McCarthyism, yay!
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/09/us/politics/09king.html
QuoteFor Lawmaker Examining Terror, a Pro-I.R.A. Past
By SCOTT SHANE
Published: March 8, 2011
WASHINGTON — For Representative Peter T. King, as he seizes the national spotlight this week with a hearing on the radicalization of American Muslims, it is the most awkward of résumé entries. Long before he became an outspoken voice in Congress about the threat from terrorism, he was a fervent supporter of a terrorist group, the Irish Republican Army.
"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," Mr. King told a pro-I.R.A. rally on Long Island, where he was serving as Nassau County comptroller, in 1982. Three years later he declared, "If civilians are killed in an attack on a military installation, it is certainly regrettable, but I will not morally blame the I.R.A. for it."
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. His statements, along with his close ties to key figures in the military and political wings of the I.R.A., drew the attention of British and American authorities.
A judge in Belfast threw him out of an I.R.A. murder trial, calling him an "obvious collaborator," said Ed Moloney, an Irish journalist and author of "A Secret History of the I.R.A." In 1984, Mr. King complained that the Secret Service had investigated him as a "security risk," Mr. Moloney said.
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.
But as Mr. King, 66, prepares to preside Thursday as chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee at the first of a series of hearings on Muslim radicalization, his pro-I.R.A. past gives his many critics an obvious opening. The congressman's assertions that 85 percent of leaders of American mosques hold extremist views and that Muslims do not cooperate with law enforcement have alarmed Muslim groups, some counterterrorism experts and even a few former allies in Irish-American causes.
Mr. King, son of a New York City police officer and grand-nephew of an I.R.A. member, offers no apologies for his past, which he has celebrated in novels that feature a Irish-American congressman with I.R.A. ties who bears a striking resemblance to the author.
Of comparisons between the terrorism of the I.R.A. and that of Al Qaeda and its affiliates, Mr. King said: "I understand why people who are misinformed might see a parallel. The fact is, the I.R.A. never attacked the United States. And my loyalty is to the United States."
He said he does not regret his past pro-I.R.A. statements. The Irish group, he said, was "a legitimate force" battling British repression — analogous to the African National Congress in South Africa or the Zionist Irgun paramilitary in British-ruled Palestine. "It was a dirty war on both sides," he said of I.R.A. resistance to British rule.
As for the hearings, he noted that counterterrorism officials from the Obama administration have often spoken, especially since a string of largely homegrown plots since 2009, of the threat from American Muslims who take on radical views. "Al Qaeda is recruiting from the Muslim community," he said. "If they were recruiting from the Irish community, I'd say we should look at that."
Mr. King's witnesses at the hearing will feature a fellow House Republican, Frank Wolf of Virginia; Representative Keith Ellison, Democrat of Minnesota, who is Muslim; Dr. M. Zuhdi Jasser, a Muslim physician and activist who has been sharply critical of some fellow Muslims; and two family members of young men who embraced extremist violence. (The committee's top Democrat, Representative Bennie G. Thompson of Mississippi, has invited Leroy Baca, the sheriff of Los Angeles County, who has praised Muslim assistance to law enforcement, and Representative John D. Dingell, Democrat of Michigan, who has many Muslim constituents.)
The furor about the hearing is less about the witness lineup, which does not seem especially incendiary, than about statements by Mr. King that appear to spread blame for terrorism to the entire population of American Muslims.
"This hearing is not focusing on the acts of a criminal fringe but is broad-brushing an entire community," said Alejandro J. Beutel, policy analyst at the Muslim Public Affairs Council in Washington.
Mr. Beutel, who has compiled a database of terrorist incidents since 2001, said the problem of radicalization of young Muslims is serious, and his group has helped counter it with a number of measures, including a video featuring nine imams speaking against extremism that has become a Web hit. But he said broadly accusing Muslims of complicity in terrorism will hamstring the fight to prevent extremism, which depends on tips from citizens willing and unafraid to contact authorities.
Even Mr. King's critics acknowledge a fundamental difference between the violence carried out by the I.R.A., which usually sought with varying success to minimize civilian casualties, and that of Al Qaeda, which has done the opposite. The I.R.A. was responsible for 1,826 of 3,528 deaths during the Northern Irish conflict between 1969 and 2001, including those of several hundred civilians, said the historian Malcolm Sutton
"King's exactly right to say there's a difference of approach between the I.R.A. and Al Qaeda," said Tom Parker, a counterterrorism specialist at Amnesty International and a former British military intelligence officer. "But I personally consider both of them terrorist groups."
Mr. Parker was at a birthday party for a friend in London in 1990 when the I.R.A. tossed a bomb onto the roof of the rented hall, a historic barracks. Many people, including Mr. Parker, were injured, but none died, by lucky chance of location and quick medical response, he said.
What troubles him, Mr. Parker said, is that Mr. King "understands the pull of ancestral ties. He took a great interest in a terrorist struggle overseas. He's a guy who could bring real insight to this situation." Instead, he said, "he is damaging cooperation from the greatest allies the U.S. has in counterterrorism."
Some who have been close to Mr. King agree. Niall O'Dowd, an Irish-born New York publisher and writer who worked with him on the peace process in the 1990s, broke publicly with him Monday on his Web site, IrishCentral.com, describing Mr. King's "strange journey from Irish radical to Muslim inquisitor."
In Northern Ireland, Mr. O'Dowd said, they saw a Catholic community "demonized" by its Protestant and British critics and worked to bring it to the peace table. Seeing his old friend similarly "demonize" Muslims has shocked him, he said.
"I honestly feel Peter is wrong, and his own experience in Northern Ireland teaches him that," Mr. O'Dowd said. "He's a very honest, working-class Irish guy from Queens who's had an amazing career. Now I see a man turning back on himself, and I don't know why."
You got a problem smoking evildoers out of their holes, Timmay?
QuoteOf comparisons between the terrorism of the I.R.A. and that of Al Qaeda and its affiliates, Mr. King said: "I understand why people who are misinformed might see a parallel. The fact is, the I.R.A. never attacked the United States. And my loyalty is to the United States."
Alright, time for the Brits to leave Afghanistan.
Our resident IRA apologist chimes in, what a surprise.
The FBI can smoke the evil doers out of their holes without congresses help. This is simply whipping up racism and paranoia.
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fquestgarden.com%2F64%2F19%2F3%2F080417100246%2Fimages%2FJapanese-american_children.gif&hash=460ddf424dd88c4caf7a9bbbea3b1e7b57ea5c2b)
Americans love to vote for terrorist enablers.
Bloody hell :bleeding:
Lets kick American imperialism out of Texas too whilst we're at it. What? Most of them want to be American?...nah, the Americans are clearly evil doers there.
Just holy hypocrisy batman. If you can defend the IRA like that then you can do the same for the various anti-american groups just the same.
I approve of Congressmen Peter King's dislike of the English. :)
How many Japs committed acts of terrorism during WWII, Timmay? Seems like the camps worked pretty well. :contract:
This is the retard that wants to ban guns in whatever place a congressman happens to be.
Great, just great. As if we needed to give the Brits more to feed their "Yanks love the IRA" paranoia.
It was the orange part of the island that supported us in our war for independence. Just sayin'. :bowler:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
It was the orange part of the island that supported us in our war for independence. Just sayin'. :bowler:
How'd they do that? :huh:
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
It was the orange part of the island that supported us in our war for independence. Just sayin'. :bowler:
Why would Irish Anglo-Protestants have supported the Americans?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 07:18:50 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
It was the orange part of the island that supported us in our war for independence. Just sayin'. :bowler:
Why would Irish Anglo-Protestants have supported the Americans?
They saw the American Revolution as the next phase of Cromwell's struggle. According to some historian who said so anyway.
Edit: If you're curious, the book is "Irish Opinion and the American Revolution" by Vincent Morley.
Quote from: Tyr on March 09, 2011, 08:13:25 AMIf you can defend the IRA like that then you can do the same for the various anti-american groups just the same.
There is no commonality between the IRA and Islamic literalist terrorism, and you know that.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 09, 2011, 07:50:41 PM
There is no commonality between the IRA and Islamic literalist terrorism, and you know that.
Of course there is. Both groups seek to leverage violence into political gain and to conquer regions that most assuredly do not want to be ruled by them. The only difference is scale.
Mind you, these days the IRA are little more than gangsters.
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2011, 07:28:54 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 07:18:50 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
It was the orange part of the island that supported us in our war for independence. Just sayin'. :bowler:
Why would Irish Anglo-Protestants have supported the Americans?
They saw the American Revolution as the next phase of Cromwell's struggle. According to some historian who said so anyway.
Edit: If you're curious, the book is "Irish Opinion and the American Revolution" by Vincent Morley.
Cool. Too bad the English didn't join us in our glorious revolution and overthrow the King.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 09:35:00 PM
Cool. Too bad the English didn't join us in our glorious revolution and overthrow the King.
That didn't work out so well for America. Why would the British want a piece of that?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 07:18:50 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
It was the orange part of the island that supported us in our war for independence. Just sayin'. :bowler:
Why would Irish Anglo-Protestants have supported the Americans?
The Presbyterian War = American War of Independence
Quote from: Neil on March 09, 2011, 09:38:41 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 09:35:00 PM
Cool. Too bad the English didn't join us in our glorious revolution and overthrow the King.
That didn't work out so well for America. Why would the British want a piece of that?
#1 for 70 years isn't working out?
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 09:44:06 PM
Quote from: Neil on March 09, 2011, 09:38:41 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 09:35:00 PM
Cool. Too bad the English didn't join us in our glorious revolution and overthrow the King.
That didn't work out so well for America. Why would the British want a piece of that?
#1 for 70 years isn't working out?
Indeed. Given the natural advantages of the American continent, the United States is well below par. And now that they're squandering the advantages that they built up following the self-destruction of Europe, they're going to end civilization on Earth.
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 09, 2011, 07:50:41 PM
Quote from: Tyr on March 09, 2011, 08:13:25 AMIf you can defend the IRA like that then you can do the same for the various anti-american groups just the same.
There is no commonality between the IRA and Islamic literalist terrorism, and you know that.
:D
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 09, 2011, 07:50:41 PM
Quote from: Tyr on March 09, 2011, 08:13:25 AMIf you can defend the IRA like that then you can do the same for the various anti-american groups just the same.
There is no commonality between the IRA and Islamic literalist terrorism, and you know that.
Other than being terrorists? :huh:
And I thought the IRA's ties to PLO terrorists (and various splinter groups) was well documented.
Quote from: Barrister on March 10, 2011, 02:03:27 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 09, 2011, 07:50:41 PM
Quote from: Tyr on March 09, 2011, 08:13:25 AMIf you can defend the IRA like that then you can do the same for the various anti-american groups just the same.
There is no commonality between the IRA and Islamic literalist terrorism, and you know that.
Other than being terrorists? :huh:
And I thought the IRA's ties to PLO terrorists (and various splinter groups) was well documented.
They were invited. Punch was served.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 09:35:00 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2011, 07:28:54 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 07:18:50 PM
Quote from: MadImmortalMan on March 09, 2011, 12:43:15 PM
It was the orange part of the island that supported us in our war for independence. Just sayin'. :bowler:
Why would Irish Anglo-Protestants have supported the Americans?
They saw the American Revolution as the next phase of Cromwell's struggle. According to some historian who said so anyway.
Edit: If you're curious, the book is "Irish Opinion and the American Revolution" by Vincent Morley.
Cool. Too bad the English didn't join us in our glorious revolution and overthrow the King.
For the English a Glorious Revolution is being invade by the Dutch.
Muslim Congressman tearfully decries committee's questioning of Muslim-American patriotism, vows vengence on America*
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42005790/ns/politics (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42005790/ns/politics)
QuoteWASHINGTON — Minnesota Democratic Rep. Keith Ellison, the first Muslim congressman, gave emotional testimony Thursday to a House of Representatives committee hearing on radicalization in the U.S. Muslim community.
Tearfully describing the story of a Muslim-American first-responder paramedic who died on September 11, 2001, Ellison criticized New York Republican Rep. Peter King for leading the controversial hearings that have reignited a national debate over how to combat a spate of home grown terrorism.
"Mohammed Salman Hamdani was a fellow American who gave his life for other Americans," Ellison said, his voice trembling. "His life should not be defined as a member of an ethnic group or a member of a religion, but as an American who gave everything for his fellow citizens."
"This committee's approach to violent extremism is contrary to American values and threatens our security," Ellison said. The congressman tried to hide his tears behind his papers and quickly left the room after his remarks.
The senior Democrat in the House, Michigan Representative John Dingell, urged King and the committee to ensure that their investigation would not "blot the good name or the loyalty or raise questions about the decency of Arabs or Muslims or other Americans."
King insisted the hearing was the logical response to Obama administration warnings over a very real threat.
"To back down would be a craven surrender to political correctness and an abdication of what I believe to be the main responsibility of this committee — to protect America from a terrorist attack," King said in his opening remarks.
Critics have compared the hearing to overly zealous investigations of communism in the 1950s that led to false accusations that destroyed careers.
"There is nothing radical or un-American in holding these hearings," King said Thursday.
Melvin Bledsoe, whose son, Carlos, is charged with killing an Army private at a recruiting station in Little Rock, Ark., testified about his son's conversion to Islam and his isolation from his family.
"Carlos was captured by people best described as hunters," Bledsoe said. "He was manipulated and lied to."
The Obama administration has tried to frame the discussion around radicalization in general, without singling out Muslims. King said that is just political correctness, since al-Qaida is the main threat to the United States.
U.S. Attorney General Eric Holder took a veiled swipe at King on Wednesday, saying the focus by law enforcement was on individuals rather than an entire community because "we don't want to stigmatize, we don't want to alienate entire communities."
At the White House, spokesman Jay Carney said, "We welcome congressional involvement in this issue."
"In the United States, we don't practice guilt by association," Carney added. "We believe Muslim-Americans are part of the solution."
Elsewhere at the Capitol, Director of National Intelligence James Clapper also was scheduled to address the threat of homegrown terrorism Thursday. In his prepared remarks, Clapper says 2010 saw more plots involving homegrown Sunni Muslim extremists ideologically aligned with al-Qaida than in the previous year.
"Key to this trend has been the development of a U.S.-specific narrative that motivates individuals to violence," Clapper's remarks say.
*Tim, this headline is what we call a joke, and not meant to be taken seriously
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 10, 2011, 07:19:58 AM
Quote from: Barrister on March 10, 2011, 02:03:27 AM
Quote from: CountDeMoney on March 09, 2011, 07:50:41 PM
Quote from: Tyr on March 09, 2011, 08:13:25 AMIf you can defend the IRA like that then you can do the same for the various anti-american groups just the same.
There is no commonality between the IRA and Islamic literalist terrorism, and you know that.
Other than being terrorists? :huh:
And I thought the IRA's ties to PLO terrorists (and various splinter groups) was well documented.
They were invited. Punch was served.
Here's a good link - entitled "IRA-PLO Cooperation: A Long, Cozy Relationship", published originally in your favourite publication the Jerusalem Post.
http://www.realclearworld.com/articles/2009/04/ira_plo_history_cooperation.html
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.esuhistoryprof.com%2F_borders%2FIRA_and_PLO_Mural.jpg&hash=198079afa0039270b6f906b8cb26dc89536b9522)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Firelandsown.net%2Fira_plo_mural.gif&hash=e4d8a3c6ee04a013f3468d209f07ff2fe5f3fbd8)
Quote from: Barrister on March 10, 2011, 01:12:01 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.crethiplethi.com%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2Fe398da16-1.jpg&hash=d3e4f8d6011c10aa2de93ad91187e6325c1f1606)
Beeb, why are you lecturing us on hotlinking? :huh:
Quote from: DGuller on March 10, 2011, 01:18:59 PM
Beeb, why are you lecturing us on hotlinking? :huh:
Huh - image doesn't show up at all for me - I'll delete it.
I did add other images though. :)
Is there anyone seriously questioning the fact that Islam breeds terrorists like a corpse breeds maggots? :yeahright:
G.
A better link:
http://www.palestineposterproject.org/poster/plo-ira-one-struggle
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 09:35:00 PM
Cool. Too bad the English didn't join us in our glorious revolution and overthrow the King.
Considering what the revolution was really about was denying the Parliament of Great Britain had any authority to make laws for us...how exactly would the English participate?
Quote from: Barrister on March 10, 2011, 01:12:01 PM
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.esuhistoryprof.com%2F_borders%2FIRA_and_PLO_Mural.jpg&hash=198079afa0039270b6f906b8cb26dc89536b9522)
(https://languish.org/forums/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Firelandsown.net%2Fira_plo_mural.gif&hash=e4d8a3c6ee04a013f3468d209f07ff2fe5f3fbd8)
Bumping for Seedy's benefit. :)
Quote from: Razgovory on March 10, 2011, 09:56:15 AM
For the English a Glorious Revolution is being invade by the Dutch.
They could have called it "Glorious Revolution 2: Electric Boogaloo"
Quote from: Barrister on March 10, 2011, 05:38:02 PMBumping for Seedy's benefit. :)
You're taking it all out of context. Obviously it wasn't for political solidarity, but for the sake of color coordination. The PLO totally complements the IRA when it comes to accessorizing with green.
Quote from: Valmy on March 10, 2011, 01:32:42 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 09, 2011, 09:35:00 PM
Cool. Too bad the English didn't join us in our glorious revolution and overthrow the King.
Considering what the revolution was really about was denying the Parliament of Great Britain had any authority to make laws for us...how exactly would the English participate?
It was about lack of representation more than it was about Parliament and Britain certainly had that problem.
How did the targeting of a religious group turn into a debate about the origons of the US rebellion? An ACW tangent would be tolerable but this is going too far.
Quote from: Barrister on March 10, 2011, 02:03:27 AM
Other than being terrorists? :huh:
And I thought the IRA's ties to PLO terrorists (and various splinter groups) was well documented.
Aside from Irish Americans the IRA's biggest contributors were the Libyans, the Cubans and drug money from Colombia.
King's like Galloway, except he actually helped fund the bastards with blood on their hands. And I think the way him and other Irish-American politicians feted people like Gerry Adams helped fatally weaken the non-violent Republicanism of real heroes like John Hume and Seamus Mallon.
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 10, 2011, 05:41:49 PM
It was about lack of representation more than it was about Parliament and Britain certainly had that problem.
Which had nothing to do with the King.
Quote from: Valmy on March 10, 2011, 11:33:44 PM
Quote from: jimmy olsen on March 10, 2011, 05:41:49 PM
It was about lack of representation more than it was about Parliament and Britain certainly had that problem.
Which had nothing to do with the King.
Revolutions are know to snowball and get a bit more extreme as time goes on.
Quote from: crazy canuck on March 10, 2011, 05:49:05 PM
How did the targeting of a religious group turn into a debate about the origons of the US rebellion? An ACW tangent would be tolerable but this is going too far.
See America's history and religious minorities. :)
Quote from: crazy canuck on March 10, 2011, 05:49:05 PM
How did the targeting of a religious group turn into a debate about the origons of the US rebellion? An ACW tangent would be tolerable but this is going too far.
Well, the American Revolution's success in creating the USA eventually led to the ACW, so we may have reason to divert into the ACW at some point. ;)