[Sabertooth]

#16: Norquist is not a traitor.

I'm going to take comments from several of your posts at once.

Norquist is past the point where even credible evidence of sheer stupidity would make a difference as a rhetorical defense, although perhaps it might as a legal one.

Traitor or stooge? At some point, it doesn't matter.

Norquist was buddied up with Sami Al Arian when it was known that Al Arian was, at best, pro-terrorist, and was under investigation for worse.

Norquist's colleague and partner, Khaled Saffuri, co-founder with him of the Islamic Institute, donated money to the Holy Land Foundation, which sponsors the children of homicide bombers.

#22: I agree with what you state. Norquist's considerable conservative credentials precludes ad hominem attacks but sensible questions are justified and Norquist should address each of them.

Sensible questions have been justified for the better part of a year, and Norquist is the one who's resorted to ad hominems against Gaffney and anyone else questioning his cozy Islamist ties.

Norquist's so-called "conservative credentials" are a mixed bag. In addition to facilitating Washington access for terror symps, and worse, he's also a known pro-Amnesty apologist for Illegal Aliens.

Norquist's wrecklessness is as appalling as that of those in the Clinton Administration who provided access for drug dealers and Red Chinese arms merchants.

#22: I would add that Norquists criticism of portions of the Patriot Act (and be extension the Muslim groups) sound exactly like the positions held by many FReepers on this board. To use that as a basis for condemnation is inconsistent.

That's disingenuous, unless you can show where said Freepers helped provide access for terror symps.

To question aspects of the Patriot Act because they may infringe on the liberties of loyal Americans is a far cry from doing so while aiding and abetting pro-jihadists.

#24: Why the focus on Norquist?

Because so many pro-terrorist roads lead to his door, at which point, he opened other doors.

#24: It seems like FBI, CIA, NSA and others are responsible for national security and they should have stopped the contacts prior to them getting an audience the White House. The fact they did is prima facie evidence even the Gov was unaware.

Or Clintonized. Like we didn't know that.

#24: To hold Norquist to a higher standard than the US Gov is ridiculous.

Straw man. Norquist is the logical starting point of any investigation. We'll get to the others in due course.

#24: As I see it, looks like everyone got fooled regarding these deep moles and their hidden affiliations. Giving Norquist 40 lashes over it is nothing but a diversion.

Your comment is a diversion.

Not everyone was fooled, but Norquist went on the attack against anyone who questioned his clearly dubious choices in pro-terrorist friends.

[borkrules]

Just so.

These aren't new questions, this is just a damning summation of things Gaffney and others have been raising since 9/11.

That Norquist responds by attacking the messenger using one of the left's favorite tactics is telling, to say the least.

[Bob J]

Norquist was fighting the good fight for conservatism when you were still in diapers. His credentials aside, I am waiting for any of his detractors to demonstrate the evidentiary national security damages from his attempt to open a dialogue and working relationship between American Muslims and conservatives.

The unsavory connections of the moles were discovered and the relationships severed. Seems like the system worked to me, maybe not as soon as it should have, but then again we got a hole in the Pentagon and two collapsed buildings in NY because America did not wake up soon enough to the danger posed by the Islamists.

Could it be that some are crying wolf over an incident that resulted in no national security damage in an attempt to destroy an influential conservative voice who disagrees with them about a non terror related issue like, say, immigration?

You're predisposition toward grandstanding with bombastic rhetoric while tossing cheap shots at any conservative who doesn't strictly adhere to your positions (which is pretty easy to do from the bleachers on this Forum) is a reason why your influence on FR has never extended any further than the overly sensationalized threads in which you love to perform.

[NYC GOP Chick]

BRAVO! I am in major awe of you! :)

[janetgreen]

Excellent post, Saber.

[winker]

Those capable of hiding in plain sight or cloaking their activities are deftly capable of fooling the ignorant massess to the point of the ridiculous. These types of TRAITORS are the most deadly. They are percieved and accepted as harmless and un-obtrussive individuals. The vast majority of Americans still wallow in gross ignorance on how to identify the enemy and then fumble the information away unable to capitalize on it and win!