• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP Congressman: ‘Increase Surveillance’ of Muslim Community

Rocketman

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Nov 10, 2012
Messages
5,660
Reaction score
1,252
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Peter King sees the attacks in Massachusetts this week as a wake-up call to local law-enforcement authorities to increase their surveillance and awareness of potential terrorists.

“Police have to be in the community, they have to build up as many sources as they can, and they have to realize that the threat is coming from the Muslim community and increase surveillance there,” the New York Republican congressman tells National Review.

“We can’t be bound by political correctness,” adds King, who chairs the House subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. “I think we need more police and more surveillance in the communities where the threat is coming from, whether it’s the Irish community with the Westies [an Irish-American gang in New York City], or the Italian community with the mafia, or the Muslim community with the Islamic terrorists.”

GOP Congressman:
 
Peter King sees the attacks in Massachusetts this week as a wake-up call to local law-enforcement authorities to increase their surveillance and awareness of potential terrorists.

“Police have to be in the community, they have to build up as many sources as they can, and they have to realize that the threat is coming from the Muslim community and increase surveillance there,” the New York Republican congressman tells National Review.

“We can’t be bound by political correctness,” adds King, who chairs the House subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. “I think we need more police and more surveillance in the communities where the threat is coming from, whether it’s the Irish community with the Westies [an Irish-American gang in New York City], or the Italian community with the mafia, or the Muslim community with the Islamic terrorists.”

GOP Congressman:
Oh hell no! There are plenty of good moderate muslims in the U.S.

If police have probable cause to suspect there is a problem in a specific community then by all means do some investigation, but being put under surveillance just for being of the muslim faith is not acceptable. I would prefer that the moderates report the whack jobs and get the process started, but just targeting people due to their faith is not ever going to be acceptable.
 
Peter King sees the attacks in Massachusetts this week as a wake-up call to local law-enforcement authorities to increase their surveillance and awareness of potential terrorists.[/url]
Of course he does, bless his heart.

I wager you do too.
 
Last edited:
Peter King sees the attacks in Massachusetts this week as a wake-up call to local law-enforcement authorities to increase their surveillance and awareness of potential terrorists.

“Police have to be in the community, they have to build up as many sources as they can, and they have to realize that the threat is coming from the Muslim community and increase surveillance there,” the New York Republican congressman tells National Review.

“We can’t be bound by political correctness,” adds King, who chairs the House subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. “I think we need more police and more surveillance in the communities where the threat is coming from, whether it’s the Irish community with the Westies [an Irish-American gang in New York City], or the Italian community with the mafia, or the Muslim community with the Islamic terrorists.”

GOP Congressman:

When is Peter King gonna recognize the difference between "political correctness" and the fact that he's just being a dumb ****?
 
When is Peter King gonna recognize the difference between "political correctness" and the fact that he's just being a dumb ****?

he probably won't. ever. that's how it works when you only seek data that supports your theory instead of testing your theory with data.

don't get me wrong; I'm depressed by this violent bull****, and I find zealotry of all types to be the root cause. however, I doubt that the number of violent Muslims in the US even approaches one percent. what he's suggesting is akin to monitoring all white people in order to catch serial killers.
 
In Peter King's defense, in 1995 he advocated rounding up everybody who's last name started with "Mc" and putting them in concentration camps. Oh, he didn't?....Never mind then.
 
"Guns don't kill people. Muslims kill people"
 
Peter King is a horse's ass...
 
Of course he does, bless his heart.

I wager you do too.

You are right, we should not used commons sense backed up by statistical evidence, that would be a waste of time:roll:
 
It's always entertaining to read the comments from the posted link to stories like these >>>> GOP Congressman:. :mrgreen:
 
You are right, we should not used commons sense backed up by statistical evidence, that would be a waste of time:roll:



The bill of rights and constitution only applies to white christian, patriotic Americans.
 
You are right, we should not used commons sense backed up by statistical evidence, that would be a waste of time:roll:

Maybe with regards to gun control we should have a massive amount of checks, registration, restrictions and bans on males but not females, because statistics. You know in the last 10 years males have committed 126,100 murders while females have only committed 13,770 with some unknown in there? Murder in America - WSJ.com

That's better statistics than you'll get for the idea that we should monitor Muslims more
 
You are right, we should not used commons sense backed up by statistical evidence, that would be a waste of time:roll:
"Unfortunately, we have too many mosques in this country. There are too many people who are sympathetic to radical Islam. We should be looking at them more carefully. We should be finding out how we can infiltrate."


"I think there’s been a lack of full cooperation from too many people in the Muslim community. And it’s a real threat here in this country."

“[Y]ou could say that 80-85 percent of mosques in this country are controlled by Islamic fundamentalists.”

“I know of any number of mosques in New York…where there are radicals in there.”

Muslims are “an enemy living amongst us.”

“They won’t turn in their own. They won’t tell what’s going on in the mosques. They won’t come forward and cooperate with the police.”
 
You are right, we should not used commons sense backed up by statistical evidence, that would be a waste of time:roll:

This has nothing to do with common sense backed up by statistical evidence. This is playing a game of guilt by association and failure to make a distinction between correlation and causation.
 
Maybe with regards to gun control we should have a massive amount of checks, registration, restrictions and bans on males but not females, because statistics. You know in the last 10 years males have committed 126,100 murders while females have only committed 13,770 with some unknown in there? Murder in America - WSJ.com

That's better statistics than you'll get for the idea that we should monitor Muslims more

what do bans have to do with surveilance? stay on topic please
 
This has nothing to do with common sense backed up by statistical evidence. This is playing a game of guilt by association and failure to make a distinction between correlation and causation.

Right, they should not have been looking at either of the bombers on the film, you know evidence:roll:
 
When is Peter King gonna recognize the difference between "political correctness" and the fact that he's just being a dumb ****?

Probably about the same time that Big Sis figures out that increased surveillance of, "white, right wing extremists", is just as stupid.

Oh, wait...that's ok.
 
what do bans have to do with surveilance? stay on topic please

It has to do with the statistical justification for your idea, if you're going to target a specific group like that then the exact same logic applies to targeting males over females for gun crime or any crime in general for that matter.
 
This has nothing to do with common sense backed up by statistical evidence. This is playing a game of guilt by association and failure to make a distinction between correlation and causation.

What statistical evidence?
 
Peter King sees the attacks in Massachusetts this week as a wake-up call to local law-enforcement authorities to increase their surveillance and awareness of potential terrorists.

“Police have to be in the community, they have to build up as many sources as they can, and they have to realize that the threat is coming from the Muslim community and increase surveillance there,” the New York Republican congressman tells National Review.

“We can’t be bound by political correctness,” adds King, who chairs the House subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. “I think we need more police and more surveillance in the communities where the threat is coming from, whether it’s the Irish community with the Westies [an Irish-American gang in New York City], or the Italian community with the mafia, or the Muslim community with the Islamic terrorists.”

GOP Congressman:

Funny he didn't mention the Jewish mafia headed up by Arnold Rothstein and Meyer Lansky along with the New York Irish and Italian gangs.
 
It has to do with the statistical justification for your idea, if you're going to target a specific group like that then the exact same logic applies to targeting males over females for gun crime or any crime in general for that matter.

If you're looking for an Islamofacist terrorist, that set off a bomb in Chicago; what neighborhoods are you going to start looking in? The high-falootin' white neighborhoods? Or the Muslim neighborhoods?
 
Peter King sees the attacks in Massachusetts this week as a wake-up call to local law-enforcement authorities to increase their surveillance and awareness of potential terrorists.

“Police have to be in the community, they have to build up as many sources as they can, and they have to realize that the threat is coming from the Muslim community and increase surveillance there,” the New York Republican congressman tells National Review.

“We can’t be bound by political correctness,” adds King, who chairs the House subcommittee on Counterterrorism and Intelligence. “I think we need more police and more surveillance in the communities where the threat is coming from, whether it’s the Irish community with the Westies [an Irish-American gang in New York City], or the Italian community with the mafia, or the Muslim community with the Islamic terrorists.”

GOP Congressman:

Sounds like common sense to me.
 
If you're looking for an Islamofacist terrorist, that set off a bomb in Chicago; what neighborhoods are you going to start looking in? The high-falootin' white neighborhoods? Or the Muslim neighborhoods?

If I was looking for a terrorist I'd try to have more information than just that, because I'd know for example that the two Boston Marathon bombers ended up in Watertown, MA which is a 91% white neighborhood, is fairly middle-class, and has a large Christian Armenian population, which is nothing like the two suspects which were born in Kyrgyzstan, spent time in Checyna, and are Muslim.

So... ya I just might look in the "high-falootin" white neighborhoods, depending on where the information leads me.
 
Back
Top Bottom