Grover Norquist--Islamist Enabler?

[All emphases by Always On Watch]

Can it be? Grover Norquist, an Islamist enabler? Norquist is perhaps best known as the founder and president of Americans for Tax Reform, and his bio and resume are impressive, especially for those on the right side of the political spectrum. But according to Frank Gaffney and Michelle Malkin, among others, Grover Norquist has another side, a side which might indicate Islamist sympathies.

From a January 15, 2006 article:

"Grover Norquist--Islamist Enabler?"

“A prominent conservative leader who allegedly has used undeclared foreign money and top political connections to promote terrorist sympathizers is an 'enabler' who threatens 'to do grave harm to the Bush presidency.'

“Norquist has been criticized for promoting what is called the Wahhabi lobby, a Saudi-funded network designed to dominate and radicalize Islam in America…”

Do the above excerpts sound like ridiculous conspiracy theory? Before deciding, consider the following, as delineated by Frank Gaffney in the above-cited article:

"The Islamic Institute, which Norquist co-founded and houses in his Americans for Tax Reform office, received seed money from an avowed supporter of Hezbollah, the terrorist group that killed 241 US Marines in a 1983 suicide bomb attack.

"The Islamic Institute reportedly is 'predominantly funded by foreign governments, shady Saudi sources, and US-based groups raided by the Treasury Department-led Operation Green Quest Task Force for allegedly funding suicide bombers, al Qaeda and other terrorists' activities.'

"Norquist led conservative opposition to parts of the Bush administration's anti-terrorism legislation, without disclosing that his Islamic group was dependent on such funds.

"Norquist has affiliated himself with the radical National Committee to Protect Political Freedom (NCPPF), from which he received an award shortly before the September 11, 2001 attacks, despite the group's thirty-year public track record of promoting domestic and international terrorism."

How much influence does Grover Norquist wield? Turn the clock back to this November 2001 article in Free Republic:

“On the afternoon of September 26, George W. Bush gathered 15 prominent Muslim- and Arab-Americans at the White House. With cameras rolling, the president proclaimed that ‘the teachings of Islam are teachings of peace and good.’ It was a critically important moment, a statement to the world that America's Muslim leaders unambiguously reject the terror committed in Islam's name.

“Unfortunately, many of the leaders present hadn't unambiguously rejected it. To the president's left sat Dr. Yahya Basha, president of the American Muslim Council, an organization whose leaders have repeatedly called Hamas ‘freedom fighters.’ Also in attendance was Salam Al-Marayati, executive director of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, who on the afternoon of September 11 told a Los Angeles public radio audience that ‘we should put the State of Israel on the suspect list.’ And sitting right next to President Bush was Muzammil Siddiqi, president of the Islamic Society of North America, who last fall told a Washington crowd chanting pro-Hezbollah slogans, ‘America has to learn if you remain on the side of injustice, the wrath of God will come.’ Days later, after a conservative activist confronted Karl Rove with dossiers about some of Bush's new friends, Rove replied, according to the activist, ‘I wish I had known before the event took place.’

"If the administration was caught unaware, it may be because they placed their trust in one of the right's most influential activists: Grover Norquist. As president of Americans for Tax Reform, Norquist is best known for his tireless crusades against big government. But one of Norquist's lesser-known projects over the last few years has been bringing American Muslims into the Republican Party. And, as he usually does, Norquist has succeeded….

“Norquist denies being involved in ‘micromanaging the specifics’ of White House meetings, but admits ‘I have been a long time advocate of outreach to the Muslim community.’ In fact, the record suggests that he has spent quite a lot of time promoting people openly sympathetic to Islamist terrorists….While nobody suggests that Norquist himself is soft on terrorism, his lobbying has helped provide radical Islamic groups--and their causes--a degree of legitimacy and access they assuredly do not deserve."

Here’s a bit of additional information:

“Although it is not noted on either group's website, Norquist's Islamic Institute actually shares office space and staff with Americans for Tax Reform….

“The AMC and CAIR have been able to get access to senior officials in the Bush Administration nine times since 9/11 despite the fact that CAIR has sued Attorney General Ashcroft and in June 2002 CAIR's executive director Nihad Awad declared that he supported the Hamas movement. Both groups have incessantly attacked President Bush's policies on Iraq, the monitoring of aliens from nations that sponsor terrorism, and the prosecution of suspected terror operatives…

“Since 9/11, Norquist has led opposition to domestic anti-terrorism laws and has been quoted in frontpage NY times articles allelging a wholesale loss of faith by conservatives in Attorney General Josh Ashcroft. Norquist has also attacked Daniel Pipes, Steve Emerson, and others who have attempted to alert Americans to the dangers of Islam.”

A July 19, 2004 article, "The Faisal Gill Affair," provides an example of one individual whom Norquist recommended for a top-level position in our government:

“It now appears that Mr. Norquist’s help has extended beyond facilitating high-level access and influence for various Muslim-American and Arab-American entities with troubling ties to, or at least sympathy for, radical Islamofascists – and even terrorists. Reportedly, his association also helped someone affiliated with such a group to gain a political appointment to an exceedingly sensitive post: ‘policy director’ of the Department of Homeland Security’s Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection division.

“As the title of this position suggests, its occupant would have access to highly sensitive information about the vulnerability of, among other things, U.S. ports, transportation infrastructure, chemical plants, oil refineries and nuclear power plants to terrorist attack. The incumbent is a 32-year-old lawyer named Faisal Gill.

“It is unclear what qualified Mr. Gill for such a post. In response to press inquiries, a DHS spokeswoman declined to describe his qualifications or background so it is not known whether he has any prior experience with intelligence or, for that matter, with security policy.

“What is known is that Gill’s political patrons include Grover Norquist, who was listed by Gill as a reference on employment documents. After all, Gill had been a spokesman for the Taxpayers Alliance of Prince William County, Virginia, which is affiliated with Norquist’s group, Americans for Tax Reform. Gill had also worked in 2001 as director of government affairs for the Islamic Free Market Institute (also known as the Islamic Institute), whose founding president was Grover Norquist.

“Interestingly, news articles published after September 11 described Gill in another capacity – as a spokesman for the controversial American Muslim Council (AMC). The AMC was founded and controlled by a prominent Islamist activist, Abdurahman Alamoudi. Alamoudi was indicted last October on terrorism-related money laundering charges. [Alamoudi hs since been convicted.] While in jail awaiting trial, he has reportedly engaged in plea-bargaining by confessing to participating in a Libyan plot to murder the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia.

“For some reason, Gill is reported to have failed to list his work with the AMC on his ‘Standard Form 86’ national security questionnaire.”

On July 30, 2004, Michelle Malkin had this to say about Grover Norquist, in reference to Abdurahman Alamoudi, the moderate Muslim who turned out to be not so moderate:

“Norquist owes a public apology to fellow Republicans whom he has smeared as bigots for raising fundamental questions about Alamoudi and the Islamist-supporting apparatus in America. More importantly, Norquist owes answers about why he partnered with a known terrorist sympathizer, whether or not he now defends Alamoudi, when he plans to stop hiding behind the race card, and what exactly he plans to do to disavow Islamist influences.”

And how much influence have Norquist and his (former) cohorts had on policies in the Bush administration? According to Paul Sperry (whose web site is here), author of the 2005 book Infiltration: How Muslim Spies and Subversives Have Penetrated Washington:

"Many conservatives are annoyed by Bush's nonstop defense of Islam. They say they understood the need for such rhetoric right after the attacks to quell bias against Muslims and prevent vigilantism. But they say it is sounding more and more like boosterism, which could lead Americans into a false sense of security about the threat....

"In part, Bush is currying favor with Muslim groups at the request of Rove, who has worked with Norquist over the years to cultivate Muslims as a new voter base for the GOP, a highly controversial issue."
(page 17)

In his book, Mr. Sperry devotes Section VII, "Political Infiltration," to the influence of Islamism within our government. Chapter 27, "Undue Influence at the White House," deals primarily with Norquist's influence on American policy toward Muslims and how that policy might be interfering with effective strategies in dealing with the enemy.

Since the publication of the above-quoted words from page 17 of Mr. Sperry's book, President Bush has been more forceful in his condemnation of Islamism, often referred to as Islamofascism. Nevertheless, the Bush family's connections with the House of Saud are of concern to many as Saudi is the bastion of Wahhabism, viewed by most as the most radical form of Islam.

At the least, Norquist has a history of promoting associates of questionable connections. And has Norquist been the advocate of others yet to be exposed?

For a detailed article on Norquist, read "A Troubling Influence," a lengthy and well-footnoted piece.

The Abramhoff scandal may bring down Grover Norquist. In the process, will any additional of Norquist's disturbing connections come to light? Will the Right or the Left have the forthrightness to look beyond the Abrahamoff scandal, to consider what may present a graver threat than ties to Abramhoff's dirty money?

Additional reading: "The Conservative Response to the Islamic Threat" and "Can the Left Face the Threat of Islam?"

Thanks to The City Troll for providing many of the links used in this article.

IMPORTANT! H.R. 2265

(All emphases by Always On Watch)

From the Center for Vigilant Freedom, on August 3, 2007:

Grover Norquist’s Wednesday Group, Congressmen Blumenauer and Shays, and Senators Kennedy and Smith are trying to destroy the laws that protect us from terrorists entering the U.S., in the guise of rewriting refugee policy for friendly Iraqi translators. Their efforts are a significant and potentially deadly effort to undercut homeland security efforts.

Actually, there are two bills, one in the House and one in the Senate (H.R. 2265 and S. 1651):

Those bills are some of the most shocking anti-homeland security legislation yet suggested by the Islamist Lobby and their friends in Congress.

[...]

H.R. 2265...[is]...[a] bill that severely damages the rules keeping known terrorists from immigrating to the US.

And Grover Norquist, about whom I wrote some time ago, is pushing hard for this legislation.

You absolutely must read the article at the Center for Vigilant Freedom. Yes, I know that the article is lengthy. Fortify yourself with a cup of coffee or a brandy. Read it! Also read related articles at Refugee Resettlement Watch, especially THIS ONE. Contact your Representative and your Senators. Take action.

What Are the Priorities?

Over at Social Sense is a short article entitled "Grover in the News." Today it occurred to me that some here at this site might like to have a look.


Samah Alrayyes Norquist, Norquist's Palestinian Muslim wife

According to a few articles in Front Page Magazine, Grover Norquist--who has the ear of Karl Rove, who has the ear of the President--may have priorities other than simply fundraising for the Republican Party. Be sure to check the comments too.

Prince William Co man with questionable ties to terrorist fronts appointed to sensitive DHS position

FrontPage magazine.com :: The Faisal Gill Affair by Frank J. Gaffney Jr.

"What is known is that Gill’s political patrons include Grover Norquist, who was listed by Gill as a reference on employment documents. After all, Gill had been a spokesman for the Taxpayers Alliance of Prince William County, Virginia, which is affiliated with Norquist’s group, Americans for Tax Reform. Gill had also worked in 2001 as director of government affairs for the Islamic Free Market Institute (also known as the Islamic Institute), whose founding president was Grover Norquist.

Interestingly, news articles published after September 11 described Gill in another capacity – as a spokesman for the controversial American Muslim Council (AMC). The AMC was founded and controlled by a prominent Islamist activist, Abdurahman Alamoudi. Alamoudi was indicted last October on terrorism-related money laundering charges. While in jail awaiting trial, he has reportedly engaged in plea-bargaining by confessing to participating in a Libyan plot to murder the Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia."

Concerns about Faisal Gill

At this time, Faisal Gill is seeking the Republican nomination to run for the 51st District of the Virginia House of Delegates, a geographical area which includes portions of Prince William County. On June 2, the Republican convention will meet to decide which candidate will represent the Party in the November election.

Before the Republican Party decides as to Mr. Gill's viability as their candidate of choice, he might first need to answer some questions about his connections with Abdurahman Alamoudi, now serving a penitentiary sentence for money laundering to terrorists. The concerns about Mr. Gill are several. According to Michelle Malkin on June 22, 2004, in her citing of Salon in "Who Is Faisal Gill?":

[Gill was] briefly removed from his job [at DHS] in March when the Federal Bureau of Investigation discovered he had failed to disclose his association with Abdurahman Alamoudi, a jailed American Muslim leader. Alamoudi was indicted last year on terrorism-related money-laundering charges and now claims to have been part of a plot to assassinate Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah.

After a flurry of interagency meetings, however, Homeland Security decided to leave the policy director, Faisal Gill, in place, according to two government officials with knowledge of the Alamoudi investigation. A White House political appointee with close ties to Republican power broker Grover Norquist and no apparent background in intelligence, Gill has access to top-secret information on the vulnerability of America's seaports, aviation facilities and nuclear power plants to terrorist attacks.

The FBI raised concerns with Homeland Security officials in March after discovering that Gill had failed to list on security clearance documents his work in 2001 with the American Muslim Council, the officials said. The advocacy group....was controlled by Alamoudi...

At the conclusion of her article, Ms. Malkin says the following:

How does a guy with no intelligence background get appointed director of intelligence policy at DHS--and how does he keep that job and his security clearance after committing two possible felonies by failing to list his two foreign-funded employers on sworn government forms?!?!?!?!

This article by Frank Gaffney also brings up some matters of concern about Mr. Gill and Mr. Norquist. Both Northern Virginiastan and I have previously blogged about both Gill and Norquist.

Not unexpectedly, the biography at Mr. Gill's web site fails to mention any of the above information. Perhaps the questions have been resolved. If so, I am unaware of any such answers.

I suspect that answers have not been forthcoming because, today, RedState posted this article about Faisal Gill. Excerpt:

This is one of those issues that troubles me. You don't want to judge a man by his ethnicity or background, but there are more and more people troubled by the candidacy of Faisal Gill. He's running for 51st District Delegate against Julie Lucas and some of the grassroots guys are concerned.

I don't know the guy, but a cursory review of Michelle Malkin's site gives me pause. It seems Mr. Gill, when he worked for Homeland Security, failed to disclose his association with Abdurahman Alamoudi, a muslim leader indicted on terrorism related money laundering charges. This is compounded by Gill's work with the American Muslim Council, which encouraged muslims not to cooperate with the FBI after 9/11.

Also troubling is that a lawyer connected to Gill is rumored to be the Washington Post leaker of the NSA wiretapping program....

In the intense race to win the upcoming election after the Republican Party's defeat in the midterm elections of November 2006, one can only hope that the GOP is paying attention to matters of national security as those matters may pertain to Faisal Gill. And if any of the above disturbing questions about Mr. Gill's associations remain open, the GOP will appear soft on national security.

[Hat-tip to Greg, who emailed me information about Faisal Gill's candidacy]

More on H.R. 2265: FAQ's

Christine of The Center for Vigilant Freedom has written an important post, which you can read in its entirety below. H.R. 2265 is being presented as a compassionate attempt to rescue Iraqi refugees. But the bill is much more than that!

Christine's article is brilliant. Make time to read it!

From this source, in its entirety, is what Christine has posted:

Here are the Frequently Asked Questions and answers for the dangerous and defeatist Democratic Iraqi refugee bill in the House - H.R. 2265 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:h2265:) (S. 1651), with Kyle Shideler’s more detailed analysis here. It’s being sold as a way to get at-risk Iraqi employees - Iraqi translators, contractors, spouses and kids - into the U.S. as “special immigrants.” But the reality is that the bill seriously undermines provisions in US immigration law, opening immigration to those identified as terrorists or supporters of terrorist groups.

As you’ll see, this bill gives refugee status to broad sections of the Iraqi population, with additional exemptions to all other aliens, and with special favorable treatment for anyone with a terrorist background. It’s as if the Bill assumes only two policy options:

(1) Surrender Iraq to al Qaeda and Iranian forces and blame the ensuing genocide on Bush OR…
(2) Surrender Iraq to al Qaeda and Iranian forces, blame the ensuing genocide on Bush, and create a program (designed to be confusing, poorly managed and dangerous) to get out as many Iraqis as possible, with a proactive effort to include Iraqis with terrorist and anti-American histories of violence.

First, here are your coordinates to track the Bill’s progress this fall. HR2265 (http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/z?c110:h2265:) provides “special immigrant status” for some Iraqis and assists Iraqi refugees living in other countries. It was introduced in May 2007 by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) and Rep. Christopher Shays (D-CT), and currently is referred to the House Judiciary and Foreign Affairs Committees.

Who gets to be a special immigrant? The “principal alien” group of “Special immigrants” are any Iraqi and his immediate family who has worked alongside the US government, contractors, U.N or U.S.-based non-governmental organizations for at least a year. Presumably this would include all contractors, most members of the Iraqi military and police in units who have fought alongside American troops, Mayors and town councilmen for every single hamlet and village, many a tribal sheikh or construction business owner, their family and employees.

Wait - who will be left to turn out the lights? Isn’t this for people who will be killed if they stay in Iraq? The Bill gets cute here in a left-wing gallows-humor fashion. It states that a principal alien has to be someone who “has a not manifestly unfounded fear of persecution, violence, or harm to the alien or the alien’s family on account of their work.” That’s clear enough…..except then it neatly states that any Iraqi who worked for a year with the U.S., contractors, U.N. or any U.S. based NGO “shall be presumed to satisfy the requirement” of having that fear of persecution. So everyone who has had any employee relationship for a year with any of those entities qualifies.

Even if they work for the U.N.? But we thought the Democrats wanted the U.N. to replace the U.S. in Iraq. Yes, even if they work for the U.N., which makes you wonder about Democratic plans for “peacekeeping” or policing after they force out a real military presence. This Bill defines any Western presence in Iraq including the U.N. as a violent threat to any Iraqis who cooperate with them. According to this bill, Iraqis will have no security of any kind.

You’re sure al Qaeda didn’t draft this Bill - that sounds like their line? No, we think it sounds more like the extreme left-wing of the Democratic party, with a compassionate pretext. But we take your point.

If the NGO they work for has a headquarters in, say, Brussels or Dubai, are their workers safe? Absolutely. This Bill says that only workers for U.S. based NGOs are at risk (plus the U.N. of course…). Al Qaeda in Iraq must have promised the Bill’s sponsors to check the location of the main office address for your NGO before you are bombed.

How many “special immigrants” will enter the U.S.? For four years, from FY 2008 - FY 2011, 15,000 immigrants (”principal aliens”) will enter the U.S. each year, for a total of 60,000 Iraqis in this category. The bill creates more categories of immigrants from Iraq too, but they are not “primary aliens.” These 60,000 principal aliens will be in addition to existing immigration quotas.

What benefits will these “special immigrants” receive? All will be eligible for the same resettlement assistance, entitlement programs, and other benefits as refugees admitted under section 207 of the Immigration and Naturalization Act. This program has serious security and management problems and coming under fire from local communities. This Bill provides “such sums as may be necessary” to accommodate the new refugees. In the private sector we call that a blank check, but this is Congress where it is compassion. The bill also states that the Emergency Refugee and Migration Assistance Fund can exceed its normal legal cap of $100 million during this refugee resettlement process.

I am a principal alien with a not manifestly unfounded fear of persecution. How will you protect me? If you apply and are in imminent danger, the Secretary of State will provide you with protection that may include temporary housing on United States military bases or at provincial reconstruction team offices, or the immediate removal from Iraq of such alien.

But wait - if the Democrats withdraw from Iraq, all 60,000 of us will be in imminent danger (plus our spouses and children, religious minorities and others). That’s 60,000+ people for Secretary Rice to protect right now. How will she do this? She will put you in base housing and in team offices. It might be a little snug.

But if the Democrats withdraw from Iraq, you will not have temporary housing, military bases or provincial reconstruction team offices. They will be in the hands of al Qaeda, the way facilities in Gaza fell into the hands of Hamas when their adversaries withdrew. So how will Secretary Rice protect us? The Bill says she will immediately remove all 60,000+ of you who are in imminent danger. Perhaps she will fly you out.

From where will she fly us out? After the Democrats surrender to al Qaeda, there will not be military bases where airplanes can land. The Bill does not specify how you will be able to leave Iraq, but we remind you that carpooling and bicycling meet Al Gore’s demands for a small carbon footprint.

I have arranged my carpool to flee Iraq under Secretary Rice’s protection after the Democrats surrender the U.S. airbases. Where do I go to apply as a principal alien? The Secretary of State will set up processing facilities in two locations in Baghdad, one location in southern Iraq, and two locations in Iraqi Kurdistan. She will do things to “minimize to the greatest extent practicable security risks” to you.

But all the Iraqi police and military will also be in line with me to flee, by the definition of this Bill, and the Democrats will have removed the U.S. Military. Who will provide security as I wait in line? Secretary Rice will protect you, “to the greatest extent practicable” which under these circumstances will be not at all. The Bill is worded to set up the U.S. Government to fail in protecting former Iraqi employees, but to show the compassion of the Bill’s drafters.

Will I need a passport and visa? The Secretaries of State and Homeland Security will work with the Iraqi government to issue passports to all 60,000+ of you in imminent danger, and will waive all fees. They will do this with careful scrutiny of each of your backgrounds as well, and in cooperation with an Iraqi government that may not exist because the Democrats will have withdrawn all U.S. military support for it.

I trust Secretary Rice and the Democratic Congress to protect me, but my big worry is that this activity will not generate a government report - can you reassure me? You are in luck. “Not later than 90 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall submit to Congress a report on aliens described in this section who worked directly with the United States Government, the United Nations or other international organizations, certified government or international organization contractors or subcontractors, or international nongovernmental organization as a translator for a period of at least one year.”

Wait - the report will cover “other international organizations” or “international nongovernmental organizations” - and it sounds like maybe only translators can leave? You said above that it was only U.S. based NGOs, but other kinds of contractors too. This is confusing! Yes, you are confused.

What about help for other countries housing the refugees? Actually, that’s one of the few sensible sections of the Bill, and should be submitted as separate legislation, to help Iraq, Jordan, Syria, Turkey, and Lebanon with resources to support Iraqi refugees. Sadly this Bill provides no details. However, since Syria has been actively supporting al Qaeda in Iraq, in order to create the instability that has created the refugee situation (H/T Shideler), it seems they should pay the costs of their meddling themselves.

Will you be checking my background? I might have a parking ticket or two. The Department of Homeland Security will create a plan, ninety days after the Bill is enacted, to check the backgrounds of all “principal aliens” and other categories of refugees. Right now these processes are a bottleneck in bringing in the current quota of 7,000 Iraqi refugees, but good intentions and another blank check for funding will theoretically fix everything. The Arabic speaking translators needed to do background checks, who will be first in line to leave Iraq, will somehow not be needed for all the other background checks.

I am still worried there will not be enough bureaucratic reports on this compassionate program, in order to blame the Bush administration when the program fails. Can you reassure me? Yes we can! An annual report will report on the “adequacy and effectiveness of United States and United Nations programs to protect and assist Iraqi refugees and internally displaced persons.” This will provide an opportunity for hearings blaming the Bush administration for the genocide resulting from the Democratic withdrawal of U.S. military from Iraq and the chaos resulting from the provisions of this Bill.

Who else can be a “special immigrant” under this Bill? The bill states that from 2007 to 2008, no fewer than 20,000 other refugees will be admitted.

No FEWER than 20,000? Then the Bill sets no upper limit, only a floor, for other refugees leaving Iraq in 2008 alone? You are correct.

Who is included in this unlimited category? I have many relatives and friends I would like to include in my carpool. Here is the list:

(1) Female-headed households and unaccompanied children.

(2) Religious communities of antiquity, including Chaldo-Assyrian Christians, Jews, Sabean Mandeans, Yazidis, Bahais, and others.

(3) Other religious, ethnic, social, or minority groups, including gay and lesbian Iraqis, subject to violence, intimidation, or discrimination by state or non-state actors.

(4) Iraqis with family members in the United States.

Is it possible that category 3 could include the entire Iraqi population, since Sunnis are subject to violence at the hands of Shiites, and Shiites at the hands of Sunnis? Yes, category 3 provides an unlimited number of “special immigrants” and by definition includes the entire Iraq population. The politically correct drafters of the Bill did not want to leave anyone out.

My brother-in-law Hussein engaged in youthful indiscretions with IEDs this spring, but my wife will never stop nagging me if we cannot bring him. Will Secretary Rice help? Hussein is also a lucky guy. The Bill allows the Secretaries of State, Homeland Security, and the Attorney General to determine that the definition of a terrorist does not apply to an individual or a group. Even better for Hussein, that determination will be made with “unreviewable discretion.”

And this is just for Iraqis, this amendment to the Immigration and Nationality Act that allows them unreviewable discretion to let in groups formerly known as terrorists? No, our reading of Section 7 of this Bill is that it uses the Iraqi refugee issue to amend the Immigration and Nationality Act to allow this discretion for all aliens, not just Iraqis. We think the Bill’s optimistic drafters are thinking ahead to a future Democratic administration where the Secretaries of State and Homeland Security, and the Attorney General, will have a politically correct and multicultural view of who constitutes a terrorist, regardless of country of origin.

My cousin Ali also did bad things but it was not his fault - he was under duress. Will you let him in? Before this Bill, Ali would have been kept out of the U.S. by the law banning those who commit an act “that the actor knows, or reasonably should know, affords material support, including a safe house, transportation, communications, funds, transfer of funds or other material financial benefit, false documentation or identification, weapons (including chemical, biological, or radiological weapons), explosives, or training.” But this Bill now adds the language “other than an act carried out under duress” to that law, so tell Ali to say he was made to do whatever he did. The drafters of the Bill trust that all applicants will tell the truth about any duress they experienced, and that the Homeland Security background checks will find any fibbers, as long as they speak English since all Arabic translators will have been evacuated.

Ali’s son and wife approved these terrorist actions by Ali, which were done within the last five years (well, last Tuesday and a few dozen times before…). Can they still be special immigrants under this bill? You bet! Before this Bill, it would have been a problem - the old language required that a spouse or child of a terrorist either be unaware, or renounce the terrorist activity, and the terrorist activity could not have been in the last five years. The Bill changes this to exempt any spouse or child of someone who committed a terrorist act in the last five years, regardless of whether they were aware or renounced the act.

The Bill calls this change a “Technical Correction,” but the change is actually substantive. The Bill’s drafters just believe in modest understatement, and were not trying to hide anything.

My cousin Abdullah applied two years ago as a U.S. immigrant and was rejected because of his youthful indiscretions with al Qaeda. Will this new law help him? Yes indeed. The amendments will apply to: “(1) removal proceedings instituted before, on, or after the date of the enactment of this section; and (2) acts and conditions constituting a ground for inadmissibility, excludability, deportation, or removal occurring or existing before, on, or after such date.” Everybody is welcome, because the Bill’s politically correct drafters do not want to exclude anyone. We also think this applies to all alien proceedings, not just Iraqi aliens.

****************

This Bill and its Senate counterpart should die in committee.

I am all for being loyal to our friends. My own extended family fled their various homelands on two continents to survive the Germans in World War II and the Iranian revolution a generation later, years in displaced person camps and then years of drifting from country to country looking for a home. I agree that granting “special immigrant” status to a selected list of Iraqis who are at genuine risk regardless of political outcomes in Iraq is worthwhile. But the best way to make Iraq secure for all Iraqis is to fight to victory over al Qaeda in Iraq, to stop the Iranian subversion of the region, and to build up Iraqis’ own capacity to maintain order among sectarian factions. That requires staying in Iraq just as we stayed in Japan, Germany and Korea.

If left-wing legislators had met this spring with CAIR and representatives of the Muslim Brotherhood to draft a bill, using the pretext of helping a defined group of “targeted” U.S. Iraqi contractors, to create an actual program that could result (no doubt completely inadvertently) in admitting terrorists into the U.S., they might have ended up with similar provisions.

Lest we forget, it has been alleged that lobbyists for this bill are “conservatives” Grover Norquist, founder of the Islamic Free Market Institute (copies of canceled checks funding it from Saudis, Kuwait, Safa Trust and Qatar here) and David Keene, lobbyist for the Carmen Group and new friend of the ACLU. We cannot confirm this information.

Perhaps they are all honorable men. So are they all, all honorable men.

Do you recognize the words in that last paragraph? They come from Shakespeare's Julius Caesar, from Marc Antony's speech in which he sarcastically referred to the conspirators who, in spite of their good intentions, brought Rome to chaos by assassinating Julius Caesar on the steps of the Senate.