Tuesday, March 8, 2011

Best Article I've Seen on the Peter King Hearings

Since Congressman Peter King (R-NY) announced that he wanted to hold hearings on the radicalization of American Muslims he's come under constant attack from the usual suspects, who scream "Islamophobia" whenever anyone points to any connection between radical Islamic terrorism and Islam. The Daily Caller has an excellent article about the situation called, "Radical Islamists condemn hearings into radical Islamists."
Congressman King is holding hearings on the radicalization of young American Muslims. This is considered selective prosecution if one ignores the fact that the profile being looked at by Congressman King belong to the people actually fitting that very profile.
As the article notes, since radical Muslim terrorism tends to be committed by Muslims, any investigation into it is naturally going to have to focus on the Muslim community. This sort of basic logic escapes the various useful idiots screaming about Islamophobia. The vast majority of the time you hear anyone using the made-up term of Islamophobia it's in an attempt to silence legitimate criticism of Islam and the actions of various Muslims. The Daily Caller hits the nail on the head on multiple points. The whole thing is worth reading.


Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post has another good column on this issue.


  1. the only terrorists here are U!

  2. "the only terrorists here are U!"

    I'm not sure what that's supposed to mean.

  3. 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the funerals of these murdered civil servants and none will speak openly about the lack of civility in regards to outdated blasphemy laws and the peaceful coexistence of religions.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.

  4. What about Christian and Jewish terrorists? Are we just going to give them a free pass?

  5. Why would we? But there's no real comparison. There's no worldwide movement advocating Christian or Jewish terrorism. If there was a Jewish version of Al Qaeda targeting the U.S. than we'd definitely need to focus more attention on Jews. But there isn't.

    As for Christians, since Christianity is the majority religion in the U.S. with all sorts of variations, denomination and nominal adherents, any focus on terrorism perpetrated in the name of religion has to be narrowed down. The only terrorism even arguably done in the name of Christianity in the U.S. involves attacks on abortion clinics/practitioners. Churches that preach radical anti-abortion views and either advocate, excuse or minimize terrorism against abortion providers should definitely come under scrutiny.

  6. After I wrote that last comment I remembered that there are also some fringe Christian militias and other militant organizations. Those people are apparently under surveillance as they should be.