Sure, why wouldn't we want to have someone associated with the terrorists who are currently attacking one of our closest allies pray at the inauguration of our new President? It's not like there's any possible conflict of interest, right? Unless Obama is trying to send some kind of a signal or something.File this under “The more things change.”
Muslim propagandist Ingrid Mattson will reportedly help lead Barack Obama’s inaugural prayer service tomorrow. (Via Ed.)
Teensy-weensy problem: She’s tied to Hamas and is president of the Islamic Society of North America — the same group named by federal prosecutors as a co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation jihad-financing case. The defendants in that trial, you will recall, were convicted on all terror-related counts in November.
Jonathan Schanzer’s background on Mattson is here.
Obama’s entanglement with ISNA is simply a carry-over from the Bush administration, alas, which has long legitimized ISNA and other jihad apologists groups with one hand while the other hand set about prosecuting terror-related crimes.
After failing to condemn Grover Norquist for recklessly engaging in indiscriminate Muslim outreach to fill GOP coffers, most Beltway Republicans are in no position now to whine about Obama’s dalliance with ISNA.
Reap. Sow.
Even more disturbing is that this is YET ANOTHER example of how political compromise ALWAYS comes back to bite you. If the GOP would have the guts to stand up for some core principles, they'd have every right to raise hell about this lady. They still do, but only at the cost of being obvious hypocrites. In this case, it would be worth it, because there's something bigger at stake than the fragile sensibilities of a few spineless Republicans.
There's my two cents.
No comments:
Post a Comment