Enjoy an Ads-Free Jets Insider - Become a Jets Insider VIP!
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 27

Thread: Story within a story re: Huma Abedin

  1. #1
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    19,619
    Post Thanks / Like

    Story within a story re: Huma Abedin

    (Mrs Weiner, if you don't recognize the name )

    So I heard about his indirectly in stories in the mainstream media because they were trying to paint Michelle Bachman as a nutjob. Turns out she (and others) actually had a valid concern!

    -------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Switcheroo! Columnist spikes her newspaper
    Diana West questions why U.S. suddenly in alignment with Muslim Brotherhood
    Published: 4 days ago

    by Bob UnruhEmail | Archive
    Bob Unruh joined WND in 2006 after spending nearly three decades writing on a wide range of issues for several Upper Midwest newspapers and the Associated Press. Sports, tornadoes, homicidal survivalists, and legislative battles all fell within his bailiwick. His scenic photography has been used commercially, and he sometimes plays in a church worship band.More ↓Less ↑ Subscribe to author feed
    inShare4 Text smaller Text bigger
    Newspaper editors spike stories and columns that are poorly written, wrong or that they just don’t like. And that’s their right. But what happens if a columnist gets frustrated by a publication’s decision not to cover an issue?

    Can the columnist spike the newspaper?

    We’ll find out, as WND columnist Diana West has written about her efforts to get the Washington Examiner to publish her commentary on the need to investigate the influence of the Muslim Brotherhood on the U.S. government.

    She was told her column about questions raised by U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., about Brotherhood influence would not be used, prompting her to review the publication’s history of reports on the issue.

    Read Diana West’s spiked column about the Muslim Brotherhood in the U.S.

    Among the concerns of Bachmann and four House colleagues was the Muslim Brotherhood ties of Huma Abedin, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s chief aide. Abedin, as WND has reported, was on the editorial board of a Saudi-financed Islamic think tank alongside a Muslim extremist accused of financing al-Qaida.

    The extremist, Abdullah Omar Naseef, is deeply connected to the Abedin family. Naseef is secretary-general of the Muslim World League, an Islamic charity known to have spawned terrorist groups, including one declared by the U.S. government to be an official al-Qaida front.

    West was writing about the letters Bachmann and four other lawmakers sent last month to the inspectors general at the departments of Homeland Security, Justice and State asking that they investigate Muslim Brotherhood influence on U.S. government officials.

    The lawmakers noted Abedin “has three family members – her late father, mother and her brother – connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations. Her position affords her routine access to the secretary and to policymaking.”

    The questions sparked a backlash of criticism against Bachmann and the others, even though, as WND reported last year, Huma’s mother, Saleha Abedin, was the official representative of Naseef’s terror-stained Muslim World League in the 1990s.


    West raised a number of those issues in her commentary.

    “Be alarmed: The U.S. government continues to be advised by organizations and individuals that the U.S. government itself has identified in federal courts as fronts for the international Muslim Brotherhood,’” she wrote. “So wrote Rep. Michele Bachmann, R-Minn., in a lengthy, heavily footnoted answer to a query last week from Rep. Keith Ellison, D-Minn.”

    Ellison, a Muslim congressman, was critical of Bachmann’s concerns about Abedin, the Muslim Brotherhood, the Islamic Society of North America, the Council on American Islamic Relations and others.

    “What is beyond shocking – beyond reason – is that such anti-American Brotherhood-linked groups and individuals have variously engaged, particularly since 9/11, with the U.S. government. Is it a coincidence that U.S. policy has since become receptive to, if not openly supportive of the Muslim Brotherhood. This is the serious question these House Republicans want answered,” she wrote in her column.

    “‘Influence’ can be an intangible thing, but sometimes there are signs. For example, someone, something, somehow managed to convince Director of National Intelligence James Clapper to testify before the House Intelligence Committee in 2011 that the Muslim Brotherhood was a ‘largely secular organization’ without ‘an overarching agenda,’” she added.

    West, on her blog, recounted the Examiner’s handling of her column.

    “The Washington Examiner spiked my syndicated column on the Muslim Brotherhood,” she said. “If the newspapers’ online search function is accurate, it is even more perplexing to note that the Examiner hasn’t run a single news story on the media-politics feeding frenzy, led by Sen. John McCain, directed at Rep. Michele Bachmann for raising questions.

    “Here is how Examiner editorial page editor David Freddoso explained why the column didn’t appear: ‘We opted not to use it this week. We also passed over other syndicated columnists’ offerings about the insinuations against Huma Abedin. The reason is simply that there is no hint of proof that she has done anything improper,’” she wrote.

    But West told WND that “doing something improper” is not the main issue.

    According to the State Department’s own “Guidelines for Determining Eligibility for Access to Classified Information,” which Clinton and her aides undoubtedly would view, it’s not a matter of doing anything.

    Among the “conditions” that “could raise a security concern and may be disqualifying,” are “contact with a foreign family member, business or professional associate, friend, or other person who is a citizen of or resident in a foreign country if that contact creates a heightened risk of foreign exploitation, inducement, manipulation, pressure, or coercion.”

    Also listed as a reason for suspicion are “connections” to a “foreign person, group, government, or country that create a potential conflict of interest.”

    West pointed out that Bachmann made no claim that Abedin had done anything wrong.

    “Amid their broad concerns about MB influence on U.S. government policy-making, the members raised a red flag over Huma Abedin. … Why? Abedin’s family members have been deeply involved with groups and movements dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization. This concerns the five House members. As it should, in my opinion – which is what my fact-based opinion column argued.”

    Arguing on behalf of asking more questions, West wrote: “Can’t you just hear the background-checker? So, Huma, your folks were in business with a guy who started a designated terrorist group, your mom’s on a board of a group banned in Israel for supporting Hamas, and you want a top secret clearance to work alongside the SecState … HAHAHAHAHAHA.”

    West told WND that it’s important to understand the concern has to do with security clearances, and an illustration from history might put it in perspective.

    “Take this back half a century. How about if the top aide to the secretary of state during World War II has a family deeply involved in the Fascist movement, or Nazi parties abroad. Would they automatically be given a pass by the U.S. Senate?

    “It’s exactly this kind of thing that security rules the State Department has in place are there to prevent,” she said.

    “What we have seen is a policy shift to the side of the Muslim Brotherhood in Libya, and again in Egypt. We’re boosting the same kinds of elements in Syria. We have switched sides and we have become receptive to the Muslim Brotherhood,” she said.

    She said her column is syndicated, and it doesn’t really matter whether the Examiner runs it.

    She noted that she asked a second time for the publication to run her column but was told, “I’ve had a look, and I will not be using the column.”

    “I’ve had a look, too – the newspaper’s lack of columns on this whole controversy, the newspaper’s lack of news on this whole controversy – and I will not be using the Examiner,” she wrote in response.

    WND columnist Judith Reisman wrote that Bachmann — who was joined in signing the letters by House colleagues Louie Gohmert, R-Texas, Trent Franks, R-Ariz., Tom Rooney, R-Fla., and Lynn Westmoreland, R-Ga. — “riled” critics.

    Reisman wrote that history “shows it is entirely reasonable to be on guard against foreign influence in the U.S. government.”

    “After all, Harry Hopkins, a Soviet agent, was FDR’s closest White House aide, Soviet agent Lauchlin Currie was another top FDR aide, while Soviet agent Harry Dexter White was a senior Treasury Department official,” she said. “And not until the release of the Venona papers in 1995 was it certain that the Rosenbergs were indeed Soviet spies. In fact, our U.S. State Department has a track record of security malfeasance, for example, having given high security clearances in the post-World War II era not only to Nazi scientists, but to hundreds of brutal Communists and Nazis known to have massacred millions.”

    Reisman continued: “The Muslim Brotherhood, incidentally, was founded in Egypt in 1928. Its motto reads, “Allah is our objective. The Prophet is our leader. The Quran is our law. Jihad is our way. Dying in the way of Allah is our highest hope.”

    Ambassador Alan Keyes joined in: “Since her critics can’t argue the facts (as WND readers have good reason to know from the reporting of WND’s Aaron Klein), their tactic is to destroy the reputation of the person pointing them out. It’s not surprising to see Obama’s henchmen and fellow travelers eagerly deploying this tactic. What’s more than noteworthy, however, is the fact that Republican Sen. John McCain quickly jumped to the forefront of the GOP leadership’s contribution to what has become an all-out elitist-faction offensive against Bachmann. Along with the GOP speaker of the House, (and, just recently, two Romney camp weathervanes, Sens. Marco Rubio and Scott Brown) the GOP’s 2008 nominee for president seems enthusiastically committed to this campaign of personal destruction. If successful, the campaign could bring about Bachmann’s defeat in the upcoming election, thus purging her from the GOP delegation. ”

    WND also has reported Huma’s father, Professor Syed Abedin, was the founder of the Institute for Minority Affairs, a Saudi group that reportedly had the quiet, but active, support of Naseef.

    Her mother, Saleha, is currently the editor of the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs, the publication of Syed’s Institute.

    The institute bills itself as “the only scholarly institution dedicated to the systematic study of Muslim communities in non-Muslim societies around the world.”

    The report also said it has emerged that Huma served on the Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs’ editorial board from 2002 to 2008.

  2. #2
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,250
    Post Thanks / Like
    If Huma is an Islamic radical then why would she marry and have a child with a Jew?

  3. #3
    JetsInsider.com Legend
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    36,678
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    If Huma is an Islamic radical then why would she marry and have a child with a Jew?
    She probably isn't a radical. In fact, I'd bet she isn't.

    What she is, though, is someone who should never have passed a security clearance check. Regardless of her own viewpoints, family ties such as hers are a security rick, plain and simple, and she should have been (and in the past would have been) disqualified for her current position due to those risks.

    I make no jugement on her.

    It is the system that failed here IMO.

  4. #4
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    7,115
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Warfish View Post
    She probably isn't a radical. In fact, I'd bet she isn't.

    What she is, though, is someone who should never have passed a security clearance check. Regardless of her own viewpoints, family ties such as hers are a security rick, plain and simple, and she should have been (and in the past would have been) disqualified for her current position due to those risks.

    I make no jugement on her.

    It is the system that failed here IMO.

    So insane, just like the army was too afraid to be non-PC and ask the right questions of the Ft. Hood animal even with good reason, looks like the same thing going on here: don't wanna appear to be anti-muslim, god (or allah) forbid, those poor people have suffered enough post 9/11.

  5. #5
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    19,619
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    If Huma is an Islamic radical then why would she marry and have a child with a Jew?
    Perfect cover?

    I know that sounds conspiracy theorist, but think about this: given who and what her relatives are, why has no one disowned her publicly? Or at least called her a traitor? Strange, correct?

  6. #6
    Banned
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    1,903
    Post Thanks / Like

  7. #7
    All League
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Portland Oregon
    Posts
    4,800
    Post Thanks / Like
    Maybe it is one of those hold your friends close and your enemies closer deals.

    Double agent?

  8. #8
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    New York
    Posts
    18,662
    Post Thanks / Like
    Anybody else find it strange that Obama is such a huge fan of Showtime's "Homeland"?



    Just sayin.

  9. #9
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Posts
    13,315
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by DDNYjets View Post
    Anybody else find it strange that Obama is such a huge fan of Showtime's "Homeland"?



    Just sayin.
    No.

    That show is awesome.

  10. #10
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    2,375
    Post Thanks / Like
    There's no proof, if you're going to make this kind of accusation have proof.

    And take a look at the "frontpage" at that news site...

    http://ch-sc-wnd-wp2.ha-hosting.com/

    Each of us can judge the merits of WND as a "news organization".

  11. #11
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    Charter JI Member

    Join Date
    May 1999
    Posts
    5,250
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by quantum View Post
    Perfect cover?

    I know that sounds conspiracy theorist, but think about this: given who and what her relatives are, why has no one disowned her publicly? Or at least called her a traitor? Strange, correct?
    We're treading dangerous waters here, in my opinion.

  12. #12
    Board Moderator
    Jets Insider VIP
    JetsInsider.com Legend

    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    The depths of Despair.
    Posts
    39,558
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    If Huma is an Islamic radical then why would she marry and have a child with a Jew?
    She's a huge Bond fan.....and the idea of being named "Huma Weiner" was too powerful to resist?





    -

  13. #13
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    19,619
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    There's no proof, if you're going to make this kind of accusation have proof.

    And take a look at the "frontpage" at that news site...

    http://ch-sc-wnd-wp2.ha-hosting.com/

    Each of us can judge the merits of WND as a "news organization".
    There's no need to judge WND - the story within a story is about Bachman's concerns, which the media dismissed out of hand.

  14. #14
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    19,619
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by Bonhomme Richard View Post
    We're treading dangerous waters here, in my opinion.
    I don't think she should be arrested, but she's an aide to the SecState. At least investigate, no?

  15. #15
    All League
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Posts
    3,932
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by quantum View Post
    There's no need to judge WND - the story within a story is about Bachman's concerns, which the media dismissed out of hand.
    You and Bachman are really on to something here.

  16. #16
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    7,883
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by detectivekimble View Post
    You and Bachman are really on to something here.
    Wow... Finally tired of the shtick, eh?

  17. #17
    All Pro
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    Un-Pleasantville
    Posts
    6,281
    Post Thanks / Like
    1st rule of detecting

    You need to be able to find your azz with both hands

  18. #18
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    LI
    Posts
    19,619
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by detectivekimble View Post
    You and Bachman are really on to something here.
    you're on something - haven't figured out what though...

  19. #19
    Hall Of Fame
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Van down by the river
    Posts
    21,932
    Post Thanks / Like
    So. She's been working with Clinton since 1996. That puts her there well before 9/11. Maybe it WAS an inside job. Maybe SHE orchestrated the whole thing and then used her power as deputy chief of staff in order to blame Osama.

  20. #20
    Veteran
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Cape Coral, FL
    Posts
    1,054
    Post Thanks / Like
    Quote Originally Posted by SafetyBlitz View Post
    There's no proof, if you're going to make this kind of accusation have proof.

    And take a look at the "frontpage" at that news site...

    http://ch-sc-wnd-wp2.ha-hosting.com/

    Each of us can judge the merits of WND as a "news organization".
    No proof of what? Who she's related to? There were no accusations of wrong doing only concern of family ties....I mean, she IS related to her father, mother and brother, right?

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Follow Us