Video
Twitter
Facebook
RSS Feed
Hearings will not make us safer
Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, will begin holding hearings Thursday on "the extent of the radicalization of American Muslims." Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has characterized the hearings as "a witch hunt." Are they?
King also has said he believes the "self-radicalization" of American Muslims represents "a very small minority" of the overall community. What are the potential consequences of singling out one religious group?
After several incidents in the 1980s when angry postal workers shot other employees, the term "going postal" became slang for violence in any workplace environment. Since then, we have improved our methods of identifying troubled workers or students who might harm themselves or others, and we hope counseling and other intervention programs will cut down on such incidents, though some continue to occur. We understood that the problem was not exclusively one of postal terrorists.
Neither will our homeland be made more secure by singling out American Muslims as the latest cause of violence in the nation. Rep. Peter King could substitute the word "immigrants" or "prescription drug users" for the Muslims targeted by his committee. After all, some immigrants commit violent crimes, and some prescription drug users sell their drugs to violent drug dealers. He shouldn't hold such political hearings, of course, because it is not the job of congressional committees to look for people who commit violent crimes for whatever reason, period. That's for law enforcement agencies, but even they can't and shouldn't target entire populations in which a few people commit crimes.
But if Rep. King is determined to hold useful hearings to curtail violence, how about hearings on gun-control laws to prevent mentally ill people like Jared Lee Loughner, who shot Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, from legally purchasing guns? While he's at it, I'd like Rep. King to take a look at a bill recently passed unanimously by a House subcommittee in my state to allow any South Carolinian 21 or older who can legally buy a gun to carry it without a concealed weapon permit. According to the executive director of the South Carolina Sheriffs Association, "It takes more to get a driver's license in this state than it does to carry a gun under this bill."
Or Rep. King could hold hearings about the extent to which hostility toward America might be a consequence of our going to war against unfriendly dictatorial regimes while supporting friendly dictators in oil-rich countries. Or perhaps he could hold hearings on whether hatred and stereotyping by pandering politicians who focus on guilt by association might be making the rest of us both more fearful and less safe--in other words, hold a hearing on himself.
We just finished a week when both liberals and conservatives can be proud of a Supreme Court that upheld the freedom guaranteed by our First Amendment. The court ruled in favor of the right of Westboro Baptist Church to hold disgusting signs near military funerals reading, "Thank God for dead soldiers" and "Fags doom nations." Such a court ruling protects us from a slippery slope that can lead to criminalization of all unpopular speech.
People in this country are free to criticize the Muslim religion or any other (I proudly do my share), but politicians must avoid the slippery slope of bringing government into the role of investigating whether particular religions incite violence. That's for the FBI, and I hope they do their job effectively and without trampling the civil liberties of innocent people.
Meanwhile, Tea Party members can falsely claim that President Obama is a Muslim, while Westboro Baptist Church members can claim that Obama is the anti-Christ. I'm just thankful for the freedoms that allow crazies on all sides to express their political and religious views without fear of government reprisal.
By
Herb Silverman
|
March 7, 2011; 12:13 PM ET
Save & Share:
Previous: Abortion is a tragedy |
Next: The King hearings: dangerous for America
Posted by: darrylalec | March 12, 2011 3:05 PM
Report Offensive Comment
STRANGE.
me tried to post on ONFAITH's "GUESTVOICES" to
Rep. Michael Honda (D-Calif.) article entitled, "Congressman King creating a religious enemy" (Whip and member of House Budget and Appropriations Committees) but i [WE] Jealously get,
"Other views on religion in the news.
Comment Submission Error. Your comment submission failed for the following reasons: [ for THEFT of Intellectual Property] Invalid request Return to the original entry."
Note: WE[i] only used 2 dots. O' Jealousy!
Note again: Like Wise, with 1 'dot' me gets da same ting on "In defense of Peter King's Muslim hearings" By Asra Nomani.
Maybe the World should know what goes on Here; Contrary to BLOGGERs Rights, Let Alone [Original] Content! Easily blockable, then easily Stealable, Sellable. aye Sneekaroo's. OYE... Jealousy!
WHERE IS Mr. Murdock? Where's da real PREZIDENT??
__
Me wanted to say to Cong. Honda; that if He Stood-Up and said, "LET's BUILT A "SHINTO" Temple On Pear Harbor Islands..." i'm sure He will be IMPEACHED or better, voted out!
Note: It was by our comment on this blogg , that not long ago; during the World Trade Center, MOSQUE Building protest/Debacle/Comedia, that
Senator GINGRICH (directly or Indirectly) STOLE that Line (from Here)! How Audacious!
i [WE] Wonder Who keeps getting these Browny-Points (Stealing Ideas; with-out Credit, let alone Compen$ation to Us loyal & Intelligent 'Onfaith' BLOGGERS; or at least Give some Alm's from Ye Paychecks & or from Our Books, Oooopss, YO Books from Royalties.
I.e., Deepak Chopra For One. Elizabeth Tenetey for Two; Eboo Patel For Three, Rabbinate of America & Israel for four, The R.C.C. for five, The Eviljealousical's for 666 et al! Even The ISHLAMI's!
___________________________________________
TRUTH + FREEDOM = Our-Religion NO PELEG-Islami!
1 Space-Ship Earth, 1 LiFE, 1 G-D?, 1 i + Holyi-TiME
-
............................ _.-(_)._
........................... '______'
.......................... {______} . . . If iSLAM is A Peaceful
.......................... /./.♥.\/.♥.\.\ . . Ummah, Then WHY Art
.......................... |.\__/\__/.|.. . YE Acquiring A 'WMD'
.......................... \.....--....../ . . against 'KAFIR' Ummah?
......................... /'...."""....'\ .
....................... \/_.............._\
....................... (__/....'|....\__)
.......................... |___.|___|
........................... '---------'. By GARY, STAN & Family
==========================================
░M░A░D░E░░I░N░░U●░S●░A●░
==========================================
.
.
Pleaza give Credits to: WWW
J░O░Z░E░V░Z░●░U░S
.
http://onwapo.wordpress.com/2010/11/13/news/
.
COPY RIGHT
░2░░0░░1░░1░, M░░M░░X░░I░ ,░5░░7░░7░░1
.
Posted by: letitbe | March 10, 2011 5:52 PM
Report Offensive Comment
..
Posted by: letitbe | March 10, 2011 4:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
King appears to be your typical Irish whitebread republican, with strong sympathies for the IRA, whom he met with more than once. Given his credentials, there's nothing particularly surprising in King's political philosophy whatsoever.
However, he voted against Clinton's impeachment (thanks for the wasted time, effort, and money Newt) and had a much more congenial relationship with Muslims earlier on. His move to the extreme right apparently happened over time.
His constituents are overwhelmingly white, affluent, upper middle class folk living in Nassau and Suffolk counties.
It's all here......
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King
From Wiki:
In the 1980s, King frequently traveled to Northern Ireland to meet with IRA members. In 1982, speaking at a pro-IRA rally in Nassau County, New York, King said: “We must pledge ourselves to support those brave men and women who this very moment are carrying forth the struggle against British imperialism in the streets of Belfast and Derry.”
In 1985, he convened a press conference before the start of New York City's St. Patrick's Day parade (for which he was Grand Marshal), and offered a defiant defense of the IRA: 'As we march up the avenue and share all the joy,' he declared, 'let us never forget the men and women who are suffering and, most of all, the men and women who are fighting.'
Regarding the 30 years of violence during which the IRA killed over 1700 people, including over 600 civilians, King said, ""If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the IRA for it". King compared IRA leader Gerry Adams to George Washington and asserted that the "British government is a murder machine".
He called the IRA "the legitimate voice of occupied Ireland."
King is apparently against terrorism, except when he's for it. He was a staunch supporter of our own rights violating, fascist resembling Patriot Act.
Although always high on John McCain, he became a big Bush supporter behind the invasion of Iraq.
Posted by: persiflage | March 9, 2011 6:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
This time atheists aren’t the target of the Republican witch hunt. In the 1950s, Senator Joseph McCarthy held hearings on un-American activity which focused on exposing the godless communist threat. Today’s threat comes from the god-fearing however. But it isn’t atheists holding the hearings; its Christian god-fearing theists vs. the even more god-fearing Muslims.
Let me try to wrap my godless brain around this. Congressman King admits that “a very small minority” of American Muslims might be terrorists and that according to The American Religious Identification Survey; American Muslims make up about .6% of the population. So a very small minority of .6% (already a very small minority) might be terrorists. Wow!
You can read the rest of my response to this topic:
http://exm.nr/g1oojt
I will be responding to every issue posted in the 'On Faith' section. If you would like to be notified when my new response is up, please subscribe.
Posted by: dangeroustalk | March 9, 2011 2:24 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Were the pilots that rained down fire on German and Japanese citizens guilty of stereotyping?
Posted by: edbyronadams | March 9, 2011 12:45 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I agree with DAN46 that all extremists are threats. Also agree with DBROWN11 that it is the job of law enforecement agencies.
Posted by: Kent-State-University | March 8, 2011 8:33 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Regardless of whether one believes that there is or is not a violence threat from some in the American Muslim community, the central point is, as Dr. Silverman points out, any investigation of this matter should properly be undertaken by law enforcement agencies, not a congressional panel.
Posted by: dbrown11 | March 7, 2011 5:55 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Actually, I blogged about "The Massive Monstrous Muslim Menace" a couple of years ago, complete with facts and figures:
http://richardsrussell.livejournal.com/99034.html
Most of what I said then is still true today.
Posted by: RichardSRussell | March 7, 2011 4:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
If they are going to investigate public safety threats, they shouldn't focus solely on Muslims. Timothy McVeigh wasn't Islamic.
Posted by: DAN46 | March 7, 2011 3:56 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Well of COURSE it's harder to get a driver's license in SC than buy a gun, silly!--the US CONSTITUTION guarantees us a right to guns, but that holy document nowhere mentions drivers, or automobiles, much less licensing them both! Thus it's harder to get a hairdresser's license, a stockbroker's license (I had one once), --a hunting or fishing license? OH WAIT--back then they stupidly let ANYONE fish and hunt, didn't they? (With all means?--bow/arrow, slingshot, long rifle...? Guess so.) Later they outlawed dueling. What was up with that? I guess if the Constitution doesn't specifically prohibit or approve something, we should go back to "the source"--the Bible, the OT or NT (King James original-language version, of course. B.t.w. I read today that the new New American Bible has, to avoid snickers, changed "booty" to...SPOILS OF WAR. But it said BOOTY in the original; maybe they DID mean butts, or nice big ones...!