Don’t citizens as well as elected government officials have a right to know the backgrounds and associations (questionable or not) of unelected (appointed) government officials?
Well, by the way some people have reacted to Michele Bachmann’s questioning and examination of the State Department’s deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin’s background, beliefs, and associations one would think that the congresswoman had committed some horrible crime.
Oh yeah, that’s right, according to RINOS such as McCain, progressives, Democrats, and others who just want to get along for fear of offending others while continuing to have their heads in the sand she committed the ultimate faux pas in politics – Bachmann challenged the status quo and chose not to be politically correct at a time when political correctness is considered to be sacrosanct. She chose to put the security of our country over political correctness.
Do you think that it is legitimate to question any person’s political philosophy? If so, what is so wrong with questioning a person’s religious beliefs when that religion brings political implications along with it? Such as if the person’s beliefs are incompatible with our form of government and our constitution? If you think it is legitimate to question President Obama’s Communist ties why would you be opposed to someone investigating Huma’s family ties to Muslim Brotherhood organizations and/or operatives? Is it for fear of being labeled ‘Islamaphobic’? When the Muslim Brotherhood follows the same methods and philosophies as other organizations that are declared terrorist organizations? There are certain religious precepts within Islam that are incompatible with our constitution so finding out whether or not Huma holds beliefs which are in opposition to our Constitution is a very important thing to know. If Huma’s beliefs are not aligned with that of her mothers that is great but if she does hold the same beliefs as her mother, ascribing to beliefs associated with radical Islam, doesn’t the American people have the right to know?
I know some of you are probably asking “but what about freedom of religion?” If that religion is not tolerant of other religions, does not believe in religious liberty, but believes in global dominance and death to anyone that insults that religion and is unwilling to coexist with people who practice other religions or those who don’t believe in any religion or even those who don’t believe in God’s existence, and wants to dismantle our constitution in order to replace it with Sharia – Islamic law – then as citizens of the United States we are called to oppose this type of philosophy which threatens the very existence of the United States of America. I am highly confident that the majority of Muslims who reside in the U.S. are peaceful, have been westernized to some extent, and are able to follow both their Muslim faith and the Constitution without seeing the two as being in conflict with one another.
This is one example of what Bachmann and the other signees wrote that the squishies and progressives have found so offensive is this:
“The [State] Department’s deputy chief of staff, Huma Abedin, has three family members – her late father, her mother and her brother – connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations. Her position affords her routine access to the secretary and to policy making.”
Now the Congresswoman has been criticized viciously by dhimmis who want to think that Islam is a religion of peace. I am not saying that all Muslims are violent but if you really think that a strict adherence to Islam is peaceful I would love to know what hole you’ve been hiding in the last 20 years or so. Strict adherence equals jihad. This is how Bachmann responded to Boehner and his ilk:
“Not once in the letter to the inspector general of the Department of State, as you summarize, was it stated that by extension (Ms. Abedin) may be working on the organization’s behalf. That her family members are connected to the Muslim Brotherhood has been reported and referenced widely in the Arab-language media, including Al-Hayat, The Arab Times and Al-Jazeera.”
Mychal Massie makes a good point:
If McCain and Boehner have such concern about not painting everyone with the same brush, why do they sit silently as Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and extreme racist bigots like Jehmu Greene publicly attack whites with racial pejoratives? If they care about justice and fairness, why have they not demanded Eric Holder and Obama’s Justice Department prosecute members of the New Black Panther Party for voter intimidation and for deaths threats made against George Zimmerman?
More from Mychal:
July 20 I received a lengthy letter from a professional person who had called McCain’s office to protest his condemnation of Bachmann. The person who wrote me requested I not use his name. He spoke to a McCain staff person named Will (who refused to give his last name) at approximately 3:52 p.m. Eastern at 202-224-2235. Following is part of that letter shared with the author’s permission – the person wrote:
“I called chastising McCain for his comments chastising Michele Bachmann and four other [members of Congress]. I said we are in dire times and that we don’t need attacks like this within the party. The person on the phone commented that Bachmann’s attack on Huma transcended politics and that she did not have evidence to smear Huma’s name in front of the whole world. The man said there was no evidence supporting what Bachmann wrote about. I said Bachmann only asked questions. He said she didn’t have enough facts to ask those questions and that she defamed Huma’s name in front of the whole world. I said Bachmann didn’t smear Huma’s name, that she wrote the letters to government offices, not to newspapers. I said whoever released those letters and then made it a public issue are to blame.
“The man … said no, the person who wrote the letter is to blame for thinking such things. I said she wrote the letter as internal documents to other government agencies, and he said if she didn’t want everyone to read them she shouldn’t have written them. … This man blames Bachmann for asking question; he says Bachmann asked pointed questions about Huma and that as a congresswoman she shouldn’t have. … I mentioned Humas mother and father; he said … everything Bachmann asks about were unfounded. He said they were only directed at Huma because she was Muslim. He asked, should we look suspect at all Christians due to Timothy McVeigh being a Christian? I replied that Timothy McVeigh was not a Christian. The man argues that he was. … I say next you are going to tell me that Hitler was a Christian, and the man replies, ‘He was.’ I said, Hitler was not a Christian – and he replies, ‘Yes, he was sir.’”
There you have it. McCain’s office believes Hitler was a Christian … and we wonder why and how the Republican Party has become what it is.
Timothy McVeigh grew up as a Catholic. Then he wandered into the darkness and became either an agnostic or atheist, and he was either an agnostic or an atheist at the time of the Oklahoma City bombing.
So according to a McCain staffer we as persons are not allowed to think certain things, or to question anything even if something smells rotten in Denmark? How Orwellian of him. Geesh. Yet another reason that both McCain and Boehner need to be voted out of office. More people adhering to the “see no evil hear no evil” way of life. Please people wake up before our whole country turns intoDearbornistan (watch here).
Catholibertarian 