Nanker Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Peter King - no, not THAT Peter King, opens up House hearings on the radicalization of Muslims in this nation. To combat this threat, moderate leadership must emerge from the Muslim community. As the majority and minority staff of the Senate Homeland Security Committee concluded in its report on "Violent Islamist Extremism and the Homegrown Terrorist Threat," "Muslim community leaders (and) religious leaders must play a more visible role in discrediting and providing alternatives to violent Islamist ideology." Thank gosh he doesn't have the only word. "I'm reminded of someone, a proverb, now quoted by Sheila Jackson Lee, cleaning a dirty kitchen, you can't clean it with dirty water," Jackson Lee, who has a reputation for being one of the most difficult bosses on the Hill, said at the beginning of her five-minute rant. "There are [sic] no redeeming factual information that we will receive today that can add to the abhorrence that all of us have on terrorism in the United States of America. We don't disrespect the witnesses, at least I do not, but you see, it has already been tainted, this hearing. There are no loud signs of reasonings [sic] that are coming through this hearing. The reason is because it has already been classified as an effort to demonize and to castigate a whole broad base of human beings. I cannot stand for that." Jackson Lee then reached for a copy of the U.S. Constitution. "I brought with me the Constitution, the living, breathing document. The First Amendment allows us the freedom of religion. The freedom of association and expression," she said. "But I will tell you today, that this breathing document is in pain." Idiot's delight. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KD in CA Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 That's child's play compared to what I've read on this board. At least he didn't say gang rape was a tenet of Islam. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Rep. Keith Ellison cried on the floor when talking about a Muslim EMT that was killed on 9/11. Touching story Mr. Ellison but what does it have to do with these hearings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Rep. Keith Ellison cried on the floor when talking about a Muslim EMT that was killed on 9/11. Touching story Mr. Ellison but what does it have to do with these hearings? I saw that video all over every news website I looked at. Look at this Muslim, weeping during his testimony. It's so touching. It's so human. He's really speaking from the heart! But the minute a Republican sheds a tear, he's mocked as "Weeper of the House." The media's in rare form these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 11, 2011 Author Share Posted March 11, 2011 You forget that Ellison was speaking from the heart and opening up his soul and that Republicans have neither heart nor soul as defined by the loony left. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 You forget that Ellison was speaking from the heart and opening up his soul and that Republicans have neither heart nor soul as defined by the loony left. Of course they don't. Everyone knows that. But I still want to know what a Muslim EMT dying during 9/11 has to do with the issue of radicalization of Muslims in the US? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Of course they don't. Everyone knows that. But I still want to know what a Muslim EMT dying during 9/11 has to do with the issue of radicalization of Muslims in the US? Because of the implicit assumption that when talking about Muslims you're talking about radicals...therefore, when you're talking about radicals, you're talking about all Muslims. Hence, King's hearings (which were a waste of time, but anti-extremism and not anti-Muslim, as King repeatedly tried to emphasize) were thus portrayed as being anti-Muslim, which therefore prompted people to bring evidence to the hearing to prove King "wrong". Short version: the purpose of the hearings were warped, because people are idiots. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chef Jim Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Because of the implicit assumption that when talking about Muslims you're talking about radicals...therefore, when you're talking about radicals, you're talking about all Muslims. Hence, King's hearings (which were a waste of time, but anti-extremism and not anti-Muslim, as King repeatedly tried to emphasize) were thus portrayed as being anti-Muslim, which therefore prompted people to bring evidence to the hearing to prove King "wrong". Which is all we've heard but we've very little if nothing about the evidence that people brought to the hearing to prove King is right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Which is all we've heard but we've very little if nothing about the evidence that people brought to the hearing to prove King is right. Because the hearing wasn't even about Islamic extremism, ultimately. Everyone morphed it into a self-referential hearing on the validity of the hearing. Like I said, silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 (edited) I saw that video all over every news website I looked at. Look at this Muslim, weeping during his testimony. It's so touching. It's so human. He's really speaking from the heart! But the minute a Republican sheds a tear, he's mocked as "Weeper of the House." The media's in rare form these days. well, there is a distinction between Boehner and Ellison and that is that Boehner has publically wept on more than a few occassions, I'd say his weeping is fair game for the peanut gallery. Edited March 11, 2011 by Magox Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted March 11, 2011 Author Share Posted March 11, 2011 well, there is a distinction between Boehner and Ellison and that is that Boehner has publically wept on more than a few occassions, I'd say his weeping is fair game for the peanut gallery. Agreed. Are the hearing"s" over? Wouldn't that have been a single hearing? If so, Tom's right again. Didn't do much. Oh well, perhaps they can begin looking into the NFL and NFLPA negotiations with their newly found spare time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 When does Senator McCarthy arrive for the hearings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Keukasmallies Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Just imagine anyone giving credence to anything Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee says or does? Someone must have told her that what she was holding was the Constitution, not her bus pass.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ieatcrayonz Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 When does Senator McCarthy arrive for the hearings? Whenever his head gets to the bottom of the flight of congressional stairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted March 11, 2011 Share Posted March 11, 2011 Whenever his head gets to the bottom of the flight of congressional stairs. You know when you won't think someone's head rolling down a flight of stairs is funny? ...yeah, neither do I. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
outsidethebox Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 I just had an image of Sheila Jackson Lee's head rolling down a flight of stairs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GG Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Jenny McCarthy is a Senator? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wacka Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Thing is, the USSR files have shown that McCarthy was right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gene Frenkle Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 Thing is, the USSR files have shown that McCarthy was right. Yes, if anything, the fall of communism proved that McCarthy's crusade against freedom of ideology correct and justified. The fall of witchcraft certainly justified all of those burnings in Salem as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RkFast Posted March 12, 2011 Share Posted March 12, 2011 (edited) EEEEVVVVVILLLLLL Pete King made poor Keith Ellison cry!!! EEEEEEEEEVIL PETE KING!!!!!!! I liked the idiot Senator who said that these hearing will rile up the extremists and cause more terrorism, thus proving Pete King correct and the hearings necessary and valid. Edited March 12, 2011 by RkFast Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts