Republican Leaders Found Supporting Jihad

Barack Obama is Huma Abedin on Steroids

By Ben Barrack

President Barack Obama and close Hillary Clinton adviser Huma Abedin have something extremely dangerous in common. Both have multiple family members who appear to be strongly connected to terrorism. In the case of Abedin, several members of her immediate family are directly tied to the Muslim Brotherhood through an organization her parents have led. In the case of Obama, his brother is a leader within an organization that finances terrorism and is overseen by Sudan’s President Omar al-Bashir. Obama’s cousin admitted to sending Kenyan students to Saudi Arabia on scholarships to attend Wahhabist schools. Cousin Musa also implicated the President’s grandmother and uncle.

Obama defends Abedin at White House iftar dinner in 2012.

Obama defends Abedin at White House iftar dinner in 2012.

When the controversy involving Abedin made national news in the summer of 2012, President Barack Obama defended her publicly from the rostrum at a White House iftar dinner.

When it came to Rep. Michele Bachmann’s questions about Abedin, no one has been able to refute the facts. They resorted only to smears, calling the claims ‘baseless’. In reality, the facts are irrefutable. Specifically, several members of Abedin’s family – to include her father, mother, and brother – are directly connected to the Muslim Brotherhood. In fact, Abedin’s parents were commissioned by al-Qaeda financier Abdullah Omar Naseef  – a wealthy Saudi – to lead the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs (IMMA). The IMMA’s long term objective is to convert Muslim minority lands into Muslim majority lands. Abedin’s mother is also a leader within the Muslim Sisterhood.

Yet, there were more Republicans in Congress who stood with Abedin than with Bachmann. They included, Senators John McCain (R-AZ), Scott Brown (R-MA), Marco Rubio (R-FL), Speaker John Boehner (R-OH), Reps. James Sensenbrenner (R-WI), Mike Simpson (R-ID), Richard Hanna (R-NY), and Mike Rogers (R-MI). In fact, one of the Bachmann five – Rep. Tom Rooney (R-FL) backed away from Bachmann’s group. To his credit, Rep. Steve King (R-IA) showed support.

Rogers heads the House Intelligence Committee and has far more access to information about the Abedin family than we do. Based on that premise, he did not level with the American people when he rebuffed Bachmann:

“That kind of assertion certainly doesn’t comport with the Intelligence Committee, and I can say that on the record,” he told USA TODAY, aligning himself with party leaders who have defended Abedin. “I have no information in my committee that would indicate that Huma is anything other than an American patriot.”

That statement is flat-out dishonest when it comes from the Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee and it should harm Rogers’ credibility. This is not the first time Rogers’ truthfulness has rightfully been questioned.

House Intelligence Chair : Huma Abedin a 'patriot'.

House Intelligence Chair: Huma Abedin a ‘patriot’.

Common, yet weak attempts to refute evidence we have presented is met with cries of ‘guilt by association’. Essentially, that is an admission by such people that the evidence about these family members is accurate. Check out the last sentence of a pro-Malik Obama article that appeared on the Arabic website Al-Bawaba’s English edition:

Before the haters get too carried away with their “Barack Obama is a Muslim” diatribe, may Al Bawaba kindly note that they’re talking about the wrong brother.

Folks, that’s called conceding the point, which is difficult to argue in the first place. What Americans need to understand is that these admissions are huge. They allow us to move to the next phase of the case, which asks a very simple question: Do the affiliations and associations of the President’s family members matter?

The answer to that question is a resounding yes.

This is where we introduce Form 86, which became a hot button issue during the Huma Abedin controversy; it should apply to Barack Obama as well.

Via Cliff Kincaid at Accuracy in Media:

The matter can be resolved, if the media are truly interested in getting to the bottom of the controversy, by demanding access to Abedin’s Standard Form 86, which she was supposed to fill out before getting her State Department job. House Speaker Boehner could also demand a copy.

Did she disclose her family connections to the Muslim Brotherhood, as well as to Saudi Arabia, where she once lived and was raised?

“It is required that job candidates complete the questionnaire and other required forms thoroughly, honestly, and with candor,” the State Department says.

If anyone with a security clearance is required to file a Form 86, shouldn’t that also include the President of the United States? Like Abedin, his family also has connections to both the Muslim Brotherhood and Saudi Arabia (according to Musa). As we wrote last month, ‘top secret’ documents revealed secret meetings during the Mohammed Mursi regime in Egypt, between Egypt’s Muslim Brotherhood and Sudan’s IDO.

Left to Right: Al-Qaeda financier Abdullah Omar Naseef, Hillary Clinton, Saleha Abedin, Huma Abedin

Left to Right: Al-Qaeda financier Abdullah Omar Naseef, Hillary Clinton, Saleha Abedin, Huma Abedin

As a perfect example for why the associations of family members matter when you’re talking about the President, look no further than the 501(c)(3) status Malik Obama’s foundation received expeditiously and quite likely illegally (backdated 38 months) by Lois Lerner. Congress should compel Lerner to testify about why she did this. If her doing so had anything at all to do with the President, the reasons why Form 86 are so important become self-evident.

Based on Malik Obama’s activities, indications are that terrorists in Sudan and elsewhere have benefited from his relationship to the U.S. President.

Why Form 86 matters.

Why Form 86 matters.

Blueprint for Success
We can only speculate as to why Congress is refusing to draw attention to this scandal, which may be the biggest in the history of the Republic. One suspects that Congressmen like Rep. Mike Kelly, who referred to the claims against Malik Obama as ‘spot on’, don’t want to come forward because of what happened to the Bachmann five.

The interesting thing is that had Bachmann not listened to consultants, she and her colleagues very well may have won the day. Some might remember that after her letter got the attention of the media, Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN), a Muslim who is supported by the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), issued a two-page letter that was directed at Bachmann and provided no acknowledgment or refutation of any facts. Bachmann shredded Ellison’s letter with a 16-page letter of her own.

Unfortunately, Bachmann withdrew from the battle shortly thereafter.

The media thinks it defeated the Bachmann five. In reality, the very small group understandably – but wrongly – surrendered. The letter to Ellison was a haymaker landed but because of political pressure and Republican congressmen who either sided with Abedin or clammed up, Abedin, Hillary Clinton, and the Obama administration itself was let off the ropes.

Now we have the same thing all over again but with President Obama and his family.

So far, not one Congressman has picked up the battle plans the Bachmann five drafted and followed but put down too soon.


, ,