Posted on 03/10/2011 6:47:30 AM PST by SeekAndFind
As Mr. King, a Republican, rose as a Long Island politician in the 1980s, benefiting from strong Irish-American support, the I.R.A. was carrying out a bloody campaign of bombing and sniping, targeting the British Army, Protestant paramilitaries and sometimes pubs and other civilian gathering spots.
In later years, by all accounts, Mr. King became an important go-between in talks that led to peace in Northern Ireland, drawing on his personal contacts with leaders of I.R.A.'s political wing, Sinn Fein, and winning plaudits from both Bill Clinton and Tony Blair, the former president and the British prime minister.
As Mr. King takes the spotlight this week with his hearings on the radicalization of American Muslims, "Vale of Tears" shows he has long been considering the dangers posed by radical Muslims, as well as what role a mere congressman can play in protecting his country.
WE need to stop Muslim immigration or we are going to end up like the UK and France. Now that they are in a pickle they are not sure how to extract themselves.
The importance of these hearings is monumental and prehaps even historical. This is the line in the sand and izzlum knows it. I hope he goes into the writings of the koran and hadeethaa and all the other hate literature of this cancer.
He has stood firm by not letting enemies “water down” the hearings by introducing side shows. We all know it that if that happened, the terrorists from the splc would spin this out of control and turn it into an anti Tea Party diatribe.
Pray for this man, because the work he is doing is of historical importance.
izzlum knows this, and Rep. King’s life and the lives of his family, are in great danger.
Lets stop acting like leftists when it comes to King. Instead of defending the indefensible, lets ask why our side was so stupid to put a past supporter of terrorism in the chairmanship of the Homeland Security Commitee. Anybody with a little knowledge of King knew he was a supporter and vocal backer of the Provos. For the last 15 years I knew this would eventually bite us in the ass. Instead of whining unfair, lets admit we were stupid for having King be a front man for anything to do with terrorism. Is there nobody else in the GOP who could have sat in this position. Instead our side selects the only representative who supported pub bombings in the past. This reminds me of the 90’s, when some of those selected to lead the correct impeachment of Slick were found out to have cheated on their wives also. The stupidity of our Congressional leaders never fails to amaze me anymore.
Don’t worry about King. If anyone tries to harm him, they will probably get a visit from the Belfast Nutting Squad.
Just reported on Fox....Keith Ellison crying during his testimony. Give me a break - did he shed those tears for every victim of his horrid sham religion? If he can’t reconcile his loyalty to Islam with what should be loyalty to America and Americans then he should resign.
You’d better get onto this thread fast and straighten out the misinformation. You were just telling us a few days ago that Islam is a peaceful religion, and it’s only a few fanatics we have to worry about. You said the vast majority of Americans understand this, so I guess you think Freepers are in the ignorant minority [i.e.: most of us think Islam, not radicalization, is the problem].
So here is a golden opportunity for you to sow your seeds of multicultural wisdom. Show up and explain how wrong we are, and that will display a modicum of courage and integrity on your part. I think you owe that much not merely to us, but to the Islam you know so well and defend (when you think no one is looking) so eloquently.
Islam is a cancer. The natural history and the prognosis for this disease, if left untreated, is clear. The treatments needed will be based on those for cancer. Will we have the stomach to understand and implement that?
Found the webmail link for Peter King....please join me in sending him a THANK YOU for his courage!
http://peteking.house.gov/email.shtml
With over a billion Muslims in the world, it stands to reason that there must be champions of a process to liberalize and de-radicalize orthodox Islam.
“What do you Freepers think about Keith Ellison’s big show at the hearings this morning?”
I say it was an Oscar-worthy example of taqiyya at its finest. I say “boo hoo hoo - cry me a (bleepin’) river.
I DID think that the black businessman’s traumatic story of losing his college student son to Islamic brainwashing, and now prison for terrorism, was very sad - my heart goes out to him and his family, and he was brave to come forward and be so outspoken about the real danger that radical Islam poses to our country.
” If he can’t reconcile his loyalty to Islam with what should be loyalty to America”
Of course he can’t. I fear most Americans are reluctant, or loathe, to face just how very different Islam is from any other “religion”.
No Muslim should hold public office here because their religion calls for no separation of mosque and state - the mosque IS the state. It’s more a political ideology than a true religion in that sense. Therefore, when Ellison was sworn in (on the Koran), he could never honestly swear to uphold, preserve, protect and defend our Constitution, due to the clear conflict between their religion of total submission to Allah/sharia law and our constitutional republic with all its freedoms. This would be true for any Muslim, elected or appointed. To take the oath of office for them is to use taqiyya - lying that is condoned, even encouraged, by Muhammad to fool the infidel(s) and further the mission of Islam to reign supreme over all nations.
I wish you would have been there to query him on this. Perhaps he could explain his oath of honesty (in between sobs).
Jamese, this is now the fourth invitation I’m extending to you to repeat on an actual Islamic thread what you’ve so far confined to ‘birther’ threads. Namely, your liberal-letter-perfect defense of Islam. If you really believe it, then why confine it to threads not related to Islam? Why not put it out there for broader FR consumption?
I’ll make it easy for you. Multiple choice. Do you believe:
(1) Islam is a bloodthirsty cult that requires, according to the quran, its adherents to cut the throats of infidels, or
(2) Islam is a mainstream, peaceful religion hijacked by a minority of extremists. I.e.: that it’s the moral equivalent of Christianity, save for a handful of radicals that enable Islamophobes to unfairly malign it.
Given the hours you spend harassing people on eligibility threads, surely you can spare a few seconds to clarify this point. Even your sole defender, Kenny Bunk, admits you’ve gone overboard on the shadenfreude. [I.e.: you’ve done a whiz-poor job of concealing your gloating over the courts’ refusal to rule on the Natural Born Citizen issue.] How about a veneer of balance? It’s not asking too much, is it?
Jamese, this is now the fourth invitation I’m extending to you to repeat on an actual Islamic thread what you’ve so far confined to ‘birther’ threads. Namely, your liberal-letter-perfect defense of Islam. If you really believe it, then why confine it to threads not related to Islam? Why not put it out there for broader FR consumption?
I’ll make it easy for you. Multiple choice. Do you believe:
(1) Islam is a bloodthirsty cult that requires, according to the quran, its adherents to cut the throats of infidels, or
(2) Islam is a mainstream, peaceful religion hijacked by a minority of extremists. I.e.: that it’s the moral equivalent of Christianity, save for a handful of radicals that enable Islamophobes to unfairly malign it.
Given the hours you spend harassing people on eligibility threads, surely you can spare a few seconds to clarify this point. Even your sole defender, Kenny Bunk, admits you’ve gone overboard on the shadenfreude. [I.e.: you’ve done a whiz-poor job of concealing your gloating over the courts’ refusal to rule on the Natural Born Citizen issue.] How about a veneer of balance? It’s not asking too much, is it?
It was nice talking to you but I’m going back to the topic of my thesis now, which is my primary posting interest.
Take care.
Either you are dishonest and inconsistent, or you could very well answer the multiple choice question by going with (2). Your dodge doesn’t surprise me. You like pimping for Islam when you’re confident of not getting caught, but you don’t dare do it in a more open and honest way.
Btw, as a Lutheran, what do you think of the ordination of practicing homosexuals?
Oh, and btw, not to dispute your intelligence, but (1) and (2) are mutually exclusive. I understand that cognitive dissonance is a specialty of liberals, however, and contradictions/irrationality/illogic are their stock and trade.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.