Ellison Watch... part deux
Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) has been named to the House Judiciary Committee. Ellison said in a statement: “I look forward to pursuing a progressive agenda in the committee, including the restoration of American citizen’s civil liberties that have come under increasing attack over the past six years.”
The American citizens Ellison, the nation’s first Muslim congressman, has in mind are likely Muslims who charge that they have been subjected to unjust scrutiny and inconvenience in the aftermath of 9/11. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) shares this view: she has announced her intention to “correct the Patriot Act,” and wants to criminalize scrutiny of Muslims at airports and elsewhere: “Since September 11, many Muslim Americans have been subjected to searches at airports and other locations based upon their religion and national origin. We must make it illegal.” Helping make it illegal with Ellison on the House Judiciary Committee will be John Conyers (D-MI), the new chairman of that committee. “The policies of the Bush administration,” he has declared, “have sent a wave of fear through our immigrant communities and targeted our Arab and Muslim neighbors.”
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26388
I thought we were targeting them so that they wouldn't target us.
What were the Democrats thinking - putting Ellison on the Judiciary Committee? He could have done much more damage on the Committee for Homeland Security, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, or the House Armed Services Committee.
Representative Keith Ellison (D-MN) has been named to the House Judiciary Committee. Ellison said in a statement: “I look forward to pursuing a progressive agenda in the committee, including the restoration of American citizen’s civil liberties that have come under increasing attack over the past six years.”
The American citizens Ellison, the nation’s first Muslim congressman, has in mind are likely Muslims who charge that they have been subjected to unjust scrutiny and inconvenience in the aftermath of 9/11. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA) shares this view: she has announced her intention to “correct the Patriot Act,” and wants to criminalize scrutiny of Muslims at airports and elsewhere: “Since September 11, many Muslim Americans have been subjected to searches at airports and other locations based upon their religion and national origin. We must make it illegal.” Helping make it illegal with Ellison on the House Judiciary Committee will be John Conyers (D-MI), the new chairman of that committee. “The policies of the Bush administration,” he has declared, “have sent a wave of fear through our immigrant communities and targeted our Arab and Muslim neighbors.”
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=26388
I thought we were targeting them so that they wouldn't target us.
What were the Democrats thinking - putting Ellison on the Judiciary Committee? He could have done much more damage on the Committee for Homeland Security, the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, or the House Armed Services Committee.
And I didn't realize that American Muslims had been subjected to unjust scrutiny and inconvenience. Well that changes everything! And this "wave of fear through our immigrant communities" can't be good.
I think we can all be grateful that the Democrats finally "get it" and intend to protect young males of Middle Eastern descent from the terrible evil that is America.
13 comments:
Let me get this straight, you are saying that if an American citizen follows the Islamic faith, then he forfeits his rights?
This kind of vitriolic bigotry and hatred is sickening.
You have my pity. I can't imagine what is to live in such sad, small world of fear and loathing.
Malott,
I see you've progressed to "vitriolic bigotry and hatred." I think we all knew it was just a matter of time... you small, small man.
I suppose you should take some small measure of comfort, however, in the fact that you have Mr. Mclefty's pity. Maybe that will get you through the self-loathing and depression that will inevitably result from the reassessment of your life that you must surely now be undertaking.
Here's my opinion, center mclefty, for what it's worth:
If pasty white women between the ages of 20 and 40 were hijacking planes with the intent to destroy America, and the government decided that they were going to make a point of doing extra screening of all pasty white women who fit that profile who wanted to fly, then fine.
I fit that profile. Go ahead and search my belongings...I don't have a thing to hide. I have nothing to worry about and I don't have a chip on my shoulder that believes that my government is racist, therefore they are targeting me. I understand that this is not only for the security of our country (all of us), but also for my own security. It's really that simple.
The Muslim population, or at least the whiners we hear about in the news, have a chip on their shoulder with regard to America. (Of course, there are always exceptions to this.) It's as if their race and/or religion should make them untouchable. The fact that the American government would engage in profiling upsets their sense of privilege and angers those who wish to be offended by everything.
Those muslims who are here in America to be Americans first understand why the muslim population is being scrutinized. I daresay they even agree with and encourage compliance with these tactics. Those who want be muslim above all else and who do not want to be American, but rather who wish to take our abundance and disregard our culture, are the problems. They're here for an entirely different purpose.
And now I'm quite certain that I fit into your category of hateful and biggoted as well.
Christina,
You pasty white women are all the same: irrational, hate-filled bigots who think that mild-mannered suicide bombers should have their right to privacy in public places infringed.
I'll bet you're a Christian too. Pathetic. You narrow-minded, intolerant, Bible-thumping, racist, Islamophobic, hate-monger. It's no wonder the radical Islamic world wants to kill us. All they want is for us to convert to Islam or die (well, that and the extermination of Israel, but that's a given). Is that so hard? Why can't we all just get along? Jeez, if it wasn't for white pasty women like you, this world would be a lot safer.
How does it feel to live in Malott's "sad, small world of fear and loathing?"
I've always liked pasty white women... maybe because I'm a pasty white man.
Trying to put myself in the equation... How about if there was a guy my size and coloring that was messing with kids at a local park. The fact that I'm also single would probably make me a candidate. If the police came to my home and questioned me I would be embarrassed, and maybe it wouldn't be fair - but I would want to cooperate with the authorities so that I could be "ruled out" and they could more effectively go after the bad guy... But I certainly wouldn't selfishly "make it all about me" and get a lawyer or something.
Civic-minded American Muslims would have the same attitude about airport security.
Ellison is the kind of American Muslim that puts his personal pride and "rights" above the safety of families that fly. And I just can't respect that.
Odd that this discussion would happen on this particular day.
---------------
First they came for the Jews
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for the Communists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a Communist.
Then they came for the trade unionists
and I did not speak out
because I was not a trade unionist.
Then they came for me
and there was no one left
to speak out for me.
Pastor Martin Niemöller
----------
You people can revel in your McCarthy-like paranoia. I'd rather not live in world where I have to give up every single freedom and right in the name of "security."
First they killed some Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they killed some moderate Muslims, and I did not speak out because I was not a Muslim.
Then they killed some American soliders, and I did not speak out because America probably provoked them somehow.
Then they killed innocent men, women and children, Americans and non-Americans alike on 9/11, and I did not speak out because, after all, who am I to question their religion?
When others sought to call attention to the evil that threatened, I called them hate-filled bigots, taking solace in my belief that to confront reality would be to surrender my freedoms.
And then they came for me...
-Anonymous
First they killed some Jews, and I did not speak out because I was not a Jew.
This has been going on for centuries. The Israelis stick up for themselves.
Then they killed some moderate Muslims, and I did not speak out because I was not a Muslim.
You can't stop religous insanity.
Then they killed some American soliders, and I did not speak out because America probably provoked them somehow.
Blame Bush for this one. He's the one that sent them foolishly into battle, to look for WMDs that didn't exist. He's the one that is tossing American servicemen around like tin soldiers.
Then they killed innocent men, women and children, Americans and non-Americans alike on 9/11, and I did not speak out because, after all, who am I to question their religion?
I thought this happened before the wonton disregard for American soldiers. Anyway, this also happened on Bush's watch.
Terrorists = radical Muslims
Muslims do not = terrorists.
Bottomline, Malott in his first post is encouraging the denial of the basic freedoms and rights to AMERICAN citizens based soley on their ethic or religous background.
And his BS arguement about "messing around with kids" doesn't fly. I don't think he'd be as accomadating if they came to his house everytime a child was molested or if they threw him in jail and six months (or three years) and then said "Oh, we were wrong. You can go."
"I thought this happened before the wonton disregard for American soldiers. Anyway, this also happened on Bush's watch."
As just one example, try the USS Cole... on Clinton's watch.
Your flippant responses, however, do more to illustrate my point (and the tenuous nature of yours) than you likely realize.
"Bottomline, Malott in his first post is encouraging the denial of the basic freedoms and rights to AMERICAN citizens based soley on their ethic or religous background."
Where, exactly, is Malott encouraging that? If you think he is doing so by suggesting that it is more appropriate to ask a young male of Middle Eastern descent to submit to closer scrutiny at an airport than an 87 year old African-American grandmother of 7, then I guess we have a different view of what constitutes our "basic freedoms and rights."
There is a difference between discrimination and common sense.
Everyone just back off C-mac, he and his kind will be the first to go when "they come" and I for one will not speak up because I am not a "lefty."
So, center mclefty, what kinds of things would you propose to keep this country safe from further terror attacks? How would you secure the airlines? What is your plan for dealing those "Terrorists [who] = radical Muslims"? (By the way, we agree on this point, not all muslims are terrorists and no one here is suggesting that.) How do you plan on allowing the rest of America their freedoms without cowtowing to and infringing upon the feelings and "freedoms" of muslims in America?
I'm not trying to be sarcastic here, I'm really curious...do you have better plans?
Chris
"Part deux"? Are you giving in to your French roots?
I think Center McLefty hit on that very point by mentioning your "small world of fear and loathing." It's so French.
Come back from the Dark Side...
"I am not talking about banning things but I think they do a disservice to their sisters in other parts of the world where there isn't such choice. If they were in Afghanistan, they would have been forced. To be able to make a choice is fine, but I think to adopt that as a badge of pride is assisting the oppression of women who don't have a choice."
-Salman Rushdie about wearing of veil by western Muslim women.
A quote I liked.
Post a Comment