The question is, with so many prominent targets (individuals and governement agencies) of what appears to be at the least very poor judgement, why the single minded obsession with Norquist?
Another question is:
Why the singleminded efforts to dismiss scrutiny of Norquist? Another:
Why is he explaining himself so poorly, according to a number of observers? It all appears to much like a personal pissing contest.
If that's the case, then given the favors Norquist has done for the Free Republic Network, which way are you pissing? Or, to avoid that appearance yourself, why not confront the facts head on? Let's put all the marbles on the table. Let's quit all the nambly pambly innuendo, gossip and guilt through association stuff.
I'm not sure you fully understand the information. Whether or not Norquist was aware of or incurious about his Islamist associates, the primary allegation is association. Once the associations are established, and despite a lot of handwaving there's been no effort to bring any factual evidence to dispute them, other questions ensue. It certainly appears that a number of Islamists have cultivated associations with Grover Norquist, presumably for his access to various circles of power in Washington. To what extent were they successful? To what effect? Are the associations ongoing? You have basically alleged that Norquist knew who these people and what their agendas are, that he has been in collusion with them to push a radical Islamist agenda here in the US, that he has knowingly accepted money from terrorists and terrorists organizations, that he has assisted them in attempting to water down provisions of the Patriot Act (A position also taken by other prominent conservatives and libertarians including stalwarts such as David Keene of the ACU and Paul Weyrich of Free Congress, although they don't seem to show up on your criticism radar as Norquist has), and that he has knowingly provided access to the US Government, politicians and even the President, so that they, and Norquist by extension, can pursue and agenda that calls for the destruction of the United States and replacing it with the United Muslim States.
Which of them did so on behalf of Sami Al Arian's brother-in-law, Mazen al-Najjar, and received an award from Al Arian's NCPPF for doing so? In addition to outlining the secret evidence and material support cases, and the impact NCPPF has had on these, a written summary of the coalition's past year also included information on an April 5 awards ceremony at which the "champions of the abolishment movement against secret evidence" were honored. Mazen Al-Najjar, Nasser Ahmed, Hany Kiareldeen, Anwar Haddam, Dr. Ali and Mohammad Karim, and Harpal Singh Cheema (in abstentia) received awards for enduring the pain of imprisonment while fighting against the use of secret evidence. Congressman David Bonior (D-MI) and former Congressman Tom Campbell (R-CA) were honored for their efforts in trying to repeal secret evidence. Many lawyers received plaques as well. Greg Nojeim of the ACLU, filmmaker Hazim Bitar, and Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform received awards for their assistance.
National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom Holds Fourth Annual Convention
Washington Report on Middle East Affairs | October 2001
Yes, by the way, I have posted about Campbell and Bonior. Here's a question: on the Hugh Hewitt show last Tuesday, why did Grover Norquist lie and say that Sami Al-Arian didn't visit the Bush White House in July of 2001, when it's a matter of public record?
|
