|

New chairman of House Homeland Security Committee has ties to terrorists

 peter_king-300×300.jpg

If a Democrat with connections to terrorist groups was named chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, conservatives would be howling to the high heavens.

Ah, but Peter King (above) is a Republican. And the terrorists with whom he’s been cozy ostensibly are Christians.

Interesting facts about King’s background can be found HERE and HERE and HERE.

Share:

16 Comments

  1. The terrorists he supported are Christian and to my knowledge have never vowed to destroy the US.

  2. The Democrats named one as President of the United States, and not a peep from liberals…go figure. Hypocrites!

  3. hokumboy

    doc,
    Being Christian and not vowing to destroy the US may make them no threat to the US, but it certainly doesn’t make them any less terroristic.

    Marine,
    just which President are you referring to, and in what way has he been found a terrorist?

  4. Neftali

    If hokumboy had his way, the United States would still be known as British colonies, and Europe will be divided up between Germany and the Soviet Union. All war is evil ya know, and nothing good ever comes from it.

  5. Orlando Clay

    Neftali writes: “All war is evil ya know, and nothing good ever comes from it.”

    Oh, I don’t know about that. After all, you Bush worshippers promised us that the “cakewalk” into Iraq would result in cheaper oil prices and the spread of democracy throughout the Middle East. The “cakewalk” would cost no more than $1B (and that would be paid for by the oil profits) and no more than 150 American lives would be lost (El Rushbo’s bold prediction during the first days of “Shock and Awe”). And that’s exactly the way it all turned out, right?

  6. hokumboy

    Net,
    When did I say that?
    Many of the US’s wars were more than justified. Many were not.
    I served, and served honorably in a war I didn’t think justified. But I did my duty to my country and served.
    Did you?

  7. First of all thank you to Pat for linking to my post on Peter King.

    Second to expdoc – muslims, christian or otherwise – if you are against terrorism you are against terrorism – you can not say that because one is so called Christian they are somehow okay. Tell that to the 1000′s of innocent’s the IRA targetted during their 30 year tenure.

  8. Is the department of homeland security a charitable organization whose stated goal is to stamp out terrorism every place it is found in the world? If that’s the case then they need to get a new marketing person and rename themselves.

  9. expdoc: Three things:

    1) We’re talking about the Homeland Security Committee of the U.S. House, not the Department of Homeland Security.

    2) That committee should not be headed by a guy who has played patty-cake with an organization that’s been labeled a terrorist group by one of our closest allies (namely, Britain).

    3) What difference does it make that the terrorist organization at issue here is ostensibly Christian? Does that somehow absolve that organization of its terrible crimes? After all, this organization has killed innocent people, including children.

  10. Neftali

    Orlando (in response to #5 above)- You and Jerry Critter really need to get your facts straight.

    The original cost of the Iraq war was estimated at $74 Billion to fight the war, which was based upon a 6 month conflict. (This NY Times link states $50 to $60 Billion, but Mitch Daniels personal records state it at $74 Billion)

    http://www.nytimes.com/2002/12/31/politics/31BUDG.html?scp=1&sq=mitch%20daniels%20and%20iraq%20and%20the%20cost%20bumiller&st=cse&pagewanted=print

    Not sure where you came up with the idea that it would only cost $1 Billion. There definitely wasn’t any claims from the Bush administration it would be paid for by oil profits.

  11. Neftali: You’re wrong in your argument that “there definitely wasn’t any claims from the Bush administration it [the war in Iraq] would be paid for by oil profits.

    The war costs borne by the United States have included tens of billions of dollars for reconstruction of Iraq. But the Bush administration told us that those costs would be covered by oil revenues.

    In 2003, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz said this in testimony before a congressional committee:

    “The oil revenue of that country could bring between 50 and 100 billion dollars over the course of the next two or three years. We’re dealing with a country that could really finance its own reconstruction, and relatively soon.”

    In 2004, President Bush said this:

    “One year after the liberation of Iraq, the revenues of the oil stream is pretty darn significant. One of the things I was concerned about, prior to going into Iraq, was that the oil fields would be destroyed, but they weren’t. They’re now up and running. And that money is — it will benefit the Iraqi people. It’s their oil, and they’ll use it to reconstruct the country.”

    Even before the war started, White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said that Iraq “is a rather wealthy country. … And so there are a variety of means that Iraq has to be able to shoulder much of the burden for their own reconstruction.”

    Also before the war started, a Washington think tank prepared a report commissioned by the Pentagon. The report recommended that oil funds be used to defray the costs of a military occupation in Iraq.

  12. John.Wilson

    I am with you Peanut (I pronounce it like Al Grace)

    Posted on Saturday, January 14, 2006 3:14:06 PM by Khashayar

    Few terrorists groups garner the bipartisan endorsement and support that Iran’s Mujahedin al-Khalq Organization [MKO] has. On October 20, 2005, several congressmen and many aides attended a briefing in Congress. Maryam Rajavi, co-leader of the group and self-styled president-elect of Iran, addressed the gathering by video from France.[1] She received a warm reception. Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) thanked “Sister Maryam.”[2] A bipartisan group of U.S. Congressmen have signed petitions calling for the U.S. Department of State to lift its 1997 classification of the group as a terrorist organization.[3] In an April 8, 2003 interview, Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-Fla.), chairwoman of the House International Relations Committee’s Central Asia and Middle East Subcommittee said, “This group loves the United States. They’re assisting us in the war on terrorism; they’re pro-U.S. This group has not been fighting against the U.S. It’s simply not true.”[4] Ros-Lehtinen is wrong. Unfortunately, hers is a mistake common to some on the left and the right who care deeply about Iranian freedom but fail to understand the nature of a group which, in public, says the right things about freedom and democracy but, in reality is dedicated to the opposite. Maryam Rajavi and her husband Masud are adept at public relations and adroit at reinvention, but the organization over which they preside eschews democracy and embraces terrorism, autocracy, and Marxism.

    http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1558191/posts

  13. “3) What difference does it make that the terrorist organization at issue here is ostensibly Christian? Does that somehow absolve that organization of its terrible crimes? After all, this organization has killed innocent people, including children.”

    Well Pat, I was just parroting back what you emphasized in the lead to the post. Why does it matter to you what religious persuasion a terrorist organization claims (falsely I might add).

    What matters to me, and what should matter to the department of HOMELAND security, is the stated aims of the terrorists in regards to the HOMELAND.

  14. Bush Derangement syndrome has just been declared an official disease by CMS. Although there is no known cure for those exhibiting the classic signs of this terrible mental affliction, at least supportive therapy will be reimbursed in the future.

  15. john.wilson

    Peanut (I pronounce it like Al Grace),

    No I agree that Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) and others from her party are also terrorist.

  16. Neftali

    Iraq has held free elections since 2005. They have a government with several divisions similar to our own. For the first time all major religious sects have a say in the legislative process. Iraq is no longer run under fear of a military regime. The facts are undeniable, Iraq is a much better country thanks to George W. Bush.

    And Peanut and many liberals don’t like it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

CAPTCHA Image

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>