The first hearing a few months ago produced little in the way of a consensus on change, this second one will probably be the same. We can hope for a true and open investigation, but that will depend on who Rep. King allows to testify, and whether he will be bullied again by Islamic thugs like Hamas-linked CAIR and the MAS.
From the Examiner.com June 10 by Jim Kouri
Read it all
From the Examiner.com June 10 by Jim Kouri
Controversy: Rep. King plans second Muslim-American radicalization hearing
Rep. King isn't backing down
from his opponents who want
him to stop investigating radical
Islamic trends in the United States.
Credits: US Congress photo gallery
U.S. Congressman Peter King (R-NY) yesterday informed all parties concerned that there would be a second House Homeland Security Committee hearing on the subject of radicalization within the American-Muslim community.
This latest hearing is scheduled for Wednesday, June 15, and its main topic will be the Muslim population incarcerated in prisons throughout the country.
“We have seen cases in which inmates have been radicalized at the hands of already locked-up terrorists or by extremist imam chaplains,” said Chairman King in a statement.
“We will focus on a number of the serious cases in which radicalized current and former inmates have planned and launched attacks or attempted to join overseas Islamic terrorist organizations.”
King's first hearing in March caused many within the Muslim community to condemn the subject of radicalization, and almost half of the Democrats in the House urged him to cancel it.
"While there have been extremist groups and random acts of political violence throughout our history, the al Qaeda attacks of 9/11 and the ongoing threat to our nation from Islamic jihad were uniquely diabolical and threatening to America’s security, both overseas and in our homeland," said King last March.
"It was this dramatically increased threat which Attorney General Holder said “keeps him awake at night” and drove him “to make people aware of the fact that the threat is real, the threat is different, and the threat is constant."
Attorney General Holder also noted before March's hearings that the teachings of Islamic jihadist Anwar Al Awlaki inspired many of the most recent terrorist attacks. This threat is real, and we can hardly afford to ignore the motivating ideology behind nearly every recent homegrown attack, such as the Zazi plot, the Times Square Attack, Fort Hood, the Portland Christmas bombing attempt, and numerous others. "
And that "motivating ideology" is what, Mr. Holder? From your perspective it is an "extremist" ideology having little to do with Islamic doctrine and how it is defined today by leading Islamic scholars and clerics. The ideology you seek to separate from "mainstream" Islam is exactly the opposite: it is Islam in it's truest form, as practiced by Muhammad 1400 years ago. The only extreme Muslim is one who is not Muslim enough.
“We have seen cases in which inmates have been radicalized at the hands of already locked-up terrorists or by extremist imam chaplains,” said Chairman King in a statement.
“We will focus on a number of the serious cases in which radicalized current and former inmates have planned and launched attacks or attempted to join overseas Islamic terrorist organizations.”
King's first hearing in March caused many within the Muslim community to condemn the subject of radicalization, and almost half of the Democrats in the House urged him to cancel it.
"While there have been extremist groups and random acts of political violence throughout our history, the al Qaeda attacks of 9/11 and the ongoing threat to our nation from Islamic jihad were uniquely diabolical and threatening to America’s security, both overseas and in our homeland," said King last March.
"It was this dramatically increased threat which Attorney General Holder said “keeps him awake at night” and drove him “to make people aware of the fact that the threat is real, the threat is different, and the threat is constant."
Attorney General Holder also noted before March's hearings that the teachings of Islamic jihadist Anwar Al Awlaki inspired many of the most recent terrorist attacks. This threat is real, and we can hardly afford to ignore the motivating ideology behind nearly every recent homegrown attack, such as the Zazi plot, the Times Square Attack, Fort Hood, the Portland Christmas bombing attempt, and numerous others. "
And that "motivating ideology" is what, Mr. Holder? From your perspective it is an "extremist" ideology having little to do with Islamic doctrine and how it is defined today by leading Islamic scholars and clerics. The ideology you seek to separate from "mainstream" Islam is exactly the opposite: it is Islam in it's truest form, as practiced by Muhammad 1400 years ago. The only extreme Muslim is one who is not Muslim enough.
The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) prodded Rep. Thompson into attempting to discredit King's probe and one the Islamic group's top officials released a press statement. "Representative King seems to believe that he need not offer any evidence or expert testimony to back up his baseless allegations," said CAIR Legislative Director Corey Saylor.
"One wonders whether Representative King will call witnesses to support his bizarre claim that '85 percent' of American Muslim community leaders are 'an enemy living amongst us,'" Saylor stated.
A misleading statement. The latest research is that about 80% of mosques in the US have given sermons which can be considered anti-Israel or anti-Western, so by extension that would assume that 80% of imams have preached hate against non-Muslims. Not all imams are community leaders and not all mosques preach hate, but one must recognize the differences and act accordingly. CAIR wants no one to know what goes on in any mosque, thus the blanket attack against the questioners.
Read it all
1 comment:
"The latest research is that about 80% of mosques in the US have given sermons which can be considered anti-Israel or anti-Western, so by extension that would assume that 80% of imams have preached hate against non-Muslims". Being 'what can be considered anti-Israel' isn't anti-Western. Neither is it 'hate'. On the contrary.
Post a Comment