"Our counterterrorism efforts have been effective in constraining al-Qaida's capabilities, but their intention and efforts to carry out spectacular attacks in America have not stopped. The NIE underscores why we cannot grow complacent or relax our vigilance against the radical jihadist threat." - Rep. Pete Hoekstra, R-Mich.
The bill passed the House 371-40 on July 27th. Hoekstra was the only Congressperson from Michigan voting against the bill. Pete likes to talk about "radical jihadists" every chance he gets. It's his fancy new catch phrase he started using after the surge debate. Too bad he's busy beating us over the head with it instead of voting to strengthen our state and country's security. So maybe Pete changed his mind about the threat of "radical jihad" in 10 days. But just 5 days before the vote he said:
"I work under the assumption that the United States and the West are at risk and with the knowledge and belief that al-Qaida and other radical jihadists want to attack the United States and want to attack Europe. The heightened threat level means to some there is an increase in activity that makes an attack more likely today than three or six months ago."
So which is it Pete? Do we need Homeland Security or not?