
Huma Abedin has specific “ties” to the Muslim Brotherhood, this is not in dispute; it is a fact. Huma’s Egyptian mother is an open member of the Muslim Sisterhood. So the answer from DHS Secretary Napolitano is flat-out “false”, or in real words, “a lie”. The issue is NOT if she has ties, that is self-evident, the issue is whether the actual ties have “influence” over her.
Huma Abedin’s mother, Saleha, who is a member of the Muslim Brotherhood’s female division (the “Muslim Sisterhood”), is a major figure in not one but two Union for Good components. The first is the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief (IICDR). It is banned in Israel for supporting Hamas under the auspices of the Union for Good. Then there’s the International Islamic Committee for Woman and Child (IICWC) — an organization that Dr. Saleha Abedin has long headed. Dr. Abedin’s IICWC describes itself as part of the IICDR. And wouldn’t you know it, the IICWC charter was written by none other than, wait for it, Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, the Muslim Brotherhood’s chief sharia jurist, in conjunction with several self-proclaimed members of the Muslim Brotherhood.
Prog-logic is always based on various degrees of obfuscation, disingenuous hair-splitting and semantics. (See Bill Clinton “it depends on what your definition of “is” is…. ) In Napolitano’s answers to the faux-questioning from Sheila Jackson Lee you find all of these aspects propagated to create specifically worded distractions.
Alarming to say the least. However, the easiest way to deconstruct the falsehoods amid trained and comfortable liars are with additional questions, which -by the way- are always missed. Such a question like: “So Abedin’s mother is not then a member of the Muslim Sisterhood”? This type of follow-up question always brings out the liar in the room.
A liar is bound by their connective ideology to continue shaping, molding and tweaking their response out of a necessary aim toward deflection. The truth teller does not hold the same capacity to change their response with any adjustment. Someone telling the truth has to repeat the same response over and over, because the truth does not change, it exists without variation, and does not have an agenda in delivery.
WASHINGTON DC - During a hearing Wednesday with the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Sheila Jackson Lee (D-Texas) asked Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano if DHS had discovered any links between a high-ranking official in the State Department and the Muslim Brotherhood.
The question was a nod to a letter authored by Rep. Michele Bachmann and signed by five House Republicans that was sent to the State Department.
The Representatives questioned whether Secretary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin or any other government officials have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.
Secretary Napolitano answered Jackson Lee with a resounding no. To further emphasize her point, Jackson Lee asked her question a second time.
“We have looked into this,” Napolitano said. “The FBI has looked into this. We have found … no credible evidence that such activity is going on.”
The letter resulted in bipartisan criticism, with House Speaker John Boehner calling the accusation “dangerous” and Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) taking to the Senate floor to refute the claim. (read more)
I have no idea whether Huma Abedin is “influenced” by her family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, perhaps only she can honestly answer that question. However, the connection is factually there. So say otherwise is indeed, and in actuality, a lie.
Our government reversed the policy against formal contacts with the Brotherhood; funded Hamas; continued funding Egypt even after the Brotherhood won the elections; dropped an investigation of Brotherhood organizations in the U.S. that were previously identified as co-conspirators in the case of the Holy Land Foundation financing Hamas; hosted Brotherhood delegations in the United States; issued a visa to a member of the Islamic Group (a designated terrorist organization) and hosted him in Washington because he is part of the Brotherhood’s parliamentary coalition in Egypt; announced that Israel should go back to its indefensible 1967 borders; excluded Israel, the world’s leading target of terrorism, from a counterterrorism forum in which the State Department sought to “partner” with Islamist governments that do not regard attacks on Israel as terrorism; and pressured Egypt’s pro-American military government to surrender power to the anti-American Muslim Brotherhood parliament and president just elected by Egypt’s predominantly anti-American population.
I am somewhat out of the loop per se’, because I am working on putting together a research series, a white paper of sorts, highlighting and understanding the ideological aspects around similar prog-obfuscations. Suffice to say, not all liars are progs, but all progs are liars. This includes professional liars within the institutional legacy media complex and also progs within the ranks of Repubicans such as Speaker Boehner, Minority Leader Mitch McConnell and the aforementioned John McCain. These political people are professional liars and what I prefer to call “Decepticons”, or deceptive conservatives.
It is difficult for most people to engage in prog, or Decepticon, push-back, because a central tenet to most conservatives, or most patriots, is a natural tendency to believe, or trust, the speakers intent.
This is a powerful tool of the manipulators, especially the media, because they can rely on your naiveté’, your compassionate conservatism and your desire to avoid anger in conflict to overwhelm your response.
They kill you with your heart.











Off topic, but what is with the baby?
It’s a metaphor.
“The Representatives questioned whether Secretary Clinton’s deputy chief of staff Huma Abedin or any other government officials have ties to the Muslim Brotherhood.”
Why are they going after Hilary’s girlfriend? Start with O’bama.
“We have looked into this,” Napolitano said. “The FBI has looked into this. We have found … no credible evidence that such activity is going on.”
Hmmm, how many ways can this be deconstructed?
1. Who *exactly* is “we” – what are the names of the investigators? Or does she use the royal “we”, meaning just Napolitano herself?
2. What *exactly* is the “this” that has been looked into? And who decided what aspect/s of “this” should be investigated?
3. If “we” looked into it and the FBI looked into it and she’s telling the senate what “we” found, that doesn’t necessarily tell ‘em what the FBI found. (We looked into it; the FBI looked into it; they found areas of concern but we found no credible evidence.)
4. What’s lurking in those ellipses?
5. What is “credible evidence” and who defines it? When was it so defined?
6. What *exactly* is “such activity”?
7. What exact period of time is covered by “is going on”? Technically she wouldn’t be lying if they found “credible evidence” that “such activities” HAD been going on up until, say, yesterday afternoon.
Did I miss anything in that list?
So why are the other Republicans trying to make her look crazy?
In anticipation of donations/speaking fees from Muslims or income from future deals with Muslims. Money. The same reason that Dubya and crew kissed Saudi azz. New day, SOS.
Decepticons – Not Republicans. Decepticons.
From the reports I’m reading, Huma Abedin has been with Billary about 15 years. That would put it at about 1997. Now look at the intelligence reprts released since the Billy presidency.
http://clintoncrimes.tripod.com/ClintonsBinLadenGateMotherofallScandals/id4.html
I vividly remember a History channel documentary about bin ladens terrorist training camps in the mountains of Afghanistan, It was about 1995. There was an American infiltrator that managed to get back out alive who reported that it was a training camp to teach the young jihadis to hate Americans and America. There was American air survielliance that photographed one camp in particular.
Hillary wore the pants in the Clinton presidency. Bill promoted himself as the “first black president.” Why did the blacks annoint Bill Clinton as the first black president? The progressive plot thickens, and it appears that Bill and Hillary weren’t the first to start the decline, but they were instrumental in advancing the plot by many multiples. While Billy was an immoral pres., with his various paid off trysts, like Jennifer Flowers, it was a ruse to take the attention off his Marxist goals.
Did I tell everyone that I despise the Magoo, who bought himself the 2008 R nom. He had no desire or intention to ever become the Pres. He enabled the Marxist now in the WH. Sarah Palin ought to be ashamed of herself for promoting the re-election of this traitor. Hopefully she learned a good damn lesson from that.
OK, ya lost me. How exactly is Sarah Palin “promoting the re-election of this traitor” ?
Didn’t Uma Abedin just have a baby not long ago? So the baby is being raised by Anthony Weiner? That’s a great father figure right there.
Huma isn’t exactly you average “staffer” working for Hitlery Clinton. Come on. No Huma, No Hitlerly.
Moslems in the US Government are going to do what the Communists in my Administration couldn’t do. American society’s politically correct attitude is going to make their job so easy.
What a waste World War II was for the United States. The Nation learned nothing. Sad.
Any update on when Johnny Mac is headed your way?
At least we know what to expect if the commies take over, since that’s about where we are. People will be “shocked” when they “find out” that muslims kill people and chop off their heads and they will do it in this Country. NOT GOOD.
How ya been Frankie?