Wednesday, July 18, 2012

Investigating The Obama Administration's Ties To The Muslim Brotherhood...A Sensible Idea



Members of Congress Michele Bachmann, Trent Franks, Louie Gohmert, Lynn Westmoreland, and Thomas Rooney sent a letter to Deputy Secretary General of Harold W. Geisel last month with an interesting and important topic - the influence on State Department policies by individuals associated with the Muslim Brotherhood. Copies were also sent to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Ileana Ros Lehtinen, chairwoman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

The letter mentioned what's been obvious to many observers for sometime now, the Obama Administration's enabling of the Muslim Brotherhood and Islamists generally, with the letter writers providing a number of examples. And it raises the perfectly obvious question of whether certain individuals working within the Obama Administration are influencing these policies to the detriment of American security. It also asks the Deputy Secretary General to report on what, if any members of the State department have actively renounced the Muslim Brotherhood's goals, what what influence the Brotherhood may have had on policy, and what, if any corrective action he has taken to ensure that no individual who has not renounced the Brotherhood's stated goals is placed in a position of trust.

Given that the Muslim Brotherhood is committed to a world wide caliphate and what it refers to as 'civilizational jihad', these are by no means frivolous concerns.

The letter mentions Huma Abedin, Secretary Clinton's personal aide as someone who has close personal ties with family members actively involved in the Brotherhood, although it does not accuse her personally of any wrongdoing.

As you know if you you're a regular member of Joshua's Army, I've dealt with Huma Abedin and her close ties to the Ikhwan, the Muslim Brotherhood before on these pages. For the Muslim Brotherhood leadership, it would be hard to imagine a better placed intelligence mole, and that theory accounts nicely for a number of interesting discrepancies in her personal life.

And she is by no means the only one in the Obama Administration with such ties.

Needless to say, the usual suspects exploded over this, including Senator John McCain, Mrs. Clinton's very good friend of long standing.

The whole affair reminds me of the ginned up outrage over the questions that were raised over the loyalties of people like Alger Hiss, Harry Dexter White, Laurence Duggan, Lauchlin Currie,Robert Talbott Miller III, and Maurice Halperin, among many others back in the fifties.

Of course, thanks to the Venona Papers and our access to the Soviet Archives during Boris Yeltsin's tenure, we know know that they were active Soviet agents who did this country and the cause of human freedom a great deal of harm.

Another phenomenon back in the fifties was the existence of a number of what Lenin referred to as useful idiots, true believers more than prepared to work towards the Soviet's goals out of misguided ideology.

The same thing exists in the Obama Administration today, and there's little sense in whitewashing it or throwing a tantrum over it. These are serious concerns best dealt with now, and a thorough investigation is called for.

Jihad in America is not a fairy tale. I wish it were.

UPDATE: I see where Michele Bachmann and the other four Congress members are not backing down on their calls for an investigation on Muslim Brotherhood ties to our governent. My apologies for the linked CBS article, which is one of the most biased excuses for a so-called 'straight news' piece I've seen in some time. It's such biased crap it isn't even worth the electrons to pick it apart.

Oh, and by the way, kudos to Speaker John Boehner for once again proving he's gutless and unworthy of leadership.

When even asking questions and calling for something to be honestly investigated garners this kind of response, you know the rot goes deep.

Democrat Rep. Keith Ellison is entirely correct that this is just like the fifties. A number of people back then called the same kind of questions being raised about Soviet infiltration of our State Department a witch hunt too. And it wasn't until years later, when the Venona Papers were released and we had access to the Soviet archives did we find out that the people asking the questions and calling for an investigation of Soviet penetration into our government knew exactly what they were talking about and were entirely right about the matter.

Of course by then, it cost America an incredible amount of blood and treasure.

-selah-

10 comments:

Roland said...

The letter mentions Huma Abedin, Secretary Clinton's personal aide as someone who has close personal ties with family members actively involved in the Brotherhood, although it does not accuse her personally of any wrongdoing.

If you have evidence that she's done something that even remotely promotes the Muslim Brotherhood, I'd be very interested to hear about it. But if this is all based on who she's related to, then I hope you'll forgive me if I yawn and assume that Bachmann et al are just being their usual racist witch-hunting selves.

Rob said...

Hello Roland,

Actually,if you read the link, it's based on a lot more than simply whom she's related to.

As for witch hunting, the Obama Administration has been quite blatant about supporting the Muslim Brotherhood and its fronts here in America.Among other things,the Administration filed disinclination to prosecute motions in what amounted to an open and shut case against CAIR and other Muslim Brotherhood fronts that were unindicted co-conspirators in what would have been the second Holy Land Foundation trial, thus letting some pretty reprehensible Islamists walk.(do a search on this site for details) The letter merely proposes that due diligence be exercised and an investigation performed.

Has Ms.Abedin ever formally denounced the MB's agenda? What are her views on the matter? Can she answer questions about her finances, since her lifestyle seems rather lavish for someone making her salary? Is she willing to credibly deny that she supports sharia being introduced into America? Has she had contact with any members of the MB outside her family? what kind of input has she had on decisions by the State Department that directly affect the MB?

These are all quite reasonable questions given the circumstances, and the are a number of other people in the administration who likewise should and ought to be asked these questions and subject to investigation.That's how national security, properly done, works.

As a friend of mine, an Armenian from Iran once told me when I asked her about being singled out for extra scrutiny at airports because of her birthplace, "If it helps keep everyone safe, I don't mind a bit. What do I have to hide?"

I would feel exactly the same way myself.

The cry of 'witch hunt' is exactly what the left said to defend Alger Hiss and others of his ilk. The cost to America's security and to human freedom was staggering.

And by the way,Islam is not a race, but an ideology. I realize that the label is convenient, but it's simply inaccurate.

Regards,
Rob

Roland said...

I actually did read the link, but I'm guessing that it has changed since you last read it. The link now goes to an article where Bachmann seems to be furiously backtracking the comments in her letter. Maybe she's not as dumb as she looks.

Has Ms.Abedin ever formally denounced the MB's agenda? What are her views on the matter? Can she answer questions about her finances, since her lifestyle seems rather lavish for someone making her salary? Is she willing to credibly deny that she supports sharia being introduced into America? Has she had contact with any members of the MB outside her family? what kind of input has she had on decisions by the State Department that directly affect the MB?

This is just hilarious. These are the questions of the 'when did you stop beating your wife' variety. Like Obama's birth certificate, there's no way that she could answer any of those questions in a way that would possibly satisfy you. And asking about her finances is rich considering the stink you've made about Romney's financial issues.

But maybe you've got an idea here. I think a McCarthy hearing for the Arab element in the US would be a good move for you. It worked so well last time. What a way to win over the American people!

Rob said...

Actually, the link I referred to in my comment was not the 'Hill ' story,but my own article on Ms. Abedin. You might find it of interest, along with another link I posted.

I don't think Rep. Bachman was backtracking (if you're referring to the story I think you're referring to) as much as saying that the letter she and the other Congress members signed was being distorted. I agree with her.

The same thing happened with Rep. Peter King's long overdue hearings on radical Islam in America.

Needless to say, we disagree on the what the nature of the questions is that I posed and the facts I suggested should be investigated.

Sine you mention McCarthy, here's something for you to ponder. He was indeed a heavy drinker with an offensive, bullying manner, but what he said was that the US State Department, other areas of government and Hollywood were riddled with communists, what he referred to as 'fellow travellers' (useful idiots whose ideology sympathized so closely with the Soviets that they could be easily manipulated) and actual Soviet agents.History has proven that he was entirely correct.

You're right, it didn't turn out well. The result was the loss of America's atomic secrets, the loss of the freedom of Eastern Europe for decades, the Korean War, the huge defense expenditures of the Cold War, a near miss on an atomic war over Cuba, and a number of other things I could mention.

The facts speak for themselves.

I may be mistaken, but occurs to me that you may be one of those people who think the Muslim Brotherhood and similar salafist and jihadist organizations can be 'worked with' and pose no danger to America.

Or that their influence is negligible.

If so, I can understand why. There was a concerted effort by the Bush Administration to whitewash this, especially after 9/11, with his farcical declaration of a 'war on terror', and the Obama Administration and its media allies have gone even further along this path.

One would have thought that 9/11 and numerous events around the world and our own country would have already shown how mistaken and dangerous this POV is.

Regards,
Rob

Roland said...

The link you provided does not fill me with me much confidence in your journalism skills. Nowhere in your article do you mention a single sentence this woman has uttered that would make anyone think she's some sort of secret agent for the Muslim Brotherhood. But wait. You do state:

"It's no stretch at all for me to see Huma Abedin working over time to influence Secretary Clinton as to the beneficence of the Brotherhood and or to ask her to use her influence as part of the Obama Administration on behalf of the husband of her mother's old comrade-in-arms."

Well, we in the real world call that speculation. A less kind characterization would be paranoid conspiracy theory. You see, I could say "It's no stretch at all for me to see Rob luring small children into his van and killing them." But we don't say things like that without proof. The slander laws may be loose in the states, but you should be careful slandering a woman without even an utterance from her lips that can back it up. Bachmann's just an idiot. What's your excuse?

"I may be mistaken, but occurs to me that you may be one of those people who think the Muslim Brotherhood and similar salafist and jihadist organizations can be 'worked with' and pose no danger to America."

Obviously I'm a full-blown member of the Muslim Brotherhood because I think it's not smart to accuse people of things when there is no evidence. I can see how an unrelated issue would cause such a deductive fallacy on your part. But if all it takes is a hunch and an absence of facts to accuse someone under your rules, then I'm looking forward to applying that principle in any future conversations.

I'd always had the sense that the current Republican position is to ignore all facts and just argue whatever you gut tells you. Now I have both my gut and proof as well. Thanks.

Rob said...

Talk about arguing based on gut feelings and no facts!

Please point out where I ever actually accused Ms. Abedin of anything.You can't.Neither did Rep. Bachmann.

Based on your logic, if a murder or other crime was committed and you were a detective, you would find it 'slanderous' to interview possible suspects or follow up any any investigative leads based on possible motive or opportunity.

Ditto if you were an FBI agent that received evidence of a crime or terrorist strike in the planning stages

OK.Fine by me.

BTW, your position is exactly the same as that of former AG Janet Reno's and Assistant AG Jamie Gorelick's during the Clinton Administration and is based on exactly the same logic.

They prohibited U.S. intel agencies from sharing data ( the infamous 'wall'), from tracking persons of interest involved in Islamist terrorism or monitoring their communications and actually impeded intel ops like Able Danger who were actually attempting to track people like the 9/11 hijackers.

As you might remember, that didn't end well.

Oh wait..that was Bush's Fault, based on one obscure, unsourced and undetailed memo obviously written for CYA purposes!

Perhaps the original documents ex-NSA Sandy Berger stole and hid in his underwear might have shed some light on the matter.

We simply disagree, and have a completely different viewpoint on the matter.

You're certainly entitled to your own opinion, just not to your own facts.

Regards,
Rob

Roland said...

"if a murder or other crime was committed and you were a detective, you would find it 'slanderous' to interview possible suspects or follow up any any investigative leads based on possible motive or opportunity."

Well, something you don't do is run up to random people on the street and start interviewing them. You interview them when you have cause to do so. And based on the fact that you have no evidence or cause to think Ms. Abedin is somehow a secret Muslim Brotherhood agent, your post is nothing more than innuendo and slander.

Ditto if you were an FBI agent that received evidence of a crime or terrorist strike in the planning stages

So now you're saying that there is evidence that she committed a crime? Did you lost track of your analogies or did you find actual evidence in between paragraphs? The flowchart in your brain must look like an Escher drawing.

So now you're backtracking (as is Bachmann in the face of bipartisan outrage). There are a lot of people who are not 'publicly accused' who still have their reputations dragged through the mud by people with the some political motives as Ms. Bachmann. Maybe you should talk to the list of people on the right who have been 'Borked' over the years. They'll give you an earful about the tactics you seem to have such admiration for.

But, by all means, stick to your guns. The next time Romney comes under attack for acts when there is no evidence (his tax returns maybe??), I'll be sure to remind you of your unique crime fighting philosophy. Shoot into a crowd, interrogate the dead.

Rob said...

No cause to ask Huna Abedin and others about their ties to the Muslim Brotherhood and their feelings about their agenda? Well, maybe in your universe.

As usual, you ignore facts when they're inconvenient, as you have throughout this little discussion.

In the beginning, I simply asked you whether you were one of those people who felt that the Muslim Brotherhood was essentially harmless, a perfectly reasonable question. Instead of answering, you accused me of calling you a Muslim Brotherhood agent.

Talk about a leap in logic!

Since that's essentially your way of 'debating', there's obviously no point in continuing to discuss this.

It isn't worth my time, frankly.

Regards,
Rob

Dr. Ron Polland said...

Obama is aiding and abetting the jihad of the Muslim Brotherhood. Wghat most of America missed is that the Brotherhood issued a formal declaration of war against the UN and Israel.

Now, that they control the government of Egypt, they can declare war as a state.

The MB are the Nazis of the 21st Century, and I am not violating Godwin's Law by saying so. They share the same ideology with respect to worldwide control, a single unifying set of laws, and a pathological desire to extermine all Jews from the planet.

But, what makes them far worse than Nazis is the religious motivation. The Nazis did what the Fuhrer wanted, but The MB and all other like-minded jihadists are commanded by their god to wage eternal warfare against non-Muslims. It is a religious duty FOR ALL MUSLIMS and there is no such thing as a "peace-loving, moderate" Muslim.

These are people who are purposefully ignoring Sharia Law and its totalitarian ideology to practice only the "good parts" of Islam which were co-opted from Judaism and Christianity.

The Crusades were defensive wars to drive out the invading Moslems from THEIR land and ended over 700 years ago. Jews have never sought any kind of world conquest, imperialism, supremacism, or colonialism as did the Muslims 100 years after the death of Mohammed. They built empires that encompassed 2/3 of the known world, from Asia to Africa to Europe - all built on mountains of bodies and destroyed civilizations.

WWI ended the last of the Muslim empires, the Ottomans, and the allies split up their conquered territories, but they never extinguished the purpose of Islam, which means "submission."

The MB was born in 1928 by Hassan al-Banna, an admirer of Adolf Hitler, and his successor in Egypt and "mandated Palestine" was Amin el-Husseini, the Grand Mufti of Jerusalem.

The Mfti was a personal friend of Hitler and the architect of the Holocaust. el-Husseini was given his own SS division of Bosnian Muslims to command. He was told by Hitler that after he captures north Africa, the Mufti and his followers - the Muslim Brotherhood - could exterminate all of the Jews in the Arabian peninsula.

Fortunately for the Jews and the Western world, the British destroyed Rommel's Afrika Korps (tank command) at el-Alamein.

But, the British sided with the Brotherhood after the war and allowed all of the Nazi intelligence agnts to escape to Egypt where they were given safe haven and a job running Arab intelligence.

The Ikhwan - the name for the militant Muslim Brotherhood who have moved from the planning and propaganda state of their infiltration of America to the implementation stage.

Getting Obama in the White House was part of the plan to end the US's support for Israel, and in doing so, make her a sitting duck.

Who do you think caused the so-called Arab Spring, the Muslim Brotherhood uprising and the takeovers of non-Muslim nations or overthrow of non Orthodox Sunni leaders?

Obama, his community organizers from America, Venezuela, Egypt, Yemen, and Lebanon, with funding from George Soros, the House of Saud, and the hundreds of front groups posing as Muslim charities and civil rights advocates.

The MB is in 70 countries and Europe is quickly becoming Eurostan. Britain, France, Sweden, Denmark, and Norway have let their enemies inside the gates, as we have been doing.

The complete and utterly brain-dead morons of the liberal Left, irrespective of political party, have bought into their TAQIYYA and MURUNA, hook line, and sinker.

These are the Muslim principles of intentionally lying to the infidel - that's you, you stupid libtards Democrats, Republicans, and Independents, who bought their "WE're moderate and despise violence" shtick hook, line, and stinker.

This is a real conspiracy, written in black and white and blood red - the Explanatory Memorandum for North America, that explains how the Brotherhood would take political control before they invoke vilence and war to finish the job.

Dr. Ron Polland said...

THIS was Arafat's plan. Gain as much ground and concessions from Israel through these phony "peace negotiations," and then reject whatever offer they give you as being "not enough" and then launch an intifada against innocent Israeli citizens. Then, let the West intervene to end the fighting, and start the process all over again until Israel is totally wiped out.

This is what is in store for America if you leave the Muslim Brotherhood's Manchurian candidate in office.

Hitler went from bing a small-time politician to the supreme leader of the German people in only 52 days.

It took the MB longer because EVERY nation in the middle East saw them for the threat they were. Only the Western Europeans and Americans had no clue as to who they were and what they had been planning since 1928.

Five brave people in congress stood up and asked a simple question about the relationship between this White House and the MB. Why are they given security clearances to see top secret informaton?

Purely legitimate questions, and yet the rest of our government and the Islamic ignoramouses in the Media and liberal blogsphere treatedthem as traitors.

Seems like every despot in the 20th and 21st Century has their share of useful idiots to enable them to take over their countries. When that happens, the useless idiots are the first to be lined up against the wall.

Well, we have running all throughout our government and military, both state and national, people who would just as soon slit your throat as shake your hand.

Of course the vast majority of Muslims have no intention of engaging in a worldwide jihad to destroy the West, to kill all the Jews and Christians.

Nevertheless, it's the Sharia, stupid, and it is of no comfort to know that, out of 1.5 billion Muslims worldwide, the jihadists only make up a very tiny percentage.

Even if it were only one percent, that leaves us with 1.5 million potential Osama bin Ladens spread across the globe, ready to do whatever it takes, to fulfil their irrefusable mission from Allah and his Messenger.

It's like the Mob in the movie, "The Godfather," when one of their enforcers blows someone's head off with a shotgun and says,

"Nothing personal. It's just business."

This is the way Jews feel about the Brotherhood and other groups bent on killing Jews, except that it is personal and it is business for the most persecuted people in history.

I've got some news for the Ikhwan and the Ummah: Jews won't be hiding behind trees and rocks when their God returns to his Kingdom in Jerusalem and destroys all who would destroy His people.