Washington Examiner refuses to print syndicated column on Muslim Brotherhood infiltration

The Ministry of Truth is busy. via The Death of the Grown-Up | Diana West > Home – Spiking the Examiner.

News flash: The Washingon Examiner spiked my syndicated column on the Muslim Brotherhood and why five House Republicans — Reps. Michele Bachmann, Trent Franks, Louie Gohmert, Tom Rooney and Lynn Westermoreland — were correct to call on Inspectors General to investigate MB influence on US government policy-making. And therein lies a tale.

If the newspaper’s online search function is accurate, it is even more perplexing to note that the Examiner hasn’t run a single news story on the media-politics feeding frenzy, led by Sen. John McCain, directed at Rep. Michele Bachmann for raising questions about strong indications of Muslim Brotherhood penetration of the Washington policy-making chain. The geyser of Left-cum-GOP-Establishment hysteria arose from Bachmann et al pointing out in a letter to the State Department IG that Huma Abedin, a top advisor of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, has close family members involved in MB-associated groups and movements, which are dedicated to the destruction of the West. Indeed, it was on the mention of Huma Abedin that the Examiner told me the paper turned down my column (full column reprinted below).

A little backstory.

I have noted before with dismay that the Washington Examiner automatically spikes any syndicated column I write regarding what might be referred to as President Obama’s identity issues.

These include: the debate over the constitutional requirement that the president and vice president be “natural born”; this same debate as it enters court in eligibility challenges litigated from New Jersey to Georgia to the US Supreme Court; and related pieces of “natural born” legislation introduced in some state legislatures, including Arizona’s. Since April 27, 2011, when Obama published a highly problematic illustration of a birth certificate on the White House website, the debate has taken a darker turn. There is now extensive evidence that fraud and forgery took place in the creation of the White House birth certificate. What that means to the Examiner is that it now also auto-spikes columns about this evidence and other sensational news coming out of the Cold Case Posse investigation mounted by the renowned Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Regrettably, Townhall.com has this year decided to spike columns on this same subject by myself and others. In fact, the silence on this epic story extends across the public square, from Left to Right, from CNN to Fox, from Democrats to Republicans. When, earlier this year, this began happening to my column in a more systematic way, I was shocked. Others, too. I will note for the record that concerned scribes expressed outrage and alarm over such censorship, for which I remain grateful. It is a more than passing strange sensation to write about what clearly seems to be important news in our country’s history involving Americans from different states, from different walks of life — lawyers,  judges, detectives, computer experts, government officials including the president, and more — knowing full well that some outlets won’t run it because the subject is verboten in the public square. I have even come to expect this treatment on the subject, which must be some dangerous stage of complacency.

In a way, then, I almost welcome this latest, very different spike as a salutary jolt of alarm.

Here’s how Examiner editorial page editor David Freddoso explained why the column didn’t appear:

We opted not to use it this week.  We also passed over other syndicated columnists’ offerings about the insinuations against Huma Abedin.  The reason is simply that there is no hint of proof that she has done anything improper.

But the five House Republicans made no such claim. Amid their broad concerns about MB influence on US government policy-making, the members raised a red flag over Huma Abedin, Deputy Chief of Staff to the US Secretary of State. Why? Abedin’s family members have been deeply involved with groups and movements dedicated to the destruction of Western civilization. This concerns the five House members. As it should, in my opinion — which is what my fact-based opinion column argued. What we learn from this escapade is that such an opinion is not considered printable at the Examiner.

Meanwhile, as former federal prosecutor Andrew C. McCarthy writes:

A person is not required to have done anything wrong to be denied a high-ranking government position, or more immediately, the security clearance allowing access to classified information that is necessary to function in such a job. There simply need be associations, allegiances, or interests that establish a potential conflict of interest.

To sample some of what McCarthy has further reported:

1) Saleha Abedin, Huma’s mother, is a member of the Muslim Sisterhood.

2) Saleha is also a board member of the International Islamic Council for Dawa and Relief. The IICDR has been long banned in Israel for supporting Hamas.

3) Moreover it turns out that Huma Abedin herself was, until late 2008, a member of another of her mother’s Islamist organizations, the Institute of Muslim Minority Affairs.

Huma’s parents actually started this institute in Saudi Arabia in the 1970s, McCarthy explains, “with the backing of Abdullah Omar Naseef.”

Who is Naseef?

McCarthy: “Naseef is a former secretary-general of the Muslim World League, which, as I’ve previously explained, has long been the Muslim Brotherhood’s principal vehicle for the international propagation of Islamic supremacist ideology. Under the auspices of the MWL, Naseef not only backed the IMMA” — which, remember, was Huma’s parents’ Saudi project — “Naseef founded the Rabita Trust, which …is a specially designated international terrorist organization under federal law.”

Can’t you just hear the background-checker? So, Huma, your folks were in business with a guy who started a designated terrorist group, your mom’s on a board of a group banned in Israel for supporting Hamas, and you want top secret clearance to work alongside the SecState…HAHAHAHAHA. 

And there’s even more, so much more. But let just this much sink in while I note that I sent this information (and more) to the Examiner, asking the editorial page editor to examine the evidence for himself, and, I hoped, run my column belatedly this week.

No soap.

Response: “I’ve had a look, and I will not be using the column.”

I’ve had a look, too — the newspaper’s lack of columns on this whole controversy, the newspaper’s lack of news on this whole controversy — and I will not be using the Examiner.

Dhimmitude from the Washington Examiner. Read Diana West’s banned piece at her site here.

13 thoughts on “Washington Examiner refuses to print syndicated column on Muslim Brotherhood infiltration

  1. Liberals can not handle any truth, facts, or any information that is uncomfortable, honest, shocking or scary, they should be brushed aside so the grown ups can run the media and the country.

  2. Why am I not surprised. Unless you are fawning over a known terrorist praising him for being a freedom fighter it’s not worthy to print. Meanwhile America is being handed to the Islamist not on a silver platter, but a golden one.

  3. obama and all his cronies continue to put the USA last and the islam/muslims/jihadists first; when will folks wake up to their agenda????

  4. I sincerely hope & pray that they don’t let up on fifth columnist Abedin – I do believe she’s definitely a wolf in sheep’s clothing! “Too close (to classified – and even unclassified – info) for comfort now,” as the song goes! I just know someone will find SOMETHING treacherous on her before this is finished. Well, at the very least, with Hitlery – and,
    pray God, Ovomit! – out of power after Nov. 6, there goes – or certainly SHOULD go – Ms. Abedin as well!

  5. Pingback: Washington Examiner Refuses to Print Syndicated Column on Muslim Brotherhood Infiltration

  6. “There is no hint of proof she has done anything wrong” That is not theirs to decide, it is the American peoples to decide. Their job as a newspaper is to report the news and be impartial about it and show all points of view and evidence presented and let the readers be the judge. IT IS NOT TO PRINT THAT WHICH REFLECTS ONLY THEIR OPINION. I just went through this, this past week with our local newspaper over the issue of government corruption. One of our local officials who was running for office again this past Thursday has
    charges of corruption and ethics violations against him,
    in which ,HE DID COMMIT BECAUSE I, LIKE MANY OTHERS, SAW HIM AND HEARD HIM. It was also taped and posted online and I wrote a letter to the editor to print in order to let our citizens know where to find this info in order to make a educated choice regarding who they
    were going to vote for.The newspaper would not print what I had written because he was their favored candidate and not only that, they contacted the candidate and told him what I wrote and they addressed those issues (without printing my letter)with a bunch of BS and smoothed the violations over IN THE NEWSPAPER by saying the ethics committee had found him “No Fault” because nobody who had charged him with corruption had shown up to testify. However, this public meeting was deliberately never publically announced by the ethics committee, which are all his buddies, or the newspaper and they met in private. This is against the law in my state and a violation of the Sunshine Law. If the public does not know, they cannot show up to testify against him. Thus he got his headline in the paper the day before the election declaring he was found to be with “No Fault.” A attorney was consulted and this ethics committee has been advised they broke the law and a meeting is going to have to be held with public notice.However, this candidate got what he sat out to do and that was lie to the people in order to get re-elected and make it look like the charges were nothing more than a political ploy by his opposing candidate and was aided by the very biased newspaper. He won the election by 100 votes which is such a small margin in my county. Had alot of people known this information, it might have turned out differently. Now we have to go through all kinds of legal crap to get him out costing alot of money.Voting them out is how to get corrupt officials out of office…unless they cheat and are aided by the liberal press. This left me with little to no hope that we will get Obama out. He is just as corrupt but on a much BIGGER SCALE. He is selling off this country to get re-elected.

If sharia law continues spreading, you'll have less and less freedom of speech - so speak while you can!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s