Michael van der Galien

Like Obama, the Secret Service Speaks No Evil, Sees No Evil, Hears No Evil

Posted on January 4 2010 5:21 pm
Michael van der Galien was born in the Dutch city of Leeuwarden in 1984. For as long as he can remember, he has been obsessed with the United States. When he was 17 years old, he started blogging - of course about America. His articles have been published at Big Hollywood, Pajamas Media, Hot Air (the GreenRoom) and Right Across The Atlantic. He's also an editor for the Dutch conservative blog, De Dagelijkse Standaard.
Be Sociable, Share!
Print This Post Print This Post

Using the 'hear no evil, speak no evil, see no evil' monkey image is only racist for morons who want to see racism in everything (for explanation, click on the image).

Michaele and Tareq Salahi were not the only uninvited guests at the White House state dinner in honor of Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, Newsmax reports.

At the last minute, someone from the Indian diplomatic delegation invited a man to attend the White House event on Nov. 24 without the knowledge or consent of the White House.

As with the Salahis, the Secret Service ignored the fact that the man wasn’t on the guest list and didn’t do a background check on him.

At a hearing on Dec. 3 by the House Homeland Security Committee, Eleanor Holmes Norton, D-D.C., asked Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan whether any other “interlopers” might have been allowed into the event by the Secret Service.

“Ma’am, that was a concern of mine, as well,” Sullivan replied. “That is something we have focused on; I cannot talk about it in this setting, but I believe that I can satisfy you in explaining that there were no other people there that night that should not [have been let in].”

Oh, really? Well, no problem then. Just three uninvited guests, all of whom could have theoretically been terrorists.

As David Horowitz’s NewsRealblog‘s very own Paul Cooper wrote over a month ago, “I believe this embarrassing incident finds its greatest importance in its symbolism. It represents an Administration that has consistently proven itself faulty on who has the ear of the President and clueless on the policies presented to the American people.”

Combining the above with the failed terrorist attack on Christmas day, it’s time for us to wonder about this administration’s attitude towards very real dangers. What effect does this attitude have on the intelligence community and on the Secret Service? If the president himself doesn’t take (foreign and domestic) threats violent, why should the CIA or the Secret Service? And what does that mean for national security?

Be Sociable, Share!
4 Responses leave one →

Leave a Reply

Note: You can use basic XHTML in your comments. Your email address will never be published.

Subscribe to this comment feed via RSS

Copyright 2019 NewsReal Blog

The Theme Foundry