May 27, 2013 at The American Thinker
Could a Mayor Weiner Pose a Threat to
New York City Security?
[I've been
waiting for someone to blog about this for months. Not only is Wienie
Boi a lefty hack (what can we expect in Moscow on the Hudson), but his wife is
truly dangerous, and means the end of Commissioner Kelly and his work in the
anti-terrorism field. Muslim go boom?]
Huma Abedin is back in the spotlight again, as her
husband Anthony Weiner has announced that he is running for mayor of New York
City. The Daily
Mail of the United Kingdom claims that "Huma Abedin [is]
deemed her husband's greatest political asset." Michael
M. Grynbaum, et al. of the New York Times claim that
"it is Ms. Abedin, a seasoned operative well versed in the politics of
redemption, [who] has been a main architect of her husband's rehabilitative
journey[.]"
The word "operative" is a word that needs
careful examination. If Weiner were to win the mayoral election in New
York, could this bring the Muslim
Brotherhood closer to the inner security workings of New York City?
Almost one year ago, Walid Shoebat exposed Huma
Abedin's connections to the Brotherhood. Michele
Bachmann and four other Republican congressional representatives
requested that "no Muslim Brotherhood-associated entity or individual [be]
placed into a position of honor or trust within the programs and operations of
the Department of State unless he or she has publicly condemned and disclaimed
the previously stated goals of the Muslim Brotherhood." Yet such
condemnation was never forthcoming from
Abedin.
The five Republican congressional representatives
were lambasted by
Senator John McCain and Rep. Keith
Ellison for entertaining the notion that someone closely connected to
the Muslim Brotherhood, as Ms. Abedin is, might not be the best candidate to
hold the job of deputy chief of staff for the State Department.
Couple this with the fact that in 2011 the
"Obama administration formalized ties"
with the [Muslim Brotherhood], and in 2013 "the Islamic Society of North
America (ISNA), a group with Muslim Brotherhood origins and an unindicted
co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation terror-financing trial, toured the
White House and met
with multiple officials," thus signaling a major "policy
formulation" by the White House.
Such overlapping groups all
stem from the Muslim Brotherhood and the issue of infiltration may now
have a new twist as Weiner runs for office. It is critical to recall that
the Brotherhood's objective is to "destroy the Western civilization from
within." As Claire Lopez explains:
... the Islamic Society of North America (ISNA)
functions as a kind of umbrella organization for many hundreds of offshoot
Islamic Societies across North America. Yet, in spite of its DoJ status
as a front group for the jihadist Muslim Brotherhood, ISNA still has been
granted a coveted advisory role with the National Security Council (NSC) of the
Obama White House. ISNA's president, Muhammed Magid, is not only the
Director of the All-Dulles Area Muslim Society Center, but also an A-list
invitee to White House iftar dinners and a member of the Department of Homeland
Security 'Countering Violent Extremism' Advisory Council.
Notwithstanding the New York Times whitewash
of the evidence, Huma Abedin was, in fact, an assistant
editor for the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs from
1996 to 2008. Her mother works to advance the Brotherhood agenda against
Western interests and policies. Her brother has had a "strong
working relationship with Abdullah Omar
Naseef and Yusuf Qaradawi." Naseef "ran a charity
front for terror," and Qaradawi has
stated that:
... he would not deny women the right to engage in
suicide bombings, a position he articulated in
a 2004 fatwa that
read: '[t]he committed Muslim women in Palestine have the right to participate
and have their own role in jihad and to attain martyrdom.' The following month,
Qaradawi said,
'[t]here is no dialogue between us [Muslims and Jews] except by the sword and
the rifle.' In an October 2010 interview with Al-Jazeera, Qaradawi was asked
whether Muslims should try to acquire atomic weapons 'to terrorize their
enemies.' He replied that
such an objective was permissible [.]
Yet none of these connections raised any red flags
concerning Huma Abedin's security clearance.
In his book entitled The New Muslim
Brotherhood In the West, author Lorenzo Vidino, writes that
"participationist Islamic organizations are by default the main candidates
to become privileged interlocutors of Western governments. Is their
stated desire to participate in the democratic process genuine, or simply
tactical? Do they meet the criteria of reliability and moderation
required by Western governments?"
In July 2012, Cliff
Kincaid explained that all the controversy about Huma Abedin and her
security clearances could be resolved simply by "demanding access to
Abedin's Standard Form 86, which she was supposed to fill out before getting
her State Department job. Did she disclose her family connections to the Muslim
Brotherhood, as well as to Saudi Arabia, where she once lived and was
raised?"
And more recently, Andrew
McCarthy writes that Ms. Abedin "spent her last months at the
State Department not really at the State Department." Thus, while
receiving her "$135,000 as a 'special government employee' Abedin was also
permitted to moonlight as a 'strategic consultant' for Teno, a firm founded by
Doug Band, a former adviser to President Bill Clinton." In addition,
Abedin did consultant work for the William Jefferson Clinton Foundation as well
as help to head up Hillary Clinton's transition office from secretary of state
to private individual. Yet Abedin did not disclose her consultant income
on government financial disclosure forms.
This non-disclosure of
activities seems to be a habitual occurrence with Ms. Abedin.
When Wiener released their 2012 tax returns, it
showed that the two of them made just shy of a half-million dollars last
year. Yet it is unclear how much comes from Abedin's
"extracurricular activities while she was still on the government
payroll."
Also unsettling is that "Clinton cronies like
the Saudis and
Qataris are multi-million dollar donors to the William Jefferson Clinton
foundation who do mega business with the State Department."
Which brings me back to Weiner's bid for one of the
most important jobs in this country. Given the sinister associations to
the Muslim Brotherhood, the disturbing connection of the Clintons to shady
deals and opportunistic exploits, and the ability of Muslim governments --
e.g., Saudi Arabia -- to funnel money to influence, it becomes more critical
than ever that the issue of Huma Abedin and her security clearance be made
transparent.
Is it inappropriate to connect certain dots?
On May 23, 2013, President Obama stated that "he'll lift a ban on sending
up to 90 Yemeni detainees home and will initiate other stalled transfers out of
the [Gitmo] compound." This, despite the fact that, as John Bolton
has explained, "at least a third will
return to the battlefield against us and probably much more than
that." Does this have the potential to launch more Benghazis here
and abroad, as Michelle Malkin queries?
Concerning the latest horrific jihadist terrorist attack in
London, Daniel
Kochis explains that the "Obama Administration's response has
been to avoid calling the attack terrorism, let alone terrorism motivated by a
radical Islamic ideology. Instead the Administration, via the State
Department, said it
stood with the U.K. in the face of 'such senseless violence.'"
Kochis maintains that:
... 'senseless violence' is the Administration's
catch-all phrase loyally called upon whenever motivations for a despicable act
should not be ascribed, lest someone take offense. Particularly troubling is
that 'senseless violence' is the same
terminology the Administration used when describing the terrorist
attack in Benghazi[.]
And then there is the latest news that Obama is
"urging the repeal of
the Authorization for Use of Military Force (AUMF), the 2001 law that
essentially authorized the War on Terror."
Andrew McCarthy has asserted that "to perceive
no correlation between the Islamists' fervid anti-assimilation program and the
United States government's
stunning accommodation of the Brotherhood and its agenda is to be
willfully blind."
Unless it is not willful blindness at all.
Eileen can be reached at middlemarch18@gmail.com.
No comments:
Post a Comment