Peter King: Holder Blocked Indictment of CAIR Thugs

To be fair, the Bush Justice Department didn't exactly pursue the unindicted terror co-conspirators with any alacrity either. Still, don't for a minute expect that the incompetent Eric Holder will do anything.

Letter to Peter King: 'White Bitches' Will Be Naming Their Sons Mohammed, Says 'Kiss My Black Muslim Ass'

How charming. No doubt our fearless Attorney General will spare no expense finding out who perpetrated this hate crime that has rocked the conscience of the nation. Oh, it hasn't? I figured such a horrific offense in the new Age of Civility would have the left in an uproar. Well, since they've instigated this climate of hate toward King with their incendiary rhetoric, it's no wonder they're laying low.

The threatening package containing a bloody pig's foot sent to Rep. Pete King (R-LI) was as much a racist assault as it was religious hate mail, The Post has learned.

The rambling note accompanying the porcine parcel proclaimed that "white bitches" would soon be naming their sons Mohammed, said a Capitol Hill source.

The note contained anti-Semitic slurs, called the pig's foot a "Jew foot," taunted "kiss my black Muslim ass," and said King -- who is Catholic -- was targeted because of hearings he held on the radicalization of Muslim Americans.

King, chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, received numerous threats over the hearings and has been getting additional security.

The congressman's office would not comment on the threatening package other than to say it was cooperating with the investigation and referred questions to the Capitol Police.

Meanwhile, a serial fabulist on the Democrat payroll continues to smear King.

Peter King Unloads: 'Maybe Eric Holder Wants to Live in a Dictatorship, We Don’t'

I get the feeling racial coward Eric Holder won't be going out of his way to find out who set a pig's foot and an anti-Semitic diatribe to Congressman Peter King. Especially after he gets wind of this.

The chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee suggested that Attorney General Eric Holder should resign after criticizing Congress for interfering with the trial venues for the detainees at Guantánamo.

Rep. Pete King (R-N.Y.) said Tuesday that Holder should resign if he's so against trying the suspects before a military commission.

“Maybe Eric Holder wants to live in a dictatorship, we don’t," King said in an interview with Fox News. "If he feels so strongly about it [...] and this is such an issue of conscious for him, then Eric Holder should resign. If he feels this strongly he should resign on principle. It would do him good, it would certainly do us good. It would do the country good."

Please, Rep. King, stop sugarcoating things.

Muslim Congressman Grieves for Football Player/Paramedic

Rep Keith Ellison (M-MN) got all teary eyed testifiying today before the panel asking questions about how the radicalization of Muslims can be blunted. My first question for Mr Ellison is have you ever shed those types of tears of any American service member slain battling these radical Islamic terrorists?

He knows what makes good theater but in regards to his comments about Muslims in America rushing in there to grieve maybe he ought to look at the nutjob in New York who promotes active jihad against America and takes great delight in the sufferings of the infidels. Or maybe he can explain all those missing Somalia guys from his home state of Minnesota who keep winding up in Somalia and they have a weird way of celebrating spring break.

Newsflash: Peter King Doesn't Like the New York Times

Say what you will about New York's Peter King, and I've had my disagreements with him in the past. But when it comes to his contempt for the New York Times, he may even have me beat. The thumbsuckers from the Old Grey Hag whimpered the other day about his upcoming hearing on the growing Islamist threat from withing, and today he fired back with both barrels. And that's putting it mildly.

“The New York Times is just basically being a mouthpiece for political correctness,” King said, later adding: “These are very legitimate hearings.”

In many ways, King may prove to be a major problem for the Obama administration in the new Congress.

Since Republicans won the House in November, the media spotlight has mainly focused on one incoming committee chairman: Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), who will head the House Oversight panel.

But the burly New York Republican could be just as big a thorn in the White House’s side.

King, a fiery Irishman known for an independent streak, has repeatedly blasted the administration for its attempt to close the detention facility at Guantanamo Bay and try terrorism suspects in civilian courts.

Not one to mince words, King denounced John Brennan, chief counterterrorism adviser to the White House, for his involvement in homeland-security issues. King accused Brennan of intentionally shutting Congress out of critical briefings on terrorist attacks.

King has every right to challenge Obama and his lackeys. In case the Times has forgotten already, the GOP now controls the House and would be neglecting the desires of millions of Americans. If they don't like it, then too damn bad.

While some Democrats bristle at his King’s criticism of Obama’s national-security policies, it will be difficult to cast him as an ideologue who is just interested in scoring political points.

Former New York City Mayor Ed Koch (D) on Tuesday took a swing at The New York Times on behalf of King for a Sunday editorial denouncing his plans to hold a hearing on the radicalization of U.S. Muslims and homegrown terrorism.

The scathing editorial stated that King needed to take his anti-Muslim criticism down a notch if he wants to be taken seriously as the Homeland Security chairman.

King’s proposal to hold hearings on the issue has brought a rash of criticism from those who argue it could turn into a McCarthy-esque witch-hunt, fueling distrust of the government among Muslim citizens.

In its editorial, the Times wrote that King’s “sweeping slur on Muslim citizens is unacceptable.” It also accused him of too much “blather” and “bluster” on a host of national-security issues.

King quickly punched back.

“I’m certainly not going to take any political advice or direction from The New York Times,” King told The Hill. “I have more contempt for The New York Times than anything or anyone I can think of.”

He added, “People follow what I say. I’m outspoken, but I can back up everything I say. I am what I am and people seem to like it and I’m at peace with myself.”

Good for him. He's sure to receive an onslaught of criticism from the media and those terror co-conspirators from CAIR, but so be it. He'd receive more from the right if he were to fold like a cheap camera under the criticism. If Obama and company are afraid to testify it shows they've got something to hide. And when you've got the bedwetters playing the tired McCarthy card then you know you're on the right track.

Let the hearings begin.

Peter King Plans Hearings on Radical Islam

The unindicted terror co-conspirators at CAIR hardest hit.

In the days following 9/11, I made several television and radio appearances supporting American Muslims, saying that they had nothing to do with the attacks and were as loyal and patriotic as any Americans. I particularly warned that we could not do to Muslims what was done to Japanese-Americans after Pearl Harbor.

Even today I cannot begin to describe the disappointment, anger and outrage I felt when, barely a month after those attacks that killed so many hundreds of Long Islanders, prominent Long Island Muslim leaders were insisting there was no evidence that al-Qaida was responsible for the attacks - even saying it could have been the CIA, the FBI or the Zionists!

Even more troubling is that to this day, no Muslim leader has denounced those vile remarks. Nor did Newsday say a word about these slanders - no moral outrage or condemnation. No demand for an apology or even an explanation.

As I became more immersed in attempting to unravel the radical Islamic threat to our nation and our civilization, it became more and more obvious to me that the moral myopia of Long Island's Muslim leaders and their apologists in the media was the rule - and that there were few exceptions.

Federal and local law enforcement officials throughout the country told me they received little or - in most cases - no cooperation from Muslim leaders and imams.

This noncooperation was perilous enough in the years following 9/11, when the main Islamist threat to the homeland emanated from overseas. Fortunately, that aspect of the jihadist threat has subsided because of the effective counterterrorism infrastructure constructed by the Bush administration. Some Bush policies, such as sharing and receiving intelligence with and from our allies, were relatively non-controversial. Others such as enhanced interrogations, wiretapping foreign terrorists phoning into the United States, the prison at Guantánamo, and monitoring terrorist financial transactions were routinely condemned - but all were necessary and effective.

Al-Qaida has adjusted to this new reality and is recruiting Muslims living legally in the United States - homegrown terrorists who have managed to stay under the anti-terror radar screen. This is why the hearings I will hold next year are so critical.

In the past 15 months we saw Najibullah Zazi, who was raised and educated in Queens, attempt to attack the New York City subway system with liquid explosives, using skills he learned in terrorist training camps in Afghanistan. We learned about Zazi by chance when his name came up on a wiretap. The case was almost compromised when a Queens imam - ostensibly cooperating with the New York City Police Department - tipped off Zazi.

Then there was Nidal Hasan, the Army major accused in the murder of 13 innocent people at Fort Hood last year. And Faisal Shahzad, an American citizen trained in Pakistan, who attempted to detonate a car bomb in Times Square in May. There have also been the recent arrests of homegrown Muslim terrorists in Texas, Chicago, Virginia, Riverdale, North Jersey, San Diego and Portland, Ore.

And on and on it goes. Naturally, that slob Dougie Hooper is whining like a stuck pig.

A spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based CAIR said he fears King’s hearings will become an anti-Muslim witch hunt.

“We’re concerned that it’ll become a new McCarthy-type hearing,” said the spokesman, Ibrahim Hooper.

Aww, poor guy.

'I Wonder What Else They Are Hiding'

Congressman Peter King better watch it. Lil' Mikey Bloomberg might call him a bigot for uttering such a statement.

Not so fast.

The developers of the controversial mosque proposed near Ground Zero own only half the site where they want to construct the $100 million building, The Post has learned.

One of the two buildings on Park Place is owned by Con Edison, even though Soho Properties told officials and the public that it owns the entire parcel. And any potential sale by Con Ed faces a review by the state Public Service Commission.

“We never heard anything about Con Ed whatsoever,” said a stunned Julie Menin, the chairwoman of Community Board 1, which passed a May resolution supporting the mosque.

Daisy Khan, one of the mosque’s organizers, told The Post last week that both buildings on Park Place are needed to house the worship and cultural center. But she claimed ignorance about the Con Ed ownership of 49-51 Park Place and referred questions to Soho Properties, which bought the building at 45-47 Park Place in 2009.

Rep. Peter King, who opposes the mosque, said the developers seemed to be “operating under false pretenses.”

“I wonder what else they are hiding,” said King (R-LI). “If we can’t have the full truth on this, what can we believe?”

Sharif El-Gamal, the head of Soho Properties, first came forward in 2006 seeking to buy the empty building at 45-47 Park Place, said Melvin Pomerantz, whose family owned the property.

Pomerantz said El-Gamal eventually raised $4.8 million cash for 45-47 Park Place. El- Gamal paid an extra $700,000 to take over the lease with Con Ed for the building next door. The lease expires in 2071.

The two buildings were connected years ago — common walls were taken down — and housed a Burlington Coat Factory store.

Con Ed said El-Gamal told the utility in February that he wanted to exercise the purchase option in his $33,000- a-year lease for the former substation.

The utility is now doing an appraisal to determine the property value, and it would be up to El-Gamal to decide whether to accept the price, the utility said. The price is estimated at $10 million to $20 million.

“We are following our legal obligations under the lease. We will not allow other considerations to enter into this transaction,” Con Ed said.

Really hard to believe this duplicitous group of agitators would lie to the public, isn't it? Well, they've probably got nothing to worry about here. The mayor will just clear the way for them and call anyone who opposes him bigots and racists.

Meanwhile, not that anyone is listening to the victims of 9/11, a Muslim voice cries out to put a stop to this insanity.

She must be a bigot or something.

'It's Like They're Bringing al Qaeda Lawyers Inside the Department of Justice'

The most honest, ethical, transparent administration ever, blah blah blah.

The Justice Department's disclosure that nine of President Obama's appointees had either represented or advocated for Guantanamo detainees has touched off a firestorm of criticism.

The surprising admission came three months after Republican Sen. Charles Grassley of Iowa asked Attorney General Eric Holder for a list of names of Obama DOJ appointees who had been involved in legal work for Gitmo prisoners.

Holder, in a letter to Grassley, admitted that nine of the agency's appointees had done some kind of work on behalf of terror suspects.

"To the best of our knowledge, during their employment prior to joining the government, only five of the lawyers who serve as political appointees in those components represented detainees," said Holder in the letter, which is dated Feb. 18.

Only five? Why, I feel better now know only five of Obama's appointees represented these monsters. Now if it were, say, six or seven, then I might have a problem with this insanity.

"Four others either contributed to amicus briefs in detainee-related cases or were otherwise involved in advocacy on behalf of detainees."

Holder refused to reveal the names of any of the DOJ lawyers who worked on behalf of terrorists or their positions in the department, except for two officials whose advocacy for Gitmo detainees had already been reported.

Neal Katyal, the department's principal deputy solicitor general, was once the lawyer for Osama bin Laden's driver. Jennifer Daskal, part of Obama's Detention Policy Task Force, advocated for detainees at Human Rights Watch.

Nice to see we have terrorist advocates in or Justice Department, huh?

But the revelation that the DOJ had staffers who had once backed America's enemies left many critics fuming.

"It's like they're bringing al Qaeda lawyers inside the Department of Justice," said Debra Burlingame, who lost her brother on 9/11 and a board member of the advocacy group Keep America Safe.

Long Island GOP Rep. Peter King said he was perplexed why Holder didn't reveal the names of appointees who had worked for terrorists.

A DOJ rep reiterated that no ethics codes were broken.

"The department's attorneys are subject to ethics and disclosure rules . . . which are the strongest in history," said spokesman Matthew Miller.

It's historic!

If the disclosure rules are so strong, how come we don't know their names? We pay their salaries so we deserve to know who these people are.

'To Me, It's a Sign of Maturity, Strength and Intellect'

To me this entire exercise has been a sign if immaturity, weakness and stupidity, but hey, I'm just some guy with a blog and not a renowned expert.

The trial of 9/11 mastermind Khalid Sheik Mohammed won't be held in lower Manhattan and could take place in a military tribunal at Guantanamo Bay, sources said last night.

Administration officials said that no final decision had been made but that officials of the Department of Justice and the White House were working feverishly to find a venue that would be less expensive and less of a security risk than New York City.

The back-to-the-future Gitmo option was reported yesterday by Fox News and was not disputed by White House officials.

Such a move would likely bring howls of protest from liberals already frustrated that President Obama has failed to meet his deadline for closing the prison at Guantanamo Bay.

Let them howl all they want. Those of us in the New York area should be the ones Obama is listening to, not some whiny, self-serving bunch of babies more concerned with the rights of killers than innocent civilians.

It would also indicate that after years of attacking the Bush administration for its handling of the war on terror, Obama officials are embracing one of the most controversial aspects of it.

The administration is likely considering Gitmo because Congress is moving to cut off funding for holding the expensive trials in civilians courts.

Rep. Peter King (R-LI) has introduced a bill that would prohibit the use of Justice Department funds to try Guantanamo detainees in federal civilian courts, and Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) said he would introduce a similar bill in the Senate next week.

The Washington Post, meanwhile, reports that wherever the terror trials are eventually held, it is virtually certain that they will not take place in New York City.
...
Bloomberg said yesterday that he would not brand Obama a flip-flopper over his turnabout.

"To me, it's a sign of maturity, strength and intellect," Bloomberg said on WOR radio yesterday.

Way to kiss Obama's tush, Mikey. If this towering intellect was so brilliant, he'd have seen what a firestorm this idiotic decision would have caused.

Naturally, some "experts" don't see it that way.

There are limits to where the U.S. can try the self-professed Sept. 11 mastermind outside of New York City - especially if murder is in the mix, experts say.

Bowing to critics who want the trial of Khalid Shaikh Mohammed out of Foley Square, the Department of Justice Friday appeared close to abandoning plans to bring the case in lower Manhattan.

If the attacks had taken place outside the U.S., prosecutors could bring the case in any federal court in America.

Because the crime occurred in the U.S., the trial has to happen where at least one part of the conspiracy took place.

"The trial has to occur in the venue where the crime was committed," said James Benjamin Jr., a former Manhattan federal prosecutor who handled the appeal of World Trade Center bomber Ramzi Yousef.

Complicating matters is that prosecutors would likely want to bring murder charges against Mohammed and his four co-defendants for the deaths of 3,000-plus.

That, experts said, would restrict the location to the three places where blood was shed: the Southern District of New York, the Eastern District of Virginia or the Western District of Pennsylvania.

OK, then how about trying them at the Pentagon?

Shocker! Sleazy Rangel Whips Out the Race Card

Can't say we're surprised by this. The desperate Democrats just love injecting race into any political disagreement. You object to anything proposed by a black man and bingo, you're racist!

So easy, even a criminal Democrat can play!

"Some Americans have not gotten over the fact that Obama is president of the United States. They go to sleep wondering, 'How did this happen?' " Rangel (D-Manhattan) said Tuesday.

Speaking at a health-care forum in Washington Heights, Rangel said that when critics complain that Obama is "trying to interfere" with their lives by pushing for health-care reform, "then you know there's just a misunderstanding, a bias, a prejudice, an emotional feeling."

"We're going to have to move forward notwithstanding that," said Rangel, the powerful chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee and a chief health-care negotiator.

Rangel then likened the battle over health-care expansion for the uninsured to the fight for civil rights.

"Why do we have to wait for the right to vote? Why can't we get what God has given us? That is the right to live as human beings and not negotiate with white southerners and not count the votes. Just do the right thing," he said.

Quite amusing how many Democrats have found God recently. If a Republican mentions God we see the left go apoplectic. But since the Democrats have no shame, they're allowed to insert God into every political discussion.

Don't you just love double standards?

Critics of ObamaCare blasted Rangel for taking the low road.

"Charlie Rangel knows that race has nothing to do with the health-care debate. He should not be implying that race has anything to do with it," said Rep. Peter King (R-LI).

State Conservative Party leader Mike Long called Rangel's comment "outrageous and outlandish" -- and suggested the congressman might be trying to deflect attention from his ethics woes.

"Rangel is playing the race card. It's clear that the congressman is trying to galvanize the minority community that this is 'us against them.' It's going to backfire. A majority of people will see through this," Long said.

After the forum, Rangel insisted he was not smearing opponents as racists.

"What I'm saying is, if you watch the town-hall meetings, people were angry and did not care what the answer was to some of their questions. They were angry with their member of Congress, period," he said.

Meanwhile, this thug's recent tax re-filings have apparently become contagious.

Charlie Rangel's "forgetfulness" is apparently contagious.

Two of his top aides are among about a dozen highly paid staffers on the powerful tax-writing Ways and Means Committee who have filed a flurry of amendments correcting their financial-disclosure statements since 2002.

Jim Capel, chief of staff for Rangel's personal office, failed to file any such statements for six years.

On the afternoon of July 14, Capel filed five years' worth of delinquent reports.

Capel told The Post yesterday it was a simple oversight.

"I am sorry for not making these filings in the timely manner as required," he said. "My failure was not done for no other reason than I just forgot to do so."

Another serial mis-filer working for Rangel is George Dalley, who is legal counsel in Rangel's personal office. Dalley has amended his statements four times since 2002.

In his 2007 statement, he failed to disclose as much as $150,000 in rental income on two properties in DC.

Amazing hor "forgetful" these Democrats are.

Peter King Goes Nuclear on Holder: 'It's Disgraceful. You Wonder Which Side They’re On'

Yes, I've been wondering that for some time.

A "furious" Rep. Peter King, the hawkish, maverick Long Island Republican, blasted a "disgraceful" Eric Holder for opening an investigation of CIA interrogators and chided his own party for what he described as a weak response to the move in an interview just now with POLITICO.

"It’s bulls***. It’s disgraceful. You wonder which side they’re on," he said of the Attorney General's move, which he described as a "declaration of war against the CIA, and against common sense."

"It’s a total breach of faith, and either the president is intentionally caving to the left wing of his party or he’s lost control of his administration," said King, the ranking Republican on the House Committee on Homeland Security and a member of the House Select Committee on Intelligence.

King, channeling both the sense of outrage and of political opportunity felt in parts of the GOP, defended in detail the interrogation practices -- threats to kill a detainee's family, and or to kill a detainee with a power drill -- detailed in a CIA inspector general report released yesterday.

"You're talking about threatening to kill a guy, threatening to attack his family, threatening to use an electric drill on him – but never doing it," King said. "You have that on the one hand – and on the other you have the [interrogator's] attempt to prevent thousands of Americans from being killed."

"When Holder was talking about being 'shocked' [before the report's release], I thought they were going to have cutting guys' fingers off or something – or that they actually used the power drill," he said.

Pressed on whether interrogators had actually broken the law, King said he didn't think the Geneva Convention "applies to terrorists," and that the line between permitted and outlawed interrogation policies in the Bush years was "a distinction without a difference."

"Why is it OK to waterboard someone, which causes physical pain, but not threaten someone and not cause pain?" he asked, warning of a "chilling" effect on future CIA behavior.

"You will have thousands of lives that will be lost and the blood will be on Eric Holder's hands," he said.

Interesting how Holder's old law firm is in the business of releasing Club Gitmo terrorists and now he's aiming to prosecute the men who helped put them there.

Change!

I will say Obama's desire to change the subject while he's busy golfing sure has worked. The left is wee-weeing with joy all over themselves at the notion that our nation's heroes could be prosecuted.

Meanwhile, King isn't the only one sending out the warnings.

“This is a political act….It’s awful, just awful” said Vince Cannistraro, who headed CIA counterterrorism efforts in the early 1990s. “There’s a lot of sadness among the professionals that have been doing this…They’re scaring the hell out of people. A lot of people are going to just retire.”

Cannistraro said he viewed many of the extreme techniques, such as waterboarding, as unhelpful and unwise, at least in retrospect. But he said it was “stupid” to expose people to criminal liability for excesses such as trying to frighten a detainee by staging a mock execution in another room.

“There were a lot of stupid things done, no question about it, but do you want to prosecute them for doing the same kind of thing you saw on TV in a drama?” the former CIA official said. “We are now forgetting why they were doing what they were doing. Whether it was right or wrong is another question.”

'It Was An Orgy of Glorification'

After the first day or so of the Michael Jackson coverage I felt the same way. Hard to believe they haven't even held a funeral for him yet. Thankfully, with beautiful weather and time off, I've had much better things to do than watch the excessive coverage of the freakshow that tomorrow will overrun Los Angeles.

Always one to speak his mind honestly, New York Congressman Peter King has had enough and is now taking heat in some quarters for his recent comments.

Tonight he's not backing down.

Good for him.

Over the weekend, Long Island Congressman Peter King posted what is often called "a rant" on YouTube -- sounding off. In this case, about what he called the media glorification of Michael Jackson. CBS 2 HD sat down with the congressman Monday and King continued in person where he left off on

On the video, King launches into scathing criticism of Jackson.

"For the last, I don't know how long now, this low-life Michael Jackson, his name, his face, his picture, is all over the newspapers, television, radio. That's all we hear about is Michael Jackson. Let's knock out this psycho-babble. This guy was a pervert, a child molestor, he was a pedophile, and to be giving this much coverage to him day in and day out, what's it say about us a country?" King says on the video.

The "rant," as such a video posting is called, that Rep. King posted on the popular video sharing site sparked a split of outrage and praise. And Monday, he told us why he did it.

"I just thought, this has gone over the top. It was an orgy of glorification," King told CBS 2 HD on Monday.

On the video King also says: "I just think we're too politically correct. No one wants to stand up and say, 'We don't need Michael Jackson!' He died, he had some talent, but fine, there are people dying every day. There are men and women dying everyday in Afghanistan, let's give them the credit they deserve.

"The bottom line is, would you let your child or grandchild be alone in a room with Michael Jackson?

King also says "there was nothing good about this guy" even though Jackson "may have been a good singer" and "did some dancing."

On Monday he carried the rant further:

"Yes, he did violate young boys. He did put them in terribly inappropriate positions. And that's a terrible signal to be sending out to society -- that we're somehow condoning that behavior. And you are condoning it when you give him the type of --- when we give him the type of regal coverage! And millions of people fighting to get to this mega-memorial! I mean, this is --- this is wrong!"

Needless to say, most news outlets will be going wall-to-wall with the freakshow Tuesday.

I won't be watching.

Meanwhile, if you need a good laugh, some goofballs are raising money to try and unseat King. As of this writing they've raised just over $500.

That'll go far.

Michelle Malkin notes one of Barack Obama's stooges at the Huffington Post is promoting this.

Obama's Hugs for Thugs

Ralph Peters brings the hammer down on the very misguided Barack Obama.

Until Latin American states accept responsibility for what generations of corrupt, oppressive leaders did to their own countries, they won't progress beyond their self-destructive cultures of blame.

It's easy to chant, "Yanquis, go home!" Well, the Yankees went home. And only such countries as Chile, Colombia and, increasingly, Brazil, which have taken responsibility for their own futures, are making progress.

Obama was exactly right on one point: Our relations with Latin America must be a partnership in which all are treated as equals, based upon mutual respect.

But how do the lurid, screwball attacks on us by the likes of Chavez, Ortega or Bolivia's Evo Morales -- a racist demagogue -- count as examples of mutual respect? Doesn't our country deserve some slight defense from our president?

Obama needs to get up off his knees. Foreign leaders have already pegged him as the wimpiest metrosexual this side of the men's grooming-products counter at Barney's.

Ouch. Read the whole piece.

Meanwhile, since Obama is all for a Cuban stimulus plan (American money going there, no freedom in return), New York Republican Peter King is calling for the extradition of certain fugutives, who just happen to be left-wing terrorists.

Amid signs of a potential thaw in US-Cuba relations, Rep. Peter King wants to force the extradition of criminals who have been hiding out in Havana with the blessing of the Castro regime -- saying the cases should be a precondition for any talks.

At the top of the list is William Morales, the former bomb-maker for the FALN, which carried out several bombings in New York in the 1970s.

Morales lost nine of his fingers during an explosion, escaped from Bellevue Hospital in 1978, then made his way to Mexico and later Cuba.

Also living freely in Havana is Joanne Chesimard, who was convicted of killing a New Jersey trooper in 1977. There is still a $1 million bounty for her return.

"It's disgraceful that they have their sanctuary in Cuba," King told The Post.

If Cuba is serious about thawing relations, then hand them over. Somehow I doubt Obama has any interest in bringing them back.

King: Guantanamo Like Club Med for Terrorists

Considering many of these monsters at Club Gitmo claimed they were just hapless bystanders on vacation in Afghanistan, you suppose they would be enjoying the creature comforts at a Club Med-like facility. Of course such comments will likely send delicate flowers like Glenn Greenwald into fits of apoplexy.

They should call it Camp Gitmo.

Congress yesterday conducted its first inspection of the Guantanamo Bay military prison since President Obama ordered it closed.

Long Island Rep. Peter King said it looked more like Club Med for terrorists than the torture chamber depicted by its critics.

"The prisoners are being treated better than American citizens in any prison I've been to in the United States," said King, the ranking Republican on the Homeland Security Committee.

"They're allowed out of their cells for hours at a time - even the worst of the worst," he told The Post

Meanwhile, racial coward Eric Holder also visited Club Gitmo Monday, and in a nod to openness and transparency, no reporters were allowed to accompany him.

Attorney General Eric Holder on Monday visited the U.S. detention center at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, as the Obama administration weighs what is needed to shut the facility.

The role of the prison in the war against terrorism and the treatment of suspects held there was a continuing international controversy during the Bush administration. During the campaign, Barack Obama repeatedly pledged to close it if elected president.

Now, Obama has set a goal of shuttering the facility within a year. And a large part of Holder's visit involves talks with officials about detention and interrogation practices.

No news reporters accompanied Holder on the flight.

Holder and about a half-dozen key aides arrived at Guantanamo around midmorning Monday and they are scheduled to return to Washington Monday night.

Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., who led a congressional delegation to Guantanamo that left shortly before Holder arrived, said he think Holder's visit is a good thing if Holder keeps an open mind.

"If he has an open mind, he would see that the detainees are treated humanely, that these are dangerous people, and I don't believe Guantanamo should be closed," said King, the senior Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee.

"I think he's going to realize the problems, as to where these people are going to go," King said. "Who's going to accept them? What we do with them?"

Princess Would Topple King

You want to know what bad shape Republicans are in in the state of New York? Well, just 42% of respondents believe Caroline Kennedy is qualified to serve in the Senate, but she'd still hammer Republican Congressman Peter King in 2010.

The latest Rasmussen Reports telephone survey of New York voters finds Kennedy would attract 51% of the vote in a match-up with Republican Peter King, a longtime congressman form Long Island. King, who has made his interest in such a race clear, earns 33% of the vote at this time. Nine percent (9%) say they would vote for a third-party candidate, and seven percent (7%) are not sure.

Still, there are hints of potential vulnerability for the daughter of former President John F. Kennedy, who is the leading candidate to replace Hillary Clinton in the Senate.

Just 42% believe she is qualified to serve in the Senate, and only nine percent (9%) believe she would do a better job than Clinton. Thirty-four percent (34%) believe she would not do as well as her predecessor, who has been nominated by President-elect Obama to serve as secretary of State.

Less than half the voters believe she's qualified yet she still crushes the Republican with the best name recognition.

Great.

'We're Seeing a Seat-Warmer in Delaware, a Seat-Seller in Illinois, and We're Making Seat-Cushions in New York ...'

One of the more surprising things about this story is there are actual Republicans still left in New York that can get some face time on television.

By all means, send us more seat-warmers. All this global warming here in the Northeast is taking a toll on us.

Caroline Kennedy, who has placed her name in contention as a replacement for Sen. Hillary Clinton, was slammed by New York Republicans who view her as a "celebrity" without the qualifications necessary to function in Congress.

At the same time, it was suggested that Republicans might want her to be chosen, preferring to run against her in two years' time than against a more experienced politician.

Speaking on CBS' Face The Nation, Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. (who has said he wants to run for Senate) called Kennedy a "People Magazine celebrity" who, as far as he knew, "has never held a real job.

"How can the average New Yorker identify with Caroline Kennedy?" King asked. "She comes from an outstanding family, I'm sure she's a wonderful parent, but she's never taken a stand on any public issue. She's never even held one news conference. She hasn't gone to one American Legion hall or Knights of Columbus hall or Masonic temple, or one synagogue to answer questions. When she does go on her so-called listening tour upstate, she's, like, running from city hall into the car to avoid reporters.

"And we just can't afford that. We can't afford to have a senator who is not prepared on day one."

While King said that other potential replacements for Hillary Clinton had "far more credentials" than Kennedy, he believed that choosing her would put Kennedy under tremendous scrutiny. "There's going to be a magnifying glass on her," he said. "And people are going to see that she is not equipped for the job. And I think the Republican candidate in 2010 will have a much better opportunity against Caroline Kennedy than against the others, especially someone who can identify with middle-income, working-class families."

The GOP sentiments were echoed by Rep. Tom Reynolds, from Buffalo in upstate New York, who decried the Senate as becoming "a House of Lords."

Referring to replacements being named or proferred to replace Senators Joe Biden and Barack Obama, Reynolds said, "We're seeing a seat-warmer in Delaware, a seat-seller in Illinois, and we're making seat-cushions in New York for, kind of, an aristocrat royalty of entitlement coming in here."

'He's An Evil Person. It's Morally Disgraceful'

Congressman Peter King tells it like it is, while Chuckie Schumer, finally commenting after four days, offers some lame, mealy-mouthed drivel about what he's doing with the money he received from the disgraced Bernard Madoff.

He's the Grinch who stole . . . everything.

Accused mega-swindler Bernard Madoff yesterday skulked out of his Upper East Side penthouse and went into hiding as scores more charities, banks and individual investors revealed that they face financial ruin from his alleged $50 billion Ponzi scheme.

"He's an evil person. It's morally disgraceful," said Rep. Peter King (R-LI), who yesterday called for a congressional probe of the scam.

King said he recently attended several Christmas parties where guests included people who lost tens of millions of dollars in investments entrusted to Madoff, 70, who was busted by federal authorities last week.

One party guest pointed around a room, saying, "That guy lost $10 million, and that guy lost so many millions," King recalled.

Madoff seemed maniacal about keeping his scam going to the end.

As recently as Thanksgiving, he was pushing pals to invest more money with him, telling them he could work wonders in the volatile market, a source told The Post.

Madoff's alleged fraud has especially hurt charities linked to his own Jewish faith.

Schumer, meanwhile, who's been noticeably absent on this, the biggest swindle in world history perhaps, finally had something to say.

Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) Monday led a long list of officeholders and groups expected to give up more than $430,000 in political contributions from Bernie Madoff and his family.

"My money, I'm returning," Schumer said. The $6,000 Madoff gave him over the years would be sent to charity, he said.

The $100,000 Madoff donated to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee, run by Schumer until last month, should also be returned, but "that is their decision," Schumer said.

Weak, Chuckie. Very, very weak. You ran the DSCC, you took the money from Madoff. Step up and demand they return it. Good grief, imagine the howls from this guy if Republicans were swimming in this ill-gotten money like the Democrats are?

Madoff contributed $164,650 to various campaigns and political-action committees - including $101,000 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee - over the past decade, records show.

That largesse helped Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY), who chaired the DSCC, in his successful quest to win Democratic control of the US Senate.

Madoff also kicked in $6,300 to Schumer's congressional campaign committees.

Schumer yesterday said he is giving the $6,300 Madoff donation to three charities associated with police and fire unions.

Madoff also welcomed Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-NY) to the state by donating $1,000 to her initial Senate run in 2000.

Harlem Rep. Charles Rangel has received two $1,000 contributions from Madoff.

As for King's call for a Congressional probe: Good luck with that. If it were strictly Republicans who received money from this bum they'd be pounding the gavel already. Since the GOP received a pittance compared with the vast sums lavished on Democrats, you can forget Congress taking any action.

Meanwhile, get ready for a government bailout of the swindled investors. Chuck Schumer will probably be first in line. Maybe it's just me, but bailing out people because of gullibility and stupidity isn't the government's responsibility.

GOP Outrage Over Islamic Society Convention

We noted Monday that the Department of Justice was sponsoring a convention held by the Islamic Society of North America.

Finally, some lawmakers have spoken out about it. Republicans only, of course.

What, you expected Democrats to speak up?

Republican lawmakers are urging the Justice Department not to participate in a convention held by the Islamic Society of North America -- a group named as an unindicted co-conspirator in an ongoing terrorism-financing case.

In a letter to Attorney General Alberto R. Gonzales, Reps. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan, ranking member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, and Sue Myrick of North Carolina called the Justice Department's involvement a "grave mistake."

"In light of the threat that our nation is currently facing from radical jihadists, and because of the president's commitment to fighting the war on terror on all fronts, we believe it is a grave mistake to provide legitimacy to an organization with extremist origins, leadership and a radical agenda," the lawmakers said.

Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, said he agrees that Justice officials should not attend the conference.

"It is absolute insanity for the federal government, especially the Department of Justice, to be giving any credibility at all to a group like the ISNA, which has such strong links to Islamic extremism," Mr. King said.

The Washington Times notes there will be a complete story to follow.

Let's hope the DoJ snaps out of it and puts the kibosh on this lunacy.

UPDATE: More at Michelle Malkin and LGF.

Democrats Kill 'John Doe'

These people really are disgusting. Not only do they want to surrender to the terrorists on the battlefield, but now if you report suspicious activity, the Democrats have made it easier for you to be sued.

Democrats cut 'John Doe' provision

Congressional Democrats today failed to include a provision in homeland security legislation that would protect the public from being sued for reporting suspicious behavior that may lead to a terrorist attack, according to House Republican leaders.

"This is a slap in the face of good citizens who do their patriotic duty and come forward, and it caves in to radical Islamists," said Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee.

Republicans wanted the provision included in final legislation, crafted yesterday during a House and Senate conference committee, that will implement final recommendations from the September 11 commission.

Mr. King and Rep. Steve Pearce, New Mexico Republican, sponsored the provision after a group of Muslim imams filed a federal civil rights lawsuit against US Airways and unknown "John Doe" passengers. The imams were removed from US Airways Flight 300 on Nov. 20 after fellow passengers on the Minneapolis-to-Phoenix flight complained about the imams' suspicious behavior.

On March 27, the House approved the "John Doe" amendment on a 304-121 vote.

"Democrats are trying to find any technical excuse to keep immunity out of the language of the bill to protect citizens, who in good faith, report suspicious activity to police or law enforcement," Mr. King said. "I don't see how you can have a homeland security bill without protecting people who come forward to report suspicious activity."

While the conference is not likely to meet again, Mr. King noted the conference report has not been written and says he will continue discussions with Sen. Joe Lieberman, Connecticut independent and chairman of the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, to insert the "John Doe" language.

Sen. Susan Collins, Maine Republican and ranking member of the committee, announced afterward she will attempt to attach a similar bill to an education measure currently under debate on the Senate floor.

The Democrat Party. Fighting tooth and nail to make you less safe.

More from Michelle Malkin, Riehl World View, Atlas Shrugs, Wake Up America.

House GOP Alternative to Shamnesty

It's times like these when I tip to my hat to Long Island's Peter King, a man who never is afraid to be called names and generally does the right thing, most notably recently in the Flying Imams/John Doe legislation in the House (which the Democrats are trying to bottle up).

Now King and Lamar Smith of Texas have introduced a bill focused on improving security and urging President Bush to enforce the laws already on the books, Steven Dinan reports today.

Goodness, they must be taking their marching orders from talk radio. Or, more likely, they realize the overwhelming majority of Americans are opposed to Shamnesty.

Key House Republicans yesterday said they would stick with current immigration laws rather than adopt the Senate's reform bill, taking a poke at the key selling point of President Bush and Senate Republicans to try to earn conservatives' support.

"Ideally, you would have the current law plus the legislation we are proposing today, but what we want to do is stop the Senate amnesty bill in its tracks right now," said Rep. Peter T. King, New York Republican and ranking member of the Homeland Security Committee.

He and fellow Republicans -- including Rep. Lamar Smith of Texas, ranking member of the Judiciary Committee -- introduced a bill enhancing existing security and a resolution calling on Mr. Bush to enforce a dozen laws already on the books.

Mr. Bush and some Senate Republicans have argued that the current situation is de facto amnesty for illegal aliens because the laws are too difficult to enforce. They say the Senate bill -- which gives legalized status to most illegal aliens, creates a new worker program and requires stricter employer checks ? is needed to gain control.

Meanwhile, Dinan also notes the focuse of Georgia's two GOP senators, Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, who are under tremendous pressure on both sides.

The battle for each senator's vote on immigration is at the hand-to-hand combat level now, with business groups that want the bill and grass-roots activists who oppose it fighting it out through phone calls, radio ads and personal visits at offices back home.

Georgia is the newest fight, with the state's U.S. senators considered premier prizes: Sens. Saxby Chambliss and Johnny Isakson, both Republicans who appeared to back the Senate's immigration bill before distancing themselves in the face of voter opposition. But even as they try to increase the gap, the Bush administration and Georgia businesses are trying to rope them back in, telling them the state's economy needs the workers.

Michelle Malkin, as usual, is leading the charge, today highlighting an ad from 9/11 Families for a Secure America. It is the notion of us allowing undocumented terrorists into this country which is in great part driving the opposition to this legislation.

You can make all the arguments you want that we cannot deport the millions of illegals here. Fine. Still, what Americans want is our borders secure and the flow of mysterious people coming in halted. It's as if we have sat by for 40 years and watched an invasion without putting up any resistance. Nobody is implying poor Mexicans who want to come here have nefarious motives, but it isn't a stretch of the imagingation to see Al Qaeda being able to recruit Mexican gang members to work with them, is it?

Finally, if we need to reinforce to logical choice of deporting criminal illegals, Patterico, the newest addition to Hot Air, has yet another example of a criminal illegal -- who never should have been in the country -- taking lives while driving drunk.

Ironic that a drunk driver who snuffed out a life -- hello, Ted Kennedy!, is the driving force behind allowing a swarm of illegals to overrun this country.

Others weighing in include 7.62mm Justice.