Lol, no. 30,000 Arab Americans according to the demographics on wiki. Many of whom are Christian anyway. Where do you get this stuff from?
So you agree they serve no purpose?
Such investigation already has been going on on a regular basis, both by law enforcemnt and by independent studies like the one cited by tom above. Turns out there’s basically nothing there. Homegrown Islamic terrorism in the US is all but non-existent - no more prevalent than anti-abortion terrorism - but, the investigations are still already happening under much more valid methodology and circumstances than the theater of Congressional hearings is capable of. What is King going to find out that the FBI doesn’t already know?
Heh, there is an element of cruel irony at work: sometimes Sikhs (who of course are not Muslims) look more like Muslims to the uninformed than actual Muslims do - religious Sikhs wear turbans and beards - and so they get targeted by bigots.
I think Indonesia would have something to say about that…
Also, he shows his ignorance of a fundamental point of law – that a defensive alliance commits the parties to treat an attack on one as an attack on all.
People who are fundamentally ignorant of law have no proper place in the body that makes it.
I think that would depend on how you define the IRA. I am talking off the top of my head here, but I seem to remember NATO specifically excludes internal “attacks.” Now if the IRA are classified as an arm of the Republic of Ireland (which they aren’t) you could argue, I think, the attack on all clause was triggered. But if they are seen as internal, you can’t.
Moreover, the IRA were nothing more or less than murderers. When a murder was committed in New York City, whether by a US citizen or by a foreigner, that did not commit Western Europe to come to the aid of the US militarily. However much the IRA smeared their shit on the wall and went on crash diets, they were the lowest form of criminal scum, nothing more.
If he held hearings on the role religion plays in acts of terror I would be behind him. Selecting only one religion to discuss is deliberately ignoring the real issue.
If they have to have such hearings, just focus on domestic terrorism, whatever the motivation behind it.
I would agree with this, with the proviso that we “not be afraid to see what we see”, as Reagan said.
If it turns out that most of the major domestic terrorist incidents of the last twenty years or so are committed by Shriners, that would deserve no less attention than if it came from Islamo-fascists. Also no more.
Regards,
Shodan
I’m not sure I would look to the Reagan administration as the pinnacle of that virtue. I have no doubt an investigation of domestic terrorism would be run along the lines of the Attorney General’s Commission on Pornography.
Most domestic terrorism has actually come from homegrown, white Christian rednecks.
What do you believe that peter King is going to discover that the FBI doesn’t already know about?
These hearing are American politics at its worst. They will demonize the muslims for political gain. They will push the hatred of muslims resulting in the crazies attacking them. It is pathetic.
I think that the hearings are theatrics and are just for Muslim bashing.
That said, they’d help dispell the muttering that they’re all somehow closet Al Quida supporters, if they actually announced publicly that extreme Islamist terrorists are total scum, have no justification whatsoever for their actions and are not supported by the majority Muslim community.
Instead of the mealy mouthed, half hearted “condemnations” of terrorist actions that usually begin "While I can’t condone their actions "…
and often contain “But you can see their point/why they act this way…”,…
and “the West must make this that and the other concession, to stop alienating the Muslim community.”
Which is the case whenever Muslim community leaders in the U.K. actually speak out against terrorist atrocities committed by Muslims .
As to King he is as much guilty of terrorism as any member of Al Quida.
If you support terrorism in ANY way whether its Irish, Islamist, Basque, Shining Path, Grey Wolves , whatever, vocally, financially, with information (Or for that matter withholding information) or in any way whatsoever then you are as guilty of the victims deaths just as surely as if you planted the bomb/pulled the trigger yourself.
Though all to many people try to rationalise (to salve their consciences) that they aren’t because they’re not DIRECTLY involved.
King should be locked up, not holding a political office.
Who is “they?”
Take it from the context, unless of course its too difficult for you.
And by you, I mean …YOU.
Difficult for me to. Who specifically are you talking about?
He means “Muslim Community Leaders,” of course. I think the question is, “Cite?”
IOW, there is a lot of talk about how MCLs are mealy-mouthed–but that’s just talk. Tell us who specifically you’re talking about that’s being mealy-mouthed.
You didn’t privide a context.
The vast majority of mainstream Muslim leaders and spokespeople have unequivocally condemned, and continue to condemn acts of terrorism, and were doing so even before 9/11. I don’t know where this meme comes from that they don’t. I’ve heard people say, “I don’t see them on TV condemning it,” but they don’t own television networks, so I don’t know how they’re supposed get much air time for it. Fox News sure as hell isn’t going to give them any opportunity.
I’m no fan of the IRA but this post displays your ignorance of Northern Irish history. I recommend Making Sense Of The Troubles to you or anyone else who wants to better understand the context for their reprehensible actions.