[cyncooper]

It states clearly that Al-Arians son worked for Democrat david Bonior. Al-Arian never met the President while at the White House. He was let in yes, bet never met GW while there.Clinton regularly met with a KNOWN terrorist named Yasser Arafat.

I have not read one story regarding Sami Al-Arian yet that reports that his wife, Nahla, testified before Congress TWICE in 2000. This family was accorded a measure of political legitimacy that more than likely colored the vetting process. A coloring that was corrected, as the removal of the son from the meeting indicates.

As to Gaffney's question "what are we to make" of the arrest of the elder Al-Arian, the answer is obvious. This administration enforces the law.

[cyncooper]

This family was accorded a measure of political legitimacy that more than likely colored the vetting process.

To clarify: were accorded this legitimacy well before President Bush was ever inaugurated. Today Sami Al-Arian is behind bars.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"As to Gaffney's question "what are we to make" of the arrest of the elder Al-Arian, the answer is obvious. This administration enforces the law."

BUMP!

[Sabertooth]

As to Gaffney's question "what are we to make" of the arrest of the elder Al-Arian, the answer is obvious. This administration enforces the law.

And that's a good thing, as far as it goes. Clearly, the Bush Administration has restored a great deal of integrity to the Justice Department, after Janet Reno's eight-year malfeasance.

However, what are we to make of the efforts of Khaled Saffuri, co-founder with Grover Norquist of the Islamic Institute, to intervene on the behalf of the Safa Trust in a meeting with Treasury Secretary Paul O'Neill last year, after warrants were served on Safa investigating their financial links with terror orgs (link)? Isn't this troubling, given that Norquist has acknowledged that the Islamic Institute has received donations from the Safa Trust (link)?

I'm not saying that the investigation has been influenced, but why was Saffuri even given the opportunity to weigh in, given the clear conflict of interest?