March 11, 2011

The King hearings on Muslim extremism

The Establishment Press is having conniptions over the King hearings because they are getting in the way of their Narrative: that white male conservatives with pitchforks and torches are The Threat. Recall the MSM response to the Tucson shootings — It’s Limbaugh's and Beck's and O’Reilly’s fault — and how they went on for days and days in that vein long after there wasn’t a shred of credibility left. Or look at the various Schillers of NPR.

The King hearings send the perfectly appropriate message to Muslims in America that we are tired of their losers trying to (and sometimes succeeding at) at killing Americans and that they need to do something about it.

We should have had these kind of hearings years ago, but they would have undermined the Bush Administration's main claim to fame: that they had protected us from all terrorist attacks. Moreover, they would have raised questions about Bush's Grand Strategy of Invite the World - Invade the World - In Hock to the World.

72 comments:

RWF said...

There might be a need for the hearings but Peter King is the wrong man to chair any hearing into the causes of terrorism given his longheld support for the IRA.

It's like having Charlie Sheen head the DEA.

Average Joe said...

Peter King is the wrong man to chair any hearing into the causes of terrorism given his longheld support for the IRA

How many Americans were killed by the IRA? The reality is that whether you support the IRA or not, they are not trying to kill Americans - unlike the Muslim terrorists. Also, if you don't like King then who would you support holding these hearings and why hasn't this individual come forward before King did?

TPM said...

What we need is a new 9/11 commission, and that's just for starters.

Anonymous said...

How many Americans were killed by the IRA? The reality is that whether you support the IRA or not, they are not trying to kill Americans

If King is so concerned about Americans why waste time in the affairs of another country thousands of miles away? Is his primary concern Americans or a foreign contry?

Anonymous said...

I remain relatively neutral on the topic of potential Muslim extremism. Still, I had a hearty laugh over Congressman Al Green's ethnocentric assertion that the KKK is a bigger threat.

I can't think of anyone smart enough to be a threat who would be dumb enough to belong to whatever is left of the KKK. And the fact that a Texas congressman is more worried about paying back any white person for past transgressions than any present danger we might all be facing leads me to believe that stupidity and egotism are bigger threats than any terrorist group ever could be.

How shattered Al would be upon discovering that there aren't a bunch of hooded white men out to get him. Yes, Al, lots of white folks think you're not too smart, not too ethical and probably not very sane but we're more likely to kill ourselves than you being as it has somehow become more possible for a deranged idiot to get elected to public office because of who he is than for a sane, rational, competent individual to get elected on the basis of sound reasoning and competence as evidenced in past performance.

Anonymous said...

RE: King as an IRA supporter. I tend to agree with RWF on his conflict of interest. King can't both be in support of what most consider to be terrorism in one setting and fighting the threat of it in another. I wouldn't doubt King is logically consistent within his own belief system though and will be looking to see if he has articulated his thoughts on the matter.

BTW, I've had an Irishman accuse my family of funding the IRA. I was shocked at the thought of anyone in my family funding a foreign conflict and can tell you my father would've avoided anyone who wanted him to finance someone else's war like the plague.

Anonymous said...

The IRA -yes they have really been on top of their game.... I think they bombed a car about 25 years ago

Anonymous said...

Also, this is a shameless conservative attempt to woo American Jews by sending the message, "we are with you Jewish Zionists against those 'muzzies'".
Liberal Jews--85% of Jewish population--are not biting.

Average Joe said...

If King is so concerned about Americans why waste time in the affairs of another country thousands of miles away? Is his primary concern Americans or a foreign contry?

King comes from a district that has a large Irish-American population which is one reason he was so supportive of the IRA. Don't blame King for acting in the interests of the people who voted for him. At least he is one GOP politician who actually cares about the white voters who put him into office - unlike many other Republicans.

Average Joe said...

King as an IRA supporter. I tend to agree with RWF on his conflict of interest. King can't both be in support of what most consider to be terrorism in one setting and fighting the threat of it in another.

Then who should replace King in holding these hearings?

Average Joe said...

Liberal Jews--85% of Jewish population--are not biting.

I think this may have something to do with the fact that Jews tend to see white gentiles as their ultimate enemies.

Whiskey said...

Yes Liberal Jews love Obama and Muslims (same thing). But ordinary White Americans generally loathe Muslims. Because Muslims attack us and blow us up, a lot. The Scots-Irish response is to be supremely uninterested in any "why" moralizing/agonizing (that's a Quakerism/Puritanism luxury for rich people). But rather demand a whacking big response.

More Derbyshire (rubble doesn't make trouble) and Steyn than Howard Dean or "release my Chakra" Al Gore.

Just want to know. What the hell is wrong with "invading the world," as long as we get something out of it? Suppose we invaded (part) of Mexico and ran silver and gold mines to exhaustion to pay for their sending all those illegals all those decades, and then made the US dollar redeemable for a basket of gold and silver (you can blow up oil pipelines, open pit mines are pretty much sabotage proof, its just a bunch of dirt).

What would be so bad about the US dollar suddenly buying twice as much? By invading the hell out of Mexico and taking their silver and gold? Really?

RKU said...

Well, I think Peter King's support for the IRA was at its absolute height right around the time the IRA blew up that big British resort hotel (in Brighton?), and came very near to wiping out Margaret Thatcher and the entire political leadership of Britain's government. And that was also the point when Thatcher was by far America's strongest international political ally.

Still, I guess that doesn't really count as "terrorism" or "material support for terrorism." You can't be terrorists unless the America television shows say you are, and any group with strong support in Congress aren't terrorists by definition...

Average Joe said...

You can't be terrorists unless the America television shows say you are, and any group with strong support in Congress aren't terrorists by definition

I am not denying that the IRA are terrorists. I am saying that they are not anti-American terrorists since - as far as I am aware - they have never targeted Americans. Just because the IRA is an enemy of our ally Britain does not mean that we have a moral or legal obligation to treat it as our enemy. If we did then we would have to treat all the enemies of Israel as our enemies since Israel is one of our most important allies.

airtommy said...

Then who should replace King in holding these hearings?

Someone who does not support terrorism, be it Irish or Israeli. There aren't many candidates in Congress. Ron Paul would be the most obvious choice.

none of the above said...

Whiskey:

Yeah, you're right. We could invade all kinds of weaker countries, take their territory, and call them...oh, what would be a good name. Say, how about colonies. And then, we could keep a few troops there to hold them down, get what wealth we could from them, perhaps give the concession on controlling the country's trade to a politically-connected company.

You know, I could swear this has happened before at some point. But as I recall, it kinda stopped working somewhere along the line. Before we resume that policy, we might want to consider why it stopped working.

Average Joe said...

that was also the point when Thatcher was by far America's strongest international political ally

When two countries are allies it means that they will fight together against common enemies. Since the IRA was not an enemy of the United States, we had no reason to fight it. Thinking that the United States has an obligation to fight against all of the enemies of our allies is what got us into the war in Iraq with the neocons saying that we had an obligation to remove Saddam Hussein since he was an enemy of Israel.

Anonymous said...

That's great Whiskey

I'm sure the corporate overlords will reward you with great wealth for the thousands of white men sacrificed.

Oh wait.

Now I'm no libtard, but the shit you're spouting is down right insane, and never works in favor of the American people.

Or any people for that matter. Except a select few.

Mr. Anon said...

Wan't King the guy who, in the aftermath of the Tucson shooting, said that Congressmen should be exempt from TSA screening, and that they should not be put in positions where they might have to rub shoulders with the unwashed hoi-polloi who actually elected them. I think he called for some kind of gun-control too.

But if can raise the general level of hostility toward muslims, so that more of them leave, then that's all to the good.

David said...

>Then who should replace King in holding these hearings?<

Rahm Emanuel.

LOL.

Just joking. How about Joe Lieberman?

Seriously though, it may perhaps be difficult to find a Washington official who eschews foreign entanglements, or even eschews terrorism.

Chasing the Klan and other bugbears of the 1920s seems easier.

Anonymous said...

Why do I think that the best and easiest way to have made Americans safer would have simply been to have never adopted the 1965 Immigration act?

Anonymous said...

To Average Joe who wrote, "I think this may have something to do with the fact that Jews tend to see white gentiles as their ultimate enemies."

Speaking as Jew, I can tell you that Jews I know see ultimate enemies in people who'd like to kill them or discriminate against them and, today, it's not white gentiles. In view of sky-high rate of intermarriage with white gentiles, your statement can't be true.

But some Jews--especially older ones who might've experienced some antisemitism--are bitter. And bitter is not the same as seeing someone as the ultimate enemy.

Jews and white gentiles are in the same boat now and most Jews recognize this fact.

Anonymous said...

"Then who should replace King in holding these hearings?"

Someone whose findings won't be tainted by the appearance of a conflict of interest.

Of course looking at the list of names of people on the Council on Foreign Relations who should be knowledgeable about fundamentalist islamic groups leads me to believe the dems involved would use the hearings as yet another platform for appeasing muslims.

I mean it's nice and all that someone's finally gotten around to addressing the issue but I'd gotten kinda used to the idea that we'd simply be taken over for being too apathetic to protect our borders or screen foreigners for hostility to our culture and our government. Seeing the unavoidable and inevitable, I keep my passport up to date, have a burka tucked away just in case I need a disguise on the way to the airport and am currently shopping for a stable little country to evacuate to.

RWF said...

"How many Americans were killed by the IRA?"

The answer is not zero.

"The reality is that whether you support the IRA or not, they are not trying to kill Americans "

So if it turns out that American Muslims support groups like Hamas or Hezbollah, who don't aim to kill Americans then all is fine and dandy?

RWF said...

BTW- I'm obviously referring to Hezbollah today as not aiming to kill Americans. I am aware of their history.

Comment Inflation said...

I think this may have something to do with the fact that Jews tend to see white gentiles as their ultimate enemies.

==============

might this have to do with 2000 year of persecution, which, culminated in the holocaust which killed almost six million? ?

you'll have to forgive them for not being so forgiving.

Anonymous said...

"King comes from a district that has a large Irish-American population which is one reason he was so supportive of the IRA. Don't blame King for acting in the interests of the people who voted for him. At least he is one GOP politician who actually cares about the white voters who put him into office - unlike many other Republicans."

That's nice. How about at least one GOP politician who actually cares about the white, non-hyphenated American voters who put him into office? There really isn't much difference in principle from whoring after Irish-American votes by supporting the IRA and whoring after Jewish-American votes by voting the straight Zionist party line. In both instances, it isn't white American interests that are being catered to.

georgesdelatour said...

There's something very shallow in King's argument that the IRA didn't target Americans, therefore his support for the IRA is irrelevant.

King did not support the IRA because he felt the USA had a clear national strategic interest in destabilising the British Isles. He did it because he felt passionately, patriotically Irish. Most Irish people in Ireland didn't feel that way, BTW - that's why voters in the Republic consistently rejected the Provos. But King did feel that way about his mythical homeland.

To paraphrase the Oath Of Allegiance, King absolutely and entirely FAILED to renounce and abjure his allegiance and fidelity to a foreign sovereignty - Ireland. But this is precisely what he's trying to confront American Muslims with - that they have an allegiance to somewhere other than America, to the Ummah.

Anonymous said...

"Jews and white gentiles are in the same boat now and most Jews recognize this fact."

No they don't. If they did, they would act like they do, but they don't. Actions count for everything; words nothing. Self-deception of course plays a key role in this; Jews may "feel in the same boat" as white gentiles, yet they turn around and support and fund the very same Jewish organizations that have been pushing for white race replacement in all white countries worldwide.

"might this have to do with 2000 year of persecution, which, culminated in the holocaust which killed almost six million? ?

you'll have to forgive them for not being so forgiving."


As usual, the who/whom double standard: we have to forgive them, they never have to forgive us. We have to support them, they don't have to reciprocate. Fundamental lack of reciprocity is the key here.

The Greeks and Romans and others had the same complaints about the Jews long before this "2000 years of persecution"; they were not referred to way back then as hostis humani generis for no good reason. Jewish apologists put the cart before the horse: Jewish anti-gentile behavior came first, "anti-semitic" actions by gentiles in reaction to Jewish bad behavior came afterwards.

They are not unforgiving because they were persecuted. They are unforgiving so as to provoke persecution, thus strengthening their in-group cohesion. They act surprised when their victims turn on them, as though they have no conception of how their actions are perceived by others, and then after they suffer for it, they do it all over again the first chance they get. They never forgive, never forget, and never learn.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Culture_of_Critique_series

Self-deception is the key to Jewish group evolutionary psychology. If they actually learned from their history they would cease to be Jews.

Anonymous said...

The fascinating thing about Pakistan is that *every* Pakistani absolutelt loathes, hates and reviles America and seceretly believes that no punishment, no scorched earth, no earthquake, tsunami or Hell is horrific enough to damn Americans.
Yet, *every* Pakistani, every single one of them will strive might and main - to the extent of slitting granny's throat - for the chance of living in America.

An even more curious and pertinent fact is that secretly, America's entire political class wants to let them all.

What a f*cked-up world we live in.

Anonymous said...

Averagejoe

Ony a small percentage of eleigible voters in King's congressional distict vote in congressional elections. Peter King gets a percentage of that vote. So the number of voters who actually vote for Peter King.

I can tell you from first hand experience that thousands of Irish Catholics have fleed Long Island for geener pastures. This is a direct consequence of Peter Kings open borders voting record. There are towns in his congressional district that had large Irish Catholic populations that now have large and growing Muslim populations.

Peter King over the years was given an F- voting record on immigration by numbersusa.com..worse than Teddy Kennedy's immigration voting record..if you can believe that.

The death and destuction on 9/11 was a a direct consequence of an immigration policy that allowed Islam to expand in America. Peter King continues to vote for the expansion of Islam in America. The Muslim population in America contiues to grow.

Peter King is no Patriot. He is a faud and traitor. Peter King is directly repsonsible for the death of all those Irish Catholic NYC Cops and Firemen who died on 9/11.

Anonymous said...

Prior to 9/11,Peter Kings voting record on immigration was atrocious-F- grade from numbersusa.com. Since 9/11, there has been some slight moderation in his open borders extremism. And here is the reason why...

One week after 9/11 there was a story in Newsday about two young NYC Firemen who died in the Twin Towers. These two young men came from families that Peter King was very good friends with. These two young men were practically raised as brothers. Peter King had to make changes in his open borders voting record. If he hadn't, he was at great risk of becomming booted out of office.

So now he has morphed into Peter King the Patriot who is the terrorism expert in Congress. But this is all one big lie. These two young Men from his congressional district and all the other NYC Firemen and Cops died as a direct consequence of the interaction of 1)Peter King's treasonous open borders voting record-F- grade from numbersusa.com and 2)his enthusiastic support for a foreign policy in the Middle East that radicalizes young Muslim Men-such as the 9/11 terrrorists-who then come to America to kill Americans.

It is not unreasonable to state that Congressman Peter King has been a force of death and destruction in America and the World at large. Which is just another way of saying that Peter King is a traitor and a terrorist.

What I have just written should be the focus of the Patriotic Immigration Reform Movement during these hearings on Muslim terrorism in America. King's hearings on jihadists in America is so besides the point. The real point is that Peter King is still an enthusiastic supporter for importing Muslim Legal immigrants and the racial transformation of America. Peter King is anything but an American Patriot.

Anonymous said...

To the anonymous who wrote, "If they [Jews] did, they would act like they do, but they don't. Actions count for everything; words nothing. Self-deception of course plays a key role in this; Jews may "feel in the same boat" as white gentiles, yet they turn around and support and fund the very same Jewish organizations that have been pushing for white race replacement in all white countries worldwide."

This is true and false at the same time. Peer pressure plays a great role in Jewish behavior, just as it does in other people's.

But... very few people who donate to Jewish organizations are aware of some un-Jewish causes their money is helping support. When the donors learn, they change their strategies by 1. attaching strings to specific charitable activities, 2. switching their donations to a different charity, 3. stopping donations to Jewish charities altogether, 4. stopping donations to any charities.

Most Jews I know are shocked to learn that HIAS gives settlement assistance to Muslim immigrants. Most Jews I know are against the Mosque at Ground Zero. People who elect themselves to be our public voices are as self-serving as Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson. Every once in a while they say something valid, but even a broken clock is right twice a day.

I think the right strategy to shame organizations is to make small donors aware of what their money is being spent on. A light shone on these things will redirect the communal efforts to charities that help Americans.

Matra said...

Average Joe: How many Americans were killed by the IRA? The reality is that whether you support the IRA or not, they are not trying to kill Americans

Since the IRA was not an enemy of the United States, we had no reason to fight it.

That doesn't mean you have to go to the other extreme and support the IRA. We saw how 'conservative' Americans got their panties in a knot when Europeans, especially the French, were insufficiently supportive of the US adventures in Afghanistan and Iraq. How would those 'Freedom Fries' Americans have felt if European politicians had gone Peter King and actively supported AQ because, hey, he's only killing our allies, the Americans, not us?

That said, the IRA has long supported anti-American terrorists. At the time King was using his office to support the IRA that organisation was providing expert training to those Arabs who were later sent out by Gaddafi to kill Americans. They also provided training and weaponry throughout the 70s and early 80s to various left wing terrorists in Europe from the Red Army Faction (Baader-Meinhof Gang) to the Basque separatists ETA as well as the PLO. Right up until a couple of years ago they were also assisting FARC in Columbia. King wasn't bothered by the IRA's aiding of groups that targeted Americans and their allies. That tells me King is loyal to his ethnic group not America. If it had been firefighters from Kentucky who were killed on 9/11, not Irish Catholics, would he even be having these hearings?

Anonymous said...

Let's get serious about the IRA and IRA terrorism as compared to Islamic terrorism.

A few years ago I and my wife traveled to England and Ireland. While we were staying in London there were two IRA terror bombings. One was on the other side of town but one was only a block from our hotel.

Consider their technique. The IRA stopped a delivery truck in the early evening. They took the driver off and filled the truck with explosives. They waited until something like 3:00AM in the morning so the streets would be clear and blew it up. No one was hurt and the driver was released.

The IRA has developed the expertise to set off a bomb in the middle of a huge densely populated city without hurting anyone and doing as little collateral property damage as possible.

Stop please with the fuzzy headed relativism.

Albertosaurus

Anonymous said...

On the other hand...

In the discussion of THE KING HEARINGS ON MUSLIM EXTREMISM, somehow we slide again to the Jews (I'm as guilty as Average Joe and another Anonymous in answering their Jews=bad posts).

Hello, we have a problem with Islamic terrorism around the world. Let's focus on solutions not on scapegoating.

Since we are stuck with the Muslim population, what can we do to live in peace in the United States, if not the whole world?

Average Joe said...

Ron Paul would be the most obvious choice

Has Ron Paul volunteered to replace King?

Average Joe said...

In view of sky-high rate of intermarriage with white gentiles, your statement can't be true.

Actually I think this has more to do with the fact that white gentile women tend to be more attractive than Jewish ones than with any pro-gentile sentiment on the part of Jews.

Average Joe said...

So if it turns out that American Muslims support groups like Hamas or Hezbollah, who don't aim to kill Americans then all is fine and dandy?

As long as these groups are not trying to kill Americans then I have no problem with them. I have problems with people who support groups like Al Qaeda because these groups are trying to kill Americans.

Average Joe said...

There really isn't much difference in principle from whoring after Irish-American votes by supporting the IRA and whoring after Jewish-American votes by voting the straight Zionist party line.

How many wars are we fighting because of the IRA? As far as I am aware, none. The reality is that the neocons have gotten more Americans killed than have the IRA.

Average Joe said...

To paraphrase the Oath Of Allegiance, King absolutely and entirely FAILED to renounce and abjure his allegiance and fidelity to a foreign sovereignty - Ireland. But this is precisely what he's trying to confront American Muslims with - that they have an allegiance to somewhere other than America, to the Ummah.

I don't care who Muslims or anyone else swears an oath to as long as they are not causing the deaths of Americans. King and his fellow Irish-Americans are not causing the deaths of Americans. Muslims are causing the deaths of my fellow Americans.

Anonymous said...

"Jewish apologists put the cart before the horse: Jewish anti-gentile behavior came first, "anti-semitic" actions by gentiles in reaction to Jewish bad behavior came afterwards."

Like me. You need to do some more reading. Jews have consistently been the target of ethnic cleansing. Of course other ethnic groups have taken their turn at being the recipients of genocidal hate but by and large this has been contingent on taking turns being the aggressor then receiving payback as the victim. So far, I've not noticed any historical examples of Jewish groups gaining an advantage using violence as Jews. This is IMPORTANT.

Ken Hoop said...

Sailer should understand, complaining about Muslim attacks on Americans is appropriate alright--after our government's Empire gets out of Iraq and the Mideast, quits drone bombing innocents in Afghanistan, and cuts off aid to Israel (and all Arab-Muslim buyouts who do the Empire's bidding in undercutting Palestinian rights.)

Anonymous said...

Why are there no successful terrorist groups?

Because we don't call them terrorist groups after they've succeeded.

Come on really...

What is the difference between P O'Neill and George Washington other than Washington's success?

Georgesdelatour wrote:

"BTW - that's why voters in the Republic consistently rejected the Provos."

As one those Irish voters I can tell you we never rejected the provos. The provos had they same support as the Klan did in the US south in the 1950s. But Irish voters would never have voted for them for reasons of class insecurity.

P.S. Ted Kennedy suggested more than once that Ulster Protestants should be re-located to Britain. But did you ever see that thrown in his face?

Average Joe said...

That doesn't mean you have to go to the other extreme and support the IRA.

As long as a group is not out trying to kill Americans, I don't care who supports it. For example, I have no problem with Muslim groups who use violence against Israelis as long as they don't use violence against Americans. I hate Al Qaeda because they kill Americans, not because they are Muslims.

Average Joe said...

Ony a small percentage of eleigible voters in King's congressional distict vote in congressional elections.

And whose fault is that? If people in King's district don't like what he does then they should get off their butts and vote against him. If they are too lazy to do so then that is their problem.

catperson said...

Muslim terrorists are anti-Semites. They attack America because they see it as a puppet of Israel. They aim for regions where they assume they'll find a lot of Jewish targets like economic centers of New York city.

Bryce Varlens said...

While I often disagree with points by Whiskey, I think he may be on to something here, at least in part.

'Invade the world to promote democracy' is not true colonization, per se, because America doesn't come for the purpose of taking resources and intend to permanently stay there as owners of a new piece of land. However, its damned expensive, even if you don't factor in all the American soldiers' lives. Personally, I agree more with the paleoconservative idea that we shouldn't be out trying to play superman to the world, we should let them solve their own problems. Ostensibly, the US went into Iraq to depose Saddam, protect the world from his 'weapons of mass destruction' and bring democracy (whether or not there were other more pressing reasons). If we are going to do that, then shouldn't we demand or take resources or wealth in proportion to the cost of doing the job as war reparations before leaving? The idea of impoverishing your own country to benefit a country that is against you is so blatantly stupid that only a delusional liberal or a "compassionate conservative" neoconservative would want to carry it out.

Charles McD said...

"So far, I've not noticed any historical examples of Jewish groups gaining an advantage using violence as Jews. This is IMPORTANT."

Historically, the Torah & Bible are chock full of violence.

In more recent history, in most countries they are too few in number for that, they play behind the scenes, conceal what they do, use others as pawns to carry out the violence that needs to be done, and let them take the repercussions, such as using blacks as the muscle and face of left wing violence for their own gain in diversity acceptance, hate crimes legislation, loosening of immigration restrictions, etc.

In Israel on the other hand, they have numbers on their side, and modern Israeli history is filled with plenty of gains for the Jews from use of violence.

Anonymous said...

As one poster already mentioned, 9/11 was a direct consequence of the passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act.

Any future horrific terrorist attack on American soil would be a direct consequence of the passage of the 1965 Immigration Reform Act.

Everyone should keep the following in mind. A cabal of legal immigrants muslims-around seven of them-almost blew up the Twin Towers in Nov 9/11. How did the blind Muslim Holy Man form Egypt and his young associates manage to migrate to America legally? Well,as I mentioned previously, sociopathic traitors such as Peter King-with his F- voting record on immigration at the time(numbersusa data)-voted to let the blind Muslim Holy Man from Eygpt into America.

A lot more people should be pointing this out about the sociopathic traitor King.

But the ultimate reason why the 1993 attack on the Twin Towers and 9/11 attack occured is beause millions of White Amerians are in a brain state..or maybe a trance is a better word..where they are incapable of percieving obvious cause and effect relationships. It is this trance like state that allowed Jorge Bush to get away with bold-face lies about how "we have to be over there..or the muslim terrorists will come here and kill Americans" with not an eyebrow being raised. I don't understand this. Does anybody here undestand the psychology behind such obvious collective insanity?

none of the above said...

Anonymous:

You might want to google for "Irgun" and "Stern Gang" before continuing with that line of argument.

Leye Marin said...

Did anyone else consider that King may have been selected by elites because he has a record of being pro-immigration and siding with IRA terrorists? Who better than a Republican (who most won't equate with sympathetic to these causes) to allay suspicions of if a more sympathetic outcome is delivered than is deserved?

Average Jihadist said...

Having a terrorist like Peter King run hearings on terrorism tells the casual news viewer that the hearings are a joke, which is what I want. The last thing I want is for the USA to get serious about terrorism.

Anonymous said...

" occured is beause millions of White Amerians are in a brain state..or maybe a trance is a better word..where they are incapable of percieving obvious cause and effect relationships.'

I think white people are waking up in America. I was also in a trance like state on immigration,but am out if it now. But it's too late. There is no going back. America is no more.

The Anti-Gnostic said...

Just want to know. What the hell is wrong with "invading the world," as long as we get something out of it? ...

Because then we end up like all empires eventually do: broke, socialist and populated by our enemies.

Anonymous said...

Having a terrorist like Peter King run hearings on terrorism tells the casual news viewer that the hearings are a joke, which is what I want.



If you are under the impression that Peter King is a terrorist, it's you who are the joke.

Anonymous said...

as I mentioned previously, sociopathic traitors such as Peter King-with his F- voting record on immigration at the time(numbersusa data)-voted to let the blind Muslim Holy Man from Eygpt into America.

A lot more people should be pointing this out about the sociopathic traitor King.


Allow me to inject a small dose of reality into your ravings.

Omar Abdel-Rahman (the blind Muslim Holy Man in question) entered America on a tourist visa in 1990, in spite of his name being on a terrorist watch list. His presence in the US had nothing to do with King (who has a B from NumbersUSA) or any other member of Congress.

You sociopathic nutter.

Anonymous said...

Prior to 9/11,Peter Kings voting record on immigration was atrocious-F- grade from numbersusa.com. Since 9/11, there has been some slight moderation in his open borders extremism.


This is what is known as a "lie". King is and has been a solid voice on immigration related issues.

Anonymous said...

That said, the IRA has long supported anti-American terrorists. At the time King was using his office to support the IRA that organisation was providing expert training to those Arabs who were later sent out by Gaddafi to kill Americans.



Oh, bullshit. The IRA lacked the resources to offer support to other terrorist groups. It was the Soviets and their allies who provided support to the IRA and to the Arab terrorists.

Anonymous said...

"Then who should replace King in holding these hearings?"

Someone whose findings won't be tainted by the appearance of a conflict of interest.


And exactly what "conflict of interest" do you imagine King has?

Anonymous said...

Every few months, I read about some new terrorist plot involving Muslim immigrants. I don't blame the entire Muslim population for this, but terrorism doesn't come out of nowhere. For every terrorist, there are hundreds, maybe thousands, of sympathizers that are actively speaking against our country.

Why are we letting these people in? What purpose does it serve to have a large Muslim population of 2-3 million in our country?

Japan doesn't have any Muslim immigrants. In the context of this tsunami, would they be better off if Sendai and Tokyo were full of foreign Muslim immigrants?

Anonymous said...

Anon

Complete lie? Just go check out King's voting record on immigration prior to 9/11. I am not the liar, you are. A voting record worse than the loathsome beast Teddy Kennedy.

Peter King continues to vote for importing Muslim immigrants into America. He also continues to vote for both the H-1B and L-1B visa job thefy programs.

Peter King was, and is still is an enthusiast for the America destroying post-1965 immigration policy. He has a voting record that is consistent with monumental treason.

Anonymous said...

The truth about Congressman Peter King's voting record on Immigration is hard to swallow by Peter King's supporters.

After the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers in Nov 1993-came very close to knocking down the Twin Towers- by Omar Addel Rahman and his young associates, Congressman Peter King continued to vote for importing Muslim legal immigrants...just like he did when he got elected to the congress...9/11 was a direct consequence.

Congressan Peter King was a very public enthuiast for open borders. Back in the late 1990s in a letter to the editor of the NR expressed his contempt for the zenophobes in the Immigration Reform Movement. The homepage of his website-prior to 9/11-was openly pro-immigration(pro-open borders).

Congressman Peter King had, and continues to have, an America destroying voting record on immigration.

By the way, is King calling for a complete shutdown of all Muslim legal immigration? This is the American Patriot litmus test.

As I already mentioned, Peter King's pre-9/11 voting record was beyond-the-pale treason against America.

Vintage said...

To the anonymous who said, "As I already mentioned, Peter King's pre-9/11 voting record was beyond-the-pale treason against America."

Politics is the art of possible. Politicians are humans and nor saints. If King changed--even if he is not calling for a moratorium on Muslim immigration at this time--it's better than King holding the view that all immigrants are net positive to the U.S.

Also, he might be treasonous to his ethnic group but it's not state treason in legal terms. Suicide? Yes. After all, suicidal Jews are not the only ones bent on hurting their ethnic brethren.

Anonymous said...

As I already mentioned, Peter King's pre-9/11 voting record was beyond-the-pale treason against America.

As I already mentioned, you're full of crap.

After the terrorist attack on the Twin Towers in Nov 1993-came very close to knocking down the Twin Towers- by Omar Addel Rahman and his young associates, Congressman Peter King continued to vote for importing Muslim legal immigrants

Again, you're just making up lies for your own twisted reasons. I already pointed out that the "blind Muslim Holy Man" who you insisted was brought here by King was not in fact brought here by King. You have to yet to admit that this particular claim of yours was a lie. Do that and then we can move on to your other nonsense.

Congressman Peter King had, and continues to have, an America destroying voting record on immigration.

Yet another lie. Congressman Peter King continues to have a voting record on immigration which garnered a rating of B from NumbersUSA.


is King calling for a complete shutdown of all Muslim legal immigration? This is the American Patriot litmus test.

By all means, list for me all the Congressmen who are calling for a complete shutdown of all Muslim legal immigration. There's not a single member of Congress who passes your so-called "American Patriot litmus test". You're a raving lunatic.

Anonymous said...

Peter King either had a open borders voting record prior to 9/11 or he didn't? The evidence is indisputable-F- grade according to numnerus.com at the time- that prior to 9/11 Congressman Peter King voted for open borders. 9/11 was a direct consequence of Peter King's sociopathic and treasonous open borders voting record. His pre-9/11 voting record as documented by numbersusa.com was open borders. He was openly hostile to Patriotic Immigration Reform.

The first Twin Tower attack by legal muslim immigrants occured in 1993. Peter King was elected to office-replacing John Mrazack-in 1993 and went on to vote for an immigration policy that allowed Mohammed Atta and his gang of angry young Muslim Men into America....9/11 was a direct consequence. By the way, his pre-9/11 voting voting record on immigration showed an extreme hostility towards border enforcement.

Let's do an obvious counterfactual analysis imbued with good old common sense. Suppose Peter King has been elected to the US Congress in 1990. What can we resonably so his voting record would have been starting in 1990 thru to 9/11 2001? Well, it would have been the same treasonous voting record that he had from 1993 to 9/11 2001...open borders. He only moderated his extreme open borders voting record when two young NYC Firemen from two families in his congressional district-families who he was very close friends with-died in the Twin Towers. King obviously realized that his pre-9/11 voting record was potentially a very serious political liability.

Peter King was on Sean Hannity's show last week. King went to great lengths to praise the "good" Patriotic Muslim Americans. This is an example of Peter Kings new and improved B voting record:legal Muslim immigration full speed ahead. I have lost count of the number of attemped and succuesfull-Fort Hood massacre-Muslims "American" terrorists acts. And since I mentioned the Fort Hood Massacre, we have another example of how the treasonous and sociopathic voting record of Peter King has lead to the destruction of American lives on American soil.

This talk about "poltics is the art of the possible" when translated into English means this:full speed ahead with the demographic transformation of America-right on to racial minority status for White Americans. Congressman Peter King will continue to vote for racial minority status for White Americans. And this will end up being-by many orders of magnitude- more catastrophic than what happend in 1993,9/11 and at Fort Hood in Texas a year ago. If this isn't treason, then the word has no meaning.

Peter King, invade the world-invite the world.

Anonymous said...

Peter King either had a open borders voting record prior to 9/11 or he didn't? The evidence is indisputable-F- grade according to numnerus.com

NumberUSA DOES NOT SAY THAT PETER KING HAD AN F GRADE PRIOR TO 9/11!

I've pointed this out to you several times but you keep repeating the same stupid lie.

You also claimed that Peter King was somehow responsible for the "blind Muslim Cleric" entering the US. This is impossible, as I pointed out to you. And yet you still refuse to admit you were wrong about that.


9/11 was a direct consequence of Peter King's sociopathic and treasonous open borders voting record.

Again, this is both a lie and also insane. The 9/11 terrorists came here on student and tourist visas and overstayed them.


The first Twin Tower attack by legal muslim immigrants occured in 1993. Peter King was elected to office-replacing John Mrazack-in 1993

For one thing they were not "legal muslim immigrants" you demented lunatic. And for another, that Peter King must be some sort of miracle worker if can cause the WTC bombing within a few months of taking office. You might as well argue that 9/11 happened as a "direct consequence" of George W Bush being elected to office in 2001, nine months before the attack.


the same treasonous voting record that he had from 1993 to 9/11 2001.

He did not HAVE a "treasonous voting record" from 1993 to 9/11 2001, you frothing moonbat.


Peter King was on Sean Hannity's show last week. King went to great lengths to praise the "good" Patriotic Muslim Americans.

I'm still waiting for you to wipe the spittle from your lips and list for me all the Congressmen who oppose the "good" Muslims and want to end all Muslim immigration to America.


since I mentioned the Fort Hood Massacre, we have another example of how the treasonous and sociopathic voting record of Peter King has lead to the destruction of American lives on American soil.

So in addition to the first WTC bombing and 9/11, you now also think that Peter King is personally responsible for the Ft Hood shootings?

I suppose you also believe that Peter King rode a tank in the generals rank when the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank. You shouted out "Who killed the Kennedy's?" and after all, it was Peter King.

You are one of the sickest and most twisted people I've ever encountered on-line, and God knows, that's saying something.

Anonymous said...

Peter Kings voting record on immigration prior to 9/11 was atrocious. I remember looking at at numbersusa.com around 99-98. He voted in favor of every category pro-immigration legislation. I have no idea if numbersusa.com keeps a backlog of congressional voting records. But his record-pre-9/11 was one of the worst-if not the worst..at least Teddy Kennedy voted for the H-1 visa program.

But Peter King did for a wide open immigration policy that included a liberal policy on tourist visas and student visas. There is no evidence-zero-that he opposed handing out tourist visas and student visas. And there is a reason for this:Congressman Peter King had no problem with allowing as many nonwhite foreigners into the United States. Peter King-pre-911-was part of sociopathic and treasonous political culture in the Ciongress that reeked of massive enthusiasm for demographic transformation,ie;race-replacement. The fact that Mohammad Atta and his accociates were able to come and live in America is direct consequence of having a prexisting rapidly growing Muslim population in America. Peter King continues to vote for the expansion of the Muslim population in America. And as Brenda Waker shows in her vdare.com column this morning, Congressman Peter King shows not the slightest inclination to shut Muslim legal immigration down completely.

No matter how many times yo want to deny it, the blind Egyptian Holy Man and his young associates came into the country legally. And apparently you are too stupid to understand that the point of the thought experiment was to make a resonable inference-very resonable inference-about how Peter King would have voted on imigration in 1990.

So the question is Peter King vote for the expansion of Islam in America pre-9/11. Well, Islam did expand and it expanded because of open border enthusiasts in the Congress, and Mohammad Atta and associates were able to enter America because of sociopathic traitors in Congress such as Peter King. This makes Peter King and every other Republican and Democratic sociopath in the Congress mighty repsonsible for 9/11.

By the way, Peter Kings new shinny B voting grade from numbersuasa.com is still treasonous. His B grade essentially means rapidly exapanding the Muslim population and the nonwhite population through legal immigration. In other words, White Americans get race-replaced the legal way.

Peter King's race-replacement voting record will-with 100 percent certainty-dwarf what happened on 9/11. Nonwhites will be the majority in the military-highly armed and dangerous. So I'm going to assume that you too are on board with race-replacement.

Anonymous said...

Peter King is your typical run-of the -mill Republican Party Clubhouse party man. And these are the creatures who could give a hoot about the long term racial survival of White Americans in America.

Anonymous said...

This past Saturday was the annual Saint Patricks Day Parade in Bethpage. The parade of Irish Ameican marchers will make a left turn onto Central Avenue-right down the block from Saint Martin of Tours Catholic Parachial School-and march right past a new Mosque-right down the road from the Catholic school. Who voted for this?Why, Congressman Peter King..naturally...sociopathic treason in its full Republican Party Hack Glory.

Steve

Your newest post today about affordable family formation...

A Deli Owner in Bethpage told me about six years ago that his two teenage sons will never be able to afford to live in Bethpage-a quintessential blue collar American town if there ever was and home of Gruman Corp-because they can't compete with the Muslims in the Bethpage housing market...right in Peter King's congressional disrict of Nassau County..King knows this is going on, and thinks its just dandy(as we know from Brenda Walker's vdare.com post today)

Anonymous said...

By the way, Peter Kings new shinny B voting grade from numbersuasa.com is still treasonous. His B grade essentially means rapidly exapanding the Muslim population and the nonwhite population through legal immigration. In other words, White Americans get race-replaced the legal way.


You do realize that by this definition, 95% of the US Congress is made up of "traitors"? Along with the majority of the American people?


Mohammad Atta and associates were able to enter America because of sociopathic traitors in Congress such as Peter King.

Again, you need to start taking your meds, because this is what is known as a "lie". And the only sociopath around here is you.


Peter Kings voting record on immigration prior to 9/11 was atrocious. I remember looking at at numbersusa.com around 99-98.

I remember when they closed down all the psychiatric institutions and threw people like like you out on the street.


Peter King's race-replacement voting record will-with 100 percent certainty-dwarf what happened on 9/11.


Who knew that Peter King, little known Congressman from New York, possessed such immense influence?


There is no evidence-zero-that he opposed handing out tourist visas and student visas.

Ah hah! There you go! Zounds! Great Scott!

Of course there is also "zero evidence" that any other member of the US government opposed handing out tourist visas and student visas. But Captain Kangaroo here has stumbled on the dreadful truth - they were all under the influence of Peter Kings evil mind-control powers.

Anonymous said...

This past Saturday was the annual Saint Patricks Day Parade in Bethpage. The parade of Irish Ameican marchers will make a left turn onto Central Avenue-right down the block from Saint Martin of Tours Catholic Parachial School-and march right past a new Mosque-right down the road from the Catholic school.

And it's all Peter Kings fault!


A Deli Owner in Bethpage told me about six years ago that his two teenage sons will never be able to afford to live in Bethpage-a quintessential blue collar American town if there ever was and home of Gruman Corp-because they can't compete with the Muslims in the Bethpage housing market..

And it's all Peter Kings fault!