In FrontPage today I discuss the sentencing of Nada Nadim Prouty:
Nada Nadim Prouty is a Lebanese national who has been employed by both the FBI and the CIA. She has admitted that she searched FBI files for information on investigations connected to the jihad terrorist group Hizballah – although, according to her plea agreement, she “was not assigned to work on Hezbollah cases as part of her F.B.I. duties and she was not authorized by her supervisor, the case agent assigned to the case, or anybody else to access information about the investigation in question.”For that, U.S. District Judge Avern Cohn on Tuesday gave her a $750 fine – and no jail time at all.
Cases Prouty sought information about included those of two accused Hizballah operatives in the U.S. – namely, her sister and brother-in-law. Her brother-in-law, Talal Chahine, is the owner of La Shish, a restaurant chain in the Detroit area. Chahine has fled the country to escape indictment for evading taxes and sending the restaurant money to Hizballah (to the tune of $20 million). While searching for information on Chahine, Prouty also took the time to search the files to see what information the Feds had on herself – an exercise intriguing in its implications. At the time of her guilty plea, some agents declared their suspicion that Prouty was actually a Hizballah mole. There is no doubt, meanwhile, that she is an illegal immigrant: she has also admitted to paying an American citizen to entering into a sham marriage with her so that she could obtain U.S. citizenship. She is currently married to a longtime State Department official who has held important positions in the Egyptian and Pakistani embassies. And while working for the CIA, Prouty had access to key Al-Qaeda detainees in Iraq.For all that -- $750, and not a single second in prison. If Nada Nadim Prouty had been a serial double parker, she might have drawn a larger fine than that. But at this point, her case is closed. The only thing that U.S. Government agencies can do now is try to make sure that there will be no more Nada Nadim Proutys – if they have the will to do so.
How can they do it? In the first place by examining the culture that enabled her to rise so high in the first place. Before she was hired by the FBI, Prouty was a waitress at La Shish. That’s an impressive career move, but it does suggest that when the Feds hired her, they were primarily motivated not by her outstanding qualifications but by the pleasing thoughts that were dancing in their heads – thoughts about how good it would be to reach out to the Arab community in the Detroit area, so as to deflect the ubiquitous criticism of anti-terror efforts as “racism” and “racial profiling” that has come from the American Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee and the Arab American Institute, as well as from the Council on American-Islamic Relations and the Muslim Public Affairs Council.
Given the fact that such charges are taken seriously by the mainstream media, it is hard to imagine that when she was hired, Nada Nadim Prouty was asked any hard questions about just where she stood on Hizballah, or in general about the jihad ideology and Islamic supremacism. Few agents, in any case, would even have known how to formulate such questions, or how to evaluate the answers. And if they were being asked of Arab and Muslim applicants, CAIR and its ilk would begin immediately to charge bigotry and demand that the application process be changed.
And given today’s political climate, they would probably succeed in this. But when you don’t ask, of course, and make no effort to investigate in any other way, you don’t get answers. If the FBI and the CIA don’t want the relatives of fugitives who are accused of funding jihadist groups illegally rifling through the files on the case, they shouldn’t hire
them in the first place, or should subject them to rigorous and politically incorrect screening. The very fact that such an elementary recommendation has to be made indicates just how far all too many officials in these agencies have drifted from a healthy concern for the security of the United States. Apparently it is more important not to be racist than to be protected from potential jihadist moles.Several CIA officials, meanwhile, have praised Prouty as a great agent and expressed interest in hiring her again. If they do, they’ll have no one to blame but themselves.
and they might hire her again along with some of her relatives she will help to get a job.
the more the merrier....
"The only thing that U.S. Government agencies can do now is try to make sure that there will be no more Nada Nadim Proutys – if they have the will to do so."
-from the article
But they don't have the will, for several reasons. First there is the PC notion that some people might not be wise choices for hire. Then there is the illegal alien conundrum. Stopping future Nada Nadim Proutys from obtaining citizenship in this way would require stopping all Joses and Marias from doing the same, or else the government would be accused of profiling. And if we kept them out then who would do those jobs "Americans can't or won't do"?
The light sentence can be attributed to the fact that this woman was an ILLEGAL alien. Throwing the book at her might set a precedent for law enforcement that this and future administrations would just as soon not be bound by.
Anyone who thinks an Obama or Clinton administration would be better in this regard is sorely mistaken.
Re-posted from yesterday's thread:
She's a Shia, and "served with distinction in Iraq" means that as a Shi'a, she was delighted to see the American army getting rid of Saddam Hussein's Sunni despotism, and replacing it with a Shi'a despotism. That is a very different thing from owing her loyalty to the American government. Her loyalty is to her deen, and to her sect. And everything else about her, save for the fact that at one point her interest in promoting the Shi'a, and the
American government's misguided and foolish but stated interest in "bringing freedom" "ordinary moms and dads" in Iraq meant, of course, transferring opwer to the Shi'a becuase they constitute 65% of Iraq's population, from her being an illegal alien, to repeatedly lying to government officials about her background, to her attempting to monitor what the government might have known about her Hezbollah-related relatives -- all that show that the judge in the case did not understand a thing about the meaning, or menace, of Islam.
And this is not the first, nor will it be the last, farcical trial. The need for judges to be instructed in the nature of Islam, of its texts, tenets, attitudes, atmospherics, to understand the loyalties -- to Islam, then to the sect, then to the tribe, then to the family, without any loyalty conceivably being given to the Infidel nation-state or to its legal and political institutions -- is a concept that is hard for ordinary people (and judges are perfectly ordinary people), with conventional ideas that they have picked up, about...oh, about how we all want the same thing, and if someone works for the army in Iraq that someone must be a good, loyal, wrongly-suspected American, and so on -- well, that kind of naive and dangerous mindset just has to go.
And the whole thing is and will remain a farce, using ordinary courts, with their ordinary juries and ordinary judges, when what is needed is special courts, with judges trained in the relevant matters (and the most relevant matter is Islam), who can dispense justice in a way that makes sense, adequate to the high task at hand. Such courts exist wherever specialized knowledge is required -- Tax Courts, Patent Courts. There should be such courts for cases of Muslim terrorism. This is a difficult and unpleasant problem, for it raises the matter of having to learn about Islam. But it has to be discussed, in detail, rationally. We cannot all be put permanently at risk because everyone is afraid of offending either Muslims, or the kind of people who, though non-Muslim, are "offended" by discussions about something which, of course, they really know nothing about, but have their attitudes, and their attitudinizing, to keep them warmth.
We are not obligated to worry about their delicate sensibiliites. Bombs in the street, Saudi-financed mosques rising on every street corner - that's what we have to worry about.
Be it noted that the "ordinary judge" in this case is an octogenarian Dhimmi Carter appointee.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Avern_Cohn
The US government is converting itself into a Caliphate. It will be complete when the new President Obama will be called Sultan Obama.
Be it noted that the "ordinary judge" in this case is an octogenarian Dhimmi Carter appointee.
by Papa Whiskey
That explains everything. Case closed.
Is she deportable? Can her husband, the diplomat, be sent to Somalia or some other third world hell-hole?