Newt Gingrich @ Politico:
The recent assault on the National Security Five is only the most recent example of the fear our elites have about discussing and understanding radical Islamists.
When an orchestrated assault is launched on the right to ask questions in an effort to stop members of Congress from even inquiring about a topic — you know the fix is in.
The intensity of the attack on Rep. Michele Bachmann (R-Minn.) as well as Republican Reps. Trent Franks of Arizona, Louie Gohmert of Texas, Tom Rooney of Florida and Lynn Westmoreland of Georgia is a reminder of how desperate our elites are to avoid this discussion. Yet consider this rush to silence questions in light of our history of unpleasant surprises during the Cold War.
Given all the painful things we learn about people every day and the surprises that shock even the experts (the head of the FBI anti-spy effort was a Russian spy, for example), you have to wonder why people would aggressively assert we shouldn’t ask about national security concerns.
Remember the shock in 2001 when we learned that FBI agent Robert Hanssen had been spying for 22 years — first for the Soviet Union and then the Russian Federation. This disaster came just seven years after the 1994 arrest of Aldrich Ames, a CIA counterintelligence officer who was a Soviet spy for eight years.
Why should we assume we’re in better shape today, when political correctness is passionately opposed to tough counterintelligence screening? It’s as though our leaders have forgotten every lesson of the 1930s about fascism, Nazism and communism and every lesson from 1945 to 1991 about communism.
We have replaced tough mindedness about national security with a refusal to think seriously and substituted political correctness and a “solid” assurance that people must be OK because they are “nice” and “hard working” for the systematic, intense investigations of the past.
I’m not suggesting that our primary threat is espionage. Our greatest problem is getting the wrong analysis, advice and policy proposals. It is the bias of the advisers and the disastrous policies they propose that are our gravest danger at this stage of the long struggle with radical Islamists.
Our elites refuse to even consider that the advice they are getting is biased, tainted, distorted — or just plain wrong.
The underlying driving force behind this desperate desire to stop unpleasant questions is the elite’s fear that an honest discussion of radical Islamism will spin out of control. They fear if Americans fully understood how serious radical Islamists are, they would demand a more confrontational strategy.
MICHELE BACKMANN
IS DOING HER JOB AS AN AMERICAN ELECTED IN CONGRESS,
SHE IS DOING WHAT OBAMA SHOULD HAVE DONE,
AND SHE SEE THE WHITE HOUSE IN DAMAGING LEAKS,
SHE LOVE AMERICA ENOUGH TO STAND UP TO CRITICS TRYING TO DISCREDIT HER AND SILENCE HER.
SHE IS A TRUE PATRIOT AND THE BEST FIGHTER FOR THIS AMERICA, THE REAL AMERICA BEING ASSAULTED BY THE HATERS ALREADY INFILTRATED HERE TO CHANGE THIS COUNTRY,
WHERE THE BRAVEST SPILL THEIR BLOOD STILL NOW AS WE SPEAK, FOR THE SUPER AMERICA,
@MataHarley:
I did not see that letter. It looks just like the other letters with the exception of the Huma insert. I don’t believe that was a wise move.
As for citing the Klan and any other subversive group, the letter references a report about MB infiltration and civilization jihad specifically. I don’t know why they would request a check on other subversive groups when referencing that report.
If our requirements for a security clearance have become so slack that we are no longer asking the right questions, then we should do so and I agree that is the question congress should be asking. Bachmann may very well be motivated by the religious aspect, but I absolutely refuse to believe either Gohmert or Westmoreland are.
And on a rant, I have a serious issue with granting a security clearance to just anyone. I no longer have friends that are actively serving, but many of my friend’s children are currently serving, and my youngest is considering a military career. If this is an issue, I don’t care whose feelings are hurt or who gets offended. From Nazis to Muslims, everyone should be investigated thoroughly. And quite honestly, in light of the report on the Fort Hood report, it appears many Muslims are getting a pass in the name of political correctness. That is a fact.
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2012/07/19/fbi-did-not-investigate-fort-hood-shooter-because-political-correctness-report/
(I know it’s Fox News, but you can find the story anywhere, including the HuffPo).
Aqua, I don’t disagree in the least that applications for national security clearances should not be constructed as to fit within politically correct guidelines. However as it is now, I can’t see where Abedin would have lied on an SF86, looking at the current version. Additionally, I haven’t got a clue what Bachmann is supposed to be accusing Abedin of doing. Other than references to relatives, and not so subtly hinting that Hillary takes her marching orders from Huma, it’s pretty empty.
But if they want to change the current application to include relatives’ relationships to subversive groups, that should be handled without making wild eyed charges against someone without a lick of evidence.
And last, I do not think that any changes should only include Muslim subversive groups, but all. Just as you said above – “From Nazis to Muslims, everyone should be investigated thoroughly.” The Muslim Caliphate is not the only US enemy that would like us to fall from within. But apparently it’s all that Bachmann wants to focus on.
Mata, your point is that Bachman’s focus should be on everybody, not one group.
An old proverb states that, in a field filled with rabbits you will never kill one unless you aim at only one.
Sure, there are bad guys out there.
The TSA is protecting us from them by stripping old people and taking away their Depends undergarments.
The TSA is protecting us from the real bad guys by feeling up little boys and girls.
By goosing teenage girls.
The only reason we haven’t had a successful attack from the air since the TSA has been on the case is because of attentive passengers and crew members.
You want our government to always be that scattershot!
The only thing that protects us from is the ACLU and CAIR.
And I say that as someone who agrees with you about Huma!
She is no more as crazy as her mom and late dad for Islamist takeover (by peaceful means) as Rand Paul is as crazy as his daddy is about being the only person in DC who ”understands the Constitution.”
LOL, Nan G! Well, I suppose that proverb is great when you’re hunting rabbits, but it’s less applicable in the political world of national security, IMHO, than focusing only on MB as an enemy who is infiltrating our system. Especially since those far more aggressive, like AQ and all past, current and future named affiliates, have done significant harm with out right attempted and successful attacks.
But on that, I find the Euro-socialist, Marxist and Communist infiltration in our system far more harmful since that is attempting to rewrite our founding principles, using our own system and invading our education system. If you asked me who I think has done this country more harm, it’s the Willima Ayers injection of socialist propaganda into our education system, weening on young from vulnerable ages into the social justice and entitlement mentality, than terrorist attacks. One is an immediate and tragic loss of life, ensuing loss of liberties and economic repercussions. The other is undermining who we are and how we are governed, forever changing our future.
So if you asked me, I’d say we have more “red commies hiding under beds” in our nation than we do Muslim terrorists.
@MataHarley:
Agreed.
OK, since the title of the post is “In Defense of Michele Bachmann…,” I’ll go along with that. But as I said in three different posts, the letter referenced a specific threat involving the MB. The letter didn’t mention Al Qaeda, Hamas, the PLO, or any other radical Islamist group. Also, Bachmann may very well be after Huma for simply being Muslim, but I refuse to believe the same about Gohmert and Westmoreland.
@MataHarley:
Mata, the rabbit is behavior, not the MB.
My point was to go after the BEHAVIOR of the real terrorists rather than, in scatter-shot fashion, going after grannies and little kids and cute girls.
Naturally some other groups are touting the takeover of the US government (peacefully or not) be they Occupiers, Islamist groups, or race-based hate groups.
If Huma ever got caught pushing the MB agenda at Hillary or State, if she ever got caught colluding to allow the Blind Sheik to go free (as the MB in Egypt wants) or something like that, then she should be targeted.
Far as I know she has done none of that.
@Aqua:
That’s a good point Aqua. It is so very important to remember that there is NO Separation of Mosque and State in normative Islam. The Muslim Brotherhood is a anti-democratic totalitarian supremacist organization with sovereign design of the territory of the United States. The Muslim Brotherhood is no less political than the KKK or the Schutzstaffel (Nazi SS) . Mind you the 20th century KKK presented itself as a Christian religious fraternal organization, founded by a former Methodist minister. Similarly the Schutzstaffel (Nazi SS) was unequivocally Neo-Pagan religious with mystical Occultist Neo-Pagan origins. All three, the Muslim Brotherhood, the KKK and the Nazi SS, have or had pronounced racial supremacist aspects: Arab, White and Nordic-Aryan. It is easy to imagine MataHarley and many Americans demanding background information relating to membership in the KKK or SS in similar situations.
@MataHarley:
So what? What on earth is the problem with congresswomen focusing on an immediate problem? We are currently in the middle of a hot war with genocidal jihadists. What’s the problem with prodding or probing an Administration which seems to have compromising ties with that enemy?
Moreover if you think Marxists and Communists in our post-Soviet era represent a substantial and present national security danger, please tell us why. The KKK? According to the ADL the KKK has splintered is starved for funds and is down to a combined membership of 5,000 members. Neo-Nazis? When any American administration begins to allow the nasty boys at Stormfront similar access, let us know. And the New Black Panther Party? Tell us how do they pose a similar national security threat.