When Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) announced Tuesday that he will hold a hearing next week in the Senate Judiciary Committee on the civil rights of American Muslims, everyone thought it was a joke. No other group gets the extraordinary, unconstitutional special status that Muslims enjoy. The Muslim Brotherhood, an organization whose stated goal is to destroy and eliminate America from within, has accessed and secured extraordinary power at senior levels of the Executive branch, the Department of Justice, Department of Defense, State Department, Homeland Security, etc.
One can point to Alger Hiss or Benedict Arnold for like historical antecedents. The difference between then and now is that we didn’t know that Hiss et al were seditionists whose objective was to overthrow the government. We know who and what the Brotherhood is, but the political elites, the chattering classes and the media elites have taken up their considerable weapons against those who are exposing this century’s Nazis.
Dick Durbin’s hearing – with the Orwellian title “Protecting the Civil Rights of American Muslims” – is intended to serve as a counterpunch to the much more sensible and logical (although still toothless, as I explained here and here) House Homeland Security Committee hearing led by Chairman Peter King (R-NY) two weeks ago on the radicalization of Muslims in the U.S. Senator Durbin’s press release announcing the hearing said that it was being triggered by a non-existent “spike in anti-Muslim bigotry in the last year.” Apparently, the numerous acts of terrorism committed by American Muslims, and the warnings that have even come from the Obama Administration about the homegrown radicalization of Islamic jihadists, are to be deliberately ignored in deference to Islamic demands and supremacism.
In my previous oped piece on the Durbin debacle, I thought that a hearing on “Muslim rights” would be a good idea if it addressed the increasing surrender of secular law to Islamic law, and the assertion of Islamic supremacism over the rights of all others. We need hearings on the Florida circuit court judge who just ruled that a case be decided according to Sharia law. We need hearings on the special rights being afforded Muslims at the expense of everyone else. We need hearings on the Obama Justice Department’s suing a school district for not allowing a Muslim woman to take nearly three weeks off during the school year to go on a pilgrimage to Mecca.
We need hearings on taxpayer dollars being used to fund Islamic finance (thereby funding jihad and the prohibition of whole American business sectors). We need hearings on the violation of the separation of mosque and state in the public schools, in the workplace, in the courtroom and in foreign policy. We need hearings on the violation of the Constitution in regards to Muslims — no longer are equal rights sufficient, now it’s special rights for a very extra special class, Muslims.
But no, these hearings will be an attack on free speech and the few, the brave who speak candidly about Islamic jihad and the hundreds of thousands who have been slaughtered in jihadi wars, land appropriations, cultural annihilations and enslavements.
Durbin is pulling out all the stops to ensure that the hearing is little more than a pathetic exercise in dhimmitude with only one viewpoint represented, that of the Islamic supremacists. Indeed, the four scheduled witnesses are (i) Muslim activist Farhana Khera, the President and Executive Director of Muslim Advocates in San Francisco; (ii) Catholic Cardinal Theodore McCarrick of Washington, DC; (iii) Tom Perez, the Justice Department’s Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights and resident militant leftist who has advocated openly for the non-enforcement of federal immigration laws; and (iv) Alex Acosta, the Bush Administration top civil rights official and current dean of fourth-tier Florida International University Law School, a notorious hotbed of left-wing academics. I’m surprised that Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brothehood’s ideological point-man on sharia law, didn’t make the cut.
The presence of Khera, McCarrick, and Perez is no surprise. All are longstanding liberals who, for a variety of reasons, have exhibited a distressing willingness to cast aside any concern over the Islamic, Qur’an-based terrorism committed by a growing number of American Muslims. Think Queers for Palestine.
‘But why would Acosta be added? Apparently, the Bush Administration’s most outlandish stooge-in-chief has decided that he needs to further burnish his credentials with the Left in an effort to remove any conservative taint. One would have thought that he achieved that goal years ago.
During his tenure in office, Acosta famously mugged for the camera while seeking justice for an Oklahoma girl who was prevented from wearing a headscarf to school. He also arranged to meet monthly with every Muslim group in Washington – including the Hamas-linked Council for Islamic-American Relations (CAIR), a well-known terrorist front group – thinking that these jihad supporters might facilitate some cushy presidential appointment. No doubt this time around, we will see Acosta even embracing DOJ’s crazy recent lawsuit against Berkeley, Illinois for not allowing a first-year teacher to take a 19-day hajj to Mecca in the middle of final exam preparation, a lawsuit that former Attorney General Mukasey said reflected “dubious judgment” for which “the upper reaches of the Justice Department should be calling people to account.”
So desperate is Acosta for political advancement that he is willing to sacrifice any principle or his soul to get there. Perhaps he’ll eventually strap one on for the cause.
For him, the ends completely justify the means. To paraphrase Sir Thomas More’s epic line to Richard Rich in A Man for All Seasons: Alex, it profits a man nothing to give his soul for the whole world… but for the support of the Islamic Left?
Desperately, Acosta sold his soul long ago.