Moving and powerful testimony by Rep. Keith Ellison D-MN at today's hearing on Islamic radicalization. <object width="420" height="245" id="msnbc91749d" classid="clsid27CDB6E-AE6D-11cf-96B8-444553540000" codebase="http://download.macromedia.com/pub/shockwave/cabs/flash/swflash.cab#version=10,0,0,0"><param name="movie" value="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" /><param name="FlashVars" value="launch=42008459&width=420&height=245" /><param name="allowScriptAccess" value="always" /><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true" /><param name="wmode" value="transparent" /><embed name="msnbc91749d" src="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/32545640" width="420" height="245" FlashVars="launch=42008459&width=420&height=245" allowscriptaccess="always" allowFullScreen="true" wmode="transparent" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" pluginspage="http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/download.cgi?P1_Prod_Version=ShockwaveFlash"></embed></object><p style="font-size:11px; font-family:Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif; color: #999; margin-top: 5px; background: transparent; text-align: center; width: 420px;">Visit msnbc.com for <a style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;" href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com">breaking news</a>, <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032507" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">world news</a>, and <a href="http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/3032072" style="text-decoration:none !important; border-bottom: 1px dotted #999 !important; font-weight:normal !important; height: 13px; color:#5799DB !important;">news about the economy</a></p> For the record Ellison is my US Rep and a friend of a friend, although I don't know him personally. Also I worked on one of his opponent's campaigns. What he said though was very important and I am glad he said it. I am not against King's hearings in principle and think he does have a point that we need to consider the danger of radicalization of American Muslims but I think his approach is troubling. If King had framed this as hearings to see how we can work with American Muslims to combat radicalization so rather than framing Muslims as the part of the problem but part of the solution there would be no controversy over this. That was why Ellison's statements were needed and timely.
While I share his sadness, I think the reality is that this would be critisized no matter how it was framed, and that American Muslims should do more to distance themselves from the brand of Islam that Peter King is allegedly targeting. A "we don't share their religion" campaign makes far more sense than "we are all Muslims".
Couldn't agree more. You can't allow shouting and crying to stop legitimate, open discussion on a topic of this magnitude. I don't think much of Peter King at all, but he's doing the right thing this time.
<iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/dr-2N2v7orw" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="640" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/KpRgqDMrD4M" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> <iframe title="YouTube video player" width="480" height="390" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/Sv9wUSA-b6Y" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe> Three testimonies.
And I think in principle it is something that needs to be discussed at the Congressional level. The question is how do you go about it. Obviously with people like Nidal Hasan and the Somali youths who were brainwashed to go to fight in Somalia there are American Muslims who are getting radicalized at the same time there are American Muslims who have been victims of terrorism too. Ellison's comments were meant to remind that American Muslims aren't a Fifth column out to undermine America but Americans too who have suffered and fought extremism also. That is why I said these hearings shouldn't be about looking at American Muslims as the part of the problem but how can they be part of the solution.
Maybe I oversimplify (or skip the opportunity for "the fear" of da muslim) but we seem to currently have a much greater problem with non-islamic domestic terrorism: witness the Arizona shooting, the Virginia Tech shooting, Columbine, Oklahoma City, and so on, and so on. The Islamic terrorism we've seen (primarily 9/11) was not from a domestic source. That's why I think this is fear-mongering and vote-grubbing instead of logical service of the pubic safety. Or it is just stupidity instead of logical service of the public safety -- that's more probable.
You are right. And what's sad is that other congressmen reached out and offered to work with King to investigate threats from Islam in America but also other sources such as environmental terrorists, and right wing racist terrorist groups. But King rejected the idea.
People made fun here of Fatty when he talked about 9/11. But this guy comes up with this melodramatic story and breaks out in tears all of a sudden 10 years later and y'all are like "oooh, powerful testimony"?
I thought the words were powerful when I read a transcript. I don't give a flip about the tears. That said, if investigations were started by congress of my ethnic and cultural group, when tons of other groups were just as problematic in this country, I would probably react emotionally. Probably not with tears, but with something akin to Molotov cocktails. Of course, it's hard to lasso us Irish-Native-American-Cajun mongrels. We are sneaky and have deeply hidden agendas. We also hide our birth certificates, FWIW.
While I agree it is fear mongering and stupidity, I think it's reasonable why we treat jihadi terrorism differently from these other incidents. We can get a framework around jihadi terrorism, understand why they do what they do, identify who might participate and why. Apart from the OKC bombing and abortion clinic bombings, I don't think you can do that with most domestic terrorism. Most of it is apolitical and areligious. Other than putting all males aged 14 to 28 in prison, there's probably not much we can do to identify and deter assailants. Since there isn't much we can do on that, I think we just let it go and hope we're not next; but there's a feeling that maybe there's something that can be done with Islamic fundamentalism. Unfortunately, I don't think this is the thing to be done at all. Save for counter-testimony like Ellison's, the tone breeds more mistrust and probably more terrorism -- likely in the form of arson at mosques.
Your post addresses the problem. The people who do most of the acts of terrorism aren't necessarily easy to put into a group. Which is why we shouldn't just look at one group, but look extremism as a whole, or at least a broader basis. Simply because outsiders can see the "difference" in the Islamic attackers isn't a reason to just get lazy and only look into that group. Especially since most attacks in the U.S. come not from radical Islam but other groups.
I think we're on the same page, because I agree with your points. I just don't think public hearings accomplish point(s) #2. We have intelligence agencies, NSA and homeland security to handle 2a and 2b appropriately, right? So this devolves to point 1 as a public circus, at best, and a recruitment tool for the baddies, at worst.
What I want to know is whether there is one single terrorist who will be turned in or arrested and one signle terrorist attack that will be averted as the result of Peter King's hearing. Seems like the main purpose of the hearing is for Peter King to be seen on TV in a way that makes Tea Baggers happy. It has nothing about stopping terrorism, but instead is all about using the threat of terrorism/radicalization as p*rn. Pretty much the same thing the ATW posts do-- stuff for his ilk to masturbate to.
Keith Ellison, only Minneapolis Democrat to vote for Creationism in State Science Standards. http://www.mail-archive.com/mpls@mnforum.org/msg38909.html Can someone decipher this?
I'm putting this here as I don't think it needs its own thread. http://www.wtsp.com/news/watercoole...er-King?odyssey=mod|newswell|text|FRONTPAGE|p Bloody pig's foot sent to Rep. Peter King Authorities intercepted a parcel Monday morning addressed to Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.) containing a bloody pig's foot and a derogatory message, a source has confirmed to CBS News. The parcel was intercepted at the Congressional mail facility in Landover, Maryland, where mail sent to lawmakers is screened for security risks. The U.S. Capitol Police and U.S. Postal Service confirmed that there is an open investigation, though would not confirm the details of what was contained in the parcel because the investigation is ongoing. King's office, which did not see the parcel, referred all questions to the Capitol Police. According to the Postal Service, a hazardous materials response team tested the parcel and found it to be non-hazardous. Last month, King held hearings on radicalization in the Muslim-American community that critics suggested unfairly targeted Muslims, though it's not known whether this incident is related to those hearings. Muslims are forbidden from eating pork products. Ibrahim Hooper, National Communications Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations - a target of King's hearings - said he found the situation confusing. He said his organization regularly receives pig-themed hate messages, including letters smeared with bacon. "My guess is it was an anti-Muslim bigot, and bigots not being brain surgeons they probably got their signals crossed," he said. UPDATE: A source on Capitol Hill told NBC News that the note "contained anti-Semitic ramblings" and referenced the radicalization hearings. King is Roman Catholic.
