candidates themselves.
These organisations also organised voter registration drives to get Muslims out to the polls.
As a result of these efforts, the close to six million American Muslims might have been a deciding factor in shoring up George W. Bush's vote.
Without this critical support, it is clear from the current electoral deadlock that Al Gore would most certainly have won."
The Truth is Out There.
Source:
Pipeline News
Interesting Letter
Posted by: Mick_n_NYC at July 17, 2007 12:01 AM
Sorry, that letter
Posted by: Mick_n_NYC at July 17, 2007 12:08 AM
Did anyone see "Hannity and Colmes" take on this Mr. Shabazz guyy? What a conspiracy theory nut Mr. Shabazz is.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at July 17, 2007 1:36 AM
What did you expect? He's part of the same bunch of kook-fringe conspiracy lunatics that claimed Hurricane Katrina was a honky conspiracy...LOL
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=19498
at July 17, 2007 2:17 AM
Ynkyedoodl2 wrote.......
ellison is a 9-11 denier.
I put 9-11 deniers in the same class with holocaust denials.
So true Ynkyedoodl2!
Seems like a name change is in order for this congressman, so much for the true beleiver. He's guilty of sedition already. "Tar and feathers" on Saturday night would suit him well!
2007's the Year Of The Fire Pig!
MK
Posted by: Malaria_Kidd at July 17, 2007 3:49 AM
esquared,
I'm going to make the same point as others here, but in a different fashion.
To put it bluntly & very simply, your comparison is so general that it is similar only at the very highest level.
As a result, almost ANY political, economic, or religious event could apply.
You'll simply have to do better than Ellison to convince skeptics that your theory holds water.
Posted by: Miss_Anthrope at July 17, 2007 1:06 PM
MEMO TO ALL JIHAD WATCH POSTERS:
Please view "The Islamic Mein Kampf" video on the "TERRORISM AWARENESS" website directly accessible from this website.
This video should clear up a LOT of misconceptions about both Islam and Nazism (which in fact was a DIRECT spinoff of Islam and Hitler never made a secret of that either!).
This video describes the many links between the Third Reich and Islam including Hajj Amin al-Husseini's friendship with Adolph Hitler.
Keith Ellison isn't fooling anyone (except for maybe Nancy Pelosi who should have stuck with the local Gardening Club which she might once have been pretty good in). Islam and Nazism are virtually one and the same thing.
at July 17, 2007 11:02 PM
(Note: The Comments section is provided in the interests of free speech only. It is mostly unmoderated, but comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying stand a chance of being deleted. The fact that any comment remains on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch, or by Robert Spencer or any other Jihad Watch or Dhimmi Watch writer, of any view expressed, fact alleged, or link provided in that comment.)