Rep. Keith Ellison’s Bigotry


In fact, six weeks after the September 11 attacks — before Hamdani’s remains were identified, which Ellison implies to be the turning point of public perception — Congress signed the PATRIOT Act into law with this line included: “Many Arab Americans and Muslim Americans have acted heroically during the attacks on the United States, including Mohammed Salman Hamdani, a 23-year-old New Yorker of Pakistani descent, who is believed to have gone to the World Trade Center to offer rescue assistance and is now missing.” That is, Hamdani was actually singled out for particular high honors among the thousands of victims of the September 11 attacks.

There’s little evidence of the “rumors” of which Ellison speaks, either. Poke around yourself. Go to Google and search for Mohammed Salman Hamdani’s name, using various time frames from before today’s hearings (say, in the week after the September 11 attack). You’ll discover two discordant sets of returns: none for sites and news reports accusing Hamdani of being a terrorist, and many thousands of pages honoring him as a hero while claiming that he was “widely accused” of being a terrorist.

Web pages that do source the claim that Hamndani was “widely accused” of being a terrorist typically trace back to a single report from the New York Post, dated Oct. 12, 2001, and titled “Missing — or Hiding? Mystery of NYPD Cadet from Pakistan.” The piece has been taken offline, but its content is preserved elsewhere. Here’s what the New York Post wrote:

Read the article
(Hat tip: Dennis Prager Show)

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Notify of
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

People who are ignorant of Islam have no idea how very different it is from other ”religions,” like, say, Judaism or Christianity.

For example, Keith Ellison lied several times with regards to the Homeland Security Hearings on American Muslim radicalization.

Both Judaism and Christianity have admonishions AGAINST lying.
(See Exodus 20:16; John 8:44; Proverbs 14:5; or Proverbs 6:19)

But Islam actually encourages lying, dissembling and holding back the whole truth.
In Islam these teachings and practices are called Kitman and Taqiyya.

Here’s what Keith E. did:
On Friday on TV Keith invoked a deceitfully redacted extract of Koran 5:32, and the ostensible Koranic paean to “tolerance,” verse 2:256.

See the video here:,0

The Koran’s “verses of peace,” as cited by Ellison, verse 2:256, “There is no compulsion in religion,” were all abrogated by the so-called verses of the sword.

These abrogating verses of the sword recommend beheading or otherwise murdering and mutilating non-Muslims, and Muslim apostates.

According to classical Muslim Koranic commentators verse 9:5 (perhaps the most infamous verse of the sword), “Slay the idolators wherever you find them, and take them captives and besiege them and lie in wait for them in every ambush...”, for example, cancels 124 verses that promote patience and toleration.

And this doctrine of abrogation, necessitated by the many contradictions which abound in the Koran, originates as putatively taught by Muhammad, himself, at verse 2:106: “Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?”.

This verse, in combination with verses* 16:101, 22:52, and 87:6, was elaborated into a formal system of abrogation (naskh in Arabic) by the greatest classical Muslim Koranic scholars and jurists, which entailed (p.72),

…the suppression of a ruling without the suppression of the wording.
That is to say, the earlier ruling is still to be found in the Koran, and is still to this day recited in worship, but it no longer has any legal force.

So. Ellison had a “script” ready, and just needed to find a “player” to “fill the role”??? A “missing 9/11 Muslem fit perfectly? Then “create” a “record” to fit the script??? Hmmmm how very “Liberal of him”! Didn’t I see this somewhere once?? Um, oh yeah, it was in a MOVIE! “Wag the Dog”!! Dems seem to use that sort of “Idea” a lot!

Oh, wordsmith, that’s EASY! We’re used to talking to Liberals about things political.. and that REQUIRES repetitiveness, to penetrate thick skills… over and over and over…..and most of the time, it doesn’t work anyway.. once thru the skull portion, the “great void” in there does not HOLD new ideas or thoughts! All that hard work for nothing! LOL!


You had me until: “…I believe he sincerely believes in the “pc” notions of “Islam is a religion of peace” and is trying to faithfully follow that belief. ”

If you mean that he thinks it says to kill non-believers then I agree. The man is racist bigot who calls anglos white devils and hates Jews. He wants peace? I don’t think so.

Wordsmith, I wonder why, if all you say about how the Koran can be understood, there have been NO REFORMERS of it?
Why is it that would-be reformers cannot use the Koran to REFUTE teachers of violent Jihad and hatred of the non-Muslim?
Not even anonymously on the web?

I personally believe there are many, many weak Muslims, in-name-only types, who would leave that religion if they could do so without family targeting them for death.
(I even know a couple of these, types.)

Sorry, wordsmith, you’re wrong. There is no multiple interpretations to the Qu’ran. Read any Islamic scholar (Bernard Lewis) and you will learn that any edict make by Mohammed that was changed in his later years, it is the later edict that stands, not the earlier one. Then talk to any Islamic scholar and ask them if the Qu’ran is up for different intrepretation, depending on the Imam. They will tell you “no” as the Qu’ran is to be taken literally, not philosophically.

What Ellison did, beside painting a false story about the Muslim victim of 9-11, was to quote an earlier edict and not the later ones that abrogated the earliest. You see, Islam did in fact go through a reformation, but during Mohammed’s time; he was a man of peace the first 13 years, and a violent war lord pedophile the rest of his life.

For some reason I was thinking of Farrakhan when I made my previous post. With that said, he has been buddies with Farrakhan and a member of the nation of islam. I still think Ellison is a fan of the more violent Koran, a racist, and likely an anti-semite.


Your every day, ordinary, Joe-Muslim does not go around “killing and converting” infidels. Joe-Muslim doesn’t go after those who left the faith.

Does the name Abdul Rahman ring a bell, Wordsmith?
Had Abdul Rahman been acquitted and freed inside Afghanistan the MOB would have torn him to death.
Had he been convicted the Sharia Court would have executed him.
So, mostly because Karzai had billions of dolloars of US money at risk, Abdul Rahman was spirited out of Afghanistan in secret.
Other Christians who used to be Muslim sit in prisons in Afghanistan as well as elsewhere.
And that is their only crime….converting away from Islam.

If our man in Pakistan gets out alive I will be happy.
A CIA man, an infidel, who killed two Muslims.
Now the Pakistani court has found him eligible for US diplomatic immunity.
He is safely out of there.
But blood money was paid.
Rana Sanaullah, the law minister of Punjab province, said, “[Raymond] Davis was freed after the exchange of money in the court.”
So Sharia was adjusted to allow an infidel to pay to cover his own life after the deaths of Muslims.
That is NOT in Sharia Law.

Maybe what you mean when you say, ”Joe-Muslim,” is really ”AMERICAN Joe-Muslim.”
Because on that we can agree.

Muhammad dealt with those who left Islam in his life-time with death.
“…..for the Prophet said, ‘If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him.’ ” [ Sahih Bukhari 4.260]

Mohammad said, “The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.” [Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17]

”A man embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism. Mu’adh bin Jabal came and saw the man with Abu Musa. Mu’adh asked, “What is wrong with this (man)?” Abu Musa replied, “He embraced Islam and then reverted back to Judaism.” Mu’adh said, ” I will not sit down unless you kill him (as it is) the verdict of Allah and His Apostle.” [Volume 9, Book 89, Number 271]