Jul 16 2007

Democrat Congressman Compares Our President To Hitler

Is the Democrat party allied with al-Qaeda’s Islamo Fascists? What would one say if the only Muslim in Congress compared our President, during a time of war, to Hitler?

Freshman Congressman Keith Ellison (D-MN), the only Muslim in U.S. Congress, has set off a firestorm of controversy after comparing President Bush to Adolf Hitler, and suggesting that the Bush Administration may have been complicit in the terror attacks of 9/11.

Talk about a recruiting tool for al-Qaeda and a propaganda bonanza for Islamo Fascists everywhere. While the true modern Hitlers are al-Qaeda and their brutal cousin organizations, the news that a US Congressman is comparing our country to the Nazis and that we were the ones behind 9-11 is a serious act of treason. I don’t care HOW desparate you are for votes, you don’t repeat the enemies propaganda as fact if you are a leader who has sworn (on a Koran no doubt) to protect this country and its constitution.

Speaking to a group of atheists in his home district in Minnesota, Ellison equated the 9/11 attacks and aftermath to the 1933 Reichstag fire in Germany, which helped cement Hitler’s power.

He carefully parsed his words stating that he would not ‘accuse’ the Bush Administration of planning 9/11 because “you know, that’s how they put you in the nut-ball box – dismiss you”.

Ellison, a co-sponsor of a bill to impeach Cheney for “high crimes and misdemeanors,” described the Vice President as “the very definition of totalitarianism, authoritarianism and dictatorship” and further condemned his refusal to answer Congress’ questions.

Ellison’s promise: “You’ll always find this Muslim standing up for your right to be atheists all you want,” reportedly “raised eyebrows” among the 300 present.

Ellison must think we are all idiots for not seeing him for what he is. al-Qaeda will stand up for our right to be athiests as they hack our heads off on TV. Will the Democrats stand up as Americans and reject this nonsense from one of their own? Will they rejct Ellison and push him aside like the Reps did David Duke? The test is on. Ellison should be totally rejected – including any support for his re-election, for this crap. As should any insane person who thinks the US was behind 9-11. There is a reason that kind of thinking get’s one into mental institutions. It is not a big step from that insanity to thinking you must take violent action to stop Bush and Cheney. Once reality is lost nothing is for certain.

30 responses so far

30 Responses to “Democrat Congressman Compares Our President To Hitler”

  1. ivehadit says:

    Soothie, do you need AJ to explain to you again that, in a nutshell, George has made the FISA court stop throwing referrals away??!!!

    And let me say this: I trust ONLY George W. Bush in the WOT. I DO NOT trust Hillary or Obama or Edwards with wiretapping ANYONE. Imho, they would not use the intel for our benefit, but rather, against their political enemies…check out the previous administration’s ACTUAL wiretapping for “economic” reasons…riiight!

    Beyond BDS….

  2. MerlinOS2 says:


    Shame poor Sooth doesn’t realize that the Patriot Act warrant requirements have be totally vetted but skips over that part.

    Also it’s really makes sense that ONLY 15,000 cases where sufficient probable cause was demonstrated are not a REAL danger.

    Seems to have kinda high pain threshold there don’t ya think.

    Oh and there is that little thing called the AUMF under which the CIC can order tapping every phone from sea to shining sea at no more than just a gut feeling.

    So there would be a good case to be adjudicated that the Patriot Act was ill formed and does not recognize the exemption for CIC powers and could be declared unconstitutional as a restriction to powers of the CIC.

  3. Terrye says:


    You do not know what you are talking about. If it was that simple we would not even be discussing it. Really. Those impeachment proceedings you lust after would have already been under way.

    I think the interesting thing is that if Bush or any other president tries to stop an attack he has people like you comparing him to Hitler or if he does not do whatever is necessary to stop an attack, he has people like you comparing him to Hitler.

    The truth being that Ellison can yammer on about 9/11 and who was behind it, but if that program you are complaining about had been in effect at the time chances are the government could have stopped that attack.

    Tell me, how do you thinks the Brits are rounding up these guys before they actually kill people? Psychic abilities or what? I think they are watching them and listening to them and spying on them. But that is ok, after all they aren’t Americans.

  4. MerlinOS2 says:

    Sooth still has not grasped the distinction that the NSA doesn’t get warrants.

    They can listen to wherever intel points them. When they build up enough data they pass it to someone like the FBI who then maybe does a 72 hour tap to confirm the data and they get a warrant.

    No grasp of the difference between the difference between the intel side and the justice department side.

    So Sooth present stawman that have no validity.

    I am sure they would also get their panties in a bunch if the goberment was accessing commercially available databases but would give a pass to mass mailers who own or access the same data bases.

  5. crosspatch says:

    “How does that cramp anyone’s style.”

    It doesn’t. That is why that particular “warrentless wiretapping” program is no longer needed and is no longer being done. Once that compromise was made with the FISA courts, that program could be terminated and it was. In the meantime, there has been nobody who has come forward and said they have been harmed in any way. That might be because only people who were in communication with terrorists outside of the US would have been monitored and only in conversations with those terrorists.

    So Sooth, unless you have been in communication with known terrorists outside of the US, you would have nothing to worry about.

  6. crosspatch says:

    “Sooth still has not grasped the distinction that the NSA doesn’t get warrants.”

    That’s true. Basically it has been illegal for NSA to monitor US citizens who are in the country legally. Their efforts are on foreign communications. One of the “holes” in our system was brought to light by the 9/11 commission when it was revealed that it was possible that communications with the 9/11 hijackers may have been intercepted but the intercepted communications destroyed because the hijackers (the pilots, I believe) were in the country legally. These communications were intercepted in the course of monitoring known terrorists overseas, the way I understand it but since one end was in the US, NSA could had to destroy the intercept. They were not even allowed to hand it off to FBI because FBI requires a warrant BEFORE the intercept is collected so we were in a catch-22.

    NSA had the intercept but must destroy it, it can’t be handed over to FBI because there is no warrant beforehand, NSA couldn’t keep it because it involved communications where a warrant was required. In this case the person on the US side of the conversation wasn’t the one being monitored, it was the person overseas. To make matters worse, NSA couldn’t even TELL FBI about the person in the US communicating with the terrorist because it wasn’t allowed to know what the conversation was about.

    In other words, our system was set up so that unless a terrorist in the US was already known to us in advance and a warrant obtained, we could not in any way use communications intercepts acquired in the process of monitoring foreign terrorists when someone in the US stumbled into the picture. That was insane and was changed. First by allowing the NSA to use such intelligence without a warrant, and later by changing the FISA requirement so that a warrant could be obtained after the fact when a domestic terror suspect stumbled into the picture while foreign terrorists were being monitored.

  7. MerlinOS2 says:

    Sooth seemed so worried by the low rejection rate of warrants.

    Well since we already had a communication linkage then the FBI gathers additional evidence to support the warrant, you should have a good chance of getting the warrant issued.

  8. Soothsayer says:

    Trot out your bogus distinctions between NSA or FBI if you wish. The fact is, ANY warrantless wiretap is under present law a FELONY and there is no exemption for either NSA or the president.

    Cheeses K. Rist, legal opinions from thye same people who thought Scooter Libby would be found not guilty.

  9. Aitch748 says:

    Hey Sooth, how’s that impeachment thing going? You think we’ll be seeing articles of impeachment this summer?

  10. ivehadit says:

    Scooter Libby IS NOT GUILTY. Just wait and see.

    Do you still think Nifong was a decent, honest prosecutor, just doin’ his job? Hah! And Ronnie Earle?

    Fitzfong is what Scooter got. Have you all seen Clarice’s comments on the redacted info Fitz kept out of the public eye??????

    And let’s see…Gonzales was supposed to out by the end of April..
    I wouldn’t be throwing stones in that glass house, soothie.