Why Congressman Peter King is on a Crusade against Muslims

     You’re aware, of course, that Congressman Peter King (R-NY) has embarked on a crusade to investigate Muslims in America, supposedly to find out what motivates them to become "radicalized.” Millions of sensible Americans are scratching their heads, wondering why he"s doing this.

     According to a 2007 survey by Pew Research, American Muslims are about as radical as apple pie. (Source)

     Rabbi Yosef Kanefsky and Imam Jihad Turk  have an unconvincing explanation for King's crusade. They say that King is "making a mistake.”  (Source)  They rightly point out that King's witch hunt is more likely to stir up animosity against Muslims and perhaps serve to radicalize a few Muslims and more than a few non-Muslims.

     Excuse me, but a mistake is something that happens once, over a brief period of time. For example, if a beer-bellied man wore a tight-fitting, knit sport shirt, that would be a mistake. It would make him look like a product placement ad for Budweiser.

     I looked into Peter King's records and found more convincing explanations for the congressman's radical and un-American behavior.

     Like most politicians who began their adult lives as Vietnam draft dodgers (he cooled his heels in the National Guard until 1973), Peter King is gungho on America's wars of aggression and empire building. In his letters to constituents, he can be particularly harsh with constituents who try to reason with him.

     I realize that most politicians are far from smart, but stupidity alone doesn't explain King's witch hunt. After all, his campaign contributors didn’t get rich by being stupid.

     Who are his campaign contributors? Let's take a look at the 2010 campaign cycle.  (Source)

     Of the twenty top contributors to his 2010 re-election campaign, five of them are manufacturers of military weaponry. They are General Dynamics, Boeing, Lockheed Martin, Raytheon, Honeywell International, and United Technologies. Open Secrets.Org doesn't have a link for United Technologies. Here's a link for it:  

http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=7004833821877183483&postID=9143759782290515867

     In the 2010 election cycle, Congressman King received a total of $62,250 from PACs or individuals representing those few companies.

     A brief search turned up the fact that United Technologies, Boeing, and Raytheon are closely connected. Boeing and Raytheon have been manufacturers of the tomahawk missile—the missile that many researchers believe was used to attack the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. Boeing and United Technologies are sister companies. Boeing and Honeywell have undertaken joint projects.

     During that same cycle, he received $11,000 from Goldman Sachs, which needs no introduction.

    If you’ve never heard of Park Strategies, don't feel embarrassed. I had to look it up myself. They are lobbyists for the military-industrial complex, the banksters, and "homeland security.” 

(Source) King received $11,550 from them.

     Of course, heavy-hitting campaign donors don't dish out that kind of dough just because they like a candidate. For them, it's an investment.

     Does it pay off? Well, let's take a look at which companies got the most federal taxpayer dollars for FY2010. I’ve placed in parentheses the amount they received in return for their campaign (ahem!) "contributions.” .(Source)

     Below each name, I've given the total amounts of money that their PACs or individuals gave to Congress (Source: Open Congres.org)

1. Lockheed Martin Corporation ($38,512,401,433.23)

Contributions 2010 cycle: $2,669,689

2. Boeing Company ($21,956,065,368.89)

Contributions 2010 cycle: $2,805,693

4. Raytheon Company ($16,106,903,431.28)

Contributions 2010 cycle: $2,172,978

22. Honeywell International Inc. ($2,938,415,700.74)

Contributions 2010 cycle: $3,861,235

     In case you’re wondering, what Goldman Sachs's PACs and perps did with the billions of dollars in bailout (read: embezzlement) money, they gave $5,868,239 to congressmen for the 2008 election cycle and $2,482,477 during the 2010 cycle.  Where else can you get a multibillion-dollar return on an eight-million-dollar investment?

     Never let anyone tell you that our congress critters are cheap crooks. As Pete King and his unindicted co-conspirators have shown us, they're some of the most expensive crooks that blood money can buy.