Posted on 03/11/2013 7:22:23 PM PDT by AuntB
Popular radio show host Sean Casey (The Morning Show with Sean and Frank) had CPAC chief Al Cardenas on his show today, and Sean asked Cardenas about my banning at CPAC (a story that has gone viral). If you recall, Al Cardenas told the Washington Post last week:
"...this year we decided not to invite Pamela Geller for comments she made at CPAC critical of our officers [ Grover Norquist]. In each of these cases, their ad hominem attacks denigrate the debate and distract from the real point of CPAC....."
But in his response to Sean Casey this morning, he out and out lies, contradicting his previous statement. This morning he said this:
"As I have said publicly, I plan to get together with Pam. I know she does good work on a very important topic. And I plan to meet with her and see how we can collaborate in the future."
He said this publicly? He has never contacted me, nor is there any meeting planned. What a bold-faced lie. I want that meeting! Listen here: Download CardinasOnPamSandFWCBM031113
Oh and BTW, these checks made out to ACU board member and influence peddler Grover Norquist's organization, The Islamic Institute, are not "ad hominem attacks." They are from Abdurahman Alamoudi, who is serving a 23-year prison sentence for terror-related crimes. Alamoudi was also found to be a longtime secret financial courier for Al Qaeda. (see checks at link)
And All Tea Party groups are NOT created equal! BEWARE! http://towncriernews.blogspot.com/2013/03/all-tea-party-groups-are-not-created.html
An ongoing roll featuring a bunch of soap opera queens.
Too bad CPAC has been trashed in the process.
Some shady people, mostly Grover Norquist, are using the tea party label to further themselves and radical islam and destroy others who try to expose it. I hope to see the grass roots tea party organizations disassociate themselves with teaparty.net and theTea Party News Network (TPNN), who are controlling CPAC.
“Too bad CPAC has been trashed in the process”
Yes, it is. But worse, the Tea Party name is being used and destroyed.
This is why I’ve always opposed any firm tea party organization. Structure becomes a target of manipulation and intimidation.
Instead I belong to a very small informal local group that meets at a diner when we happen to gather there. We talk about issues over coffee and keep track of what other little local groups are doing and join them for things like town hall meetings.
Same here, cripplecreek. The Tea party is supposed to be grass roots. Now we’ve got the biggest lobbyist on K street using the name to fundraise under several Tea Party labels and it’s only lining he and his political ‘non profit’ friends pockets. I love how they post their addresses on their fund raising emails, and they turn out to be ‘virtual’ offices. Norquist is just running another scam.
Two of my favorite tea party politicians are my congressman and my state representative and neither has ever claimed the tea party. My congressman says he’ll happily take tea party support but doesn’t want to try to claim the mantle. My state rep has never uttered the words “tea party” and he’s been solid. (He introduced the RTW legislation here in Michigan)
Isn’t it true that Norquist was the one who bamboozled W into having the Sept. 26, 2001 “dinner” at the White House with all those Muslim leaders? You know.... the meeting to prove Mussies were peaceful? W WAS a fool for believing the misguided advice of Norquist.
Isn’t it true that Norquist is married to a Muslim, was promoting the gound zero mosque and denounced anyone as Muslimophobical (satire) for “infringing upon religious freedoms”.
Norquist’s wife Samah, listed as a Senior Advisor to Arab and Muslim Outreach for the U.S. Agency for International Development under the Bush Administration is sure no Betsy Ross.
I agree the T.E.A. Party name has been spoiled. Too many money grabbing, power mongers are ruining the name and exactly as you say... lining their pockets. He IS a scam and now he’s ruining the CPAC. Perhaps Saracudah will let him have it!
Thanks for taking the time to understand this! Few want to be bothered.
Agreed. I’ve had more than enough of Grover and of CPAC’s management!
Time for a new confab organized by others.
More from Robert Spencer re; CPAC
CPAC’s demand that Robert Spencer not speak about Muslim Brotherhood influence at CPAC when accepting the CPAC People’s Choice blog award: “A huge miscalculation”
Pete Da Tech Guy has a good analysis of CPAC’s demand that I not speak about Grover Norquist’s and Suhail Khan’s ties to Islamic supremacists when receiving the CPAC People’s Choice blog award. It is important to bear in mind that this is not a dispute between John Hawkins of Right Wing News and me. John Hawkins is just an errand boy, sent by grocery clerks. He told me he was relaying the gag order at the behest of higher ups he could not name, and for whom he is now taking the fall. Clearly there are some highly-placed people at CPAC who don’t want the truth to get out about how deeply the organization is compromised to Islamic supremacists.
“CPAC Update Spencer/Hawkins,” by Datechguy, March 8 (thanks to iOwntheWorld):
...Looking at the two statements and counter statements there are three basic facts that are in agreement:
1. Robert Spencer is the winner of the People’s Choice award
2. John Hawkins asked (or demanded) Robert not to bring up the CPAC/Norquist/Kahn when accepting it
3. Robert Declined that demand (or request).
Where the worm turns to me is this
A: “Did John ask Robert Spencer to not bring up any issues when accepting the award on his own initiative as a favor (as he said to me) or
B: was John asked/told to give that condition to Robert (as would be consistent which what Robert said to me about “checking with his superiors”) by TeaParty.net or someone at CPAC to keep Robert from speaking?
If it’s A, then John made a well meaning but foolish mistake, if it’s B then then it’s a much more insidious because that means John went along with the idea.
I understand the argument. People much more important that Teaparty.net are out. (Chris Christie) and they need CPAC more than CPAC needs them. Either John on his own or the Tea Party.net wanted to avoid trouble.
But while I understand the argument, my reaction is still: Are you kidding me?
Robert just lost a speaking gig at the Catholic Men’s Conference (coincidentally scheduled at the same time as CPAC this year) due to outside groups putting pressure on the church. There was absolutely no chance that he was going to agree to such a thing, it would be totally inconsistent with all he’s done to agree to be silent and as he said, it would be inconsistent with his honor and honorable behavior to say he would shut up and then speak.
Regardless of A or B this was a huge miscalculation. If Robert was just allowed to say whatever he was going to say it would have been one speech at one event at CPAC and that would be it. In fact even if he did say something stronger that what TeaParty.net or CPAC wanted they could have simply have pointed to the speech and contrasted it with the move to stop him speaking in Worcester as something to their credit.
Instead keeping him from speaking simply highlights divisions and sends the wrong message and makes this a story worth covering as opposed to just another CPAC event.
Once can argue CPAC is our host and we should respect that and if this was a dinner party or a college graduation that would be an excellent point. But this is a gathering of conservatives who are defenders of the Bill of Rights. It is impossible and incredible that a conservative group should do this....
I totally agree with you - not many want to do any digging for further info. When I hear Grover’s name, the fuzz on the back of my neck starts to crawl! He’s a slippery guy.
Why, oh WHY does the GOP let themselves be led around by the nose by the likes of Norquist, Rove, etc.??????
That is exactly why the original version of the T.E.A. Party was so exciting - new, fresh and not connected to any creepy, slippery politician in DC.
Norquist sucks!
Petition to allow Geller & Spencer to speak at CPAC
Contention at CPAC 2013: The Counterjihad vs. Grover Norquist, Brett Kimberlin, et. al.
[snip]Ooooh, looky here:
This page lists board of directors of the American Conservative Union, which hosts CPAC. The page isn’t easy to find, most likely because it shows both Grover Norquist and fellow mole Suhail Khan. Grover is keeping a low profile; as of this writing, I don’t see him on the speakers’ roster.
The ACU chairman is Al Cardenas,[born in Cuba[ who has been pushing for another amnesty for illegal aliens. He actually expects us to believe that giving eleven million illegal aliens (including a large number of Muslim infiltrators) will “stimulate the conservative electorate.”
“Norquist sucks!”
Yep....Frank Gaffney bump!
Good posts! Thank you all!
We have excused GWB’s many treasonous acts as a mistake for too, too long. The truth is GWB is as bad as Clinton, Obama or Carter. The Bush’s have ruined the R party.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.