Today House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King held the first in a series of controversial hearings exploring "radicalization" and potential terrorism in the American-Muslim community. Media interest was so massive, members had to RSVP to attend the hearing.
Monday's New York Times editorial hit the nail on the head:
Not much spreads fear and bigotry faster than a public official intent on playing the politics of division.
Politicians like King (and plenty others at the hearing - highlights after the jump) should not use their public office legitimize discrimination and exploit prejudice. Our public servants should protect the entire public, not embolden bigotry by targeting one segment of the public based on race and religion.
Civil rights and civil liberties groups, registered their serious concerns about infringement on First Amendment freedoms of religion and speech, and 56 lawmakers wrote to Chairman King objecting to the hearings.
The Washington Post pointed out how interesting it is that former Irish Republican Army-supporter King leading the charge on investigating Muslim-Americans for terrorist ties.
Bush-era CIA & NSA director General Michael Hayden voiced support for the hearings on Washington Journal on Tuesday (not surprisingly now that he's making his money in the Chertoff Group), describing the hearings as a "logical consequence" of the "new flavor of threat" of radicalization.
At today's hearing King warned that
to back down would be a craven surrender to political correctness.
King's mulish determination to hold these hearings begs the question: How much progress have we really made since 1963 when then-Alabama Governor George Wallace told us , "segregation today, segregation tomorrow, segregation forever" and stood stubbornly in the University of Alabama doorway to prevent African American students from entering? Politicians today are using anti-Muslim rhetoric that echos the anti-civil rights rhetoric spewed over 40 years ago, and they were out in full force at today's hearing.
Rep. Frank Wolf (VA) railed against the Council on Islamic-American Relations (CAIR), told us the FBI was not doing enough against radicalization, and indicated he would propose legislation to great a special team to investigate radicalization (a dangerous prospect, when targets for radicalization investigations will likely be based on protected First Amendment activities of religion and speech).
Rep. Mike Rogers of Alabama asked witnesses how the Muslim Community to better "self-police." (Since when is the entire Muslim community responsible for making sure all of its members of law-abiding?)
Rep. Paul Broun of Georgia warned that
there are entities in this country supporting jihadists [and] political correctness is the enemy of those who want to destroy this country
Not to worry though, Broun reassured us that
no one on this side of the aisle is an Islamophobe.
Rep. Jeff Duncan of South Carolina is concerned about the threat of "Sharia" law on the Constitution, is "outraged" that the Obama administration refuses to signal out "the enemy," but also assured us that
No one is attacking Islam.
(George Wallace gave similar assurances in his 1963 gubernatorial inaugural speech: "We want jobs and a good future for BOTH races.")
Rep. Candice Miller of Michigan lectured about how we need to condemn "hateful" words from "extremists" and in the same breath defended Michigan's demanding that Muslim women remove Hijabs for driver's license photos saying,
equal rights for all, special rights for none.
(She failed to mention that these hearings give a "special right" to the entire Muslim community: the "right" to be targets of congressional investigation).
How far our civic leaders haven't come was no more obvious than at a protest against a recent Muslim charity fund-raising event in Orange County, California. Protesters shouted at those entering things like "not welcome" and "Muhammad was a pervert." Local politician Villa Park Councilwoman Deborah Pauly drew laughs and cheers telling the crowd of protesters:
As a matter of fact I know quite a few marines who will be very happy to help these terrorists to any early meeting in Paradise
What purpose do statements like Pauly's (from U.S. politicians) serve, other than as propaganda for actual terrorist groups? It is not "caving to political correctness" to demand that our public servants speak with care, encourage understanding, and condemn prejudice, rather than exploiting intolerance and fear for political gain.
However, there is hope. Several congresspeople have articulated the same concerns as the civil liberties community. Laura Richardson (CA) compared the King hearings to the McCarthy hearings, saying the only difference is these hearings are televised in color. Rep. Yvette Clarke (NY) called the hearing "great congressional theater" and compared it to reality TV. And watch Rep. Keith Ellison's (MN) heart-wrenching, moving testimony describing a young Muslim-American who heroically gave his life for this country on 9/11. If only all Congresspeople so compassionately saw things clearly.