The world has changed dramatically since September 11 and the wounds dealt to our great nation are still felt both in the heartland and in nations abroad. The criminal acts committed on that day still fuel, understandably of course, many of the actions and considerations the U.S. has made and brought into light regarding this new world.

Many are felt everyday by average Americans wishing for nothing more than the chance to go back to a time when airline travel wasn’t the hassle it is today.

Some have become questionable, such as the Patriot Act, which raised questions as too what the differences between safety precautions and violation of rights might actually be in a new era infested by malicious hate-filled thugs.

Through it all a singular concept so simple and yet so layered ignited the torch which would guide us Americans through these testing and turbulent times: freedom.

Not just the freedom that is preached so vehemently by our nation’s pundits, but the simple freedom to live as a citizen of our borders with the good intentions of governmental powers at our beck and call. But it would appear that even 10 years after the fact, many still cling to the racial and religious persecution of Muslims we have tried to steer from even during our darkest hours.

Recently, Republican congressman and chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee Peter King has been snatching up media attention and the ear of politicians on both sides of the aisle with his fevered push for hearings based around the radicalization of the Muslim population within the U.S.

Making claims as unsupported and unfounded such as 85 percent of American Mosque’s are radicalized. It would seem that King’s arguments focus mainly on the idea that practicing American Muslims in the states are not doing all that they can to individually combat terrorism.

The sheer audacity of King and his supporters to suggest that the whole of a religious community so large and widespread as Islam should be focused on and responsible for the actions of a small minority of its twisted followers is nothing short of ridiculous.

Though the focus of the conversation is based around religious ideologies, the racial implications of such bold and unfair suggestions are easy to see considering that a majority of Islam’s followers are from or in some way tied to ethnic groups found in the Middle East.

As humorous as the comparison may seem, King’s concept that Muslim’s should be watchdogs for radicals in their faith is as absurd and unthinkable as the U.S. government requesting that Italians should have put an end to Mafia activities in the late twenties or that Catholics should be required to seek out pedophile priests.

The absurdity of the whole move to hold these legislative hearings is only topped by the situations real kicker.

King himself has openly declared that he has and in instances still is an avid supporter of the Irish Republic Army most commonly known as the IRA. If the name doesn’t sound terribly familiar, these are the Irish Catholic most noted for their attacks on, and bombings of several civilian populated areas and buildings in England.

Plainly speaking, these guys have been noted terrorists well before Al Qaeda and Hezbollah were even on the average American’s brain, and yet King feels that their acts don’t constitute true terrorist action simply because their attacks have never been directed at the U.S.

If hypocrisy and short-sightedness could pull itself from the obscurity of language and personify, it would probably call itself Peter King.