Is Hillary Clinton subjugating herself to Muslims on Capitol Hill?

Submitted by Svetlanatchkah (United States), Feb 28, 2009 at 05:32

After Tom Tancredo gave an interview in July 2005, in which he suggested "Bombing Islam's holy sites, including Mecca", Nayyera Haq, a spokesperson for John Salazar (D_CO) organized 22 mostly democratic Muslims to start the Congressional Muslim Staffers Association"....It comprises of a cross section of American Muslims including African Americans, South Asians, Arab Americans and others."...

"...Her goal is to educate staffers and through them, congressional members about Islam...One of the Educational points is teaching staff and members that Islam shares its roots with Judaism and Christianity and providing them a "broader" "understanding" of the breath of Islamic beliefs. "...

"...The 2006 election of Keith Ellison (D_MN), is likely to provide additional opportunities for "education and understanding" about Islam in the 100th congress."....

Taken from Essential of American Government by Connor and Sabato (ed. 2008), page 184.

I was wondering if this group that aim to "educate" and "teach" about the "shared" roots with Judaism (remember that under Islamic theology Abraham, Moses, Christ and that one named Muhammad" were all Muslims, so I do not understand the "shared" roots), is not blackmailing the so fragile and coward Hillary Clinton.

Is Hillary subjugating herself to Nayyera Haq and Keith Ellison in the Congress?

Well, to be honest, I did not feel much strength of her, still when living abroad in the past decade, when a simple psychologist at the White House managed to replace Hillary, in one of her most important duties Hillary was not able to fulfill.

In my opinion, again, in my opinion, she was always pathetic. Even when showing support for Israel - just too weak.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".