Rep. King is Saying 'No' in the Face of Jesus

I think the racial/ethnic/cultural issue is drummed up. Again I note that Islamic radicals have been responsible for the most terror-related deaths in this country. This is irrespective of their race/ethnicity/culture.

That you have to put "Christian" in quotes is interesting. Yes, we here don't consider them good Christians, but I think there's more to it than that. I think that their actions were less about their faith than their suspicion of the government taking away their guns or perceived freedom. They happened to claim Christianity as their professed religion, but their actions were not related to it. They wouldn't consider less (or not at all) "Christian martyrs" and more "freedom fighters". Big difference compared to those who killed 3000 in one day.

Actually, I believe there IS commonality between them all. And, except for September 11, I think the number of people killed by home-grown terrorists is greater than that of Islamic terrorists. The Timothy McVeigh-type of terrorism IS just as much of a threat. In fact, until September 11, the Oklahoma City bombing had killed the largest number of Americans on native soil. And I think it is the Timothy McVeigh-type of terrorists who are most active and most dangerous in our land today.

These hearings are nothing but a sideshow witch-hunt - a sideshow witch-hunt being hypocritically conducted by a known terrorist sympathizer Congressman, to boot.

Also big difference between those who killed 3000 in one day and the beliefs of the totality of the Muslim population.

You are advocating targeting an entire religious group, and holding that entire group to a completely different standard than we hold ourselves - notice how you "opt-out" the Timothy McVeighs and Neo-nazis from your own group?

It is just wrong to target American Muslims as if, by dint of their religion, they are somehow automatically less patriotic, less "American," and less trustworthy than Christian citizens.

We tried attacking easily-identifiable domestic targets already - Japanese-Americans during WWII.

Look how that turned out for us.

This is the same thing. Attacks by a majority motivated by irrational fear and prejudice towards a minority.

That is NOT what we are supposed to be about, either as a nation or as a church!

NPR reports this morning regarding the arrest of a terrorist who planted a backpack bomb at Spokane's MLK Day parade (fortunately it was discovered before it went off).

Islamic terrorist?

NO!

Neo-Nazi terrorist!

No, Patricia, Kevin Harpham had ties to the "white supremacist" movement, which up here in the Pacific Northwest is mostly "Christian Identity" groups.

And did you hear about the family of settlers in the West Bank who were slaughtered? The five-member Fogel family in the Itimar settlement north of Nablus? Probably Arab/muslim terrorists, right?

Wrong. Neighbors report that Mr. Fogel refused to pay 10,000 shekels in wages which he owed an Asian worker he hired. The worker threatened to kill the settler and his family. And it appears that he did.

Of course that's not being reported in the mainstream western media ~ people are left to assume that it was part of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, just another day in the life of the "Islamic terrorists" spreading out everywhere on the planet.

Here's a rather insightful video on this existential threat to everyone's existence ...

I think that their actions were less about their faith than their suspicion of the government taking away their guns or perceived freedom.

The way evangelical Christianity is disseminated these days, especially in the "sticks" and in the South, they are very much intertwined.

BTW, 93 percent of Muslims opposed the actions of their fellow Muslims on 9/11.

You are basing your entire argument about "killing more people" upon the September 11 attacks, which were carried out NOT by domestic terrorists, but by FOREIGN terrorists.

I don't think it is honest of you to conflate foreign and domestic terrorism to try to justify this McCarthy-esque "investigation" of Muslim Americans.

If you want to talk about DOMESTIC terrorism and DOMESTIC terrorist acts, please stop using a FOREIGN TERRORIST incident as your "evidence."

If you compare apples to apples, the other domestic terror groups have been, and continue to be, our greatest threat.

So, yes, I would support an investigation into domestic terrorism -if it were conducted by someone other than a known terrorist-sympathizer, and if it actually focused on domestic terrorism - ALL domestic terrorism - instead of being a witch-hunt.

I believe I have been making that distinction when I refer to Muslim or Islamic "extremists". I am simply not painting with as broad a brush as you believe I am. I am not calling all Muslims less patriotic. I am not suggesting in the slightest that all Muslims should be treated like the Japanese during WWII.

I *am* noting the undeniable fact that Muslim extremism is makeing a huge impact on the US and the world with its violence directed at perceived infidels, many victims being in the Muslim faith themselves. This is not irrational fear; this is looking at the numbers and seeing a credible threat.

The assumption by you of irrational fear and/or prejudice on my part or the part of anyone sincerely concerned about that credible threat is why we can't seem to have a calm discussion about the facts.

I live in Atlanta, and I don't recognize that brand of Christianity, myself. There's a lot of broad-brush-painting going on here.

BTW, 100% of Muslims killed by radicals in their own religion oppose the actions of their fellow Muslims on 9/11 and on other dates.

These hearings are not about foreign terrorists. They are about domestic terrorists - that is the parameter that Rep King has set, and that is the point you seem to be missing. Or ignoring.

I've been curiously unsilent on this. In case you missed it, here it is again.

Regarding that, I don't know, but I wonder if his support for the IRA was for its aims but not its means. Still, even if he was supportive of their means, you seem to attack him for supporting terrorism, and also attack him for investigating terrorism. One could at least say he's moving in the right direction, but apparently there's no pleasing you, is there?

DPayton, how about a few hundred years of genocide against native Americans, whom Bryan Fischer of the American Family Association says lost the continent because of their godlessness? Lynchings, bombings and other attacks against African Americans? Bombings and assassinations related to abortion? Hate crimes against glbt? Many of the neo-Confederate, neo-Nazi, anti-gay groups claim to base their hatred on Christian/Biblical beliefs.

Yes, it would be nice - perhaps if Rep King had not insisted on limiting the *target* of his investigation to Muslims, and perhaps if Rep King had not insisted upon such a public platform, and perhaps if Rep King had not himself advocated violence and terrorism in his support of the IRA, we could have that discussion without the motive questioning.

But, if it looks like a duck, and walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, it's probably a duck, despite the fowl's insistence that it is something else, and despite demanding that all those duck-like qualities be ignored, set aside, and not even mentioned.

Rep King is NOT a person who should be even remotely involved in investigating terrorism, especially as long as he continues to support and justify terrorism:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/wa...

http://www.thedailyshow.com/wa...

Yes I know it's a "comedy show" - would you like to dispute the facts, or the words from Rep King's own mouth?

You'd prefer these hearings be held in secret?

Interestingly enough, I first detected the roots of that brand of Christianity in a church in suburban Atlanta in 1980, when I was a student at Tech.

BTW, 100% of Muslims killed by radicals in their own religion oppose the actions of their fellow Muslims on 9/11 and on other dates.

And -- ?

"If you want to make unequal equivalences, have at it."

Equal rights for all are predicated upon unequal equivalences.

I'll watch these at some point in the near future, I promise you. But what I'll note is that you're getting your news and views from John Stewart's comedy show. See this link of when he appeared on Crossfire:

http://politicalhumor.about.co...

Perhaps to get a laugh, but he doesn't take himself or his show too seriously, and I'd suggest you take that advice.

But I'll watch the videos.

Which would make sense if the topic was "equal rights". It is not. It's about identifying and dealing with a major source of terrorism.

will you provide a follow up article on the content of the hearings and analyze if they were productive and helpful or bigoted and anti-muslim?

Considering you seemed to paint evangelical Christianity with a very broad brush as generally supporting such acts, I daresay that you'd be quick to detect such "roots of that brand". Nevertheless, fair enough. I would think (and, in fact, I do believe) that in the intervening 30 years, things have changed for the better down here. I would be interested in knowing the particular church you refer to.

And -- ?

And what? And all I was saying was that the targets of Muslim extremists also include Muslims themselves, so I'm not painting all Muslims with the same brush, and noting that Muslims should be (and are, I believe) just as concerned about this. If Christians were trying to blow up planes for the cause of Christ, you bet I'd be concerned about the state of my religion.

al-Qaeda's primary aim is to create an Islamic caliphate. It's a religious motivation. Please don't try to insinuate that it's just a good government urban renewal program.

If corrupt, repressive regimes go in the process, that's a collateral win. But if they take out non-corrupt, non-repressive regimes, well, whatever.

Hmm It seems from the tone of your posts that the USA was a "corrupt, repressive regime" in 2001.

How would you classify it now?

Considering you seemed to paint evangelical Christianity with a very broad brush as generally supporting such acts, I daresay that you'd be quick to detect such "roots of that brand".

If you must know, it was Grace Evangelical in College Park; truth be told, it was the first time I had ever experienced anything like that. Also, from what I saw in those days, evangelicals generally did support that agenda up until the 1990s; it's still prevalent in their media. (I'm an evangelical myself, so I found myself swimming upstream for the longest time.)

As for Muslims, I had said on another thread that 93 percent of Muslims actually opposed terrorism. al-Qaeda was actually pushed out of Iraq for a time; a lot of folks over there got tired of the bloodshed because, as I heard Thomas Friedman say a few years ago, "Terrorists always overplay their hand."