Apparently, the failed Peter King hearings weren’t enough for the Democrat dhimmis in the Senate. They felt compelled to counter the King hearings with their own, and the result makes the flaccid King hearings look like a vicious attack on Islam never before seen.
The Senate hearings, chaired by Dick Durbin, and co-chaired by Republican Lindsay Graham-in other words, two Democrats, took place earlier this week, and the witnesses called to testify were either hard core Muslim advocates, or the aforementioned dhimmis, those that have bowed to Islam and look to bring the rest of us down that path. That included the disgraceful New York Cardinal that stood with the clowns that wanted to build a victory mosque at ground zero. He also bragged about how closely he works with ISNA, a Muslim Brotherhood front group. Or the parent group. Yes, the confusion is intentional.
C-Span has the hearings if you can take it, but I’ll just highlight the main points-as I see it. We know what Durbin would say, and he did, shamelessly slobbering over Islam, and making them seem like saints in the making. Graham’s remarks were a little more conservative (I know, a non-sequitor, Graham/conservative), but watered down nonetheless. He lauded Durbin, and said he would stand with him in defending Muslims. He even cited thousands of Muslims currently serving in the military ranks. Not sure where he got those numbers, and even if they are accurate, Maj. Nidal was a high ranking Army officer. So what was your point, Lindsay?
Graham repeatedly said that the problem in Islam was a small radical minority. The numbers don’t back up the small part, but these folks were just talking, not backing up their assertions. Then he went completely off the rails and talked about how we need to help the rebels in Libya fight Gadhafi, and what a wonderful thing it was for Egypt to have fallen the way it did. Apparently, he didn’t get the memos that al-Qaida and Hezbollah are fighting in Libya, and the Muslim Brotherhood is positioned to take over in Egypt. Well, he heard about it; he just doens’t believe it. You can’t convince me, I think his exact words were. Well, he did say that he stood with his buddy Dick Durbin. Indeed.
Most of the hearing consisted of contrived statements from the likes of Thomas Perez, a hack from the Justice Department that gave a crocodile teary account of marginalized Muslims that just tore his heart out. Yeah. He also mentioned that he and his gang travel the country aggressively pursuing civil rights violations. We just have to assume that the complaints of bigotry towards Muslims has nothing to do with the Justice Department actually seeking out those scenarios. He was just a hack with a script though. The part that got me was near the end.
Testimony also came from Farhana Khera, head of Muslim Advocates, yet another Islam imposing hate group. This is the same group that balked and bitched to the Justice Department at the way the would-be Christmas Tree bomber in Oregon was captured. They saw it as entrapment. The rest of us saw it as many Oregonians still alive as a result. This is the same group that implores all Muslims not to speak with law enforcement without an attorney. I find that odd as well, unless there’s a reason you would need an attorney…
In a way too long, rambling statement, Khera also said that the founding fathers envisioned Islam as part of American society. You can’t make this up.
“. . . it is clear that the Founding Fathers thought about the relationship of Islam to the
new nation and were prepared to make a place for it in the republic.”
She wasn’t worth listening to, because you can just use your imagination and know what her rhetoric would be. The interesting part was near the end, in an exchange with John Kyl. It was softball questioning, but Khera couldn’t-or wouldn’t answer even the most basic questions. She couldn’t. Durbin’s hearing would have gone up in flames.
Kyl asked if the Muslim Advocates or their website condemned violent rhetoric or hateful speech aimed at other religious groups. Simple question, right? Did you condemn that kind of head chopping hate speech or not?
Khera started in with some kind of background BS-Kyl stopped her right there. He let her know what she already knew, that his time for questioning was limited. Her background would certainly have used up his time. She blathered her organization stood for this and that-but she never answered the question. Kyl asked again. She asked for specfics. Kyl was getting a little frustrated. She refused to answer the question. Of course we already have the answer, don’t we?
He then asked if she would condemn death threats against writers and others that criticize Islamic extremism. You would condemn that, wouldn’t you? He asked. Once again she squirmed. She started to blather about the First Amendment, but Kyl brought her back on course. She finally conceded that killing someone for their political or religious views was inappropriate. You think?
He finally asked about the website spiel about not talking to law enforcement. She stands by that, but at the same time talked about how happy Eric Holder was with Muslim cooperation in terror cases. ‘Nuff said.
The hearings were meant as a love-in for Muslims, but with an impossible to defend ideology, the truth oozed out of the rhetoric at different points. What we can expect is more Muslim advocacy in Congress, at the expense of your own liberties and free speech. It seems so cut and dry. We have the Koran-their field manual, we know what they’re going to do, yet these people sit here and say pay no attention to the Imam behind the curtain. Dick Durbin and his fellow dhimmis obey as if they are hypnotized. We have the book. We know what they believe, we know what they are required to do. And the more balkanized communities we allow to flourish in the United States, the more Keith Ellisons we’ll have in Congress. You think Obama, Holder, Napolitano and rest are bad? Wait until Muslim Advocates start installing some of their own.