Evidence of what? Where is the demonstrable harm to America's national security?
We're fighting a War on Terror based, in part, on a principle of pre-emption. We aren't going to wait until terrorists or terror states attack, or can threaten us with WMDs, we're taking the fight to them. Why, then, should we preclude pre-emption with regard to Fifth Columnists in the WoT? Shouldn't we find them before they do harm our national security? The illegal transfers to the People's republic of China were proven to my satisfaction and to a Congressional Committee's satisfaction.
Great, let's get a Congressional Committee to investigate the Islamist Fifth Columnists, and those who are aiding them in their efforts. Right now, there is NO evidence of harm to nationals ecurity or the prosecution of the war. Only very serious charges being laid out.
Thanks for acknowledging the charges are serious. Unfortunately, you seem, like the Democrats, to want to wait until our national security is actually harmed before you're willing to do anything to prevent it. And what strikes me as suspicious is that in the ABSENCE of any evidence of a crime on the part of Grover Norquist, you demand a full investigation.
Isn't the purpose of investigations, to gather evidence? What we do have with Norquist is a lot of evidence that he's cozy with terror symps, and has assisted them in penetrating the circles of power in Washington. Maybe he's just an ambitious dupe, and has committed no crime. Maybe some of his associates have committed crimes. Sami Al Arian is under arrest for involvement with Palestinian Islamic Jihad. Abdurahman Alamoudi is under arrest for charges that include financial dealings with al-Qaeda and Hamas. Alamoudi also helped recruit the Islamic chaplain spies at Gitmo. Khaled Saffuri, Ahmoudi's former deputy at the American Muslim Council, and Norquists current partner at the Islamic Institute, whom Norquist calls a "great patriot," gave money to the Holy Land Foundation, now a banned terror organization. Their Islamic Institute has received donations from the Safa Group, an umbrella for a number of terror orgs. No, nothing to raise suspicions here, no reason to investigate. Do you know what your position sounds like to me? It sounds like Tom Foley saying that the charges that Reagan-Bush campaign officials met with Iranian officials to sabotage negotiations to release the hostages held by Iran - baseless charges leveled by Carter Administration Gary Sick needed to be investigated BECAUSE there was no evidence of wrongdoing. "We need to investigate for evidence of wrongdoing BECAUSE there is no evidence of wrongdoing."
You sound like John Glenn. Is providing access to terror symps an example of rightdoing, or wrongdoing? Where is the evidence of criminal wrongdoing? I have seen NONE.
Where's the evidence that you want to look? And why are you now hedging with "criminal" wrongdoing? I have seen nothing that indicates that at all. So that leads me to believe this is more about settling some sort of score that some people have with Norquist than it is about national security, and using the same type of smear tactics that were used against George Bush Sr.
How badly will President Bush be smeared if you're wrong? Tell you what: 90% of the reason I'm voting to re-elect this President is because of the War on Terror. I don't want that war or his re-election hindered because Republicans were unwilling to look squarely at a problem in our own camp in the person of Grover Norquist.
|
