Peter King on Holder’s CIA investigation: “You wonder which side they’re on”

posted at 5:05 pm on August 25, 2009 by Allahpundit

Easy there, pal. Are the prosecutions politically insane? Sure. Dangerous to national security? Very possibly. Likely to result in more renditions as an end-around this sort of headache in the future? All signs point to yes. But “bulls**t” and “disgraceful”? Holder’s limiting his focus (supposedly) to agents who went beyond the Bush guidelines. If it’s bulls**t for the AG to do even that, what’s the alternative? Carte blanche for the CIA? Let’s not make the same absolutist mistake about enhanced interrogation that our progressive betters always do.

Although, that said, it sure would be nice if our “shock the conscience” standard employed a conscience a bit hardier than, say, Andrew Sullivan’s.

“You’re talking about threatening to kill a guy, threatening to attack his family, threatening to use an electric drill on him – but never doing it,” King said. “You have that on the one hand – and on the other you have the [interrogator's] attempt to prevent thousands of Americans from being killed.”

“When Holder was talking about being ‘shocked’ [before the report's release], I thought they were going to have cutting guys’ fingers off or something – or that they actually used the power drill,” he said.

Pressed on whether interrogators had actually broken the law, King said he didn’t think the Geneva Convention “applies to terrorists,” and that the line between permitted and outlawed interrogation policies in the Bush years was “a distinction without a difference.”

“Why is it OK to waterboard someone, which causes physical pain, but not threaten someone and not cause pain?” he asked, warning of a “chilling” effect on future CIA behavior…

“They’ve declared war on the CIA. We should resist and fight back as hard as we can,” he said. “It should be a scorched earth policy…. This isn’t just another policy. This goes to the heart of our national defense. We should do whatever we have to do.”

Maybe he does want carte blanche. Although personally, I like Goldfarb’s idea better. Exit question via Ramesh Ponnuru: “[S]ince career prosecutors have already reviewed the cases under discussion and declined to pursue charges, how does it serve the rule of law for Attorney General Eric Holder to re-open the question?”

Update: How far will the media go to shift blame from Obama? This far. Click the image to watch.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Leave it to allah to be the fart in the elevator.

RobCon on August 25, 2009 at 5:47 PM

“Carte blanche for the CIA? Let’s not make the same absolutist mistake…..”

Uh, isn’t mischaracterizing opposition to what is going on as “Carte blanche for the CIA” an absolutist mistake?

Don’t go wobbly Allahpundit. Our country is at war. You knew that.

DaMav on August 25, 2009 at 5:47 PM

I can hear the KGB laughing thier as%es off…….

……… and I live in Southern California.

Seven Percent Solution on August 25, 2009 at 5:48 PM

This is why Eric Holder is barking up the wrong tree.

This is our enemy that Eric Holder is looking out for.

fogw on August 25, 2009 at 5:48 PM

Carte blanche for the CIA? Let’s not make the same absolutist mistake about enhanced interrogation that our progressive betters always do.

Congratulations, you occupy the “centrist” position on torture saving American lives.

crr6 on August 25, 2009 at 5:36 PM

FIFY

Norwegian on August 25, 2009 at 5:48 PM

SouperConservative on August 25, 2009 at 5:35 PM

Welcome to the party.
Good, no great first post.

chemman on August 25, 2009 at 5:50 PM

I’d say Mehsud is pretty intimidated.

crr6 on August 25, 2009 at 5:46 PM

God forbid anyone you love is lost to you, by means of a terrorist. Because I’m pretty damn sure the families of those victims of 9/11, whether they were a passenger on a plane, or working in a tall building, or part of the police, and fire fighters called to duty, and died doing their duty, are still feeling the torture of that loss today. Especially with all these slaps in the face about protecting the civil rights of people who’d see you dead, rather than look at you.

capejasmine on August 25, 2009 at 5:51 PM

Congratulations, you occupy the “centrist” position on torture saving American lives.

crr6 on August 25, 2009 at 5:36 PM

FIFY

Norwegian on August 25, 2009 at 5:48 PM

You think there’s a centrist position on saving American lives? Yikes. I guess I’d have to say I’m an absolutist there.

crr6 on August 25, 2009 at 5:52 PM

Seven Percent Solution on August 25, 2009 at 5:48 PM

The reverberations off the Grand Canyon walls were so strong I hear it here in Eastern Arizona.

chemman on August 25, 2009 at 5:53 PM

Yes, it is both disgraceful and B.S.

Jim Treacher on August 25, 2009 at 5:55 PM

OB didn’t want this…. Holder didn’t want this. It’s a political no-win. So what bone does Soros have to pick with the Agency?

PaCadle on August 25, 2009 at 5:58 PM

We should stick the terrorists into general population in the state prison, call them Sally and see how they like being treated like a full citizen.

dpierson on August 25, 2009 at 5:59 PM

Don’t go wobbly Allahpundit. Our country is at war. You knew that.

Allah was born wobbly.

Jim-Rose on August 25, 2009 at 6:00 PM

Threatening to use drills, threatening families, threat, threat, threat….blah, blah, blah

Put those VIDEOS up against someone having their HEAD SLOWLY SLICED OFF…for REAL, noooo threat at all, simply SLICE AND DICE……. ANY DAY.

idiots.

bridgetown on August 25, 2009 at 6:03 PM

If you still have to wonder which side they’re on, you haven’t been paying attention.

Itchee Dryback on August 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM

Allah,

Post is busted. You can’t go tho the first page of comments.

dave c on August 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM

What Treacher said. Also, Al Quaeda are not “uniformed combatants”, and therefore, as I understand it, do not come under the protection of the Geneva Conventions. Nor do I give a flying flip whether they have been terrorized, discomfited, or annoyed if doing so saved American lives.

If one American life is lost because of the Obama Justice Department’s incredible stupidity and gotcha politics, I hope the American public rises up in wrath and throws the lot out.

coppertop on August 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM

Obama cried….Americans died.

bridgetown on August 25, 2009 at 6:05 PM

Also, Al Quaeda are not “uniformed combatants”, and therefore, as I understand it, do not come under the protection of the Geneva Conventions.

coppertop on August 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM

Which Holder himself has said.

Jim Treacher on August 25, 2009 at 6:08 PM

I know which side they’re on. They’re on whatever side is politically expedient at the time. EVERYTHING begins and ends with their lust for power and holding on to that power. They don’t give a damn about average Americans. I believe they have made that abundantly clear during the townhall meetings and the passage of 1,000 plus page bills without having read them. They all make me sick.

alwaysright43 on August 25, 2009 at 6:09 PM

I suspect Peter King knows more about Holder’s intentions than you do, AP. Until I see evidence to the contrary I will second King’s outrage.

SKYFOX on August 25, 2009 at 6:09 PM

It’s postins like these that make me understand why Allahpundit wishes to remain anonymous.

katieanne on August 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Well, obviously somebody has to divert attention from the continuing, snowballing buffoonery of Bama’s “presidency”, and Holder drew the short straw.

Not that he’s crying about it, I expect, as CIA will be less able to prevent overseas creators of man-made “bad hair days” and then Holder will have to disarm the populace to keep it “safe”. People may get to the point they will follow any voice that promises security, so why worry about that pesky 2012 election, Bama et. al. will save us.

Bama et. al. of course will be safe, and Michelle can keep wearing shorts, because the poltical class will care for itself first. The leftovers will trickle down in exchange for money or favors to the highest bidders. The night cook at Denny’s, forget him or her. Not worthy enough.

McCain is talking about a peaceful civil war and I would love to see it remain so. I wonder whether Bama and his acolytes can stand to lose peacefully. This is about the “persuasion of power” and it isn’t peaceful, by definition or in action.

Harry Schell on August 25, 2009 at 6:17 PM

They seem to be acting like cornered animals. I’m thinking there might have been some big investigations involving these people and their interests and these investigations were in the advanced stages even as Obama took office, and that they are holding up warrants and arrests by impeaching the methods of evidence collecting.

Buddahpundit on August 25, 2009 at 6:18 PM

I was at the dentist awhile ago for teeth cleaning but heard the drill going on some other patient. Was I being tortured cause I heard the noise but nothing happened to me?

eaglewingz08 on August 25, 2009 at 6:19 PM

Sorry, I’m not seeing a big difference between your preferred wording — politically insane and dangerous — versus King’s — disgraceful and B.S.

Anyhow, no need to click the image to watch the Steele video, as the graphic on the screen says it all — “Bush-era Terror Tactics Probed.” Because of course the interrogation tactics used in the Bush era are rightfully described as “terror tactics.” Sheesh.

mimritty on August 25, 2009 at 6:29 PM

But “bulls**t” and “disgraceful”?

Yes, it is and yes, they are.

baldilocks on August 25, 2009 at 6:30 PM

It’s postins like these that make me understand why Allahpundit wishes to remain anonymous.

katieanne on August 25, 2009 at 6:12 PM

Well it isn’t because the CIA would cut off his head for calling himself ‘Allahpundit’ that’s for sure.

Your dose of irony for the day.

baldilocks on August 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM

as I understand it, do not come under the protection of the Geneva Conventions.

Yes, but they do come under the protections of US laws including other treaties that we signed and were ratified.

Fortunately or unfortunately.

Although I have no idea what laws were broken by blowing smoke in a terrorist’s face. Or even wielding a drill.

For this we’ll send agents to jail?

If Obama really wanted to move the country forward he could issue a full pardon to all of these individuals.

SteveMG on August 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM

Allah,

Post is busted. You can’t go tho the first page of comments.

dave c on August 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM

It probably has something to do with the apostrophe in the URL.

Ronnie on August 25, 2009 at 6:35 PM

Allah,

Post is busted. You can’t go tho the first page of comments.

dave c on August 25, 2009 at 6:04 PM

You can do it, manually, by putting “comment-page-1/” before the “#comments” in the URL.

Here’s a link for you.

progressoverpeace on August 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Yes, but they do come under the protections of US laws including other treaties that we signed and were ratified.
SteveMG on August 25, 2009 at 6:34 PM

No they don’t. There are no US laws that apply to enemy combatants on foreign battle fields and since they are not part of any country they are not covered by treaties.
Like it or not, they fall through the legal cracks and no wishful thinking will give them legal protection under US laws.

dpierson on August 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM

I love this guy! What part of New York can he be representing. Is there such a thing as “sane” county there?

orlandocajun on August 25, 2009 at 6:39 PM

AllahPundit: If it’s bulls**t for the AG to do even that, what’s the alternative? Carte blanche for the CIA? Let’s not make the same absolutist mistake about enhanced interrogation that our progressive betters always do.

No, AP, the CIA shouldn’t have carte blanche. Rather, they should have carte noire, and the support of a president who cares about the safety of his nation, not erudite concepts of global civil rights for the heathen.

What are you trying for here, a little soft treatment when Obama et al. raid HA and arrest us all? A little waterboarding lite, perhaps? A manicure? A regular waxing? ;-)

TXUS on August 25, 2009 at 6:40 PM

SouperConservative on August 25, 2009 at 5:35 PM

Well said. Welcome.

elduende on August 25, 2009 at 6:43 PM

From McCarthyism to Holderism! My my my…

Dhuka on August 25, 2009 at 6:47 PM

Screw Peter King.

Spathi on August 25, 2009 at 6:47 PM

Had my wifes cousin murdered in Tower 2 on 9/11, and their crying about power drills and family death threats. Maybe we should stick Holder in a room and make him watch people jumping out of the windows of the trade center over and over again.

LennyV on August 25, 2009 at 6:51 PM

Had my wifes cousin murdered in Tower 2 on 9/11, and their crying about power drills and family death threats. Maybe we should stick Holder in a room and make him watch people jumping out of the windows of the trade center over and over again.

LennyV on August 25, 2009 at 6:51 PM

He’s just a brother going after “the man”.

dpierson on August 25, 2009 at 6:53 PM

Allah was born wobbly.

Jim-Rose on August 25, 2009 at 6:00 PM

To his credit AP has never denied being a beta-male, hence the wobbliness!

Liberty or Death on August 25, 2009 at 7:00 PM

Had my wifes cousin murdered in Tower 2 on 9/11, and their crying about power drills and family death threats. Maybe we should stick Holder in a room and make him watch people jumping out of the windows of the trade center over and over again.

LennyV on August 25, 2009 at 6:51 PM

I’d add to Holder’s vid loop the several videos out there of the beheadings and real torture being visited upon our soldiers and even our civilians, like Danny Pearl.

TXUS on August 25, 2009 at 7:07 PM

progressoverpeace on August 25, 2009 at 6:38 PM

Thanks for the tip and the link!

KittyLowrey on August 25, 2009 at 7:10 PM

Pressed on whether interrogators had actually broken the law, King said he didn’t think the Geneva Convention “applies to terrorists,”

There is the money quote, Geneva Conventions (GC) DO NOT APPLY to terrorists (e.g., illegal enemy combatants) because they do not conduct their operations (war) wearing a uniform or fly the flag of a recognized sovereign nation, hence ILLEGAL ENEMY COMBATANT!

If these scum vermin terrorists like AQ, Taliban, et al want to be treated in accordance with the GC then they should stop being pussies by hiding behind innocent men, women, and children, or blowing up innocent men, women, and children, or flying planes into buildings killing 3,000 innocent men, women, and children! Until they decide to stop fighting like cowards and put together an actual military wearing a uniform, flying a flag, and fighting a conventional war then I don’t care if we castrate them with a dull knife if it saves even one innocent life!

The left continually leave out the fact these terrorists animals are illegal enemy combatants whenever they throw out the “habeas corpus” and/or “torture” argument because they know THEY ARE WRONG AND THEIR “TORTURE” ARGUMENT DON’T HUNT!

Please all fellow HA readers/commenter’s, whenever a lefty starts in with their lame “torture/moral equivalence” meme be sure to remind them that as long as terrorists continue to wage war in the manner they are doing they are not entitled to GC protections and because they (the terrorists) are not US citizens THEY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO HABEAS CORPUS PROTECTIONS!

Liberty or Death on August 25, 2009 at 7:15 PM

I don’t think we have tried anyone for treason in the last few years.

Time to change that.

ted c on August 25, 2009 at 7:15 PM

If it’s bulls**t for the AG to do even that, what’s the alternative? Carte blanche for the CIA?

Dude.

Please.

Are those the only two alternatives you can come up with?

pabarge on August 25, 2009 at 7:19 PM

SouperConservative on August 25, 2009 at 5:35 PM

Welcome aboard. Look forward to your future contributions. And, happy drillin’. ;-)

TXUS on August 25, 2009 at 7:20 PM

Obama: undermining America’s security and future one day at a time.

The jihadis smile broader with every self-gelding folly of this fool.

profitsbeard on August 25, 2009 at 7:38 PM

We want to go by all the laws that citizens operate under, so tell me this: What would be the statute of limitations in these cases? As I understand it, only murder has none.

Oleta on August 25, 2009 at 7:40 PM

Pressed on whether interrogators had actually broken the law, King said he didn’t think the Geneva Convention “applies to terrorists,”

There is the money quote, Geneva Conventions (GC) DO NOT APPLY to terrorists (e.g., illegal enemy combatants) because they do not conduct their operations (war) wearing a uniform or fly the flag of a recognized sovereign nation, hence ILLEGAL ENEMY COMBATANT! …

THEY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO HABEAS CORPUS PROTECTIONS!

Liberty or Death on August 25, 2009 at 7:15 PM

+100!

Repeat this until the Idiot-In-Chief and SCOTUS realize their suicidally stupid insanity.

The Third Geneva Convention says who gets protections.

TERRORISTS (and spies and saboteurs) DO NOT.

profitsbeard on August 25, 2009 at 7:45 PM

There is no doubt who’s side Bozo is on and it is not OUR side.

S]ince career prosecutors have already reviewed the cases under discussion and declined to pursue charges, how does it serve the rule of law for Attorney General Eric Holder to re-open the question?

This whole operation is political. They want Obamunistcare off the front page so that Bozo can enjoy his faux vacation in peace.

dogsoldier on August 25, 2009 at 7:48 PM

Oh yes, it’s disgraceful and it’s total bullshit. It’s the spin to take some of the edge off of not closing Gitmo. The whole latter debacle (we’re closing, we’re not, oh nevermind) thing pissed off the base. Rendition continuing, pissed off the base. Obamacare ‘maybe don’t know there might be a public option’ pissed off the base. So here is some red meat for them to pacify them.

INVESTIGATE THE CIA OF THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION. Woot! Party on, Wayne!

It’s not about the CIA at all, it’s about regaining some leftist street cred, which has sufferred mightily of late.

As such, it’s a disgrace and bullshit. And I don’t care what Holder says ‘this is not about the entire intelligence community’, the left won’t hear that part and unfortunately for Holder and the Administration, the CIA won’t buy that either.

Carville is right, this isn’t good for the Dems. It will come off like a witch hunt, which it is.

GeeWhiz on August 25, 2009 at 7:51 PM

This is nothing but noise to get everyone off the Health Care track. This health care fiasco is Obamas Achilles heel.
Don’t let him wiggle out of this trap.

Jeff from WI on August 25, 2009 at 7:52 PM

Maybe Holder should prosecute greedy American doctors who (according to Dr. O) unnecessarily cut off body parts. The docs who needlessly amputate appendages for their monetary gain are much worse than the Bush CIA interrogators’ empty threats.

/sarc

HellCat on August 25, 2009 at 7:59 PM

I wonder whose side McCain is on……

mobydutch on August 25, 2009 at 8:07 PM

I wonder whose side McCain is on……

mobydutch on August 25, 2009 at 8:07 PM

I don’t.

Ronnie on August 25, 2009 at 8:26 PM

I don’t wonder who’s side they are on. I’m sure I know. I wonder if the majority of Americans will wake the he11 up before the point of irreversible is reached.!

Griz on August 25, 2009 at 8:26 PM

The problem with this witch hunting after the fact is that when the Republicans get back in power, and they will since the political pendulum swings back and forth, should they also start witch hunts of the Democrats and their cronies now in positions of power?

PhilipJames on August 25, 2009 at 8:34 PM

Congressman Pete King doesn’t mince words. He tells it like it is!

MCGIRV on August 25, 2009 at 8:37 PM

They are working on the house next door…every time I hear the drill I think of torture. I am calling Eric Holder and tell them I have CIA agents next door building a room addition.

right2bright on August 25, 2009 at 8:51 PM

Sorry,A P “bulls**t” and “disgraceful”is pretty mild.

katy the mean old lady on August 25, 2009 at 9:04 PM

If I knew a guy had information that would save my family I would beat him to death to get it out of him and sleep like a baby. It is good to know we still has some people with balls left who have enough moral clarity to do what needs to be done. We won’t for long with Obama in charge. The aggressor sets the rules, and like the old saying goes, “don’t start nothin’ won’t be nothin’”.

echosyst on August 25, 2009 at 9:45 PM

Finally
Hot damn someone actually said
what MOST of america is thinking
about the democrats and liberals

Whos side are they on anyways..

It isnt ours.. thats for sure..

http://www.veteranoutrage.com

veteranoutrage on August 25, 2009 at 9:45 PM

But “bulls**t” and “disgraceful”?

Yes, especially considering this is just a distraction from Teh One’s health care woes. How many times have they brought this up and dropped it over the past 7 months?

ddrintn on August 25, 2009 at 10:24 PM

Funny how the ACLU had its own sponsored link this morning on Google, urging everyone to pressure Holder to keep investigating. Almost like they knew it was coming! (wink wink)

PattyJ on August 25, 2009 at 10:37 PM

I can’t haz harsh language?

munchnstuf on August 25, 2009 at 11:01 PM

No corpses. No hacked off parts. No burns. No scars.

KSM was FRIGHTENED into divulging a plot to kill innocents, including little children. The plot was thwarted.

FRIGHTENED. This is absurdity defined.

AmericanDad on August 25, 2009 at 11:01 PM


Exit question via Ramesh Ponnuru: “[S]ince career prosecutors have already reviewed the cases under discussion and declined to pursue charges.

Those who want prosecutors to investigate CIA interrogators have time and again invoked “the rule of law” to trump all of the considerations—from national security to political prudence—that argue against those investigations. But since career prosecutors have already reviewed the cases under discussion and declined to pursue charges, how does it serve the rule of law for Attorney General Eric Holder to re-open the question?

It has often been noted that the torture statute is worded in a way that will make it hard to win convictions. Perhaps Congress should change the statute, but the rule of law involves adhering to the laws we have and the procedures by which we apply them. One of those procedures is not to start down the path of prosecution when 1) the statute suggests convictions are going to be difficult to obtain and 2) prosecutors have previously reviewed the cases and declined to act.

The administration has been under pressure from the Left to investigate the interrogators. Yielding to that pressure was a mistake. It not only demoralizes the CIA. It undermines the very rule of law that the investigations are supposed to advance.


How does it serve the rule of law for Attorney General Eric Holder to re-open the question?

Do you agree or disagree????

RoxanneH on August 25, 2009 at 11:20 PM

I believe that was the question AP asked?? Or am I wrong?

RoxanneH on August 25, 2009 at 11:22 PM

“We had been told, on leaving our native soil, that we were to defend the sacred rights conferred on us by so many of our citizens settled overseas, so many years of our presence, so many benefits brought by us to populations in need of our assistance and civilization. We were able to verify that this was true, and because it was true, we did not hesitate to shed our quota of blood, to sacrifice our youth and our hopes. We regretted nothing, but whereas we over here are inspired by their frame of mind, I am told that in Rome factions and conspiracies are rife, that treachery flourishes, and that many people in their uncertainty and confusion lend a ready ear to the dire temptations of relinquishment and vilify our action. I cannot believe that all this true, and yet recent wars have shown how pernicious such a state of mind could be and to where it could lead. Make haste to reassure me, I beg you, and tell me that our fellow citizens understand us, support us and protect us as we protect the glory of the Empire. If it should be otherwise, if we should leave our bleached bones on these desert sands in vain, then BEWARE THE ANGER OF THE LEGIONS!!”

From a letter written by Marcus Flavinius, a centurion in the second cohort of the Augusta Legion serving overseas, to his cousin, Tertullus, in Rome, quoted in the Prologue of Jean Larteguay’s, “The Centurions.”

coldwarrior on August 26, 2009 at 12:36 AM

This the third gift of Ramadan
(1. Releasing Lockerbie killer 2. Persecuting our CIA )

http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/world/12-us+initiates+%245bn+plan+for+pakistan–bi-11
We are sending more troops to Afganistan and following it up with this?

macncheez on August 26, 2009 at 1:05 AM

Rep. Peter King–for years, the congressman was alinged with “one of the most violent terrorist groups in recent European history”–the IRA

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/member-87856-attention-politicians.html

The politician once called the IRA “the legitimate voice of occupied Ireland,” he was banned from the BBC by British censors for his pro-IRA views, and he refused to denounce the IRA when one of its mortar bombs killed nine Northern Irish police officers. But Mr. King is now one of America’s most outspoken foes of terrorism.

He forged links with leaders of the IRA and Sinn Fein in Ireland, and in America he hooked up with Irish Northern Aid, known as Noraid, a New York based group that the American, British, and Irish governments often accused of funneling guns and money to the IRA.

He spoke regularly at Noraid protests and became close to the group’s publicity director, the Bronx lawyer Martin Galvin, a figure reviled by the British.

Much of the conventional weaponry and a great deal of the money necessary for IRA violence came from Irish-American sympathizers. Mr. King’s advocacy of the IRA’s cause encouraged that flow and earned him the deep-seated hostility of the British and Irish governments

During his visits to Ireland, Mr. King would often stay with well-known leaders of the IRA, and he socialized in IRA drinking haunts.

At one of such clubs, the Felons, membership was limited to IRA veterans who had served time in jail.

Mr. King would almost certainly have been red-flagged by British intelligence as a result, but the experience gave him plenty of material for the three novels he subsequently wrote featuring the IRA.

The IRA nearly killed Prime Minister Thatcher and her cabinet with a bomb in 1984, and it assassinated prominent British politicians and members of the royal family

mags on August 26, 2009 at 8:06 AM

Yes, It’s BullS***

tx2654 on August 26, 2009 at 9:28 AM

Screw Peter King.

Spathi on August 25, 2009 at 6:47 PM

Wow, that was profound. You’ve persuaded me completely.

(rolls eyes)

Cylor on August 26, 2009 at 10:03 AM

Rep. Peter King–for years, the congressman was alinged with “one of the most violent terrorist groups in recent European history”–the IRA

http://www.brownsvilleherald.com/news/member-87856-attention-politicians.html

The politician once called the IRA “the legitimate voice of occupied Ireland,” he was banned from the BBC by British censors for his pro-IRA views, and he refused to denounce the IRA when one of its mortar bombs killed nine Northern Irish police officers. But Mr. King is now one of America’s most outspoken foes of terrorism.

He forged links with leaders of the IRA and Sinn Fein in Ireland, and in America he hooked up with Irish Northern Aid, known as Noraid, a New York based group that the American, British, and Irish governments often accused of funneling guns and money to the IRA.

He spoke regularly at Noraid protests and became close to the group’s publicity director, the Bronx lawyer Martin Galvin, a figure reviled by the British.

Much of the conventional weaponry and a great deal of the money necessary for IRA violence came from Irish-American sympathizers. Mr. King’s advocacy of the IRA’s cause encouraged that flow and earned him the deep-seated hostility of the British and Irish governments

During his visits to Ireland, Mr. King would often stay with well-known leaders of the IRA, and he socialized in IRA drinking haunts.

At one of such clubs, the Felons, membership was limited to IRA veterans who had served time in jail.

Mr. King would almost certainly have been red-flagged by British intelligence as a result, but the experience gave him plenty of material for the three novels he subsequently wrote featuring the IRA.

mags on August 27, 2009 at 7:36 AM

Comment pages: 1 2