"Representative Peter King's Hearings - Will They Backfire?"
Sydney M. Williams
Congressional hearings often have a result contrary to what was intended. Representative Peter King’s hearings risk falling into that category. While political correctness has delegated many Americans to the nether regions of denial, the facts indicate that radical Islam is a danger. The proof is in the attacks: the killing of 3000 people on 9/11 by thirteen suicide Al Qaeda terrorists; Richard Reid, the “shoe bomber” who was prevented from igniting plastic explosives in his show while enroute on an American Airlines flight from Paris to Miami; Major Nidal Hasan’s, a disciple of American-born and Yemen-based cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, murder of thirteen soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas; Umar Farouk who, carrying explosives in his underwear, tried to blow up a Northwest Airlines jet over Detroit; and, most recently, Faisal Shahzad’s failed attempt to blow up a car in New York’s Times Square.
Despite all of these terrorists having one thing in common – they are all radicalized Islamists – Eric Holder, the country’s Attorney General, could not get himself to mention that fact when questioned at hearings of the House Judiciary Committee last May. Janet Napolitano, at confirmation hearings in March 2009, would not use the term terrorism, preferring instead the euphemistic “man caused disasters.”
It should come as no surprise, given that as a background, that politicians far more direct and perhaps less “political” than those in Mr. Obama’s administration, like Representative Peter King, should call for Congressional hearings to consider the question as to the role played by Islamic extremists in radicalizing an individual into becoming a mujahid. In a thoughtful piece in yesterday’s Washington Post, Ruth Marcus concludes that even with Mr. King’s blustery and somewhat crude ways, the questions he raises are “appropriate…and important.”
Nevertheless, and despite my sympathy for the intent of the hearings, my disdain for political correctness and my preference for profiling, I worry that the hearings may backfire. The Muslim community, a necessary ally if we are ever to defeat radicalized Islamism, may view themselves and their Mosques as victims and targets. We cannot afford that. The risk is that Congressman King will use too broad a brush and indict all Muslims, or, at least, that is the way the press may portray the hearings and findings. Ms. Marcus mentions that in a letter to King on Monday more than fifty progressive groups “slammed him for singling out a particular community for examination.” That’s not correct. He singled out a small segment of a “particular community,” a group that has been responsible for thousands of deaths in our country and other failed attempts. Ideally, the inquiry should be conducted by Muslims, but that is not to be the case.
As a country, we do a better job of assimilating immigrants into our society than any other country. Most people who live in the U.S., whether Asian or African by heritage, or Muslim or Hindu by faith, consider themselves Americans. That has been true for over two hundred years. Unfortunately, a number of liberals, in endorsing multiculturalism, have effectively slowed the process toward assimilation, as they appear to value diversity over unity.
The hearings opened Thursday at 9:45AM. One hundred people had already lined up at 7:00AM Opposition to an advanced copy of his opening statement, from one news report, ranged from “measured and thoughtful” to “paroxysms of rage.” The Huffington Post, unsurprisingly, huffs that the hearings exemplify “bigotry” and are “unfairly targeting American Muslims.” It will be impossible, it seems to me, to rationally discuss the seriousness of this issue in so charged an environment. My reluctance to not endorse the hearings has nothing to do with the charges or questions raised by Mr. King, for I agree with Ms. Marcus that they are important. But I fear the event will turn into a circus, serving no one and clouding the real purpose of the hearings. I worry that the consequences will be far different from what Representative King envisioned.
Thought of the Day
“Representative Peter King’s Hearings – Will They Backfire?”
March 11, 2011Congressional hearings often have a result contrary to what was intended. Representative Peter King’s hearings risk falling into that category. While political correctness has delegated many Americans to the nether regions of denial, the facts indicate that radical Islam is a danger. The proof is in the attacks: the killing of 3000 people on 9/11 by thirteen suicide Al Qaeda terrorists; Richard Reid, the “shoe bomber” who was prevented from igniting plastic explosives in his show while enroute on an American Airlines flight from Paris to Miami; Major Nidal Hasan’s, a disciple of American-born and Yemen-based cleric Anwar al-Awlaki, murder of thirteen soldiers at Ft. Hood, Texas; Umar Farouk who, carrying explosives in his underwear, tried to blow up a Northwest Airlines jet over Detroit; and, most recently, Faisal Shahzad’s failed attempt to blow up a car in New York’s Times Square.
Despite all of these terrorists having one thing in common – they are all radicalized Islamists – Eric Holder, the country’s Attorney General, could not get himself to mention that fact when questioned at hearings of the House Judiciary Committee last May. Janet Napolitano, at confirmation hearings in March 2009, would not use the term terrorism, preferring instead the euphemistic “man caused disasters.”
It should come as no surprise, given that as a background, that politicians far more direct and perhaps less “political” than those in Mr. Obama’s administration, like Representative Peter King, should call for Congressional hearings to consider the question as to the role played by Islamic extremists in radicalizing an individual into becoming a mujahid. In a thoughtful piece in yesterday’s Washington Post, Ruth Marcus concludes that even with Mr. King’s blustery and somewhat crude ways, the questions he raises are “appropriate…and important.”
Nevertheless, and despite my sympathy for the intent of the hearings, my disdain for political correctness and my preference for profiling, I worry that the hearings may backfire. The Muslim community, a necessary ally if we are ever to defeat radicalized Islamism, may view themselves and their Mosques as victims and targets. We cannot afford that. The risk is that Congressman King will use too broad a brush and indict all Muslims, or, at least, that is the way the press may portray the hearings and findings. Ms. Marcus mentions that in a letter to King on Monday more than fifty progressive groups “slammed him for singling out a particular community for examination.” That’s not correct. He singled out a small segment of a “particular community,” a group that has been responsible for thousands of deaths in our country and other failed attempts. Ideally, the inquiry should be conducted by Muslims, but that is not to be the case.
As a country, we do a better job of assimilating immigrants into our society than any other country. Most people who live in the U.S., whether Asian or African by heritage, or Muslim or Hindu by faith, consider themselves Americans. That has been true for over two hundred years. Unfortunately, a number of liberals, in endorsing multiculturalism, have effectively slowed the process toward assimilation, as they appear to value diversity over unity.
The hearings opened Thursday at 9:45AM. One hundred people had already lined up at 7:00AM Opposition to an advanced copy of his opening statement, from one news report, ranged from “measured and thoughtful” to “paroxysms of rage.” The Huffington Post, unsurprisingly, huffs that the hearings exemplify “bigotry” and are “unfairly targeting American Muslims.” It will be impossible, it seems to me, to rationally discuss the seriousness of this issue in so charged an environment. My reluctance to not endorse the hearings has nothing to do with the charges or questions raised by Mr. King, for I agree with Ms. Marcus that they are important. But I fear the event will turn into a circus, serving no one and clouding the real purpose of the hearings. I worry that the consequences will be far different from what Representative King envisioned.
Labels: TOTD
posted by Thought of the Day @ 9:48 AM
0 Comments
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home