Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Norquist (Islamofascist stooge) slams Frank Gaffney
FoxNews Channel | 02/07/2003 | self

Posted on 02/07/2003 3:09:14 PM PST by montag813

Did anyone see Grover Norquist viciously slam Frank Gaffney for daring to question surrendering the GOP to Islamic extremists? He just did it on John Gibson's show. Norquist is nothing but a stooge for Islamofascists. He actually claimed that no extremists or anyone even espousing or supporting extremist views could ever gain entry to the White House due to SS "vetting". Gee, so how did those three imams on tape calling for America and Israel's destruction end up in the post-Sept 11 meeting with Bush? Norquist actually said "people with a higher security clearance than Frank Gaffney will ever have" were giving prudent advice to the President regarding how wonderful Islam is. Perhaps he forgets that he has never had any security clearance and that Gaffney was Deputy Secretary of Defense. How insulting this little gerbil is. Gaffney was a gentleman, very reserved and reasoned. Norquist was a maniac, hurling nasty insults and questions about Gaffney's mental health. Digusting.


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Foreign Affairs; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: gaffney; islam; muslim; norquist; salamalmarayati; terror

1 posted on 02/07/2003 3:09:15 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: montag813
Was that nasty, or what? I was wondering if I was the only one in the dark about that; this was played as some prominent, long-simmering intra-party feud, and this is the first I, a fairly attentive guy, have heard of it.

I saw absolutely nothing in Gaffney's measured, reasonable comments that warranted that eruption by Norquist. Is Gaffney right? I don't know. But he sure as hell didn't deserve to becalled a "disturbed" liar in those tones.

And you know, I've got this sickening feeling this is going to be par for the course after the Lott debacle: we adopt a KGB-type routine for excommunicating "racists" from the movement. All based on the same hysterical, hypersensitive criteria for what constitutes "racism" established by the left.

2 posted on 02/07/2003 3:19:06 PM PST by winin2000
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813
Since you double-posted, I guess I gotta post my reply twice as well.

Norquist is nothing but a stooge for Islamofascists.

Absolutely not true.
Grover is NOT an ideologue.
He's more than willing to cast aside principles for the highest bidder.

3 posted on 02/07/2003 3:23:14 PM PST by Willie Green (Go Pat Go!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Do I remember correct that Norquist is of Muslim descent or relation?

I may be incorrect. But maybe someone here knows.

4 posted on 02/07/2003 3:25:18 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Since you double-posted, I guess I gotta post my reply twice as well.

My bad...PC crashed on first post and didnt think it went through. Let's stick to the other thread.

5 posted on 02/07/2003 3:26:25 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: montag813
EXISTING THREAD on this topic
6 posted on 02/07/2003 3:27:26 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
He may be dating a Moslem woman.
7 posted on 02/07/2003 3:45:54 PM PST by Grand Old Partisan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: montag813
I always found Norquist's articles in the old American Spectator to be very worthwhile reading. Furthermore, his work at his tax-reform organization is always interesting.

I didn't see the 'debate' in question, but my respect for him would have dropped if he actually called Gaffney names. I don't always agree with everything Gaffney says, but no sense in making it personal.

One thing in Norquist's favor is that Democrats absolutely hate the guy. For that alone, he deserves some respect.
8 posted on 02/07/2003 4:01:27 PM PST by ER_in_OC,CA
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813
Did anyone catch the name of the muslim sect that John Gibson named (as the ones in the White House), in his exchange with Norquist? It sounded something like Mohav??? But I have no idea how to spell it.

9 posted on 02/07/2003 4:09:07 PM PST by frnewsjunkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ER_in_OC,CA
I always found Norquist's articles in the old American Spectator to be very worthwhile reading. Furthermore, his work at his tax-reform organization is always interesting.

That was then. This is now. With him on the Wahhabi payroll, he is a menace to the GOP. I hope his "Religion of Peace" star is fading with the White House.

10 posted on 02/07/2003 4:36:40 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ER_in_OC,CA
I always found Norquist's articles in the old American Spectator to be very worthwhile reading. Furthermore, his work at his tax-reform organization is always interesting.

That was then. This is now. With him on the Wahhabi payroll, he is a menace to the GOP. I hope his "Religion of Peace" star is fading with the White House.

11 posted on 02/07/2003 4:36:40 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: montag813
They are called Wahhabi. Thanks.
12 posted on 02/07/2003 5:12:11 PM PST by frnewsjunkie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: winin2000
I remember reading a while back that there was a Muslim group that operated out of Norquist's office. I'll have to google that.

And, if I remember correctly, the person Gaffney was previously complaining about was a nephew of Sami al-Arian.

13 posted on 02/07/2003 5:19:10 PM PST by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: montag813
Here are two of the many articles I found on "Grover Norquist" and "Muslim" via google.

 

http://www.tnr.com/111201/foer111201.html

<snip>

Norquist has not undertaken this crusade alone. In the mid-1990s, he enlisted a partner, Khaled Saffuri, then working as a lobbyist and deputy director for the American Muslim Council (AMC). After receiving a master's in management science, Saffuri came to Washington in 1987 and worked his way up through the city's Arab-Muslim political apparatus, starting with a stint at the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee. In 1998 he left the AMC to help Norquist found the Islamic Institute, an advocacy organization dedicated to promoting a conservative agenda that would appeal to Muslims. Saffuri served as executive director and Norquist as chairman of the board.

The Institute operated out of the headquarters of Americans for Tax Reform, from which it borrowed not just a fax machine and conference room, but an agenda. Soon the Institute was shilling for all of Norquist's pet issues--a moratorium on Internet taxation, fast-track trade negotiation authority, and personal savings accounts. It even published a paper on the Koran's compatibility with capitalism. "People should remember that Mohammed and his wife were businessmen," Norquist notes. With the help of Saffuri, who brought ties to a vast network of activists, the Islamic Institute became a nerve center for Muslim lobbying in Washington. As Norquist puts it, "They gather at the Islamic Institute to plan and debrief, when they have meetings [with administration officials]."

Through the Islamic Institute, Norquist appears to have developed close relationships with a number of Muslim leaders. When I recently spoke to the Muslim Public Affairs Council's Salam Al-Marayati, the man who fingered Israel as a potential sponsor of the World Trade Center attacks, he recited Norquist's phone number from memory. When University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian e-mailed The Wall Street Journal in response to an op-ed that tied him to Islamic Jihad, he CC'd Norquist. Last year at its annual dinner, the AMC presented Norquist with an award for his service. As John Zogby told me, "[H]e's played the role of interlocutor. With all respect, many of the leaders are immigrants and don't have years and years of experience. Grover has filled that void."

<snip>

http://12.11.184.13/utility/search/oop/qfullhit.htw?CiWebHitsFile=/boston/news%5Ffeatures/this%5Fjust%5Fin/documents/01848515.htm&CiRestriction=%20grover%20norquist%20&CiQueryFile=/utility/search/query.idq&CiBeginHilite=%3CB%20CLASS=HIT%3E&CiEndHilite=%3C/B%3E&CiUserParam3=../query.htm&CiHiliteType=Full

<snip>

The Protestant << Norquist>>  is a founding director of the Islamic Institute, a socially conservative Muslim think tank that eschews international issues in favor of domestic issues such as tax cuts and faith-based initiatives. In addition, Norquist’s lobbying firm, Janus-Merritt Strategies LLC, was officially registered as a lobbyist for the Islamic Institute as well as for Abdurahman Alamoudi, the founder and former executive director of the American Muslim Council. Public records show that Alamoudi has done more than $20,000 worth of business with Norquist’s firm, on issues relating to Malaysia. One source says the lobbying involved efforts on behalf of reformist Islamic leader Anwar Ibrahim, imprisoned in Malaysia, whose cause has been taken up by Amnesty International, among others.

 

14 posted on 02/07/2003 5:29:18 PM PST by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Catspaw
When I recently spoke to the Muslim Public Affairs Council's Salam Al-Marayati, the man who fingered Israel as a potential sponsor of the World Trade Center attacks, he recited Norquist's phone number from memory. When University of South Florida professor Sami Al-Arian e-mailed The Wall Street Journal in response to an op-ed that tied him to Islamic Jihad, he CC'd Norquist.

Norquist is a menace and a threat to the GOP, and through his political connections, the United States. I urge all Republicans to not be fooled by his pretenses and feigned moderation. He is the foot in the door of access which allows the most extremist elements of Islamofascism into the West Wing's sphere of influence. It is dangerous and I urge the President's staff to take action.

15 posted on 02/07/2003 7:22:49 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
I believe his sister is married to a Palestinian.
16 posted on 02/07/2003 8:58:26 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: montag813
Gee, you're actually making some sense today. Those anti-depressants are starting to kick in, no doubt.
17 posted on 02/07/2003 9:00:08 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: montag813
And by the way, the other night there was some guy claiming that the Israelis intentionally attacked the Liberty. He pops up here and there, and repeats himself with this same crap. For those who are interested, check this out. I'm sure the book will be well worth reading.

http://www.jta.org/page_view_story.asp?intarticleid=12400&intcategoryid=5
18 posted on 02/07/2003 9:02:10 PM PST by holdonnow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: holdonnow
Gee, you're actually making some sense today. Those anti-depressants are starting to kick in, no doubt.

Yes, thanks for the tip. I was really off the reservation there for a while.

19 posted on 02/07/2003 10:20:48 PM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: ER_in_OC,CA
I didn't see the 'debate' in question, but my respect for him would have dropped if he actually called Gaffney names. I don't always agree with everything Gaffney says, but no sense in making it personal.

I saw the interview, and it left me with my mouth open. The best description I can think of is that it was a "Hussein Ibish" moment, in which a Muslim apologist (in this case, Norquist) totally ignores a specific question (about the danger of Islamic Wahhabi extremism) to personally attack his debate opponent (Frank Gaffney). Norquist actually ended with an exhortation for the audience to "pray for forgiveness" for Frank Gaffney's supposed intolerance. It was truly ugly and mean-spirited.

Norquist might be hated by the Dems, but I certainly don't want him representing Conservatives after that performance.

20 posted on 02/08/2003 8:57:57 AM PST by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: browardchad
it seems to me that it would be a good idea to get some facts straight. I heard Gaffney's comments at CPAC and I thought it was awful. He claimed that some guy at the White House shouldn't be in the White House just because he is a moslem. That is not just a shot at the guy, its a shot at the President. The left is always going after Grover making up stories that he hangs out with bad moslems just because they can. Why are so many conservatives feeding that frenzy, I don't know. People need to realize that not all moslems are Islamic extremists, and shouldn't be treated as if they were.

As for Grover, whether I agree or disagree, I admire what he is trying to do. He is taking the position that we shouldn't have hatred or bias towards people because of their religion and because some evil people performed evil in its name. It is a hard, politically incorrect thing to do. It's easy for people like Gaffney to call everyone a wahabi without even thinking about it, its much harder to defend the unpopular, even in a country created for purposes of religious liberty.

And he does not date a moslem. He has been dating a person in the movement for many years whose name most of you would recognize.

21 posted on 02/08/2003 7:02:52 PM PST by Skatergal
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Skatergal
I heard Gaffney's comments at CPAC and I thought it was awful.

I wasn't at CPAC, and this thread, as I recall, was discussing Norquist's appearance on Fox News. I was not aware of the background of the story, so was watching through unbiased eyes. Norquist looked bad, and his tactics, as I described in my original post, were worse.

He is taking the position that we shouldn't have hatred or bias towards people because of their religion and because some evil people performed evil in its name.

If that it his intent, that is honorable, but his tactics on Fox News were dishonorable, and definitely did not further his cause.

Considering the documented evidence of exactly who Norquist (the apparent liason with the Muslim community), has invited to the White House in the past (and to the 9/11 Memorial Service at the National Cathedral), I don't believe skepticism regarding his judgement are unwarranted, and certainly Gaffney is not the only conservative who has questioned that judgement. Are they all wrong? Are the anti-American, anti-Semitic statements of Norquist invitees, which are a matter of public record, to be disbelieved?

he does not date a moslem

I could care less who or what he dates. I made no reference to Norquist's love life in my original post.

22 posted on 02/11/2003 1:54:15 PM PST by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: browardchad
I heard the CPAC remarks as well and Gaffney did, as advertised, single out a peron who works in the White House -- by name -- and essentially accused him of letting terrorist sympathizers in to see the president based on nothing more than the allegation that his father is the treasurer of a mosque in Houston, Texas.

Norquist, in my view, has every right to be upset. Rather than confront him directly, Gaffney has been writing columns about him and otherwise smearing Muslims by altering facts to fit his theory. If Norquist went over the top, and I don't think he did, he had every right to.

Think about how you would feel if Gaffney were Blumenthal or Brock talking about Free Republic as a group based on what a few of the posters say.
23 posted on 02/20/2003 10:55:02 AM PST by Frankie Fiveangels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Frankie Fiveangels
essentially accused him of letting terrorist sympathizers in to see the president based on nothing more than the allegation that his father is the treasurer of a mosque in Houston, Texas.

I wasn't at CPAC, but I believe Gaffney's objections were based on something other than generic anti-Islamic sentiments.

Per Gaffney in The Washington Times, 2/11/03:

"The AMC (American Muslim Council) press release made a point of commending Ali Tulbah, an associate director of the White House's Office of Cabinet Affairs, for including their representatives (notably, executive director Eric Erfan Vickers) in the meeting. Mr. Tulbah similarly admitted another highly controversial organization, the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), in this meeting. There appear to have been at least nine other meetings that these groups have attended with the White House and senior administration officials since September 2001, some at the invitation of a predecessor of Mr. Tulbah in the role of gatekeeper for the administration's Muslim "outreach" efforts, Suhail khan. The inclusion of such organizations is remarkable on its face. It is, after all, a matter of public record that they actively oppose President Bush on: the need forcibly to liberate Iraq; increasing surveillance of potentially dangerous aliens in this country and the places where they congregate (including mosques); and giving law enforcement tools to counter terror. They have also repeatedly expressed sympathy for, excused or otherwise supported groups identified by the Bush administration as terrorists. Last June, for example, CAIR's executive director Nihad Awad declared "I am in support of the Hamas movement." And in a television debate last June with me, the AMC's Mr. Vickers declined repeatedly to denounce either Hamas, Hezbollah or even al Qaeda, finally describing the last as a "resistance movement."

Think about how you would feel if Gaffney were Blumenthal or Brock talking about Free Republic as a group based on what a few of the posters say.

If Free Republic were actively condoning and/or encouraging the rhetoric of groups such as the AMC and CAIR, I would say they deserved the criticism.

I don't see Bush as a villain in this BTW, but as a politician who is not thinking outside the box on this matter. Relying on entrenched special interest groups is a way of life in D.C., but in this case, it is preventing the moderate Muslims -- those who truly believe that theirs is a "Religion of Peace" -- from having their voices heard.

Today, I listened to anti-Semitic spew from Ibrahim Cooper, spokesman for CAIR, on the Press/Buchanan show on MSNBC. He stated that the arrest of Sami Al-Arian was a result of the Jewish control of the U.S., along with the same-old, same-old "persecution of Muslims" line. It was nauseating -- and yet this organization is the one cultivated by Norquist, given entree into the White House, and consulted by the State Department in its PR campaign to improve the U.S. image in the Muslim world. That is the basis of Gaffney's (and others) objections, and he definitely has a point.

24 posted on 02/20/2003 1:54:09 PM PST by browardchad
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 23 | View Replies]

To: browardchad; Frankie Fiveangels; Ligeia; Howlin; mhking; Poohbah
If Gaffney did say what Norquist is saying he said, then the White House staffer is owed an apology unless Gaffney has PROOF to back up his allegations.

Otherwise, Norquist is correct to disinvite a person who has apparently slandered a White House aide.
25 posted on 02/20/2003 5:10:54 PM PST by hchutch ("Last suckers crossed, Syndicate shot'em up" - Ice-T, "I'm Your Pusher")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: hchutch; browardchad
In the old days, this would have already been settled in a properly masculine fashion--dueling pistols at ten paces.

Norquist is perfectly within his rights to be angry if Mr. Gaffney cannot substantiate the charges.

26 posted on 02/20/2003 5:26:51 PM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: hchutch
Okay, thanks for the ping. I now have a better understanding of the disagreement. I sure wish someone would invite the two of them over for a beer and settle this misunderstanding / feud in private.
27 posted on 02/20/2003 6:26:35 PM PST by Ligeia (What we have here is a failure to communicate)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
Sometimes you are fed only 1/2 of the story.
28 posted on 02/20/2003 6:33:34 PM PST by LurkerNoMore!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: LurkerNoMore!
Norquist is nothing but a stooge for Islamofascists.
29 posted on 02/20/2003 6:34:24 PM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: winin2000
he is a fake, he is a liberal rat
30 posted on 02/20/2003 6:34:55 PM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: TLBSHOW
tat tat
31 posted on 02/20/2003 6:35:21 PM PST by LurkerNoMore!
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Fred Mertz; Sabertooth; Jael
ping
32 posted on 02/20/2003 6:35:33 PM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: Willie Green
Grover is NOT an ideologue.
He's more than willing to cast aside principles for the highest bidder

FOR THE TERRORIST
33 posted on 02/20/2003 6:42:29 PM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: nutmeg
bump
34 posted on 02/20/2003 7:10:05 PM PST by nutmeg (Liberate Iraq - Support Our Troops!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: winin2000
he may have been measured and reasonable but I suspect that Zodiac, the serial killer who terrorized San Francisco in the 1960's, was measured and reasonable too on those few occassions when he called the police
35 posted on 02/21/2003 7:07:54 AM PST by Frankie Fiveangels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: browardchad
what gaffney said at cpac was that the american muslim council bragged ina press rlease that they had gotten in to see the president as part of a group of American-Muslims because of one Ali Tulbah, who is, I believe, the associate director of cabinet affairs for, if you can believe it, state, defense and justice... his father is one Hassan Tulbah, the treasurer of an Islamic Mosque in Houston -- that was it -- not facts, not proff just smear by innuendo because the guys' father happens to be the treasurer of a Mosque.
36 posted on 02/21/2003 7:12:52 AM PST by Frankie Fiveangels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Frankie Fiveangels
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/backroom/848113/posts?page=342#342
37 posted on 02/21/2003 7:14:30 AM PST by TLBSHOW (God Speed as Angels trending upward dare to fly Tribute to the Risk Takers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: LurkerNoMore!
ping! and bump!
38 posted on 02/21/2003 7:14:35 AM PST by Frankie Fiveangels
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
I was watching the Christian Coalition yesterday on C-Span, and this Norquist name came by Daniel Pipes as a guy that pushes Islam as a religion of peace on to President Bush.

As long as the Islamic organizations in the US and the rest of the world are not outraged at their religion being the motive for violence around the world, ALL Moslems should be suspects, should never have high security clearance.

39 posted on 02/21/2003 7:59:57 AM PST by philosofy123
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson