Sunday, September 24, 2006

Peter King Had a Bad Week

And we're glad to do our part.

Congress Daily caught King lying about first-responder funding. "The agreement on a FEMA overhaul plan also has not calmed the rancor between House Homeland Security Chairman Peter King, R-N.Y., and ranking member Bennie Thompson, D-Miss., over the issue of funding to help ensure that first responders can communicate with each other in an emergency. Thompson wants to provide $3.1 billion in additional funding to state and local governments for interoperable communications, but that funding was left out of the final agreement."

"King claimed Monday that Thompson never raised the issue of providing the $3.1 billion for interoperable communications during negotiations. "It's really unfortunate that certain Democrats are trying to raise these last-minute political issues," King said.

A committee spokesman added: "Chairman King and ranking member Thompson wrote our bill together, passed it through committee together, and were negotiating with the Senate together. This was never an issue until Mr. Thompson took it to the press late last week. Frankly, it looks more like an excuse to walk away from the negotiations than anything else."

Aides to Thompson said they raised the issue of providing $3.1 billion with King's staff before Labor Day. In one communication to King's aides before Labor Day, which was reviewed by CongressDaily, a Thompson aide mentioned the funding amount. Thompson aides added that Thompson's participation in the negotiations for overhauling FEMA was based on trying to get the $3.1 billion."

Then there was a Newsday story
"Inconsistencies arise in King's attacks" about Kings letter to Jewish constituents and how he misrepresents (lies) about campaign contributions. "In thousands of letters to constituents this month, King (R-Seaford) criticized "American Muslim leaders" for failing to adequately denounce the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks. He took specific aim at the Islamic Center of Long Island in Westbury, saying the mosque's leaders "have publicly stated that the CIA or the 'Zionists' may have been responsible for the 9/11 attacks.""Because I have put aside political correctness and spoken out against these radical leaders, I have been denounced as ... a 'Muslim hater,'" King wrote. "Now they are actively supporting my opponent."

The problem was that King took more money from members of the Mosque than Mejias.

"Last year, King took a total of $3,000 from three Muslim donors who have given $950 to Mejias this year, including Ahmed; Mohammed Saleh, president of the Long Island Muslim Society in East Meadow; and Syed Zaki Hossain, a Hicksville businessman."

Then, Newsday editorialized about the issue with "Peter King's holy war: Guilt by association bad tactic in race." King will of course scream "Liiiiibbbbbuuuurrrrraaaalllll Media" and denounce Newsday but ignore that the same Newsday editorial board endorsed him in the past and he accepted the endorsement.
"Rep. Peter King is playing with fire. He lit the torch when he told selected constituents in a recent letter that "radical" Muslim leaders who've branded him "a Muslim hater" are supporting David Mejias, the Democrat running for his seat in Congress. That's an ugly attempt at guilt by association. There is scant evidence that the Islamic Center of Long Island, the group King fingered so darkly in his letter, is the hotbed of radical, 9/11 conspiracy theories that King implies. And Mejias' connection to the group is tenuous at best.
So, what's the fuss? Mejias accepted campaign contributions from some Muslim supporters associated with the center. That's it. King previously took contributions from some of the same center members. There's nothing wrong with that. After 9/11, leaders of the center in Westbury condemned the attacks and supported international action against global terrorism. Earlier this year, five young people from the center joined Jewish and Catholic youths in a study tour of the Holy Land. Those actions couldn't be more at odds with the picture King painted of leaders who "publicly stated that the CIA or the 'Zionists' may have been behind the 9/11 attacks."
Ghazi Khankan, the leader most identified with such views, left the mosque two years ago. Maybe King is running scared. He's never been bashful about taking Muslim leaders to task for, in his view, insufficiently denouncing terrorism. His full-throated criticism has, no doubt, turned off many Muslims who now support Mejias. But to indict an entire mosque for the views of a few smacks of prejudice. And for King to imply that Mejias is tainted for taking money from people whose money he himself also accepted is just plain hypocritical."

We had an interview with Dr. Farouque Khan of the Islamic Center of Long Island.
"King Watch: Peter King is sending out a letter to what it looks like only Jewish constituents with the NYPost piece attached.The letter states "For instance, leaders at the Islamic Center of Long Island in Westbury have publicaly stated that the CIA and the "zionists" may have been responsible for the 9/11 attacks." and on political contributions "What I am concerned about, however, is the larger issue of what it means to have people, who accuse Jews and he CIA of being responsible for 9/11, taking such an active role without the public knowing just who they are and what they stand for."Do you think this is an attempt to create a wedge between Long Island Muslims and Jews for the sake of votes?

Dr. Khan: Clearly the facts outlined in my previous answer contradict what the Congressman is saying and yes, this letter has the potential of undoing all the good work many of us have been doing in building bridges between faith groups. Incidentally in 2004- AMJID--received the faith fellowship award for our pioneering work with the Jewish community and in Oct. we are planning a joint Sukkoth-Ramadhan celebration at ICLI, last year we had this event in Temple Beth El in Great Neck, I will invite Cong King to the event."

The Mejias Campaign put out a press release on the letter.
"Rabbi Michael L. Kramer of Temple Judea in Massapequa said “Congressman Peter King’s letter to his constituents, tying his opponent, Dave Mejias, to Islamic financial support when he has accepted even more money from the Islamic community is hypocritical, dishonest, and a political deceit.”

And the Long Island Press story "Race Watch 2006 - Mejias To King: Keep It Clean," brought up Kings abyssmal enviromental record.
"Richard Amper, the Environmental Voters Forum’s treasurer, expresses in no uncertain terms his reason for favoring the underdog.
“This could not be a clearer call in terms of who the people of this district should vote for in November…your choice is between Dave Mejias, who is an environmental champion, and Peter King, who is an environmental Neanderthal.”

And this weekend, the Mejias campaign released its first TV ad which we will have up later tonight.


Anonymous said...

If a bad week means coming up with comprehensive Power Plant security legislation which will make our country safer, I'll take that bad week any week of the year. Just because Newsday and this Web site smear King doesn't mean its changing his supporters minds. This is from today's Newsday:

King gives as good as he gets

Newsday's attempt to smear Rep. Peter King (R-Seaford) for accepting donations from Muslims in 2005, whom he is criticizing now for giving to his opponent, is transparent and pathetic ["Clash on cash," News, Sept. 20]. With King's war chest of $1.6 million, donations totaling a mere $3,000 (from three donors) do not even make the radar screen. As reported, $950 of their donations have now gone to his opponent, Nassau Legis. David Mejias, whom these Muslims apparently feel is a more receptive audience.

As a Trade Tower widow, I am sad that Rep. King does not represent my district, because he is one of the few politicians with the courage to say what he thinks about national security and act on it. I guess the only thing left for me to do is to donate to his campaign. Again.

Leslie Dimmling

Garden City

Anonymous said...

He came up with a comprehensive plan?????
First, he didn't and second, the legislation as it stands is dead because it is pretty weak on regulation.

No smears, just the truth.

Anonymous said...

Funny how the King supporter can't refute anything.

Anonymous said...

So weak that the power plant industry is complaining about it. This web site could have some credibility if it didn't knock everything that King did.

Anonymous said...

The bill which is really a rider in the DHS appropriations doesn't allow states to impose tougher regulations than the federal government.
The chemical industry doesn't like any regulation so even the weak requirements are troubling to them.
They would rather self-regulate.

Anonymous said...

the first anonymous poster brought up the chemical plant issue, not this website.
another poster corrected the first person who said King was responsible for the legislation.
Reading comprehension is a good thing.