Replies

"Why the hyperbole here? Wasn't Norquist responding to accusations by Gaffney about Suhail Kahn?"

No. as the record shows, Gaffney was questioning the judgment of people letting the likes Alamoudi, AlArian and Awad into the WH and otehr meetings, and, of sendng the FBI director to address Alamoudi and Vickers' American Muslim Counil, see above. Grover responded to that, and to Gaffney's same point at CPAC re Ali Tulbah (who had just been thanked by the AMC fro brining them in to the WH)-- the same way he repsonds to all criticsm, by twisting it, calling it racist and then denouncing you as a Bigot. Gaffney did not attack call them traitors or terrorists, or any such thing. Period

Gaffney made charges that both Suhail Kahn and Ali Tulbah have family ties to extremist Wahhabi religious groups.

Did Gaffney backup his charges against both Kahn and Tulbah with supporting information? Can you? What are the details of these family ties?

Yes he did, read the article, follow the footnotes. You do lesson one, and then you might get help with lesson two, okie-dokey? Beyond that I can supply you with a page or two on each one, but not at the moment b/c time. Mahboob Kahn hosted Bin LAden's mentor and number two in AQ, twice; he set up a number of radcial groups as mentioned above in this thread and was a cofounder and the Western Division director of ISNA, the main Wahhabi Mosque operation in the US; the elder Tulbah was the treasurer of the Great Houston Islamic center a combine of nearly 30 entities, whose relgious teaching is controlled by a 3 or 5 member council, two of whose members, at least, maintain/contributed to pro-AlQaeda websites; this is one of the many metrics one uses to identify salafiya groups. That's the skinny.

FYI, He did't charge. He stated. This has been dealt with before, so when you are finished reading the Gaffney , you can read the thread. You can also read Keene and Weyrich and others on Grover's charge on this re "racism and bigotry" rather than him instead addressing the facts. Grover took it into the gutter to change the story so that no one would talk about Gaffney's obvious main point which was the atrocious judgment being consistently exhibited in the choices of Muslim groups to bring into the Administrations. As quickly became more evident via handcuffs, there have been nothing but troubling, not to say felonious, emanations from this clever scheme. How Suhail Khan or Ali Tulbah got the jobs, who feeds them people, who protects their political flank, and yes, even who their fathers were/are was only a sidebar to the main issue and everyone knows it. If I were Frank, I wouldn't have set myself by mentioning the fathers, knowing Grover as we do, but there it is. And as you can discover, both fathers Wahhabi/Islamist associations, to put it mildly, are
very much real.