Conservatives Fight Over Islam

NewsMax.com ^ | Feb. 20, 2003 | Wes Vernon

[TLBSHOW]

Conservatives Fight Over Islam

Wes Vernon, NewsMax.com

Thursday, Feb. 20, 2003

WASHINGTON – A fierce, nearly three-week running battle of accusations and counter-accusations between two conservative icons has brought to the front burner a long-festering debate among President Bush’s supporters on how far the White House should go in seeking Islamic support.

Frank Gaffney, president of the Center for Security Policy and a former assistant secretary of defense in the Reagan administration, has accused two White House officials – Ali Talbah and his predecessor Sukhail Khan – of putting President Bush in the company of “people who have made no secret of their sympathy for terrorists, provided them financial support, excused their murderous attacks and/or sought to impede the prosecution of the war against them.” Gaffney reiterated these charges in his Washington Times column Tuesday.

Gaffney’s initial comment in this flap came at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference on Jan. 31.

His remarks sparked a stinging rebuttal from Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform and one-time confidant of Newt Gingrich when the latter was speaker of the House.

“There is no place in the conservative movement for racial prejudice, religious bigotry or ethnic hatred,” Norquist told Gaffney in a Feb. 5 letter. He went on to accuse his fellow conservative of attacking each of the two White House officials because of their Muslim faith.

Norquist then banished Gaffney from further attendance at his influential coalition meetings that he holds every Wednesday, pending an accepted apology to Tulbah and Sukhail. He added, “It is important that we, as conservatives, stand up against bigotry, racism, and religious hatred whenever it raises its ugly head.”

Gaffney replied with a three-and-a-half page single-spaced letter to Norquist that offered no apology. Gaffney not only refused to apologize but also cited chapter and verse of quotes from radical Islamic fundamentalists (Wahhabists) who had been received cordially at the White House.

He also stressed that he had taken pains to “express distinction between such Islamists, and what is, I believe, the majority of Muslims in this country whom the former [Wahhabists] are determined to recruit, intimidate, and dominate through a variety of techniques.”

The CSP boss took Norquist to task for his involvement with Islamic Institute, through which, Gaffney argued, Norquist and his associates had been instrumental in “promoting and facilitating Wahabbis’ access to the executive and legislative branches of government” and thereby “could prove politically damaging and strategically detrimental to our cause and the well-being of our country.”

Norquist says Islamic Institute “was formed to promote within the Muslim world the fact that the Koran and Islam are perfectly consistent with a free and open society.”

In an interview with NewsMax.com, Norquist said he wrote his letter because the two young White House Muslims whom Gaffney criticized were merely underlings carrying out decisions made by more senior White House officials.

“He decided to single out the kid who was a Muslim in both cases, even though the people making decisions are Presbyterians and Catholics, not Muslims,” the ATR president said.

In his latest column, Gaffney reports that one Muslim representative in a group visiting the Oval Office just days after 9/11, Shaykh Hamza Yusuf, had said two days before the attack: “This country is facing a terrible fate. This country stands condemned.”

Why FBI Couldn’t Find Him

When FBI agents visited Yusuf’s home, they were stunned to learn from his wife that he was unavailable because he was with the president.

However, Norquist, while “not vouching for anyone,” said the Muslims who had access to the president passed muster with the Secret Service and the FBI or they wouldn’t have been there.

“If they were a security risk, not if they said something stupid, if they were a security risk or a problem ... the Secret Service would pull them out,” he said.

Gaffney describes as “bizarre” FBI Director Robert Mueller’s decision to speak to the American Muslim Council last year despite that group’s “long record of activities hostile to the Bush administration’s prosecution of the war on terror.”

Walking the sometimes unclear lines between peace-loving Muslim Americans and those who pose a threat is a dilemma symbolized by the bitter dispute between Gaffney and Norquist, two well-known conservatives in the Bush constituency.

[Hila]

This is not a muslim country, it wasn't ever, it never will be. Let all who have a lust for our land go back to where they came from and belong. The intolerant and evil muslims will not come and tell America what to say, or how to behave toward them. This is America, foreigners should conform to our culture, adapt and live in peace or leave our shores - yesterday.

[TLBSHOW]

did he say treason or did he say this?


Pro-Hamas group rallies to support controversial White House staffer


Public support for a controversial White House staffer and a prominent GOP activist is coming from an odd source: A left-wing group whose leaders reportedly support Hamas terrorists.

The Muslim Public Affairs Council (MPAC) is trying to rally public backing for the low-ranking administration staffer, whom it refuses to name, in response to Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney's warning that the official was bringing pro-terrorist activists into the White House.

Gaffney identified the staffer as Ali Tulbah. Groups supportive of Hamas have not refuted Gaffney's statements. Instead, they and their political allies have tried to divert attention from the terrorism question by accusing Gaffney, American Conservative Union President David Keene and others of "racism and bigotry," or in MPAC's word, "slander."

Earlier MPAC involvement with the White House, in 2000, generated a blast in the Wall Street Journal, in which a terrorism expert excoriated then-First Lady Hillary Rodham Clinton for consorting with Hamas supporters, including MPAC.

MPAC joins anti-Bush coalition. In a recent statement, MPAC announced it was joining the nationwide February 15 demonstrations against President Bush's policy toward Iraq. Those demonstrations are organized by International ANSWER, a front of the Workers World Party, which openly supports the Kim Jong-il regime in North Korea. MPAC has promoted International ANSWER activity in the past.

A Hillary Clinton-style scandal might await the Bush administration if White House political operatives aren't more careful. As the Wall Street Journal commentary noted more than two years ago, "the issue is whether Mrs. Clinton has unwittingly enabled these groups to gain legitimacy." That same standard applies today.

Libertarian fatwa. Over the past week, MPAC heaped praise libertarian activist Grover Norquist for publicly assailing Gaffney, and issued a release stating, "MPAC asks Americans to defend White House employees."

MPAC is urging supporters to "Thank Mr. Grover Norquist, president of Americans for Tax Reform, for defending integrity within the Republican party and preserve fairness toward all American citizens."

The Washington Times has reported on the controversy, saying Norquist "has been accused of suppressing criticism of radical Islamic influence at the White House."

Frank J. Gaffney, Jr

[Poohbah]

First, go read Article III, Section 3 of the US Constitution. That defines treason. Gaffney accused them of engaging in acts falling within that definition.

Second:

Please answer the following question with a "yes" or "no" answer. Please note for the record that this is the SECOND time I have asked you for a "yes" or a "no" answer, and that you have refused to provide it.

Did Frank Gaffney actually present any evidence to support the allegations of treason he made against two White House staffers?

[TLBSHOW]

FBI bust prompts question: Who brought the Islamic Jihad leader to the White House?


'Palestinian Islamic Jihad is one of the most violent terrorist organizations in the world," says Attorney General Ashcroft.
The FBI's arrest of Sami Al-Arian for alleged terrorist-related crimes underscores a recurring concern of many terrorist-watchers, who have worried aloud that someone has exploited President George W. Bush's outreach to Muslims for ends damaging to the president and to U.S. strategic interests.

Al-Arian was one of those portrayed as a mainstreamer deserving of White House attention. A federal grand jury in Tampa thinks otherwise, handing down a 50-count indictment against Al-Arian and seven of his confederates. Attorney General John Ashcroft describes Al-Arian as "the North American leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad." The attorney general added, "Al-Arian is not only the leader of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad in North America, but he also served as the Secretary of the 'Shura Council' -- the worldwide governing group of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad. The indictment states: 'In his capacity as a leader in the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, he directed the audit of all moneys and property of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad throughout the world…'"

So who in the White House invited Al-Arian to attend a June 20, 2001 briefing by senior political advisor Karl Rove, as reported in the July 28, 2002 Washington Post? Somebody told Rove that Al-Arian delivered the votes to win Florida for President Bush's election.

Was it the Islamic Institute, the Saudi-funded group that has tried to bring radical Muslim groups into the Republican Party mainstream? Was it Khaled Saffuri, the present Islamic Institute chairman (formerly of the pro-Hezbollah American Muslim Council) whom the Bush 2000 campaign named its National Advisor on Arab and Muslim Affairs?

Who credentialized Saffuri to the Bush campaign? Was it Grover Norquist, who co-founded the Islamic Institute with Saffuri and served as its first chairman? Why can't Norquist come straight about his ties to Al-Arian or to other extremists whom he has been parading around Washington as mainstream Muslims?

Shortly after the June 2001 White House briefing, the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom (NCPPF), of which Al-Arian is president, gave Norquist an award for his work in fighting against the use of classified evidence in prosecuting terrorists. After initially claiming not to remember whether he had received the award from Al-Arian's group, Norquist, when challenged, declared he was "proud."

The Center for Security Policy has been warning for nearly two years that supposed friends of President Bush were exposing him to dangerous, extremist groups with established records of justifying, supporting - and in some cases, funding - terrorism. It has warned specifically and repeatedly about Al-Arian.

However, Norquist, a major figure in the conservative movement who has been promoting those groups - and exploiting his ties to the president and trusted political advisers like Rove - has launched a jihad of his own against the Center and other critics, questioning motives and branding them as "racists and bigots." Center for Security Policy President Frank Gaffney addressed Norquist's jihad last week in an open letter.

American Conservative Union President David Keene has referred to the problem in a recent column. So has syndicated columnist Mona Charen, and political reporter Ralph Hallow of the Washington Times.

Still, the question must be asked: Who put the White House and President Bush in this embarrassing and potentially dangerous situation?

http://www.centerforsecuritypolicy.org/index.jsp?section=today

[dagnabbit]

How does supplying radical Muslims with 8x10 glossies of their handshakes with the President "isolate" them? Seems to me this sort of thing just enhances their status within the broader Islamic community.

BTW, wishful rhetoric aside, we are at war with radical Islam (a thing) not "terrorism" (a tactic).

[Howlin]

Not to mention the one just busted today was a friend of The Presidents.

I'm sick to death of your LIES about Bush.

Produce evidence that they were FRIENDS. And not a campaign photo --- proof that George W. Bush and Al-Arian were FRIENDS.

Cat, in all your searching have you found ANY evidence that al-Arian is a personal friend of George W. Bush?

[dagnabbit]

Yes or No:

Do dead horses feel pain?

[Howlin]

Bush has very wisely exploited divisions in the Muslim community to isolate the radicals and terrorists.

And for that he has been called a traitor and it has been insinuated that he is in bed with terrorists!

[TLBSHOW]

Your the one that says he said treason at cpac do you have the transcript?

[Alouette]

Ramadan in the White House.

[TLBSHOW]

we are discussing Grover how hard is it for you to get that throught your head?

[Poohbah]

First, go read Article III, Section 3 of the US Constitution. That defines treason. Gaffney accused them of engaging in acts falling within that definition.

Second:

Please answer the following question with a "yes" or "no" answer. Please note for the record that this is the THIRD time I have asked you for a "yes" or a "no" answer, and that you have refused to provide it.

Did Frank Gaffney actually present any evidence to support the allegations of treason he made against two White House staffers?

Again, please answer the above question with a "yes" or a "no" answer.

[Howlin]

Did you or did you not say this on this thread?

Not to mention the one just busted today was a friend of The Presidents.

Produce the evidence.

[aristeides]

I thought it was being denied on this thread that Gaffney alleged "treason." Are you saying that he did?

Even if he did use the word -- and I don't think even you have claimed that he did -- are you demanding that a non-lawyer use the word in the technical sense it has in U.S. (not, for example, UK) law?

[aristeides]

At it again?

[Howlin]

As long as he keeps lying, you bet I'm at it.

[aristeides]

For you, a bit of hyperbole is a "lie"?

If I were you, I would be a bit more careful. Those who live in glass houses...

[Howlin]

He said Bush was friends with al-Arian; it's a lie. And watch this thread; he won't answer nor will he produce anything to CLOSE to backing up his words.

And I make it a HABIT not to post things I cannot back up, don't you?

[Poohbah]

I thought it was being denied on this thread that Gaffney alleged "treason." Are you saying that he did?

He didn't use the word, but he accused them of engaging in actions that fall within the Constitutional definition of the term.

I don't believe in calling a spade a spade--I believe in calling it a (blankety-blanking) SHOVEL.

I leave the weasel words to the Axis of Weasels.

Even if he did use the word -- and I don't think even you have claimed that he did -- are you demanding that a non-lawyer use the word in the technical sense it has in U.S. (not, for example, UK) law?

I'm saying that if the man's going to accuse two White House staffers of giving aid and comfort to the enemies of the United States, he'd better have the evidence at hand to back his words up.

Like I said: if I were in the position of those staffers, I would demand that Mr. Gaffney choose between producing the evidence, withdrawing the charge, or naming his second.

[aristeides]

And I make it a HABIT not to post things I cannot back up

You do, do you? I seem to remember you saying repeatedly last night that TLBSHOW claimed the shuttle Columbia had exploded over California.