The American Spectator : Fixating on Rep. Peter King’s ‘Islamophobia’

A Further Perspective

Fixating on Rep. Peter King’s ‘Islamophobia’

By on 3.28.11 @ 6:06AM

Leftist utopians have never wanted to admit serious threats to
liberal democracy, whether from Soviet Communism during much of the
20th century, or the Nazi-Fascist-Japanese militarist alliance of
70 years ago, or in more recent years from jihadist Islam. The
denial is odd, because the enemies whose good will the leftist
utopians adamantly insist upon would, if empowered, almost
certainly prioritize the suppression and eradication of these very
same leftist utopians. 

A recent example as been the Religious Left groups enraged
at New York Congressman Peter King’s hearings on radical Islam in
the U.S. According to these critics, the hearings are McCarthyite
and echo the interment of West Coast Japanese Americans during
World War II. Any suggestion that domestic radical Islam might pose
a security risk is portrayed as an assault against all Muslim
Americans.

Cleverly, when recently pressed by a Washington
Post
reporter about church groups criticizing him, Congressman
King dismissed them as “School of the Americas” types who would “be
against me anyway.” True enough. His reference was to religious
leftists who for decades have campaigned against U.S. Army training
at Fort Benning, Georgia for Latin American military officers.
Ostensibly, it is a “School of the Assassins” where the U.S.
military teaches colleagues from the south in the ways of
authoritarian repression. That campaign caught a second wind in the
1990s after the discovery of some dusty “torture” manuals at the
school.

The booklets were mostly relics from the 1960s, available
at the school for only several years, and possibly never used. Out
of over one thousand pages, two dozen or so sentence fragments were
deemed offensive, including one cryptic reference to procuring
information “involuntarily.” Hence they became “torture” manuals.
The manuals were hastily sequestered, undoubtedly more frequently
read by the school’s zealous critics than ever by any students
there. And the school even changed its name partly to mollify
opponents. But the angry protests continue, even though Latin
America’s old rightist regimes are long gone. Many of the aging
protesters, including the defrocked Maryknoll priest who leads them
by literally living outside the gates of Fort Benning, are
left-over fellow travelers of the Sandinistas and Salvadoran FMLN
guerillas of the 1980s. They are still frustrated that Castro-style
revolution never swept Latin America, for which they doubtless
blame the school. Even Hugo Chavez’s rants, and Daniel Ortega’s
return to power in Nicaragua, have not brought them
happiness.

By citing the School of the Americas zealots, Congressman
King aptly captured the myopic, fringe nature of his religious
critics. One such critic, the Faith and Public Life Institute,
denounced King for not realizing he is opposed by a “broader faith
community” that is showing a “unified front on the issue of
religious discrimination and bigotry.” King was reminded that an
“attack on one faith is an attack on all faiths,” which has
galvanized “diverse faith leaders” to implore him to “instead
pursue investigations that protect American values and our national
security interests.” These “faith leaders” of course have not
typically articulated what America’s “national security interests”
are, since many of them are pacifist. And most of them, as
utopians, do not recognize significant national security threats.
In their view, America’s violent enemies are primarily victims of
U.S. injustice understandably crying out for redress. Apologies,
mediation, and billions in economic aid would salve their
wounds.

The “broad” religious coalition against Congressman King
(my assistant Eric LeMasters reported on their press
conference
here)
is primarily the National Council of Churches and its affiliated
Mainline Protestant groups, all of them declining, plus Evangelical
Left fixture Jim Wallis and deposed National Association of
Evangelicals lobbyist Richard Cizik, who later found a patron in
George Soros. Almost none of the protesting groups, except Cizik
years ago before he turned leftward, have for decades expressed
significant interest in America’s safety. Instead, nearly all have
aggressively adopted an extreme multiculturalism refusing to admit
even proudly self-described jihadist Islam as a threat. Any
insinuations to the contrary evince “Islamophobia.” Evidently,
terrorists ardently animated by their brand of Islam are simply to
be called extremists, without reference to their motivating
religious impulse, no matter how many millions globally may follow
it.

King’s hearings have included U.S. Muslims who warned
about radical Islam’s threat to their own families, mosques and
communities. One witness, from the American Islamic Forum for
Democracy, lamented about jihadism: “We can close our eyes and
pretend it doesn’t exist, we can call anyone a bigot or Islamophobe
for even talking about it.” Of course, King’s Religious Left
critics prefer exactly this ostrich approach, emphasizing all
Muslims as victims, and deriding all critics of radical Islam as
bigots and xenophobes. Ironically, these self-proclaimed mostly
Christian defenders of American Muslims, by portraying them chiefly
as victims, while insisting that radical Islam poses no threat, are
only making American Muslims more vulnerable to inroads by
jihadists. “I know that I also was deeply moved by their
testimony,” the chief of the National Council of Churches
grudgingly admitted about witnesses at King’s hearings who
testified of radical Islam’s impact on their own families,
including a father whose jihadist son shot up an Arkansas U.S. Army
recruiting station. “I don’t doubt the reality of
their experience.”

But Religious Left utopians would prefer to ignore that
“experience” in favor of their own dreams of an imaginary world
without conflict. 


Letter to the Editor

Religious “Leftists” would usher in the likes of Castro, Hugo Chavez, and Daniel Ortega.. not to mention radical Islam. They’re certified nuts.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s