Friday, March 11, 2011

Peter King Should Be Lauded

As far as I know, the American public supports King’s efforts. I don’t know what Wapo is talking about. As far as investigating extremism in other religions, that would be a complete waste of time since there is not a threat coming from other religions. I refuse to succumb to political correctness and pretend that islam doesn't present a specific danger.

I didn't see the program but I heard that Megan Kelly came down hard on Peter King. If this is what we are getting even from FOX, then what hope do we have of defeating our enemies? King is courageous just for holding these hearings at all, but even he caved in and withdrew Robert Spencer, Ayan Hirsi Ali, Steven Emerson and Walid Pharis from testifying under pressure from CAIR.


Via Israpundit:
Peter King vs. the American public
By Robert P Jones, WaPo

Rep. Peter King (R-N.Y.), chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, will begin holding hearings Thursday on “the extent of the radicalization of American Muslims.” Ibrahim Hooper, spokesman for the Council on American-Islamic Relations, has characterized the hearings as “a witch hunt.” Are they?

King also has said he believes the “self-radicalization” of American Muslims represents “a very small minority” of the overall community. What are the potential consequences of singling out one religious group?

As the congressional hearings on the alleged radicalization of Islam approach, one key question is how Rep. Peter King’s justifications for holding the hearings stack up to what the American public thinks about Islam and the place of American Muslims in society. The recent PRRI/RNS Religion News Survey, to date the only barometer for public opinion on the hearings, gives us a window into the differences between King and the public. The poll, conducted by Public Religion Research Institute in partnership with Religion News Service, reveals that while a majority (56%) of the public may think the hearings are a good idea, they don’t see eye-to-eye with Rep. King on his justifications for the hearings.

King sees the singular focus on Muslims as justified and has dismissed calls to broaden the hearings as “political correctness at its worst.” But an overwhelming majority of the public say the hearings should be broadened to focus on religious extremism wherever it may be found rather than focusing on Muslims alone.

King:

In the face of mounting calls by Muslim and other religious groups to broaden the hearings, Mr. King responded, “I totally reject that. That, to me, is political correctness at its worst…. I’m not going to dilute the hearings by including other extremists.”

The American public:

More than 7-in-10 (72%) Americans believe Congress should investigate religious extremism anywhere it exists and not just focus on the American Muslim community. Support for this broader approach is strong across political and religious affiliation groups, including 77% of Republicans, and 73% of white evangelicals.

This is a loaded question. If people are directly asked the hypothetical question as to whether “religious extremism should be investigated wherever it exists” of course you would expect the respondents to agree. In reality religious extremism resulting in terrorism is only coming from the muslim community. This poll result means absolutely nothing. Despite wapo’s spin, I don’t see any evidence that the American public is at odds with Peter King regarding these hearings.

King has asserted that there is “insufficient cooperation” with law enforcement on the part of the American Muslim community. But the public is divided.

King:

Asked about a recent report saying that 40% of cases involving terrorist plots were the result of tips from the Muslim-American community, King reasserted that he believes there has been “insufficient cooperation.”

The American public:

While the PRRI/RNS poll did not ask directly about cooperation with law enforcement, the poll found that the public is divided on the question of whether American Muslims are doing enough to combat extremism. A plurality (46%) say American Muslims have not done enough to oppose extremism in their communities, but one-third disagree, and 1-in-5 say they are unsure.

So it seems the American public is largely actually in agreement with King on this matter regardless of wapo’s attempt at spin. Read the rest

5 comments:

Ex-Dissident said...

So of us do not want to face the monster. Others think they are safer being friendly with the monster. Only a few will fight.

Ex-Dissident said...

"So" was meant to be Some.

NormanF said...

Arab Nazi murders five Jews sleeping in the home in Israel - a husband, wife, child, toddler and baby in the cradle.

Your Day In the Religion Of Peace and Peaceableness!

Esther said...

Conservatives never learn.

In a futile attempt to lessen criticism of him, King declined to allow the testimony of Steve Emerson, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, and Wafa Sultan...three compelling experts on Islamic terrorism.

A lot of good it did him. Liberals smeared him as an Islamophobe anyway.

The moral of the story is that whether you are fighting the jihadists who seek to annihilate Western Civilization by force or their liberal allies who seek to bankrupt it, there is no benefit to pulling your punches.

They will attempt to stifle all dissent, so if you are going to dissent at all, you may as well make your strongest case without trying to appease them.

LEL said...

Right again Esther.