FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Peter King, Witch Hunter

by CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI

Peter King is the envy of (a) former Senator Joseph McCarthy and (b) the folks in Salem MA who were looking for, respectively, communists and witches. It was a hard task that they each attacked with persistence and fortitude. It was hard because to the untutored eye, witches and communists look just like the rest of us, making it difficult to distinguish them from the general population. Nonetheless, the folks in Salem and Joe were diligent in their efforts. There was, of course, always a possibility that the person identified as a witch or a communist was not in fact a witch or a communist but there was also the possibility that he or she was, and that made it all worthwhile from the inquisitors’ points of view.

The Salem Witch Trials took place in 1692 and 1693. More than 150 people were arrested and accused of witchcraft and a number were convicted. Witchcraft was, as one would expect, a capital offense, and several of those convicted were hanged. With the benefit of hindsight one can safely assume that most, if not all of those hanged, were not witches but as in all matters involving capital punishment, learning that the executed were innocent after they have been hanged makes very little difference to the executed and has never been considered by Americans to be a reason to eliminate the death penalty.

One of the next hunts for witches occurred in the 1950s and the man who served as the official huntsman was Senator Joe McCarthy. The senator’s goal was to identify Communists in the United States. The fact that the object of the hunt could not readily be identified did nothing to deter McCarthy, who made accusations against all manner of people, many of whom were not communists but might as well have been since their careers were irreparably harmed by the accusations. A ruined career was better than being hanged but was nonetheless not a very good outcome. The newest hunter of citizens he believes unworthy of their citizenship is Peter King, a congressman from New York. He has targeted a group that is going to be easy for him to identify-Muslims. Some, though not all, can be identified by their attire or by physical characteristics.

Mr. King is one of the beneficiaries of the Republican take over of the House of Representatives of the U.S. Congress and has been named chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee. That committee deals with such things as border security and transportation security and, in addition, has the power to conduct investigations. Its investigative authority has excited Chairman King. He intends to seek out Muslims and find out why they are being such a problem.

Mr. King did not pull the idea of having hearings out of the same air that produced fictional witches and communists. According to Mr. King “When I meet with law enforcement, they are constantly telling me how little cooperation they get from Muslim leaders [when conducting terror investigations.]” By conducting these investigations Mr. King presumably will figure out how to force Muslims to cooperate with law enforcement authorities. In an article in Newsday he said he would “drive the public debate on Islamic radicalization. These hearings will be a step in that direction. It’s what democracy is all about.” He may look to some of the techniques used in Salem such as placing heavy rocks on the person being investigated until the person says what the rock placer wants him to say or dies, whichever comes first. Alternatively he can adopt the methods used by Senator McCarthy who would simply state that he was holding lists of communists employed in various parts of the government without sharing the lists with others.

Responding to criticism of his planned hearings Mr. King said it was OK with him if people called him a bigot for undertaking the hearings. Those criticizing him, he said, were simply uttering, “politically correct nonsense.” I am sure Mr. King treasures civil liberties even if preserving them means riding roughshod over them. That is the price that must be paid.

Muslims are, of course, not pleased at the prospect of the King inquisition. Rep. Keith Elison (D-Minn) the only Muslim member of Congress explains: “We need to make sure that we stand for civil liberties, so we can deprive people like Osama bin Laden of the claim that Muslims are poorly treated in America. The United States is not at war with Islam.”

America is not at war with Islam but if Mr. King’s hearings go as planned, it is a safe bet that lots of Muslims will believe that Mr. King and probably the Republican party are at war with Islam. After all, the hearings were his idea and the Republican party gave him the forum.

CHRISTOPHER BRAUCHLI is a lawyer in Boulder, Colorado. He can be reached at: brauchli.56@post.harvard.edu.

February 09, 2016
Andrew Levine
Hillary Says the Darndest Things
Paul Street
Kill King Capital
Ben Burgis
Lesser Evil Voting and Hillary Clinton’s War on the Poor
Paul Craig Roberts
Are the Payroll Jobs Reports Merely Propaganda Statements?
Fran Quigley
How Corporations Killed Medicine
Ted Rall
How Bernie Can Pay for His Agenda: Slash the Military
Neve Gordon
Israeli Labor Party Adopts the Apartheid Mantra
Kristin Kolb
The “Great” Bear Rainforest Agreement? A Love Affair, Deferred
Joseph Natoli
Politics and Techno-Consciousness
Hrishikesh Joshi
Selective Attention to Diversity: the Case of Cruz and Rubio
Stavros Mavroudeas
Why Syriza is Sinking in Greece
David Macaray
Attention Peyton Manning: Leave Football and Concentrate on Pizza
Arvin Paranjpe
Opening Your Heart
Kathleen Wallace
Boys, Hell, and the Politics of Vagina Voting
Brian Foley
Interview With a Bernie Broad: We Need to Start Focusing on Positions and Stop Relying on Sexism
February 08, 2016
Paul Craig Roberts – Michael Hudson
Privatization: the Atlanticist Tactic to Attack Russia
Mumia Abu-Jamal
Water War Against the Poor: Flint and the Crimes of Capital
John V. Walsh
Did Hillary’s Machine Rig Iowa? The Highly Improbable Iowa Coin Tosses
Vincent Emanuele
The Curse and Failure of Identity Politics
Eliza A. Webb
Hillary Clinton’s Populist Charade
Uri Avnery
Optimism of the Will
Roy Eidelson Trudy Bond, Stephen Soldz, Steven Reisner, Jean Maria Arrigo, Brad Olson, and Bryant Welch
Preserve Do-No-Harm for Military Psychologists: Coalition Responds to Department of Defense Letter to the APA
Patrick Cockburn
Oil Prices and ISIS Ruin Kurdish Dreams of Riches
Binoy Kampmark
Julian Assange, the UN and Meanings of Arbitrary Detention
Shamus Cooke
The Labor Movement’s Pearl Harbor Moment
W. T. Whitney
Cuba, War and Ana Belen Montes
Jim Goodman
Congress Must Kill the Trans Pacific Partnership
Peter White
Meeting John Ross
Colin Todhunter
Organic Agriculture, Capitalism and the Parallel World of the Pro-GMO Evangelist
Ralph Nader
They’re Just Not Answering!
Cesar Chelala
Beware of the Harm on Eyes Digital Devices Can Cause
Weekend Edition
February 5-7, 2016
Jeffrey St. Clair
When Chivalry Fails: St. Bernard and the Machine
Leonard Peltier
My 40 Years in Prison
John Pilger
Freeing Julian Assange: the Final Chapter
Garry Leech
Terrifying Ted and His Ultra-Conservative Vision for America
Andrew Levine
Smash Clintonism: Why Democrats, Not Republicans, are the Problem
William Blum
Is Bernie Sanders a “Socialist”?
Daniel Raventós - Julie Wark
We Can’t Afford These Billionaires
Enrique C. Ochoa
Super Bowl 50: American Inequality on Display
Jonathan Cook
The Liberal Hounding of Julian Assange: From Alex Gibney to The Guardian
George Wuerthner
How the Bundy Gang Won
Mike Whitney
Peace Talks “Paused” After Putin’s Triumph in Aleppo 
Ted Rall
Hillary Clinton: the Good, the Bad and the Ugly
Gary Leupp
Is a “Socialist” Really Unelectable? The Potential Significance of the Sanders Campaign
Vijay Prashad
The Fault Line of Race in America
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail