Patrick Leahy’s Concerned for Quakers?
Posted by Moonage on 06 Feb 2006 | Tagged as: National Politics
Patrick Leahy is worried. In fact, he’s darn near freaking out. This is how bad it’s gotten in the US in his view:
My concern is when we see peaceful Quakers being spied upon, when we see babies and nuns who can€™t fly on airplanes because their on a terrorist watch list put together by your government.
Babies, nuns, and Quakers are being discriminated against? Or, is Leahy asserting that the name Adamson looks and sounds a LOT like Zarqawi? Or, does Leahy know something he doesn’t feel like telling us? Or, is Leahy just pandering?
My vote’s #4. And, he’s doing a dangerous job at it. Pitting peaceful people like the Quakers against the radical Muslims is pretty callous IMO.
I’d prefer known terrorists are kept off airplanes. If a hand full of people are inconvenienced because of it, that’s a shame.
However, I googled "Quaker terrorist", and eventually came up with this story:
QUAKER ORGANIZATION SEEKS PENTAGON SURVEILLANCE FILES
Now, what happened was a group called the American Friends Service Committee opposed our war with Iraq. Because of that, they ASSUMED they were being spied on when the news of the spying broke. In addition, they made several broad accusations. What I could NOT find was where a single Quaker had been denied a flight. Nor could I find that AFSC had actually been spied upon.
If Leahy has some facts, I’d sure like to see them. As it is, I think he’s pandering. And, even if he’s got a story about someone being inconvenienced, he’s still pandering. That’s the very last thing this country needs right now.
- Technorati Patrick Leahy, Quakers, nuns, babies
2 Comments »
on 07 Feb 2006 at 3:55 pm 1.Watching Washington said …
Actually, the Quaker story is a couple of months old. Back in December, someone at the Pentagon leaked a list of groups that had been spied on. The Quakers were on the list.
The baby he’s talking about — is from a USA Today story over the summer (I believe) where a nine month old kid was placed on the No Fly List. From what I can tell, his parents haven’t been able to get his name off the list and the baby still isn’t allowed to fly.
on 07 Feb 2006 at 5:05 pm 2.Moonage
said …
I actually linked the Quaker stuff, but, the point is it was an accusation by the group that they had been spied on moreso than evidence that they actually HAD been spied on. What bugs me is Leahy takes the accusation and runs with it. The baby story is pretty neat, but one baby out of how millions of people flying every year is hardly evidence that the system is broken. And, I think the very subliminal message Leahy is fighting is that although he can cite three cases out of the millions of flyers and an accusation of spying, everyone who’s flown can cite the fact that the five years since 9/11 is about the first five year period of no US airline terrorist casualties in my adult lifetime. So, if a baby is inconvenienced, but obviously lives have been saved, so be it. It’s kind of hard to argue with that logic. But, that’s what Leahy’s attempting here. And, because he feels compelled to go for the grand slam instead of scoring for the team, he looks very silly doing it.