Grover Norquist has, for years, sidled up to Republican establishment leadership. As the president of a group known as Americans for Tax Reform (ATR), he hits many a resonant note with conservatives. There is another, far more disconcerting side to Norquist, however, that sidles up to individuals with ties to Muslim Brotherhood groups, according to Discover the Networks.
Today, in an op-ed that appeared in the Washington Times, Norquist is clearly attempting to win favor with Vice Presidential candidate, Paul Ryan, by employing the charm offensive. Says Norquist:
Mitt Romney defined and took command of the 2012 presidential election by selecting Wisconsin congressman Paul Ryan as his running mate.
The November election will focus like a laser on Barack Obama’s accumulation of 5 trillion dollars of debt, his massive “stimulus” spending, the 20 tax increases to pay for his budget-breaking new entitlement program, Obamacare’s growing costs, and the unemployment and slow growth that Mr. Obama’s failed economic policies have wrought.
Adding Paul Ryan to the ticket highlights all the painful failures of the Obama administration and adds one final rebuke: The Republicans have a real plan — a written plan — to reform entitlement spending, reform all welfare programs and enact a Ronald Reagan-style tax reform that lowers tax rates for all Americans.
Regular readers to our site – especially lately – are familiar with the name Abdurahman Alamoudi. Norquist is quite familiar with him too. Here is an excerpt from DTN about a relationship the two had:
In 1998, Abdurahman Alamoudi, a self-described “supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah,” took an interest in Norquist, whom he knew to be one of the Republican Party’s most influential networkers. For years prior, Alamoudi had cultivated ties with the Democratic Party and had contributed significant amounts of money to its candidates. These donations had given Alamoudi access to the Clinton White House and enabled him and his associates to secure the right to select, train and certify Muslim chaplains for the U.S. military. Eager to retain this influential role even if the Democratic presidential candidate, Al Gore, were to lose the upcoming election, Alamoudi wrote two personal checks (a $10,000 loan and what appears to have been a $10,000 gift) that enabled Norquist to establish, and to become the founding chairman of, the Islamic Free Market Institute. Better known as the Islamic Institute, this entity’s stated purpose was to cultivate political support (for Republicans) from Muslim and Arab Americans who embraced conservative family values and free-market economics. In addition, Alamoudi in 2000 and 2001 made payments totaling $50,000 to Janus-Merritt Strategies, a lobbying firm with which Norquist was associated at the time.
In the days after 9/11, Norquist helped a man named Suhail Khan usher Muslim Brotherhood leaders into the White House. The former also helped the latter, Khan, gain increased visibility with the Bush administration.
At CPAC in 2011, David Horowitz called out both Norquist and Khan. Fast forward and watch from 6:40 – 9:00 to see Horowitz talk about Suhail Khan’s father, Mahboob Khan, who co-founded the Muslim Students Association:
In 2006, Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI) had been in Congress for seven years. He penned an op-ed entitled, “Defining the Threat We Face”. He did so after George W. Bush used the term, “Islamic fascists” for the first (and last) time publicly.
Here is what Ryan wrote then:
A debate has been raging about what to call our enemy – the terrorists and radical Muslim leaders who have committed themselves to bringing death and destruction to America, Israel, and allied democracies. President Bush has used the term “Islamic fascists” to describe the threat we face, while Senator Feingold argues that phrase is offensive and misleading. While I respect Russ and consider him a friend, I strongly disagree with his premise.
Words matter, especially when defining the multifaceted enemy that extends beyond national boundaries and operates as a network of jihadists waging war on the West. If we can’t even define what we are fighting against, how are we ever going to win? For this reason, we must strive to use the most accurate term – not necessarily the most politically correct one.
“Islamic fascism” expresses the essence of the violent, extremist, religion-driven movement that confronts us. Both words apply, but they must be used together in order to convey the proper meaning and make the crucial distinction between peaceful Muslims and the murderous extremists of al Qaeda, Hezbollah, and similar groups that distort Islam and seek to dominate or destroy those who disagree with them.
While the phrase, “Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it”, coined by George Santayana has been oft-repeated of late, it does indeed apply here. When Ryan supported the use of the term, “Islamic fascism” in 2006, he was a young Congressman; today, he is a vice presidential candidate in a much more dangerous time, brought on, in large part by “Islamic fascists”. In 2006, George W. Bush backed down to CAIR, which objected to his terminology; he didn’t use it again.
What will Ryan do?
Will he learn from recent history? Will he learn from the mistakes of Bush, Cheney, and Rove, that their cozying up to Muslim Brotherhood front groups has taken the United States to a much more dangerous place? Grover Norquist aided the Bush administration in furthering those ill-advised relationships when he embraced Suhail Khan, who gave the red carpet treatment to Muslim Brotherhood front groups.
Norquist appears to be attempting to implement a similar strategy with Paul Ryan.
Mr. Ryan, take our advice (we give it freely and with unadulterated conviction):
Reject Grover Norquist’s influence or your legacy will be less than what it should be.