A Troubling Influence - An Islamic Fifth Column penetrates the White House

FrontPageMagazine ^ | 12/09/03 | Frank J Gaffney Jr.

[Trollstomper]

"'m stating that maybe his being a STAFFER for a US CONGRESSMAN had something to do with him getting in the WHITE HOUSE"

Actually it was Grover, (although Cambell did also write a letter). I think Grover's might have had a little more sway with Carl than a defrocked extremely liberal congressman. So, maybe, But NO. Next?

[hchutch]

Are you here for honest debate, or are you here to generate fodder for LP?

[Sabertooth]

Are you here for honest debate, or are you here to generate fodder for LP?

Until you bring some honest debate, I'm having private laughs at your expense.

You keep floating this "you don't like Norquist and Rove" lead balloon. Let's deal with that, shall we?

I don't like them, you do.

There, now you've got me right where you want me: arguing the case on the facts and the merits thereof.

Oh wait: that's not what you want at all.

[hchutch]

*Yawn*

Again, kindly explain to me why it is we should forego providingpeople with the evidence aginst them - as required by the Sixth Amendment.

"Yes, but let's see, they also helped engineer the highest increase in spending, non-defense primarily by the way, since LBJ? And that's not counting the new drug dollop and the aborning effort to subsidize another 12 million illegal aliens --- and the first term isn't even over yet!"

Southack has compiled a pretty good list of what we GOT in return.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-rlc/1038819/posts?page=156#156

Stuff like unsigning Kyoto, deploying the beginnings of a national missile defense, two tax cuts, two state sponsors of terrorism - Islamic terrorism, I might add - removed from power and one of those heads of state IN CUSTODY, banned partial-birth abortion...

Those accomplishments are not free. So the question I pose is this: Do you consider the gains Bush has made worth the price that he has paid to this point?

I do.

And for the record, the first vote for Senator I ever made went to Ollie North in 1994. It is a vote I would repeat without hesitation,a and which I do not regret. You cannot say I will not support thiose who put it on the line for national security.

[Bob J]

No, you floated the idea that Qatar is an enemy of the US and yelled booga booga! on Norquist. Seems to me if Qatar is good enough for the US Army and Rummy to trust to hold Saddam, it's good enough to take a few bucks from to hold Free Market seminars for Muslims.

[hchutch]

If that floats your boat, go ahead.

You want to hang out with those folks, fine. But I do find it interesting that FR threads and posts from me pass for entertainment.

Nick Danger and Bob J have raised some questions about this, questions that go to motive and whether all this is really necessary. We have the assertion that Gaffney did think it was necessary, but he is not a disinterested party.

And the facts I see do not warrant such a fuss. There may be some room to debate the judgement calls made, but it still strikes me as a mixture of a strong belief that the secret evidence provisions are not on strong constiutional ground and a refusal to admit mistakes than anything malicious.

[Sabertooth]

No, you floated the idea that Qatar is an enemy of the US

No, Bob, and if you think so, I challenge you to direct us all to where I've done so.

What actually happened was that you were ignorant of the fact that Qatar was funding homicide bombers when you attempted to suggest that money from Qatar was ok, because they're officially an "ally."

If Qatari funding is ok because they're an ally, then is it ok for them to fund homicide bombers?

Seems to me if Qatar is good enough for the US Army and Rummy to trust to hold Saddam, it's good enough to take a few bucks from to hold Free Market seminars for Muslims.

Is their money "good enough" for them to fund homicide bombers?

You still haven't either the stones or the intellectual honesty to answer:

BobJ, is it ok for Qatar to fund homicide bombers?

After all, they're an ally!

[Fred Mertz]

Grover attempted to get elected Kamal Nawash to the VA state senate this year -- a radical Muslim lawyer, who , along with Stanley Cohen, the lawyer for Hamas, is representing Libya & AlQaeda-charged terrorist detainee (and Norquist seed donor; Saffuri mentor)A. Alamoudi. Grover held a fundrasier for Nawash at his house ti summer.

I used to live in Virginia years ago. I was unaware that Norquist went to these lengths. Thanks for the tidbit, TrollStomper.

[Fred Mertz]

Seems to me if Qatar is good enough for the US Army and Rummy to trust to hold Saddam...

I heard that announcement about Qatar, but ten minutes later the news was retracted. Oh well, let's see what tomorrow brings.

[Trollstomper]

" based on evidence that they don't have to produce?"

1) This is what you asked. They do produce it.

2) Again , the reason I cited already, illegal aliens aren't American citizens, are in fact in violation of our laws, and can be summarily deported, in essence. It's not my job to teach you immigration law.

3) I would certainly HOPE we are getting something for it!!

a) First we have a larger deficit.

b) You can Thank Gaffney for Kyoto and missile defense; getting out of the former cost us nothing and getting into the latter is somewhere in the order of 1% of the Defense budget and was already largely budgetted for. so , the first two things you mention aren't part of "what we got for it"

c) Precisely what part of this 40-year record increase is paying for the ban on partial birth abortion?


d) Actually, the Taliban wasn't recognized as a state, but I'll give you a "C" for heading in the right direction

e) Bush doesn't pay, we pay. And no, not exactly. Congressional pork barrel and prescription drugs were neccesary in order to get which of the other cited putative benefits?

f) Actually if you want to get cutesy constitutional about it, Ollie almost took down the Reagan Administration by playin fast and loose with facts, not to mention a few millions worth of botched airdrops and non-functioning ammo reulting from having chose the wrong people to use as cut outs in CA; ditto the wrong people chosen for Operation Democracy stateside, who stole a good portion of the money. Figures from that that you would have no problem with Grover.

Read Maj Genral John Singlaub's biography, "Hazardous Duty" on the former matter; and in case you are too young to know, Jack Singlaub is who Ollie and his fans only wish Ollie could have been. And more conservative too boot. One of the greatest living US military heros. He also abhors what Norquist is doing, an dhas written against it. Of course that would figure too, you're thinking --and you'd be right. Yawn over to you kid.

[Bob J]

I don't like them, you do. There, now you've got me right where you want me: arguing the case on the facts and the merits thereof.

The merits of a case sometimes extend beyond facts and figures. I don't remember a single instance of where anyone here has disputed your facts (how could we, we're not Norquist). It's what you've done with them that we are concerned about AND an issue you have failed to respond to until now.

Okay, we're finally getting to the other side of the story. You don't like Norquist and Rove. Maybe you don't like them so much due to adversarial positions on Muslims, portions of the Patriot Act and immigration, that you may exaggerate certain facts, connect dots that can't fairly be connected and submit unsupportable conclusions in an attempt to destroy his reputation and end his ability to continue to voice those opinions that are at odds with your own.

Case closed. Buh bye.

[Sabertooth]

Nick Danger and Bob J have raised some questions about this, questions that go to motive and whether all this is really necessary. We have the assertion that Gaffney did think it was necessary, but he is not a disinterested party.

They've rasied questions about motives because they're firing blanks on the facts.

That's the essence of an ad hominem fallacy.

And the facts I see do not warrant such a fuss. There may be some room to debate the judgement calls made, but it still strikes me as a mixture of a strong belief that the secret evidence provisions are not on strong constiutional ground and a refusal to admit mistakes than anything malicious.

Well, that's mighty intellectually curious of you.

As though this entire thread has been narrow-cast to questions about the use of classified evidence in terror cases.

Norquist hobnobs with terrorists and sympathizers, and when anyone calls him on it, he resorts to race-baiting and lying. This has been demonstrated to you numerous times on this thread.

Yet you shrug it off with I don't know Norquist. I can't explain that.

Is there "room to debate" Norquist's lies and race-baiting, in your mind?

[Trollstomper]

"Grover attempted to get elected Kamal Nawash to the VA state senate this year -- a radical Muslim lawyer, who , along with Stanley Cohen, the lawyer for Hamas, is representing Libya & AlQaeda-charged terrorist detainee (and Norquist seed donor; Saffuri mentor)A. Alamoudi. Grover held a fundrasier for Nawash at his house this summer. "

I used to live in Virginia years ago. I was unaware that Norquist went to these lengths. Thanks for the tidbit, TrollStomper."

Most people are, but it's all out there. And a lot more. Google Awash. I have the Norquist fundraiser announcment from Nawash and from various muj websites. You're welcome. Share with the aforementioned friends who are having trouble understanding Why. So at least they can become au fait with the What.

[Bob J]

Ollie almost took down the Reagan Administration by playin fast and loose with facts..

According to your schematic, it appears you are now calling Oliver North a traitor, if you hold him to the same standard you use for Norquist.

[Sabertooth]

The merits of a case sometimes extend beyond facts and figures.

Easy to say, when you have none.

The merits of a case my extend beyond facts and figures; the merits will never run completely contrary to all of them.

I don't remember a single instance of where anyone here has disputed your facts (how could we, we're not Norquist).

Whether or not you are Norquist has nothing to do with you inability, demonstrated for nigh 500 posts now, to post any exculpatory evidence on his behalf.

Weren't you the one who was earlier accusing me of selectively posting facts? Selectively from what?

From what larger set of of facts did I selectively post mine?

You were bluffing all along.

Okay, we're finally getting to the other side of the story. You don't like Norquist and Rove. Maybe you don't like them so much due to adversarial positions on Muslims, portions of the Patriot Act and immigration, that you may exaggerate certain facts, connect dots that can't fairly be connected and submit unsupportable conclusions in an attempt to destroy his reputation and end his ability to continue to voice those opinions that are at odds with your own.

Let's assume, hypothetically, that all of your foregoing bit of tinfoil is gospel.

Why haven't you been able to demonstrate this? Why have I been able to post dozens of sources and links relevant to Norquist and Saffuri, all supporting what Gaffney has been saying, while you haven't been able to post anything to the contrary?

And how, exactly, did I pull the wool over the eyes of Gaffney, Horowitz, and others, when I undertook my sinister vendetta against Grover Norquist?

Case closed. Buh bye.

Well, I'm here, anytime you want to appeal the verdict.

[Pelham]

I remember General Singlaub tearing into Ollie, must have been in an Accuracy in Media newsletter. Surprised me when I first saw it, as I had been buying into the Ollie image. Singlaub is a little known hero with an incredible biography.

[Pelham]

According to your schematic, it appears you are now calling Oliver North a traitor,

He doesn't have to. General Singlaub took apart North's reputation some years ago.

[hchutch]

You don't like the folks I like. That is your perogative.

As far as I am concerned, Ollie North is a good guy in my book and a far better person than many of those Senators who looked down on him. He's put his butt on the line.

Are you one of those folks who got upset about the methods Los Pepes used against Pablo Escobar?

[Trollstomper]

Why don't you deal with my words and leave musings about my schemata, or your own metaphysics, or whatever other dross aside. If I wanted to call someone a traitor I would do so. I precisely said he played fast and loose with the facts. (Don't put words in my mouth young man, not to regroup your pallid arguments, or for any other reason.)

It was quite obvious to most serious observers, left and right, that this was the case. But, I can understand that you are unaware of the facts that occured almost a decade before you voted the first time, for Ollie.

That is why I sent you one reference, and I will give you one other, the relevant chapter on Ollie in Dr. Constantine Menges' "Inside the National Security Council" Menges was the Assistant to the President for Latin America, having also been Casey's appointee as NIO for LA at the CIA, i.e. the top job. He is the intellectual author (Rand 1968, "Democratic forces in Communist Territory" or something very close to that), of what came to be called the "Reagan Doctrine" after Krauthammer labeled it such

So there are two well-esteemed people who were there and have written about it. One Assistant to the President and one Major General who ran most every important Special Ops and COIN program we had before Carter kicked him out of Korea. Ollie, a Lt. Col., is a fine person, a patriot and a good conservative. Ditto Grover.

Difference is, Ollie can more or less admit to some mistakes, at least as those were proven by events, and in nationally televised hearings, etc. Grover can admit to none. But both are over-zealous, which is their charm and their fatal flaw. Fatal especially inasmuch as it plays to the crowds and they love that. As, I gather, do you.

Next

[Pelham]

Singlaub actually procured arms for the contras. And did it without enmeshing President Reagan in a major scandal. North delivered very few weapons to the contras, and succeeded mostly in making himself a celebrity. As I recall Singlaub was OSS, and put his butt on the line in ways that Ollie never did.