• Pro-IRA Rep. soon to become chairman of Homeland Security Committee
    35 replies, posted
[quote=CBS News] Republican Rep. Peter King of New York plans to hold hearings in Congress next year on the "radicalization" of Muslim communities, his office confirmed to the Hotsheet. As first [URL="http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/17/nyregion/17king.html"]reported[/URL] by the New York Times, King is planning to hold the hearings once he takes up the chairmanship of the House Homeland Security Committee. He says the hearings are planned in response to complaints from law enforcement officials that Muslim leaders have been uncooperative in terror investigations. "When I meet with law enforcement, they are constantly telling me how little cooperation they get from Muslim leaders," King told the Times. "It is controversial. But to me, it is something that has to be discussed." The hearings come at a time of increased concerns about "homegrown" Muslim terrorists - along with persistent fears that innocent Muslims have been unfairly targeted since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks. Muslim leaders told the Times they have strong concerns about King's proposed hearings. "We are disturbed that this representative who is in a leadership position does not have the understanding and knowledge of what the realities are on the ground," said Abed A. Ayoub, the legal director for the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. He added that King's proposal "has bigoted intentions." A [URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20016593-503544.html"]CBS/ New York Times poll[/URL] released in mid-September showed that as many as 20 percent of Americans said they have negative feelings toward Muslims because of the September 11 terrorist attacks. In September, anger over the role of Muslims in the United States came to a head [URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/11/national/main6856614.shtml"]over the so-called "Ground Zero mosque,"[/URL] an Islamic community center that organizers wanted to construct a few blocks away from the site of the 2001 terrorist attacks in New York. "We need to make sure that we stand for civil liberties, so we can deprive people like Osama bin Laden of the claim that Muslims are poorly treated in America," Rep.Keith Ellison (D-Minn.), the first Muslim member of Congress, [URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/09/12/ftn/main6858738.shtml"]said on CBS' "Face the Nation"[/URL] at the time. "The United States is not at war with Islam." King was one of the leaders who opposed the building of the Islamic center, and he has been [URL="http://tpmmuckraker.talkingpointsmemo.com/2010/09/the_war_on_sharia_started_long_before_you_ever_hea.php"]criticized before[/URL] for what critics say amounts to inflating the risk Muslim leaders in the U.S. pose. National Security experts do acknowledge that the risk of "homegrown" terrorists has increased. "There is a risk of Americans seeing something in the al Qaeda worldview," National Counterterrorism Center director Michael Leiter [URL="http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20024590-503544.html"]said on CBSNews.com's webshow "Washington Unplugged." [/URL] That risk has increased this year, he said, though he added, "I think it's still too early to say that we have a trend." Leiter stressed that the Muslim American community is diverse and a part of every aspect of life in the United States. "It has been only a tiny, tiny percentage of Americans -- increasingly more this year, but still a tiny percentage of Muslim Americans -- who have for a variety of reasons found appeal in this al Qaeda ideology," he said. King told the New York Times he would invite Muslim leaders to his planned hearings. [/quote] [quote=Wikipedia] [B]Support for the IRA[/B] King has "spent years openly supporting the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism"]terrorist[/URL] [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irish_Republican_Army"]Irish Republican Army[/URL]."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-SalonIRA-16"][17][/URL] In the 1980s, King frequently traveled to [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland"]Northern Ireland[/URL] to meet with [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Provisional_Irish_Republican_Army"]IRA[/URL] members.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-2005-nysun.com-11"][12][/URL] According to [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scotland"]Scottish[/URL] journalist [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alex_Massie_%28journalist%29"]Alex Massie[/URL], "[o]n his travels to [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland"]Northern Ireland[/URL], King would stay with members of the IRA and spend his evenings in IRA drinking clubs, soaking up the atmosphere and, I dare say, enjoying the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Craic"]craic[/URL]."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-Massie-17"][18][/URL] In 1982, speaking at a pro-IRA rally in [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nassau_County,_New_York"]Nassau County[/URL], [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York"]New York[/URL], King said: “We must pledge ourselves to support those brave men and women who this very moment are carrying forth the struggle against British [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Imperialism"]imperialism[/URL] in the streets of [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belfast"]Belfast[/URL] and [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Derry"]Derry[/URL].”[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-2005-nysun.com-11"][12][/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-18"][19][/URL] He called the IRA "the legitimate voice of occupied [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland"]Ireland[/URL]."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-Massie-17"][18][/URL] A Northern Irish judge ordered King ejected from the former's courtroom, describing him as “an obvious collaborator with the IRA”.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-2005-nysun.com-11"][12][/URL] He became involved with [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NORAID"]NORAID[/URL], an organization that the British, Irish and US governments accuse of financing IRA activities and providing them with weapons.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-2005-nysun.com-11"][12][/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-19"][20][/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-20"][21][/URL][URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-21"][22][/URL] He was banned from appearing on British TV for his pro IRA views and refusing to condemn IRA activity in the UK.[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-2005-nysun.com-11"][12][/URL] In 2000, he called then-presidential candidate [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_W._Bush"]George W. Bush[/URL] a tool of "[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Catholic"]anti-Catholic[/URL] bigoted forces," after Bush visited [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bob_Jones_University"]Bob Jones University[/URL] in [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/South_Carolina"]South Carolina[/URL], "an institution that is notorious in [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ireland"]Ireland[/URL] for awarding an honorary doctorate to [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Ireland"]Northern Ireland[/URL]'s tempestuous [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protestant"]Protestant[/URL] leader, [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ian_Paisley"]Ian Paisley[/URL]."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-2005-nysun.com-11"][12][/URL] In 2002, King "condemned as 'irresponsible' congressional hearings investigating links between the IRA and the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colombia"]Colombian[/URL] terrorist-group [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FARC"]FARC[/URL]. King claimed that the hearings were rigged and subject to a 'pre-ordained agenda' despite ample evidence demonstrating that the IRA was offering bomb-making and explosives training to the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FARC"]FARC[/URL]."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-Massie-17"][18][/URL] He stopped supporting the IRA after being offended by Irish public opposition to the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003_war_in_Iraq"]invasion of Iraq[/URL],[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-2005-nysun.com-11"][12][/URL] labelling it as begrudgery rather than suspicion of and opposition to the war. That same year, however, King told a reporter that "'we shouldn't rush to be too sanctimonious' about the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murder_of_Robert_McCartney"]murder of Robert McCartney[/URL] in a [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belfast"]Belfast[/URL] pub."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-Massie-17"][18][/URL] In 2008, King spoke in defense of bail for a fugitive IRA member, Pól Brennan, who had escaped from prison in the UK and been detained in [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas"]Texas[/URL] 15 years later. The IRA member, who had broken out of prison during the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maze_Prison_escape"]Maze Prison escape[/URL] and entered America illegally,[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-22"][23][/URL] was being held without bail after his work permit expired; King said: "My experience dealing with (Irish) republicans is that they don't jump bail in this country. They honor their commitments."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-23"][24][/URL] King's support for the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IRA"]IRA[/URL] has lead him to be labeled "The [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Terrorism"]Terrorists[/URL]' Man in [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington,_D.C."]Washington[/URL]" and "America's worst Congressman."[URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_T._King#cite_note-Massie-17"][18][/URL][/quote] So there you have it, folks. We're going to have a Homeland Security chairman [B]WHO FUCKING SUPPORTED TERRORIST...[/B] But, what if you took "IRA" and replaced it with "Hamas"? Well, to put it lightly, he'd be thrown in prison. FUCK I FORGOT! It's only MUSLIMS that are terrorist, not white Christians! Thank you swing voters, you now got your fucking Republican America.... Source: [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20026083-503544.html[/url]
oh my word a hypocritical republican
[QUOTE=Habsburg;26771555]oh my word a hypocritical republican[/QUOTE] Those are impossible to come by, I know.
While I'm by no means a fan of Peter King, you realize that he stopped supporting the IRA, right? [quote]He stopped supporting the IRA after being offended by Irish public opposition to the invasion of Iraq,[12] labelling it as begrudgery rather than suspicion of and opposition to the war. That same year, however, King told a reporter that "'we shouldn't rush to be too sanctimonious' about the murder of Robert McCartney in a Belfast pub."[18][/quote] And it can be argued that the original 1920s IRA was not a terrorist organization, but a rebel group fighting for freedom. Only in the 70s and later did some of the splinter groups turn into terrorist organizations.
[QUOTE=Prismatex;26771566]While I'm by no means a fan of Peter King, you realize that he stopped supporting the IRA, right? And it can be argued that the original 1920s IRA was not a terrorist organization, but a rebel group fighting for freedom. Only in the 70s and later did some of the splinter groups turn into terrorist organizations.[/QUOTE] Still hypocritical of him
[QUOTE=Prismatex;26771566]not a terrorist organization, but a rebel group fighting for freedom.[/QUOTE] It depends on whose side you're on. That's something I've noticed with terrorist groups, they are essentially freedom fighters. The American colonists? Terrorists. [editline]18th December 2010[/editline] If something similar to the Boston Tea Party occurred today, it'd be considered terrorism.
This is kinda where I find it stupid. I don't have a problem with terrorism and if he's mingled with them enough to know about them, what's the problem? Terrorists are like any paramilitary in that they fight for a cause. You don't put it into black and white of Terrorist or no, it's about is the cause they are fighting for just. The IRA was fighting against British Occupation and wanted independence which they weren't going to give up easily, quite a noble cause. The Taliban is fighting for the promotion of Islam throughout the world and to enforce their religious beliefs on everyone, fucked up fundamentalism. I know the IRA isn't always like that and the Taliban have many members fighting for the Liberation of Afghanistan from the US but they are cause based, not tactic based. An IRA member would have as much in common with a Taliban member as a normal Irishman and an Afghani.
I'm going to state a huge contradiction, but politicians do not belong in the government. 4 our of 5 are corrupt in some way and only work toward making more money or gaining more power and don't give a shit about making their country or world better. I really hope people wake the fuck up and overthrow this shitty fucking excuse the US calls a government. There is no democracy, only an illusion of one. Hell even if their was a democracy, things would be just as bad. Most voters are fucking morons thanks to the media (who it seems has strong ties to the government and pushed the focus off real world issues by distracting the world with stupid shit) and think that some fucking celebrity getting nailed by some douchebag is more important than real global issues such as environmental degradation, health care, current political tensions between countries, etc. I can't wait until the day some alien race comes to our planet and tells us that we are fucking idiots. However even then I doubt we would listen. As "intelligent" as the human race is, we are awfully fucking stupid and ignorant.
[QUOTE=JaxJesse315;26771715] If something similar to the Boston Tea Party occurred today, it'd be considered terrorism.[/QUOTE] I'm pretty sure that if a bunch of guys got drunk, dressed up like Squanto, and dumped tea into the ocean, it would be considered vandalism, not terrorism.
To be clear there are like 5 Irish Republican Armies. The Provisional Irish Republican Army is the one King supports/supported.
[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;26771790]I'm pretty sure that if a bunch of guys got drunk, dressed up like Squanto, and dumped tea into the ocean, it would be considered vandalism, not terrorism.[/QUOTE] Vandalists.
[QUOTE=JaxJesse315;26771715]It depends on whose side you're on. That's something I've noticed with terrorist groups, they are essentially freedom fighters. The American colonists? Terrorists. [editline]18th December 2010[/editline] If something similar to the Boston Tea Party occurred today, it'd be considered terrorism.[/QUOTE] It's kinda off because both can be considered Freedom Fighters and Terrorists. It's also hard to differentiate from Guerrillas and Terrorists but I think the main difference is Guerrillas attack military targets, Terrorists attack civilian targets. Something like that which is an intentional attack on civilian trade by a non-government organisation would probably be considered Terrorism on a large scale and vandalism on a small scale.
My Granddad's friend was once stopped by a band of IRA members while on a bus. They took everyone on the bus outside and shot them dead.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;26771928]My Granddad's friend was once stopped by a band of IRA members while on a bus. They took everyone on the bus outside and shot them dead.[/QUOTE] A lot of Afghanistan veterans say that one of the easy ways to know when there's a bomb is that there's no civilians around. A lot of them are kind enough to tell the people when they are doing that so they're not all bad.
[QUOTE=Thom12255;26771928]My Granddad's friend was once stopped by a band of IRA members while on a bus. They took everyone on the bus outside and shot them dead.[/QUOTE] So your grandfather's friend was the only survivor?
[QUOTE=Master117;26771783]I'm going to state a huge contradiction, but politicians do not belong in the government. 4 our of 5 are corrupt in some way and only work toward making more money or gaining more power and don't give a shit about making their country or world better. I really hope people wake the fuck up and overthrow this shitty fucking excuse the US calls a government. There is no democracy, only an illusion of one. Hell even if their was a democracy, things would be just as bad. Most voters are fucking morons thanks to the media (who it seems has strong ties to the government and pushed the focus off real world issues by distracting the world with stupid shit) and think that some fucking celebrity getting nailed by some douchebag is more important than real global issues such as environmental degradation, health care, current political tensions between countries, etc. I can't wait until the day some alien race comes to our planet and tells us that we are fucking idiots. However even then I doubt we would listen. As "intelligent" as the human race is, we are awfully fucking stupid and ignorant.[/QUOTE] angsty teen alert
[QUOTE=Habsburg;26771689]Still hypocritical of him[/QUOTE] A republican tends to be one who wants to reform a government through force; much like a rebel. Him stopping to support them when they stop being rebels sounds reasonable to me.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;26771753]This is kinda where I find it stupid. I don't have a problem with terrorism and if he's mingled with them enough to know about them, what's the problem? Terrorists are like any paramilitary in that they fight for a cause. You don't put it into black and white of Terrorist or no, it's about is the cause they are fighting for just. The IRA was fighting against British Occupation and wanted independence which they weren't going to give up easily, quite a noble cause.[/QUOTE]So it's OK to kill innocent civilians as long as you're "fighting for a cause" (against an occupation). I'd love you to say that about Hamas
[QUOTE=Prismatex;26771566]While I'm by no means a fan of Peter King, you realize that he stopped supporting the IRA, right? And it can be argued that the original 1920s IRA was not a terrorist organization, but a rebel group fighting for freedom. Only in the 70s and later did some of the splinter groups turn into terrorist organizations.[/QUOTE] One of the few people in this thread who has actual knowledge of the IRA ^ I myself lived around them for 11 years, and I can safely say that yes the modern IRA are pretty much a paramilitary terrorist organisation, that includes the RIRA, the CIRA, The low-fat IRA and the I can't believe it's not IRA (Bad joke). But please realize that 1970's-1990's NI was a horrible place, one of the reasons I went south was because of the shit that Catholics had done to them on a regular basis. The police force at that time (RUC) was full of bigoted thugs and corrupt to the core, both the Protestant and Catholic community had to be separated because of sectarian violence and it was a sorry state of affairs, a lot of the young volunteers in the IRA joined because of the discrimination and civil rights violations going in. In the 70's in particular the Irish government had to send the army to the border to protect the Catholic's and nationalists coming over the border to safety. They set up defensive positions encase of loyalist paramilitary attack or even the British army, medical stations were also set up for the refugees, it was that bad. I honestly can't blame the IRA at this time they were a product of violence and as such that was all they could understand. The IRA may be terrorists today but don't forget that they were created because of breaches of human rights and horrible violence. Also on another note the IRA of the 1920's was not a terrorist organisation at all, they were soldiers of the provisional government and the ancestors of the modern day defense forces, theres no debate on that subject.
[QUOTE=Dr. G;26774847]So it's OK to kill innocent civilians as long as you're "fighting for a cause" (against an occupation). I'd love you to say that about Hamas[/QUOTE] Nope. Not really OK to kill innocents intentionally or recklessly and that's not the only way to deal damage to the civilian populace. Towards the end the IRA was doing some good shit blowing up expensive buildings in London with cheap fertiliser car bombs. Killed a few civilians obviously but that wasn't the aim. Civilians will die in a struggle like that, it's inevitable. If their cause is really worthy though, they can't allow the threat of collateral damage to stop them from fighting tyranny. It's not black and white, kill civilians or don't, every fight has a cost and they should judge whether the evil they are fighting is better than what they have become. Also in relation to Hamas, their main goal is not liberation of their land, it is belligerence of Israel and an eventual takeover. Quite different from the IRA or even some Afghani fighters who merely want an end to US occupation (not the best course of action but they are horribly uneducated so there's tolerance for that).
[QUOTE=Tunak Mk. II;26771790]I'm pretty sure that if a bunch of guys got drunk, dressed up like Squanto, and dumped tea into the ocean, it would be considered vandalism, not terrorism.[/QUOTE] do you know how much that tea was worth? millions of dollars when you account for inflation
[QUOTE=staticman;26771515]So there you have it, folks. We're going to have a Homeland Security chairman [B]WHO FUCKING SUPPORTED TERRORIST...[/B] But, what if you took "IRA" and replaced it with "Hamas"? Well, to put it lightly, he'd be thrown in prison. FUCK I FORGOT! It's only MUSLIMS that are terrorist, not white Christians! Thank you swing voters, you now got your fucking Republican America.... Source: [url]http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_162-20026083-503544.html[/url][/QUOTE] white christian militias fighting white christian occupiers Where's the terrorism?
[QUOTE=Thom12255;26771928]My Granddad's friend was once stopped by a band of IRA members while on a bus. They took everyone on the bus outside and shot them dead.[/QUOTE] You know, that seems unlikely. What purpose would that possibly serve to an organization fighting for the people, in their words. I'd appreciate it if in the article they'd specify which branch of the IRA he sympathized with. It could be possible he supported the disarmament process. If there ever were a case for the axiom "One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter" it'd be the IRA in my opinion. I also wouldn't be surprised if this article is biased given how largely Protestant the upper class in the US is. I mean, Worst Congressman Ever? I disagree. There have been worse if you ask me.
One man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter. Back in the US revolution, the Continental Army was a group of terrorists. But to the residents of the colonies, they were fighting for independence.
In this thread, people mix up a terrorist, someone whose actions are met to create fear in a society, with a militant, who fights on a front though may not be supported or under the control of a government. al-Qaeda: Terrorists Taliban: Militants old IRA: Militants New IRA: Terrorists
The IRA were strange as shit. Like when the Northern Bloc guys (SAS division) drove past some IRA members funeral, They got pulled out by a mob of hundreds and beaten to death
[QUOTE=xXScoutXx;26803022]The IRA were strange as shit. Like when the Northern Bloc guys (SAS division) drove past some IRA members funeral, They got pulled out by a mob of hundreds and beaten to death[/QUOTE] Yeah theres a story behind that, A few people who the British sas thought were armed IRA operatives were in Gibraltar and they gunned them down in front of a load of people, turned out they had no weapons on them. When the funeral came round a group of soldiers from the Royal Signals corps turned up in a car, its debatable why they turned in to the funeral procession, some say they took a wrong turn. But that does not explain why they were armed and in plain cloths, we will never know. But the croud did not take kindly to the interruption, and were fearful of another funeral Loyalist attack by Michael stone started jeering and getting rowdy, when the two soldiers pulled their guns it got violent and they ended up getting killed. Sad state of affairs really, pointless deaths.
[QUOTE=Devodiere;26774979]Nope. Not really OK to kill innocents intentionally or recklessly and that's not the only way to deal damage to the civilian populace. Towards the end the IRA was doing some good shit blowing up expensive buildings in London with cheap fertiliser car bombs. Killed a few civilians obviously but that wasn't the aim. Civilians will die in a struggle like that, it's inevitable. If their cause is really worthy though, they can't allow the threat of collateral damage to stop them from fighting tyranny. It's not black and white, kill civilians or don't, every fight has a cost and they should judge whether the evil they are fighting is better than what they have become. Also in relation to Hamas, their main goal is not liberation of their land, it is belligerence of Israel and an eventual takeover. Quite different from the IRA or even some Afghani fighters who merely want an end to US occupation (not the best course of action but they are horribly uneducated so there's tolerance for that).[/QUOTE] I can't see how bombing a shopping centre is a good thing. That isn't fighting for a cause - it is causing mass damage and the loss of civilian lives to invoke terror in a populance, exactly what the IRA were hoping for, so that the populance in this case would force the UK Government to pull out of NI. Sounds like terrorism to me.
[QUOTE=Mabus;26803352]Yeah theres a story behind that, A few people who the British sas thought were armed IRA operatives were in Gibraltar and they gunned them down in front of a load of people, turned out they had no weapons on them. When the funeral came round a group of soldiers from the Royal Signals corps turned up in a car, its debatable why they turned in to the funeral procession, some say they took a wrong turn. But that does not explain why they were armed and in plain cloths, we will never know. But the croud did not take kindly to the interruption, and were fearful of another funeral Loyalist attack by Michael stone started jeering and getting rowdy, when the two soldiers pulled their guns it got violent and they ended up getting killed. Sad state of affairs really, pointless deaths.[/QUOTE] Somebody else reads Andy mcnab don't they
[QUOTE=xXScoutXx;26805582]Somebody else reads Andy mcnab don't they[/QUOTE] Who? everybody in the north knows that story.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.