Congressman Peter King's strange journey from Irish radical to Muslim inquisitor -- I no longer recognize the politician I have known for 25 years
Posted on Monday, March 07, 2011 at 06:30 PM
RSS 
Recent Posts
- President Obama’s visit to North comes at a critical time for peace process - Hopes that he can help stop slow slide into the dark side
- Boston Irish Immigration Center continues to lie about their role in turning woman in to State Department
- Why no effort to repair damage to Irish Famine memorial in New York nearly one year after? - Car slammed into memorial and ugly plywood and metal barricades still mark the site
- How sports helped defeat the 'No Irish Need Apply' racism in America - Top baseball exec Tim Brosnan tells Irish Sports 50 how Irish served as example
- Sandy scourged Rockaways is on the mend with a little help from community spirit and perseverance
Archives
I've known Peter King longer than I know any other politician in America.
We have dined out together, traveled to Ireland together and been friends for close to a quarter century.
I knew him first as the firebrand comptroller of Nassau County, Long Island, utterly unafraid to speak out on behalf of the Republican movement in Northern Ireland at a time when they were about as popular as Genghis Khan.
It took bravery to do that, and Pete was certainly brave.
Like many Irish Americans, he saw the hypocrisy of the American position, seeing no evil on one side in the North and all on the other.
He was the highest ranking elected official in the U.S. to speak out.
As the peace process began and Sinn Fein came in from the cold Pete, by now a congressman, continued to play a very large role.
Alone among American politicians, he had the ear and confidence of Sinn Fein because of his past association with them. Having a trusted political figure in Washington was very important for them.
They felt they could trust his advice on the American role in the peace process, and that he would not abuse the trust as he was no Johnny Come Lately.
The success of the peace process was a huge boost for King, who was first and was right on the issue of keen concern to millions of Irish Americans.
He had put himself out on a limb, yet refused to back off because what he saw was right.
It had to hurt because of the odium it attracted from "respectable" circles.
There was the time that President Reagan was coming to Long Island and King, an elected official, was essentially branded a terrorist and ordered to come nowhere near him.
Such incidents only enhanced his stature with Irish American activists, however, and it was no surprise when King was elected the grand marshal of the St. Patrick's Day parade in New York City in 1985.
He had the last laugh with the success of the peace process, and he was loyal to those who stood by him.
When President Clinton was threatened by impeachment in 1998 King was one of five House Republicans who refused to vote in favor.
King said it was because of Clinton's stance on the Gerry Adams visa and his support for the peace process.
Something changed for Peter King soon after, and it was undoubtedly 9/11.
He was always an uncomfortable fit as a revolutionary supporter, but 9/11 seemed to trigger some latent streak in him that made him rethink his entire philosophy.
He drifted away from the Irish community, especially over the issue of immigration which is a major concern with so many Irish undocumented.
King opposed every attempt to remedy their situation, despite defending many Irish men over the years that the U.S. government wanted deported.
His stance was difficult to understand, but it has become clear since he has resumed his position as head of the Homeland Security Committee in the House.
He has now become the biggest hardliner in Congress against Muslim Americans and alleges that some have ties to Al Qaeda.
His hearings this week probing Muslim Americans have drawn great controversy.
On Sunday, in Times Square, 500 protesters marched against them.
The New York Times accused him in Tuesday's newspaper of leading a 'show trial' writing ".. he is focusing on one group that appears to have obsessed him since the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks, resulting in slanders and misstatements that might have earned him a rebuke from his colleagues had they been about any other group. "
"The Washington Post" among others highlighted King's strange dichotomy between his past support for the political wing of the IRA, and his obsession with Muslims and radicals.
His efforts come at a time when, ironically, there are signs that Muslims are beginning their own journey towards a political enlightenment similar to America in 1776 and France in 1789, and indeed Northern Ireland in the 1990s.
The scenes from Egypt, Tunisia and Libya all show Muslims embracing the concept of democracy that seemed impossible just a few months ago.
That is the greatest threat of all to Al Qaeda -- not a hearing in Washington seeking Muslim radicals under the bed.
Strangely, given Sinn Fein's journey towards their own political awakening, King is uniquely poised to understand that shift in the Arab world.
Alas, he finds himself on the bully pulpit espousing a very different take on Muslim Americans.
It is a very strange situation for a great advocate of democracy in Ireland.
I'm glad to still call him friend, but hope he sees sense one of these days. Demonizing a group of people never works. It only leads to further fear, hate and suspicion.
I think given the reaction to his hearings that King is able to see that clearly now.
88 comments
Next
Page 1 of 6 pages
EireinAmerica | Apr 13, 2011, 08:05 PM EDT
Realist,...you are NOT a realist,..The Brits are indeed terrorists,..the real terrorists,..they aren't going to give media attention to loyalist paras,..but they will give them support!
Report abuse
hancock | Apr 01, 2011, 04:17 AM EDT
My wife says hello.
Report abuse
hancock | Apr 01, 2011, 04:16 AM EDT
Explain England's behavior in Ireland. Can you? The paras, what did they get? Anything? They shot at my Grandfather. Of course he was shooting at them too. He was buried in 1976 with a Tricolor. why do you defend the indefesible?
Report abuse
Realist | Apr 01, 2011, 03:06 AM EDT
hancock: No, I don't quite buy this. There's something personal behind your animosity. Something more than the usual rhetoric. I can see it in your responses. Why don't you just spit it out?
Report abuse
Realist | Apr 01, 2011, 02:50 AM EDT
hancock: My friend, I keep asking....Would you please produce one statement to support your claim that the UK Government are terrorists? Would you please name one country or internationally recognized organization that has designated the British as terrorists or the UK as a terrorist or rogue state? Again, feel free to quote from Stalker, Stevens, and Cameron.
Report abuse
hancock | Mar 31, 2011, 04:28 PM EDT
When you kill innocents and cover it up for thirty years you are a terrorist. Do you noT agree? When you fund,arm and collude with the good terrorists i.e UDA, B specials, rogue RUC you are terrorists. Realist, what did the Paras get? How would you describe this behavior? Infantile? It was you who brought my wife into it, I really am getting to you aint I? why don'y you come to grips with the disgraceful conduct of the English IN Ireland, not just since 1969.
Report abuse
hancock | Mar 31, 2011, 04:20 PM EDT
Stalker, Stevens, Cameron, what did the paras get? Guilford, Birmingham ETC. internment, potato famine,
Report abuse
Realist | Mar 31, 2011, 04:12 PM EDT
hancock: "terrorist tendencies"? Lol....so the British have designated themselves as terrorists? Really? Would you please produce one statement to support your claim that the UK Government are terrorists? Please feel free to quote from both the Stevens and Stalker enquiries. My friend, you just can't go around printing lies and unsubstantiated claims just because you're nursing some infantile chip on your shoulder (aka ex-wife syndrome).
Report abuse
hancock | Mar 31, 2011, 12:54 PM EDT
The UK govt acknowledged theit terrorist tendancies.
Report abuse
Realist | Mar 31, 2011, 12:15 PM EDT
hancock: Would you please name one country or internationally recognized organization that has designated the British as terrorists or the UK as a terrorist or rogue state? By contrast, during the 'Troubles' the Provisional IRA were designated as an illegal terrorist organization by, among many others, the US, the UK, and the Republic of Ireland.
Report abuse
hancock | Mar 31, 2011, 12:02 AM EDT
Because they're terrorists.
Report abuse
Realist | Mar 30, 2011, 04:28 PM EDT
hancock: What has the IRA got to do with this? Why do you hate the British? What happened? What did they do to you?
Report abuse
hancock | Mar 30, 2011, 03:47 PM EDT
I hate them as much as you hate the IRA.
Report abuse
Realist | Mar 30, 2011, 02:57 PM EDT
hancock: Lol....you really hate the British, don't you? What happened? What did they do to you?
Report abuse
Next
Page 1 of 6 pages
- Good Morning America says Sasha and Malia...
- Former church spokesman criticised for using...
- Sinn Fein deputy leader speaks out against...
- Dating website for ‘homosensible’ Catholic...
- Michelle Obama and daughters trace their...
- Michelle Obama and daughters visit Glendalough.
- American dance teacher and Ulster husband...
- President Obama’s visit to North comes at...
- Daily Mail unloads on 'drunken young' Paddys...
- Obama under fire for turning G8 summit into...
88 Comments
Report abuse