My MOC
I've blogged periodically about Rep. Sue Myrick, my member of Congress, and her claims about Middle Eastern terrorists, Hugo Chávez, the Mexican border, etc. She keeps asking (very indignantly) the Department of Homeland Security to launch an investigation and create a task force, but it keeps responding that it has no evidence of what she is talking about. As a matter of fact, DHS offered her a private intelligence briefing on the matter, but she didn't want one!
After Myrick made her request in June, she told the website NewsmaxTV that she was offered a private intelligence briefing by the Homeland Security department, but declined because she didn't want to be bound by secrecy and wanted to focus on her request for a task force.
In other words, she apparently did not want to learn actual facts.
9 comments:
When you say actual fact...are you referring to the remote detonated car bomb on the Mexico border that resembles Hezbollah tactics? Or is it the indictment in New York last week by the Dept of Justice that reveals the weapons that were held in Mexico in the home of an admitted Hezbollah member? Maybe the Dept of Justice should get that briefing also huh?
Any chance Anon that you can link to that indictment of send it as a PDF? I'm interested in reading it.
There's no confirmation from Mexico about this story out of Kuwait - picked up by the Israeli press. Even the American Spectator concluded the story was a total fabrication.
So yes, anon, please produce this supposed DOH indictment.
It's very plausible to believe, though the facts are scarce. Many imported slaves to Brazil were of Islamic descendence and continued practice there after, which means nothing till you factor in the increasing involvement of Brazil, Venezuela, and Cuba with countries like Syria, Iran, and Turkey. In Brazilian and Venezuelan expanses not just the FARC exist, but radical training grounds too.
Hezbollah
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/17874369/
http://creepingsharia.wordpress.com/2010/06/03/six-jihadi-training-camps-in-venezuela/
Can anyone who claims Hugo Chavez believes in democracy defend this statement?
"Chávez no dará "ni un centavo" a mandatarios de oposición"
This would be the equivalent of Barack Obama telling a Republican governor of a state that his state will get no federal funds because he isn't a Democrat.
ConsDemos, I won't defend Chavez's actions, but you should know that Chavez won his first election running under their third party. Before him, the two main parties had a deal (El Pacto de Punto Fijo) to alternate sharing power and they did not fund their political opposition. So this (awful) practice goes back to the dictatorship of the fifties, at least. When the opposition parties eventually oust Chavez, I doubt they will fund the socialist coalition. There's not much we can do about it anyway.
Also, look up the case Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission. The decision states that corporations are free to pay for advertising in American election because they have the right to make their views heard (First Amendment). It kills a lot of campaign finance regulations. So I think democracy is relative anyway.
John B
So I think democracy is relative anyway.
Whatever the flaws of American democracy, we have a long tradition of peaceful transfer of power. There is no such tradition (as of yet) in Venezuela since Chavez came to power. He doesn't view the opposition as his opponents but rather his enemies. It makes me wonder if the upcoming elections will be fair, given that any reasonable metric should suggest Chavez's party should lose its majority in the Venezuelan Assembly.
I think it is important to note the large number of Lebanese living in Mexico. Some of the most prominent Mexican citizens are of Lebanese descent (Slim-Helu, Hayek, and more). Sure there could have been a Lebanese citizen picked up, but it is necessary to confirm any ties before reporting them and giving Myrick ammo.
Confirming facts is my point, and any member of Congress concerned about something should accept an offer of intelligence briefing to get more facts confirmed (or disconfirmed).
Post a Comment