January 29, 2007, - 11:08 am

The Feingold Anti-Profiling Bill Poster Boy: Who is Steve Mustapha Elturk?

By Debbie Schlussel
Virtually every mainstream media news outlet is covering Senator Russ Feingold’s announcement that he will re-introduce a absurd bill prohibiting “racial profiling by law enforcement.”
But this isn’t “driving while Black,” and it’s not about “race” at all. It’s about religion, ie., the Muslim religion.
Cited in every story is one Steve Mustapha Elturk, who is identified as “an imam in Troy, Michigan”:


“Steve” Mustapha Elturk & Senator Russ Feingold:

Extremist Muslims & Idiot Senators Should be Profiled More, NOT Less

Steve Mustapha Elturk, an imam in Troy, Mich., said he would welcome a ban on racial profiling. He said U.S. authorities have detained him four times since Sept. 11, 2001 – twice at the Canadian border and twice while traveling by air – even though he has done nothing wrong.
“It is pathetic for an American citizen who has spent more than half his life in this country to have to fly fearing that I will be stopped and interrogated,” said Elturk, 52, who was born in Lebanon. “This is not the country I came to know.”

What Mustapha Elturk (Steve is just his adopted American nickname to make us think this extremist is “just like us”) really means is:

This country is not as gullible as I came to know. (But close enough.)

Elturk is exactly the kind of guy we should be profiling. He openly supports Hezbollah and HAMAS. He is the founder of a new extremist mosque in Warren, Michigan. The mosque was originally rejected by the Warren City Council because a lot of smart people live in Warren, and they worried that his mosque would embrace terrorist groups. Unfortunately, Islamist lawyers and the U.S. Department of Justice–which doesn’t believe in the democratic process in Warren, when it doesn’t get the right PC results–breathed down the neck of Warrenites, promising a federal lawsuit. And the Warren City council caved.
Elturk founded the nebulously named Islamic Organization of North America to get the new mosque approved without scrutiny. But federal agents tell me that it’s just a new name for the same old Islamic extremist groups.
Last year, I attended a “Meet Your New Neighbors” community event in Warren held to answer questions about Elturk’s new mosque. I asked him if he would condemn HAMAS. No. I asked if he would condemn Hezbollah. Nope. I asked if he would condemn Hezbollah’s murder of 300 U.S. Marines and civilians in Beirut. No way. He and CAIR-Michigan chief, Dawud Walid (more about him later, this week), said homicide bombings are not terrorism, that they are justified against those who are “at war with us.”
Elturk also identifies himself as a member of “Tanzeem e-Islami,” (the Islamic Organization) and in the name of that group delivers lectures with the title, “Why are Muslims Humiliated and what is the Way Out.” Not exactly comforting, given the topic, and the fact that another Tanzeem, a faction of Fatah terrorists, murdered Jews and other innocent civilians at random on behalf of Yasser Arafat and the Palestinian Authority. Most of them are now part of the Al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.
Elturk objects to profiling, when profiling was designed for exactly this type of man–the type of man who believes violence against innocents–no matter where in the world (even in America)–is justified.
That the extremist, bearded, thobe-wearing Elturk was only detained four times at the border and airports is disappointing. That means he wasn’t on many other occasions. That Elturk is Feingold’s new national poster boy against profiling tells us exactly why he’s among the most clueless Senators, Harvard degree notwithstanding.
It also tells us that Russ Feingold needs to be profiled, too. Liberal Dhimmiwit U.S. Senators who bend over backward–and forward–for our enemies are extremely dangerous. And a threat to this country’s national security.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

7 Responses

I don’t think racial/religious profiling is the problem, but the abuse of racial/religious profiling is. We haven’t reached that point. American law enforcement has been extremely accommodating when it comes to Muslims (American or not). Sen. Feingold’s bill is unnecessary at this point. Law enforcement should just tell the public they don’t do racial/religious profiling while covertly doing so.
Debbie, what do you think of the story of Maher Arar in Canada?
“Canada apologizes to torture victim
$8.9 mil. for man U.S. sent to Syria as terror suspect”

Norman Blitzer on January 29, 2007 at 12:26 pm

Muslims are at war with anyone who is not muslim and consider only other muslims to be innocents.

dms on January 29, 2007 at 1:32 pm

I used to live in Wisconsin, but never understood how that moderate state could elect Feingold over and over again.
Feingold is a Harvard grad and Rhodes Scholar, which means he spent time at Oxford and was thus infected with that European multicultural disease which is responsible for the Islamification of Europe.
I would be less worried about the profiling thing (although this is the proverbial camel’s nose) than about attempts, prevalent throughout Europe and Canada, to restrict criticism of Muslims or Islam. These crimes often fall under the rubrick of “Incitement to Racial Hatred or Violence”, but once on the books they allow the governing authorities to restrict speech pretty much any way they want.
I would also be worried about efforts in Congress to increase Muslim immigration to the US. Why? Well, at present there is no way to get the proportion of the Muslim population up to European levels, i.e. up to the levels where rights at home and policy abroad begins to be impacted.

sonomaca on January 29, 2007 at 2:03 pm

Show me the money! Feingold, Carl Levin, Jimmah Carter, etc. don’t give a royal flip about the truth or what we think about them. What gives them the confidence to act this way? Could it be that they have benefactors with deep pro-Islamist pockets – enough to ignore those old worthless Judeo-Christian values. If you try to stand up to them in Congress, they literally start screaming like stuck pigs (e.g., Barney Frank). This would be funny if it weren’t so serious.

Sioux on January 29, 2007 at 2:13 pm

When the shit hits the fan once again, I think Amerika will become more like America of tradition. These idiot extraordinaire Senators and Congressman will one day have to answer for their liberalism and then face the firing squad. I hope I’m alive to watch it live on TV.
What is the problem in Wisconsin? Is it the air, water, the food, what…..? How can people be that clueless when it comes to following the Constitution. Feingold/McCain continue to assault it and the Supreme Court allows it. Before you know it, the Republic that Lincoln literally died for will be gone forever to be replaced by the Balkanization of America.

Islamsnotforme on January 29, 2007 at 2:27 pm

I have wondered if Sen. Lieberbman is as soft on Islamofasicm at home as Feingold (who should think about all his relatives who died in the Holocaust every time he promotes policies which will create a new one).
We shall see who lines up where on this issue. I’d like to see what happens with Boxer, Schumer, and Durbin as well, the purported anti-Islamist Democrat tough guys.
I wonder if, when a plane goes crashing into a full Yankee Stadium, and the TSA people subsequently say that we couldn’t properly screen the 20 Muslim boys on board because of the Conyers’ bill and because of our CAIR training, will Feingold say, “I’m sorry.”
More likely, he’ll be worrying about retaliation against Muslims.

sonomaca on January 29, 2007 at 5:18 pm

Hummmm lets see what Mr. Webster has to say..
: opposed
… a set of data often in graphic form portraying the significant features of something
Ok.. I get the two words mean roughly this…
Opposed to portraying the significant features of something
: to make an untrue statement with intent to deceive
: to create a false or misleading impression
:refusal to admit the truth or reality (as of a statement or charge)
: assertion that an allegation is false
: refusal to acknowledge a person or a thing :
: negation in logic
: a psychological defense mechanism in which confrontation with a personal problem or with reality is avoided by denying the existence of the problem or reality
So… to take the facts (significant features) surrounding the history of attacks against USA and American interests (EX – Who has been behind these attacks) and to be opposed to the statement of these facts…. for the reason of being deceptive or you just refuse to acknowledge these facts…. Hummm Any suggestings Mr Webster??
: slow of mind
: obtuse
: given to unintelligent decisions or acts
: acting in an unintelligent or careless manner
: lacking intelligence or reason : brutish
: marked by or resulting from unreasoned thinking or acting
: senseless
: markedly lacking in intelligence : stupid
: showing a lack of intelligence
: having little or no meaning
: not having the capability to process data
Thank you Mr Webster…

Elephas Maximus on January 29, 2007 at 5:32 pm

Leave a Reply

* denotes required field