Peter Kingâ€™s Bigoted Bashing Of Michael
This kind of vindictive vitriol is one of the most troubling aspects of American â€œdemocracyâ€ and those purported leaders whoâ€™re supposed to be pillars of America.
[Speaking Truth To Power]
With the national economy in shambles and the New York State government entrenched in partisan gridlock, doesn’t Republican U.S. Rep. Peter King (New York) have anything better to do with the American people’s time than denigrate the King of Pop, Michael Jackson?
Spewing bile from his mouth this past July, 5, King said Michael “was a pervert, a child molester, he was a pedophile. And by giving this much coverage to him, day in and day out, what does it say about us as a country? I think we’re too politically correct.”
What does it say about a politician who’d prefer to bash a global icon rather than dig this country out of the morass we find ourselves in? This kind of vindictive vitriol is one of the most troubling aspects of American “democracy” and those purported leaders who’re supposed to be pillars of America.
King should know better. Michael was acquitted in the 2005 molestation case, and that the 1993 accusation was a fabrication built for monetary extortion. Specious media-manipulated innuendo isn’t evidence, no matter how much it’s looped on news
cycles. Apparently, for people like Rep. King, Michael’s conviction in the white media was evidence enough.
This is the same King who in 2006 outrageously proposed that the New York Times—among others like the Wall Street Journal and the Los Angeles Times—be investigated, because of news reports of the Bush Administration’s secret use of the CIA and the Treasury Department to surreptitiously monitor international financial transactions. This was preceded by the Bush’s NSA illegal wiretapping scandal.
King lobbied former Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, himself morally challenged, to “Begin an investigation and prosecution of the New York Times—the reporters, the editors and the publishers,” and also said: “We’re at war, and for the Times to release information about secret operations and methods is treasonous.”
King also opined that the newspaper’s behavior was “pompous, arrogant, and more concerned about a left-wing elitist agenda than it is about the security of the American people.”
Now, unproven media-influenced rumors of Michael as a child molester, is apparently enough for Rep. King. If he has some tangible evidence—or insightful analysis—to prove his case against Michael why doesn’t he furnish us with it? The truth here is: King is nothing more than an “arrogant” and “pompous” bigot, who has now added a dead Michael Jackson to the list of those he has attacked, like immigrants and Muslims, with his barely-closeted prejudice.
In an interview on Politico.com on September 2007, King said “There are too many mosques in this country—There are too many people sympathetic to radical Islam. We should be looking at them more carefully and finding out how we can infiltrate them.” King later claimed: “The quote was taken out of context by Politico.”
He meant to say, “that too many mosques in this country do not cooperate with law enforcement.” This clarification was supposed to make him look less bigoted?
Salam Al-Marayati, Executive Director of MPAC, Muslim Public Affairs Council, pointed out that Rep. King’s xenophobic comments regarding Muslims was “A glaring example of misguided and baseless Muslim bashing which costs policymakers thoughtful and needed analysis from Muslim Americans.”
Al-Marayati added: “In the aftermath of the 9-11 attacks, he accused American mosques of extremism, claiming that 85 percent of them are run by extremists. Last week, he turned on the Islamic Center of Long Island (ICLI), a mosque in his district he has yet to visit but finds convenient to bash, despite the fact that Christian and Jewish leaders also in the district have rallied behind the mosque. It’s bad enough that King keeps pushing lies until they’re accepted as fact, but what is worse is that no public official has stepped forward with the truth.”
Ironically, while King stereotypes Muslim with being “terrorists” or “terrorist sympathizers” while whole-heartedly supporting the immoral Iraq War. He was a strident supporter of the Irish Republican Army (IRA) and their bombing campaign against “British imperialism.”
Many like Rep. King find truth too “politically correct,” especially if it conflicts with their warped worldview. Question: why is it that some people, usually Black, in American society are stigmatized by unproven charges, like the Central Park Five
while others with their bloody fingerprints are given the benefit of the doubt? Isn’t this the same patriotic politician who steadfastly defended the gross illegality and murderous genocidal reign of the previous White House?
Here’s a suggestion for Rep. King: why don’t you roll up your sleeves and help the people of New York avert this impending disaster, and spare us your prejudiced perceptions of Michael Jackson?
Please post your comments directly online or submit them to Milton@blackstarnews.com for publication.
“Speaking Truth To Empower.”
Ann GarrisonNovember 30,2013 @ 12:14 PM
It was sexy to be against the war back then. He was probably in it to get laid.
carpinteyrobwmJuly 14,2013 @ 09:29 PM
carpinteyrobwmJuly 14,2013 @ 08:34 PM
amslctciikJuly 13,2013 @ 01:47 AM
http://youngsgear.us - louis vuitton bags cheap on the inside...
No Record Exist!!