Oxrock Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 It's because of the failed policies of the Bush Administration. [/Pelosi] Guilt by family relations. Yeah, real serious allegation. Lazy as well. Anyone say "guilty'? or was there a call for an investigation? Lord knows I presume a lot and assume a lot, but not once did anyone say she's guilty. I don't know about you, but immediate family ties (mother, father, brother, sister) are strong in my worldview and belief system. That's why it's damn near impossible to get a security clearance if you have immediate family who are tied to foreign countries who's interest are in conflict with the interest of the U.S. Legal Insurrection Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Director of National Intelligence, James Clapper described the Muslim Brotherhood as "mostly secular"? That right there should call for an investigation into James Clapper! Lazy as well. Anyone say "guilty'? or was there a call for an investigation? Lord knows I presume a lot and assume a lot, but not once did anyone say she's guilty. I don't know about you, but immediate family ties (mother, father, brother, sister) are strong in my worldview and belief system. That's why it's damn near impossible to get a security clearance if you have immediate family who are tied to foreign countries who's interest are in conflict with the interest of the U.S. Legal Insurrection I think that her assertion on page 14 should be addressed properly: "Since we sent the Inspectors General letters requesting further investigation, other shocking incidents have occurred. Chief among these was the decision just a few weeks ago by the State Department to give a member of an Egyptian designated terrorist group (reference cited) a visa to not only enter the country in violation of the federal laws prohibiting material support for terrorism, but to be granted a meeting inside the White House with National Security Council officials. (reference cited) The terror group member used the opportunity of his White House visit to call for the release of the imprisoned leader of his organization, the "Blind Sheikh," Omar Abdel Rahman, who is currently serving a life sentence for his role in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing and later planned terror plots inside the US.(reference cited) In light of the information revealed during the Holy Land Foundation trial, the FBI officially cut ties with CAIR because of their activities in support of Hamas. And yet just last month the new White House Director for Community Partnerships admitted that this administration has had "hundreds" of meetings with CAIR in spite of the FBI's stated policy. It has been reported the White House has worked to conceal these ties (in one case, with ISNA and MPAC)." Transparency and truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Lazy as well. Anyone say "guilty'? or was there a call for an investigation? Lord knows I presume a lot and assume a lot, but not once did anyone say she's guilty. I don't know about you, but immediate family ties (mother, father, brother, sister) are strong in my worldview and belief system. That's why it's damn near impossible to get a security clearance if you have immediate family who are tied to foreign countries who's interest are in conflict with the interest of the U.S. Legal Insurrection No, it's not. I know quite a few who have them. That's kind-of the point. Bachmann's basically arguing that the clearence wasn't properly adjudicated. Solely on the grounds of "Like, oh my God, we're trusting a sand !@#$!" Because that's really all this comes down to: racist idiots arguing that the investigation was flawed and clearance improperly adjudicated, simply because she's Muslim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 M 1342888438[/url]' post='2509899']No, it's not. I know quite a few who have them. That's kind-of the point. Bachmann's basically arguing that the clearence wasn't properly adjudicated. Solely on the grounds of "Like, oh my God, we're trusting a sand !@#$!" Because that's really all this comes down to: racist idiots arguing that the investigation was flawed and clearance improperly adjudicated, simply because she's Muslim. Ok. Let's stipulate that you do know quite a few that have even TS with SCI. People with Immediate family members who wish harm to the United States. Keep in mind, I said "damn near" impossible, not wholly impossible. And she's not baseless. You just can't seem to argue points. Go read the letter and give me help on understanding your view point by shooting down the allegations in the letter without resorting to using the race card. You probably can't do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nanker Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 Curious. The State Department doesn't want to discuss exactly how he got a visa. Curious. I wonder if he had to show a photo ID to get into the White House. QUESTION: Isn’t the membership in an FTO in and of itself by U.S. law grounds for their said person’s inadmissibility to the United States? MS. NULAND: In and of itself it is grounds for inadmissibility. However, there are also waiver procedures when it is in the U.S. national interest. I’m not going to get into the specifics of how this case was handled for all the confidentiality reasons. But as a general matter, yes, if you are a member of an FTO, you are excluded unless your admission is waived. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
....lybob Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 I'd bang her.... I'm serious, I would Yeah why not judging by her husband she doesn't have a lot of wear and tear down there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dayman Posted July 21, 2012 Author Share Posted July 21, 2012 About time some people are with me. I mean wake up for God's sake! I mean have you seen Huma? At least Grover Norquist was fairly well hidden but now it's like they don't even try. I'll be damned if these Muslims infiltrate our government Bachmann is all we have between us a nuclear Holocaust. At least I can sleep a little tighter knowing I have someone like Bachmann looking out for me, and America...they're ever where. We need to bring this to the light. It's time to shake down this nation and root out these Muslim extremists. Hollywood. Congress. In the ear of Hillary for God's sake! Something has to be done and it will take a strong person with a sharp mind and a little something our society used to call "will power" to do this. Thank you Ms. Bachmann. I feel a little safer in this crazy world knowing this epidemic is not going unnoticed and a good patriotic Christian woman such as yourself is looking out for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 21, 2012 Share Posted July 21, 2012 M Ok. Let's stipulate that you do know quite a few that have even TS with SCI. People with Immediate family members who wish harm to the United States. Keep in mind, I said "damn near" impossible, not wholly impossible. And she's not baseless. You just can't seem to argue points. Go read the letter and give me help on understanding your view point by shooting down the allegations in the letter without resorting to using the race card. You probably can't do. I read the letter. Bachmann knows jack **** about the clearance process. As do you. The allegations are that if a family member is somehow judged to be anti-American, the person being adjudicated for the clearance shouldn't be granted it. The allegation is completely false, on two points: that affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood means wishing harm to the US, and that that's at all a consideration in granting a clearance. There's your shoot-down. And then, of course, there's the simple observation that she's suggesting the investigation was improperly done and the clearance improperly adjudicated...based on, what exactly? Race. Does she have some sort of insight that OPM and State didn't do their job, and the clearance was improperly granted? No...because she's not complaining about the clearance. She's complaining about the PERSON HOLDING IT BEING A MUSLIM. There is no other reason for the complaint. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Oxrock Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 (edited) 1342909704[/url]' post='2510048']I read the letter. Bachmann knows jack **** about the clearance process. As do you. The allegations are that if a family member is somehow judged to be anti-American, the person being adjudicated for the clearance shouldn't be granted it. The allegation is completely false, on two points: that affiliation with the Muslim Brotherhood means wishing harm to the US, and that that's at all a consideration in granting a clearance. There's your shoot-down. And then, of course, there's the simple observation that she's suggesting the investigation was improperly done and the clearance improperly adjudicated...based on, what exactly? Race. Does she have some sort of insight that OPM and State didn't do their job, and the clearance was improperly granted? No...because she's not complaining about the clearance. She's complaining about the PERSON HOLDING IT BEING A MUSLIM. There is no other reason for the complaint. I've been working with security clearances for 27 years. From the initial application through the granting of access. Look on the SF86. Read the adjudication guide. It's pretty clear. But like anything, there are exceptions when high ranking officials get involved (like the Presidents wife). You may have a clearance, but I've been involved with thousands. The issue is NOT "PERSON HOLDING IT BEING A MUSLIM" (I'm sure I missed that quote in everything I've read on this), it's the Muslim Brotherhood. While all Muslims are not out to convert or kill all non-believers, all members of the Muslim Brotherhood are Muslim. But in either case, Muslim is not a race. The letters are a request to look into how, with all the guideline and manuals saying that having immediate family involved in foreign governments or foreign movements is grounds for adverse adjudication, did Huma get cleared? Possible that the there are mitigating factors in her favor such as non-contact for x number of years. End of investigation, answers given. You didn't read the letter Congressman Ellison. Congresswoman Bachmann definitely did not go after her because she's a Musim. Remember the rumors that Huma and Hillary had a thing? Probably what lead to her marriage to Weiner and why she didn't care much about his attempts at infidelity. Edited July 22, 2012 by Oxrock Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DC Tom Posted July 22, 2012 Share Posted July 22, 2012 I've been working with security clearances for 27 years. From the initial application through the granting of access. Look on the SF86. Read the adjudication guide. It's pretty clear. But like anything, there are exceptions when high ranking officials get involved (like the Presidents wife). You may have a clearance, but I've been involved with thousands. The issue is NOT "PERSON HOLDING IT BEING A MUSLIM" (I'm sure I missed that quote in everything I've read on this), it's the Muslim Brotherhood. While all Muslims are not out to convert or kill all non-believers, all members of the Muslim Brotherhood are Muslim. But in either case, Muslim is not a race. The letters are a request to look into how, with all the guideline and manuals saying that having immediate family involved in foreign governments or foreign movements is grounds for adverse adjudication, did Huma get cleared? Possible that the there are mitigating factors in her favor such as non-contact for x number of years. End of investigation, answers given. You didn't read the letter Congressman Ellison. Congresswoman Bachmann definitely did not go after her because she's a Musim. Remember the rumors that Huma and Hillary had a thing? Probably what lead to her marriage to Weiner and why she didn't care much about his attempts at infidelity. How many clearances have you adjudicated? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob's House Posted August 9, 2012 Share Posted August 9, 2012 Does anyone know if misdemeanors from the late 90s would preclude congressional security clearance? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts