Media figures and politicians alike have demanded “proof” regarding Congresswoman Michele Bachmann’s allegations that Huma Abedin has connections and family ties with the Muslim Brotherhood. It is understandable that many want to get to the bottom of this story regarding Huma herself. Many even demanded that Bachmann offer a public apology to Huma Abedin. Others watch the media and listen to politicians that provide short, nondescript arguments. An apology by Bachmann in this case is unnecessary since we have established what is probably the most extensive research done to date on the matter; the readers can decide for themselves by examining the overwhelming evidence to see that in reality that it is Bachmann who is owed an apology and has a valid point to demand the vetting of Huma Abedin, the aid to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Bachmann’s focus was hardly on Huma Abedin, but the infiltration of extremist Muslims into government. An issue that was completely ignored is the level of importance that should be given to vetting government employees.
We are sure that many will point to ‘specs’ of errors in our findings in an attempt to lead many to ignore the ‘mountain’ of evidence we present. The fact is that politicians are responsible for causing the controversy to escalate. John McCain – along with other politicians – denounced Bachmann and demanded “proof” regarding such ties. Said McCain:
“The letter alleges that three members of Huma’s family are ‘connected to Muslim Brotherhood operatives and/or organizations…these sinister accusations rest solely on a few unspecified and unsubstantiated associations of members of Huma’s family”.
Rep. Keith Ellison told Anderson Cooper on CNN on July 17th that:
“U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann’s allegations of a Muslim Brotherhood “deep penetration” of the federal government is “untrue” and a “phantom.”
We will prove beyond doubt that McCain, Ellison and the others are wrong. The evidence will show that Bachmann’s claim is not based on a “phantom,” “sinister accusation,” or “unspecified and unsubstantiated associations of members of Huma’s family.”
MEDIA / POLITICIANS VS. EVIDENCE
Honest researchers at times need to differentiate between what the ‘media’ and ‘politicians’ say, versus ‘verifiable proof’, which we will present in specific detail, by providing the facts, mostly from Arabic sources, both secular and Islamic, which the media and politicians did not research due to linguistic limitations. This is no excuse since they could have easily commissioned linguists to examine the Arabic sources or acquired what is considered common knowledge from Middle Eastern archives. CNN for example, critiqued Bachmann by flashing a chart showing what they termed “six degrees of separation” between Huma and the Brotherhood. Their coverage was devoid of any sources or detailed information; Keith Ellison’s view was expressed without any being challenged by supposed experts on the subject.
CNN’s Anderson Cooper made a demonstrably false statement:
“As per Abedin’s mother and brother, Bachmann never gives any evidence of their alleged links to the Muslim Brotherhood.”
Bachmann absolutely did. We will begin with Huma’s brother, Hassan Abedin, followed by her mother Saleha Abedin, then Huma herself to conclude that: 1) Either no vetting process has been done on Huma, or 2) perhaps she obtained a waiver for her security clearance. So let’s start.