The American Kafir

2010/08/27

Shari’a for Dummies

Source: FrontPageMag

By Nonie Darwish

Imam Feisal Abdel Rauf claims that the U.S. constitution is Sharia compliant. Now let us examine below a few laws of Sharia to see how truthful Imam Rauf is:

1- Jihad, defined as “to war against non-Muslims to establish the religion,” is the duty of every Muslim and Muslim head of state (Caliph). Muslim Caliphs who refuse jihad are in violation of Sharia and unfit to rule.

2- A Caliph can hold office through seizure of power meaning through force.

3- A Caliph is exempt from being charged with serious crimes such as murder, adultery, robbery, theft, drinking and in some cases of rape.

4- A percentage of Zakat (charity money) must go towards jihad.

5- It is obligatory to obey the commands of the Caliph, even if he is unjust.

6- A caliph must be a Muslim, a non-slave and a male.

7- The Muslim public must remove the Caliph if he rejects Islam.

8- A Muslim who leaves Islam must be killed immediately.

9- A Muslim will be forgiven for murder of: 1) an apostate 2) an adulterer 3) a highway robber. Vigilante street justice and honor killing is acceptable.

10- A Muslim will not get the death penalty if he kills a non-Muslim, but will get it for killing a Muslim.

11- Sharia never abolished slavery, sexual slavery and highly regulates it. A master will not be punished for killing his slave.

12- Sharia dictates death by stoning, beheading, amputation of limbs, flogging even for crimes of sin such as adultery.

13- Non-Muslims are not equal to Muslims under the law. They must comply to Islamic law if they are to remain safe. They are forbidden to marry Muslim women, publicly display wine or pork, recite their scriptures or openly celebrate their religious holidays or funerals. They are forbidden from building new churches or building them higher than mosques. They may not enter a mosque without permission. A non-Muslim is no longer protected if he leads a Muslim away from Islam.

14- It is a crime for a non-Muslim to sell weapons to someone who will use them against Muslims. Non-Muslims cannot curse a Muslim, say anything derogatory about Allah, the Prophet, or Islam, or expose the weak points of Muslims. But Muslims can curse non-Muslims.

15- A non-Muslim cannot inherit from a Muslim.

16- Banks must be Sharia compliant and interest is not allowed.

17- No testimony in court is acceptable from people of low-level jobs, such as street sweepers or bathhouse attendants. Women in low level jobs such as professional funeral mourners cannot keep custody of their children in case of divorce.

18- A non-Muslim cannot rule — even over a non-Muslim minority.

19- Homosexuality is punishable by death.

20- There is no age limit for marriage of girls. The marriage contract can take place anytime after birth and can be consummated at age 8 or 9.

21- Rebelliousness on the part of the wife nullifies the husband’s obligation to support her, gives him permission to beat her and keep her from leaving the home.

22- Divorce is only in the hands of the husband and is as easy as saying: “I divorce you” and becomes effective even if the husband did not intend it.

23- There is no community property between husband and wife and the husband’s property does not automatically go to the wife after his death.

24- A woman inherits half what a man inherits.

25- A man has the right to have up to 4 wives and none of them have a right to divorce him — even if he is polygamous.

26- The dowry is given in exchange for the woman’s sexual organs.

27- A man is allowed to have sex with slave women and women captured in battle, and if the enslaved woman is married her marriage is annulled.

28- The testimony of a woman in court is half the value of a man.

29- A woman loses custody if she remarries.

30- To prove rape, a woman must have 4 male witnesses.

31- A rapist may only be required to pay the bride-money (dowry) without marrying the rape victim.

32- A Muslim woman must cover every inch of her body, which is considered “Awrah,” a sexual organ. Not all Sharia schools allow the face of a woman exposed.

33- A Muslim man is forgiven if he kills his wife at the time he caught her in the act of adultery. However, the opposite is not true for women, since the man “could be married to the woman he was caught with.”

34-It is obligatory for a Muslim to lie if the purpose is obligatory. That means that for the sake of abiding with Islam’s commandments, such as jihad, a Muslim is obliged to lie and should not have any feelings of guilt or shame associated with this kind of lying.

The above are clear-cut laws in Islam decided by great Imams after years of examination and interpretation of the Quran, Hadith and Mohammed’s life. Now let the learned Imam Rauf tell us: What part of the above is compliant with the U.S. Constitution?

Nonie Darwish is the author of “Cruel and Usual Punishment; the terrifying global implications of Islamic law” and founder of Former Muslims United.

Advertisements

2010/08/19

Giuliani Argues Against Ground Zero Mosque

Giuliani Argues Against Ground Zero Mosque

By: Dan Weil

Rudy Giuliani delivered a passionate, reasoned argument on NBC’s “Today” show against the Muslim mosque planned near ground zero.

“This project is divisive,” said the ex-New York mayor, who was in office on 9/11. “This project is creating tremendous pain for people who’ve already made the ultimate sacrifice. All you’re doing is creating more division, more anger, more hatred.”

Giuliani acknowledges that the project can legally be built, but that doesn’t mean it should be built. Backers of the mosque say it can be a site of interfaith healing. But how is that possible when the mosque upsets relatives of the Sept. 11 victims, Giuliani asks.

“The question here is a question of sensitivity and are you really what you pretend to be,” he said.

“The idea of this is supposed to be healing, the idea that Muslims care about what Christians and Jews do. … If you’re going to so horribly offend the people who are most directly affected by this, then how are you healing?”

Click Here for the rest of the article

2010/08/14

The Dutch Ummah Comes to Ground Zero

The Dutch Ummah Comes to Ground Zero

by Baron Bodissey

Cordoba Initiative

The organization behind the proposed Cordoba Initiative — more commonly known as the Ground Zero mosque — is the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA). As reported here previously, the government of the Netherlands has been implicated in the funding of ASMA — $500,000 and $1,000,000 respectively, in separate instances — and thus can be considered a co-financier of the Ground Zero mosque.

World Trade Center rubbleThe Dutch government stoutly denies funding the Cordoba Initiative, maintaining that the money it gave ASMA was earmarked for other uses. Overlooking for the moment the fact that money is fungible — funds specified for one purpose may free up money for another — how plausible is the official denial? Can the generosity of the Netherlands with its taxpayers’ money be traced directly to the Victory Mosque at Ground Zero?

Our Flemish correspondent VH has translated a massive investigative article from the Dutch-language section of the ICLA website which provides some answers to these questions. He says, “The more pressure (scandal) on the Dutch the better, now that the CDA is slightly annoyed that Wilders will speak in New York on 9/11.”


A Mosque Too Far II: Does a Dutch minister mislead parliament over the Ground Zero mosque?

In late July the Dutch Minister of Foreign Affairs, Maxime Verhagen (CDA, Christian Democrats) answered parliamentary questions from the Party for Freedom (PVV) about the involvement of the Netherlands with the organization behind the Ground Zero mosque[1] (MDG3 Fund; Millennium Development Goals). In his answers the Dutch Minister denies involvement, because according to his information ASMA would have nothing to do with the Ground Zero mosque.

However, on closer examination of both ASMA and The Cordoba Initiative and the 2009 Audit of ASMA, the opposite seems to be the case. The Netherlands indeed is involved. ASMA — which received a grant of €1,000,000 for the term October 13, 2008 to June 30, 2011 from the Dutch MDG3 Fund — and the Cordoba Initiative are deeply intertwined with respect to leadership, organization, and financing. Therefore the assumption of the Dutch Minister that ASMA has nothing to do with The Cordoba Initiative is wrong, and his answers to Dutch parliament do no correspond with the facts.

Below are comments on the replies of the Minister who since the fall of the government Balkenende replaces the resigned responsible Minster of Development Cooperation Bert Koenders (PvdA, Labour Party, Socialists):

Answers from Mr. Verhagen, Minister of Foreign Affairs, to questions of members Wilders and Fritsma (PVV) on ‘the co-financing by the Netherlands of a mosque on Ground Zero’.

Question 1: Is it true that Dutch taxpayers’ money is used for the support of the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), the organization Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf, who wants to build a mosque on Ground Zero?

Answer: No, the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA) is not involved in the construction of a mosque at Ground Zero in the United States. For that reason, therefore, there is thus no Dutch tax money used.

However, the American Society for Muslim Advancement does receive subsidy from the Dutch MDG3 Fund to implement the program of the Women’s Islamic Initiative in Spirituality and Equity (WISE) Compact program. […]

Click Here To Continue Reading At The Gates of Vienna

Obama Backs 911 Ground Zero Mega Mosque at Ramadan Celebration

We should not be surprised at this announcement from the Muslim in the White House and giving his blessings for such a cold, evil move on behalf of Islam. This is nothing but a showing of Islamic Conquest by building a Mosque, and then calling it Cordoba for their victory celebration after slaughtering thousands. Walt

Source: Atlas Shrugs

Obama Backs 911 Ground Zero Mega Mosque at Ramadan Celebration

“We should also examine the foreign policies of the U.S. to make sure that we occupy the moral high ground in these conflicts. In particular, we have to examine some of the root causes of this terrorist activity.” — then-State Senator Obama’s post 911 attack remarks

Obama bows submits

Obama came out for the Islamic supremacist mosque at the hallowed ground of 911 attack. He has, in effect, sided with the Islamic jihadists and told the ummah (at an Iftar dinner on the third night of Ramadan, of course) that he believes in and supports a triumphal mosque on the cherished site of Islamic conquest.

If you had any doubt who Obama stood with on 911, there can be no doubt in our minds now.

I believe he planned it all along. He waited until Ramadan. Symbolic. He has now turned our Ground Zero protest on 911 into a mega-event. The very idea of a 15-story mega-mosque on hallowed ground in indecent, offensive and outrageous. If Imam Rauf and his wife Daisy really wanted to “reach out” and “heal,” they would give the $120 million to the first responders suffering from exposure to the toxic environment at Ground Zero after Muslim terrorists brought down the World Trade Center and slaughtered 3,000 Americans.

Is the president incapable of common decency?

Obama knows this is not about religious liberty. No one has suggested abridging the first amendment to stop the mosque. There are hundreds of mosques in New York, thousands in America.  This is not a religious issue. This is a national security issue.

Once again, Obama puts himself directly at odds with the majority of the American people, as is his way and the hallmark of his presidency. This is all explained in detail in my book.

Obama Defends Ground Zero Mosque Plan MSNBC

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama on Friday endorsed plans for a Muslim mosque two blocks from ground zero in New York City, declaring that “Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as anyone else in this country.”

In remarks prepared for delivery at a White House dinner celebrating the Islamic holy month of Ramadan, Obama said all Americans have the right to worship as they choose.

“That includes the right to build a place of worship and a community center on private property in lower Manhattan, in accordance with local laws and ordinances, Obama said. “This is America, and our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable.”

Obama emphasized the point as New York City is immersed in a deeply sensitive debate about whether a mosque should be built near the site of the World Trade Center’s twin towers.

It was the president’s first remarks about the mosque controversy. The White House previously called the matter solely a local one.

At the dinner attended by two Muslim-American congressmen, Obama acknowledged that hot-fire emotions the planned mosque and cultural center have stoked.

“Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground,” the president said.

He just became a one-term president. The field is wide open for 2012.

Related: Obama Ramadanadingdong

Related: Obama’s US Treasury Department Pushing Zakat (Islamic Donations)

911 Ground Zero Mosque Rally: Bolton, Gingrich, Wilders, Thomas, Berntsen

UPDATE: AP reports, Obama “harkens”:

Obama elevated it to a presidential issue Friday without equivocation.

While insisting that the place where the twin towers once stood was indeed “hallowed ground,” Obama said that the proper way to honor it was to apply American values.

“Our capacity to show not merely tolerance, but respect towards those who are different from us — and that way of life, that quintessentially American creed, stands in stark contrast to the nihilism of those who attacked us on that September morning, and who continue to plot against us today,” he said.

Obama harkened back to earlier times when the building of synagogues or Catholic churches also met with opposition. “But time and again, the American people have demonstrated that we can work through these issues, and stay true to our core values and emerge stronger for it,” he said. “So it must be and will be today.”

New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg, an independent who has been a strong supporter of the mosque, welcomed Obama’s words as a “clarion defense of the freedom of religion.”

But some Republicans were quick to pounce.

“President Obama is wrong,” said Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y. “It is insensitive and uncaring for the Muslim community to build a mosque in the shadow of ground zero. While the Muslim community has the right to build the mosque they are abusing that right by needlessly offending so many people who have suffered so much.”

Entering the highly charged election-year debate, Obama surely knew that his words would not only make headlines but be heard by Muslims worldwide. The president has made it a point to reach out to the global Muslim community, and the over 100 guests at Friday’s dinner included ambassadors and officials from numerous Muslim nations, including Saudi Arabia and Indonesia. Seated around candlelit tables, they listened closely as Obama spoke, then stood and applauded when the president finished his remarks.

While his pronouncement concerning the mosque might find favor in the Muslim world, Obama’s stance runs counter to the opinions of the majority of Americans, according to polls. A CNN/Opinion Research poll released this week found that nearly 70 percent of Americans opposed the mosque plan while just 29 percent approved. A number of Democratic politicians have shied away from the controversy.

2010/07/25

Anywhere But Here

Source: FrontPageMag

by Michael Reagan

Plans to build a mosque and Islamic center just 200 meters from the former site of the World Trade Center where 3,000 people died in the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks are not merely inappropriate, they are an outrage.

This isn’t about some sort of reconciliation between Muslims and their New York neighbors, it’s the equivalent of plunging a dagger into the very heart of America. If the Muslim community had any sense of compassion for the feelings of their fellow Americans, they’d find someplace else to build their mosque. Instead, they choose a site that forever serves as a reminder of that fatal blow against the American people.

Incredibly, the proposed $100 million development is located at the site of the former Burlington Coat Factory in Lower Manhattan, which closed after the landing gear from one of the 9/11 planes hit the building. It is about 200 meters from World Trade Center, where 3,000 people died in the terrorist attack.

Do the members of the Muslim community have any idea of how the American people feel about the site of that cowardly attack on the World Trade Center buildings? Do they not understand that the site itself stands as an indictment of the perfidy of the 9/11 sneak attack and is the least appropriate site for a Muslim religious complex that will stand as a stark reminder of that attack and the people behind it?

The proposed mosque will be part of what is known as the Cordoba House project, a 13-story Muslim community center planned to include a theater and sports facilities, including a swimming pool.

I agree with former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin who asked “peace-seeking Muslims, to try to understand that a Ground Zero mosque is unnecessary provocation; it stabs hearts.”

That fact failed to impress Nihad Awad, executive director of the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR), who is reported to have said “there is controversy and there are parties that have a political agenda and want to intimidate the American people against the mosque project which has not yet begun.” He singled out Republican Congressman Peter King, whose opinion, he said, “should not be considered because his ideas are extreme.”

Rep. King, the ranking Republican on the House Homeland Security Committee, said he favors an investigation into the funding of a proposed mosque near ground zero and has demanded an investigation into the financing of the center. He wants to know who is really footing the bill for the 100 million dollar project.

“It’s a house of worship, but we are at war with al-Qaida,” King told the AP. “I think the 9/11 families have a right to know where the funding comes from; I think there are significant questions.

“Right at this moment in history, it’s bad form to put it there,” he said. “There are things you are allowed to do, but that aren’t appropriate to do.”

According to Imam Abdul Rauf, the Islamic center would be financed through contributions from Muslims here in the United States, and by donations from various Arab and Islamic countries. He admits that building a Mosque, due to accommodate some 2,000 worshippers, has stirred heated controversy and criticism from families of 9/11 victims.

That’s putting it mildly. Many of the 9/11 victims’ families have voiced strong objections to the proposed mosque. Evelyn Pettigano, whose sister died on 9/11, told the Associated Press: “I’m not prejudiced…it’s too close to the area where our family members were murdered.”

And said the mother of a New York City firefighter who died as well: “I think it’s despicable, and I think it’s atrocious that anyone would even consider allowing them to build a mosque near the World Trade Center.”

If this project is allowed to continue, Mohamed Atta WINS!!!

That pretty much says it all.

Mike Reagan, the elder son of the late President Ronald Reagan, is spokesperson for The Reagan PAC (www.thereaganpac.com) and chairman and president of The Reagan Legacy Foundation (www.reaganlegacyfoundation.org). Look for Mike’s books and other information at http://www.Reagan.com. E-mail comments to Reagan@caglecartoons.com.

Video-CBS Profiles The Ground Zero Mosque Issue; Imam suggests America responsible for 9-11

A Mosque Grows Near Brooklyn

Source: Weekly Standard

The dubious financing of ‘Cordoba House’ deserves scrutiny.

BY Stephen Schwartz

Since a proposal to construct a 15-story mosque and community center two blocks from Ground Zero was announced last year, the project has been a focus of widening protests. To be named Cordoba House, the project would require demolition of two buildings at 45-47 Park Place and Broadway that were damaged on 9/11. They would be replaced by a glass and steel 100,000-square-foot structure with a new address, 45-51 Park Place.

According to its sponsors, the Cordoba Initiative and the American Society of Muslim Advancement (ASMA), the structure would cost $100 million and would include “a 500-seat auditorium, swimming pool, art exhibition spaces, bookstores, restaurants,” and an area for Islamic prayer. The Cordoba Initiative and ASMA were created by Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, a Kuwait-born cleric of Egyptian background.

Every inch the professional moderate, Rauf has the imprimatur of the State Department, which sent him on an international bridge-building tour earlier this year. And he has cloaked the Cordoba effort in the rhetoric of reconciliation, describing himself and his colleagues as “the anti-terrorists.” But he deflects inquiries about its financing. On July 7, New York Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio called on state attorney general Andrew Cuomo, who is also Lazio’s Democratic opponent in the coming election, to “conduct a thorough investigation” of three aspects of the project:

– Rauf’s refusal to acknowledge that Hamas is a terrorist organization;

– Rauf’s leading role in the Perdana Global Peace Organization, “a principal partner,” in its own words, of the Turkish-launched flotilla that tried to break the Israeli naval blockade of Gaza;

– and the project’s questionable sources of funding.

Lazio has been supported in this demand by New York Republican congressman Peter King.

Many who object to construction of an Islamic facility so close to the site of the World Trade Center feel that a large, if not dominating Muslim presence there would be at best insensitive and at worst a symbol of the very Islamist supremacy that is the goal of al Qaeda and other jihadist killers. Such sentiments are hardly the last word in a question of public policy. But the background support and financing for this ambitious undertaking are matters that deserve to be addressed.

Non-Muslim defenders of Rauf—including Cuomo and New York mayor Michael Bloomberg—have rejected demands for investigation of the ideological and financial underpinnings of the Ground Zero mosque. They have argued that such an inquiry would violate the First Amendment guarantee of free exercise of religion. But faith should not serve as a pretext for extremist or potentially criminal activities.

Rauf’s ASMA website lists mainstream philanthropic donors, including the Carnegie Corporation of New York, three Rockefeller charities, the Danny Kaye & Sylvia Fine Foundation, the Henry Luce Foundation, three feminist-oriented groups, and six other funders. New York Muslims, however, are well aware that the Rauf scheme is also associated with financing and support from other doubtful individuals and entities in addition to Perdana, which is led by the notorious Jew-baiter Mahathir bin Mohamad, former prime minister of Malaysia.

The idea of building an Islamic peace memorial in lower Manhattan was circulating as early as 2003. Its early proponents were two Iranian brothers, M. Jafar “Amir” Mahallati, who served as ambassador of the Iranian Islamic Republic to the United Nations from 1987 to 1989, and M. Hossein Mahallati. Amir Mahallati had served with Rauf in the leadership of an obscure nonprofit, the Interfaith Center of New York, for which Rauf was a vice chair and Mahallati a board member. The two had also participated in a 2006 radio program, “From Turmoil to Tourism: Following the Path of Abraham.”

Hossein Mahallati had experience of his own in the intersecting New York worlds of charitable giving and property management. He was director from 1983 to 1992 of the Alavi Foundation, set up in 1973 by the government of the shah of Iran as the Pahlavi Foundation, but taken over and renamed after the Khomeini revolution. The Alavi Foundation is currently the subject of a federal civil action seeking forfeiture of assets, including an office building at 650 Fifth Avenue in Manhattan and four Shia mosques and schools in New York, California, Maryland, and Texas.

While U.S. sanctions on the Alavi Foundation, announced in 2009, received little notice, the government’s charges are disturbing. They include control of Alavi by the Tehran dictatorship through its diplomats at the United Nations, and transfer of income from the office building at 650 Fifth Avenue to Bank Melli, the Iranian national financial institution. Bank Melli had been designated a “Weapons of Mass Destruction proliferator” by the U.S. Treasury Department. Under Secretary for Terrorism and Financial Intelligence Stuart Levey noted, “The international community has recognized the proliferation risks posed by Iran’s Bank Melli.” In late 2009, the Alavi Foundation’s last head, Farshid Jahedi, pled guilty to two felony counts of obstruction of justice for destroying documents about the Alavi-Melli relationship that had been subpoenaed in the investigation, which continues. Jahedi was sentenced on April 29 to three months’ imprisonment, six months’ supervised release, and a $3,000 fine.

Hossein Mahallati was the subject of an unsuccessful federal inquiry in 1992 regarding an alleged conspiracy to export biological warfare materials to Iran. His predecessor as Alavi director, Manoucher Shafie, who managed the foundation’s transition from serving the shah’s government to that of Ayatollah Khomeini, was charged with conspiring to export prohibited U.S. technology to Iran. Neither was prosecuted.

Hossein Mahallati remains an enthusiastic supporter of Rauf’s Ground Zero enterprise, especially since an Egyptian property developer, Sharif El-Gamal, who appears to be the real leader of the effort, using Rauf as his public face, put up $4.85 million in cash to purchase the location. El-Gamal is chief executive officer of Soho Properties, Inc., a commercial real estate investment firm he founded in 2003. His partner is Nour Mousa, another guiding figure in the Ground Zero mosque effort and the nephew of Amr Moussa, head of the Arab League. Amr Moussa was the first major Arab leader to go to Gaza and affirm support for Hamas, in mid-June, after the recent blockade-running assault.

El-Gamal has kept a low profile in the dispute over the appearance of an Islamic institution near Ground Zero, although last week he appeared before a hearing of the New York City Landmarks Preservation Commission to announce that Cordoba House will now be known as Park51. He and Rauf have both taken to downplaying the religious character of the proposal, preferring that the building be called a “community center.”

So far, then, the Ground Zero Islamic facility rests on a support network linked to the anti-Jewish Mahathir and the Perdana-supported Gaza raiders, some notable servants of the Iranian clerical dictatorship, and an Egyptian property developer associated with the pro-Hamas chief of the Arab League.

But the questionable aspects of the Ground Zero Islamic project do not end there. Feisal Abdul Rauf’s wife, Daisy Khan, executive director of ASMA, has been one of the most assiduous promoters of the lower Manhattan mega-mosque. She spoke on July 6 to the Chautauqua Institution, celebrating the double heritage she claims: “The first, the American faith-based social activism, a legacy that included the abolitionists, women’s suffrage movement, and the civil rights movement. Second, I have inherited the tradition of my faith, a faith that has inspired positive social change for over 1,400 years.”

Rauf’s wife failed to mention another feature of her background: She is the niece of Dr. Farooq Khan, formerly a leader of the Westbury Mosque on Long Island, which is a center for Islamic radicals and links on its website to the paramilitary Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA), the front on American soil for the Pakistani jihadist Jamaat e-Islami.

Lazio and King are right, and Cuomo and Bloomberg are wrong. Aside from the matter of sensitivity to the families of the 9/11 victims and other Manhattanites who live near Ground Zero, if the friends and fans of Feisal Abdul Rauf believe his mosque plan is entirely above board, they should be the first to encourage full public disclosure of its backing and finances.

Stephen Schwartz, a frequent contributor, is the author of The Two Faces of Islam.


2010/07/23

More Facebook Stealth Jihad? Was Palin’s Anti-9/11 Mosque Note Censored?

Source: NewsRealBlog

by David Swindle

The 9/11 Mosque is Islam's attempt to tower over us. But apparently such obvious sentiments are intolerable on the world's biggest social networking site.

How many more pro-Jihad pinpricks can we take before it’s too much?

Ben Smith of Politico reports that Sarah Palin’s admirable Facebook Note challenging the 9/11 Mosque has mysteriously vanished:

Sarah Palin’s attack on a mosque two blocks from the site of the World Trade Center vanished from Facebook amid an online campaign to brand it “hate speech.”

Her note, which was reposted soon after a reporter’s inquiry Thursday morning, questioned the views of the builders of a planned moque and community center on the “hallowed ground” and called the plan a “tragic mistake.”

Neither Facebook nor Palin’s camp was immediately sure what happened, but automated systems for reporting abuse have been used effectively in the past to take aim at political speech. Palin’s note now contains a footnote saying the original was “somehow unintentionally deleted by mistake or technical glitch.”

This certainly isn’t the first questionable pro-Jihad move we’ve seen from Facebook. See here, here, here, here, and especially Robert Spencer’s FrontPage article here.

My prediction: eventually these troubling signs are going to come to a head with a Facebook act or decision  so egregious that it’ll cause a serious exodus of users. And all the better. Facebook will not take a stand against Jihad and anti-Semitism unless its bottom line is in jeopardy.

2010/07/22

Ground Zero Mosque Goes Radioactive

Source: Big Peace

By Frank Gaffney

The latest assault of the stealth jihadists has suddenly gone national.  And so has the push-back by freedom-loving Americans.

With help from two of our country’s most prominent leaders – former Alaska Governor Sarah Palin and former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich – Americans are being alerted to a truly horrifying prospect:  The site where nearly 3,000 of our countrymen were murdered on September 11, 2001 is at risk of being defiled by a 13-story, $100 million megamosque.

More importantly, people across the Nation are learning about the true purpose of this complex:  It is intended to be a symbol of America’s defeat on 9/11 – and a beachhead for the toxic program that animated the perpetrators of that murderous attack, the program authoritative Islam calls “Shariah.”

A new 1-minute video just released by the Center for Security Policy shows how the Ground Zero mosque would fit the pattern of other mosques built elsewhere as permanent manifestations of Shariah’s triumph over its enemies.  The ad powerfully describes how our acquiescence to this initiative will be seen by the jihadists as proof not of our “religious tolerance,” but of what it is:  Our submission to Shariah.

Unfortunately, such a perception will only have the effect of inducing Shariah’s adherents to redouble their efforts to kill, terrorize and use more stealthy means – like the Ground Zero Mosque – to achieve the ultimate triumph over us, replacing our Constitution with the barbaric, totalitarian law of Saudi Arabia and Iran.

Newt Gingrich put it so well:  “America is experiencing an Islamist cultural-political offensive designed to undermine and destroy our civilization.  Sadly, too many of our elites are the willing apologists for those who would destroy them if they could.

“No mosque. No self deception. No surrender. The time to take a stand is now – at this site on this issue.”

Amen.

Joe Klein’s Upside-Down View Of Evil

Source: NewsRealBlog

by Joseph Klein

Cordoba Center Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf

After childishly mocking Sarah Palin’s use of the term “refudiate” in her appeal to “peace-loving Muslims” to oppose the building of a huge mosque and community center within the vicinity of Ground Zero, Time Magazine’s Joe Klein turns serious in calling Palin’s position “totally evil.”

Joe, I am afraid you have it all wrong as usual. You see, total evil was committed on 9/11, and many of us who lived through it and experienced the horror first-hand share Ms. Palin’s concerns. Some don’t, of course, and that is OK.  But to cheapen the word “evil” and turn it into something you disagree with is far worse an abuse of language than “refudiate.”

Joe Klein just couldn’t help himself in his latest rant against Sarah Palin on the Swampland blog:

If there ever was a place to demonstrate this country’s core value of religious tolerance, it is at the site of the World Trade Center. As regular readers know, I am an intensely proud New Yorker–from the outer boroughs, even–and Palin’s intolerance runs counter to my all-American value system
Joe Klein and the other defenders of the Cordoba House, as the proposed mosque and community center complex is called, confuse skepticism with intolerance.  They believe that building this massive $100 million, 13-story complex in the vicinity of Ground Zero will show how enlightened we are  in bridging the divide with so-called “moderate” Muslims who had nothing to do with 9/11 andwho just want to pray in peace.

Here’s a new flash for Joe Klein. Muslims have more freedom today to assemble and pray as they wish in this country than they would in many Muslim-majority countries. And that freedom includes the center of diversity, New York.  However, we have a right to question the bona fides of the backers of this particular complex, given its huge size and its proximity to what many Americans consider to be a sacred site for remembering those who perished on 9/11.

If Klein were doing his homework as a journalist rather than lecturing us about tolerance, he would want answers to such questions as the following:

  1. Where is the funding for the Cordoba House coming from?  Has any of it come from Islamic countries (and, if so, which ones) or from Islamic organizations with ties to the radical Muslim Brotherhood? Are there any strings attached to the funding?
  2. What did the leader of the Cordoba House initiative, Feisal Abdul Rauf, mean when he said shortly after 9/11 that the attacks were “a reaction against the U.S. government politically” and that the U.S. “policies were an accessory to the crime that happened?”  Rauf even expressed skepticism as to whether Muslims were involved in the 9/11 attacks:  ”Some people say it was Muslims who attacked on 9/11,” he declared. How do these sentiments square with the good faith intention to heal the wounds and bridge the divide that Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan profess?
  3. Does Rauf’s belief that the “American political structure is Shariah-compliant”  mean that he will expect special accommodations for the community center that will be an integral part of the Cordoba House complex? For example, will the swimming pool be segregated by gender? It looks that way given Rauf’s quip that “one young American Jewish woman came up to me recently and said she would be so pleased if she could attend a pool and gym that was segregated for men and women!”

Joe Klein, along with his politically correct multicultural pals, may think that healthy skepticism in the face of such unanswered questions is “totally evil.” Most Americans with any common sense, who are truly concerned about protecting  their “all-American value system,” would think otherwise.

2010/07/21

Sarah Palin Rightly Rejects Ground Zero Mosque; Bloomberg and Aide Reject Her. And Sanity

I knew in some way the Racist Card would be played into all of this. It seems every time the left, progressives and/or liberals are on the losing end of a debate, they always and I mean always, will call you out as being a racist. What part of the Islamic Terrorism that murdered thousands of our citizens, in the very spot this mosque will be built, do the people like Bloomberg not get?
Walt

Source: NewsRealBlog

by Lori Ziganto

On Sunday Sarah Palin, exhibiting common sense and courage of her convictions, called for a rejection of the planned mosque at Ground Zero. The planned mosque has been causing controversy, controversy that was easily foreseen by anyone with a brain and, you know, an ounce of true as opposed to feigned sensitivity. Apparently, this does not include a New York City Community Board nor Mayor Bloomberg.

Nearly two months ago, Manhattan Community Board 1 voted to approve the plans for a mosque to be built at ground zero. The vote was 29 to 1 in favor, although 10 chose to “vote present” by abstaining. Suffice it to say, the public had a few things to say about it.

The alleged purpose of the mosque was to spread “healing.” The actual result? Not so much. So, you’d think that the plans would have been scrapped once that was crystal clear. But, nope. Of course not. Because it’s always sensitivity for me, but not for thee, to those on the Left. Enter Sarah Palin, who once again is displaying her uncanny ability of creating a national dialogue via social media postings.  But she’s just a dum-dum, right? She tweeted this on Sunday:

“Peace-seeking Muslims, pls understand, Ground Zero mosque is UNNECESSARY provocation; it stabs hearts. Pls reject it in interest of healing,” she tweeted Sunday.

Makes sense, doesn’t it? Not if you are an aide in Nanny Mayor Bloomberg’s office.

While a recent poll showed a majority of New Yorkers oppose the plan to build the mosque built near Ground Zero, an aide in Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s City Hall hit back at Palin, first tweeting “@SarahPalinUSA mind your business.”

The aide, policy hand Andrea Batista Schlesinger, followed that up with:

“@SarahPalinUSA whose hearts? Racist hearts?”

Schlesinger deleted both tweets shortly after posting them.

“Andrea was only speaking for herself, and she has the right to her own opinions,” said Bloomberg spokesman Stu Loeser.

Schlesinger posted threee new tweets Sunday evening, explaining why she wrote, and took down, her Palin response:

“Deleted post bc I regretted curt response. But fact is, I believe this city belongs to everyone – and no one more than another”

“Unlike @SarahPalinUSA, I was born here grew up here. Was showing off to a visitor today – look at how beautiful and diverse my city is.”

“I felt pain of 9/11, the trauma. I got through it by believing in my city. Not through fear and hate.”

Sigh. Firstly, “mind your business” is hilariously ironic coming from Bloomberg’s administration. An administration that is striving to stick it’s nanny nose in every aspect of everyone’s business, down to how much salt they use. Furthermore, this was, of course, followed by the good old “you haters! So Racist ™ !” narrative. Not surprising, coming from an aide for Mayor Bloomberg. Remember, when the car bomb was found it Times Square, Mayor Bloomberg went on air and accused “somebody with a political agenda that doesn’t like the health care bill or something” as the perpetrator. Then, when even he could no longer deny the obvious and was forced to admit that it was an attempted terrorist attack, he fretted about a “backlash” against Muslims. His first thought was that Americans are racist and bullies. I’ve always said that everyone has the right to be stupid, but Mayor Bloomberg totally abuses the privilege.

After Palin’s tweet, a fracas on Twitter ensued, with the most prevalent, and intellectually dishonest straw man being “It’s not at Ground Zero! Stop discriminating, you discriminator-y wing nuts!” Only, it is at Ground Zero and only someone suffering from acute moral relativism and cognitive dissonance wouldn’t recognize that fact. The mosque is to be built at the site of the destroyed Burlington Coat Factory. The building was destroyed by fuselage from one of the planes that were purposely flown into the World Trade Center, by Islamic terrorists, killing nearly 3,000 innocent people on September 11, 2001.

There is another fact conveniently overlooked by those who wish to sanctimoniously condemn others as haters while patting themselves on the back for being oh-so-faux-tolerant, even at the expense of human decency. In Islam, a religion that demands the conquering and conversion of those it deems to be infidels, “mosques of war” are often built at the sites of odiously perceived victories over infidels. Even if this particular mosque isn’t being built for that reason, to the jihadists that is exactly what it will be. A shrine of conquer and honor. Where almost 3,000 innocent ‘infidels” were killed.

Mayor Bloomberg supports this. Until now, it has remained primarily a local New York City issue. Sarah Palin, once again bravely speaking her mind without fear of being not politically correct,  has hopefully brought this to the forefront nationally. This mosque must not be built. We must stop cowering in fear of the politically correct and we must stop condoning blatant provocations as a form of deluded tolerance and appeasement. Instead of busily demonizing American citizens, apologizing to those who wish to kill us, and frantically avoiding perceived “profiling” out of the insane fear of looking non-politically correct, Nanny Bloomberg can learn from the Mama Grizzly. Let’s hope that he does.

—–

Follow Lori  on Twitter and read more of her work at Snark and Boobs, iOwntheWorld , Right Wing News and Red State.

2010/07/18

Ground Zero: An Islamic Victory?

Every time I see an article about this Mosque being built on Hallow Grounds by the very group of people who murdered thousands of our fellow Americans it brings back a passage of B. Hussein Obama’s speech to the Muslim World soon after he became elected as President of The United States Of America. Walt

That quote was this:

“Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance. We see it in the history of Andalusia and Cordoba during the Inquisition”

Barack Hussein Obama June 4, 2009 Cairo Egypt

Source: NewsRealBlog

by Kathy Barkulis

What do Muslims do when they conquer their enemies?  They build a mosque at the site of their destruction.  It is the ultimate symbol of their victory, and now they are planning to do it in New York.

When Muslim forces first conquered Spain in the 8th century they took over the Cordoba Cathedral and built The Great Mosque of Cordoba in tribute to their bloody violence.  They did the same in Turkey and Jerusalem. Ironically, they will be calling their symbol of victory at Ground Zero the Cordoba House, which will contain a mosque as well as “an institute for cultural understanding.”   Does Mayor Bloomberg understand the history of Muslim conquerors, and the meaning behind their desire to build at Ground Zero?  Do the leaders in the city council understand anything other than the cowardly submission to political correctness? I bet those council members would deny homeowners the ability to alter the exterior of their apartment buildings, but build a mosque next to Ground Zero? No problem.

To the developers of the mosque, building at Ground Zero is like Ted Bundy taking underpants from his victims and sleeping with them, or Jeffrey Dahmer keeping skulls from his victims in his refrigerator. It is a macabre way of relishing your victory, and it is exactly what the developers of this mosque are doing.  The calculated deception of their intentions is inherent within Islamic culture. Deception is accepted in the Koran to advance the supremacy of Islam.

Faisal Abdul Rauf, a master of deception, and the developer of the $100 million mosque to be built 600 feet from Ground Zero, has Muslim Brotherhood ties and refuses to divulge where the money came from to buy the land and build his shrine. Mayor Bloomberg says it’s “un-American” to investigate the money trail, even though that is exactly how we track down suspected terrorists in this country. He has no problem mandating what kind of fat content should be allowed in New Yorkers’ food, or where they smoke their cigarettes, but he has a big problem investigating a phony “moderate” Muslim before he lets him build a memento of Islamic “victory” over America. Make no mistake about the true intentions of Rauf, which is to advance Sharia Law in America. The Cordoba Mosque is the beginning of this endeavor.

So I ask, is the entire country going to fold under the political correctness of Mayor Bloomberg and council members who obviously have already forgotten the destruction and violence of September 11th? Is there a more sinister reason that Mayor Bloomberg and the mainstream media are not as concerned as most Americans are about this mosque?  After all, Saudi money is all over New York, including within the media, and I don’t trust any of our elected leaders or the media to do the right thing anymore.

There is one thing I do know. New Yorkers must unite against this insanity.  First and foremost, it is their city, their loved ones, and their security that is at stake.  But America is our country, and the rest of us must stand with New Yorker’s and encourage them to fight this atrocity before it happens.

2010/07/17

Ground Zero Mosque – Daisy, Daisy, Give Us Your Answer Do…

Source: Family Security Matters

By The Family Security Matters Editor

A TV advertisement, which argues against the Ground Zero Mosque, has been refused an airing by two major American TV networks. The video can be seen below:

Entitled “Kill the Ground Zero Mosque”, the advertisement is the handiwork of a group called “The National Republican Trust Political Action Committee”, run by Scott L. Wheeler. The YouTube version of the advertisement has been seen by 100,000 people.

However, CBS and NBC have refused to show the advertisement on their TV networks.

The video of the commercial could be seen as emotive, but the issue of the Ground Zero Mosque has been emotive. The authorities – including the bizarre “Community Council” that approved the mosque plans – are either singularly lacking realistic emotions or they have no respect for the wounded emotions of those who had lost relatives on 9/11.

Daisy Khan is the Executive Director of the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), the group which plans to construct a mosque and 13-story Islamic center at the Burlington Coat Factory on Park Place. This building is so close to Ground Zero that the fuselage of one of the planes that flew into the Twin Towers fell onto the building and damaged it.

Daisy Khan said: “For us, it’s a symbol, a platform that will give voice to the silent majority of Muslims who suffer at the hands of extremists. A center will show that Muslims will be part of rebuilding lower Manhattan.”

If Daisy Khan and her husband really cared about the silent majority of Muslims who “suffer at the hands of extremists” then they would have signed the Freedom Pledge that was sent to them by the group “Former Muslims United” (FMU), which  includes apostates Amil Imani, Nonie Darwish, Mohammed Asghar, Ibn Warraq and Wafa Sultan.

In essence, the Freedom Pledge is about ensuring that Muslim groups in America support the democratic rights of Muslims to leave their faith without receiving any threats from other Muslims. As reported on Family Security Matters by Alyssa A. Lappen, Daisy Khan and her husband Feisal Abdul Rauf refused to sign the pledge.

Daisy Khan’s claim that the Ground Zero Mosque will give “voice to the silent majority of Muslims who suffer at the hands of extremists” becomes more curious. She does not seem to believe that Muslims who suffer at the hands of extremist Muslims should be defended or protected – if she had, she and her husband would have signed the Freedom Pledge.

Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer were behind projects to put banner advertisements onto buses. These buses carried the message:  “Fatwa on your head? Is your family or community threatening you? Got Questions? Get Answers.”

In May this year, 30 buses in New York City carried the posters. Daisy Khan appears to have been offended by these posters. She has called Pamela Geller “ignorant…. of who our community is” and has denied that in New York or in any other American city that anyone would be harmed or threatened for leaving Islam. Khan said: “It is always hurtful when your entire community is always judged on the actions of a few.”

Khan said she believes in free speech but believes the advertisements are divisive, and along with their creator, are tasteless. “I think Pamela should take the time to find out there are 1.5 billion Muslims, the majority of whom have nothing to do with extremism.”

To quote Queen Gertrude in Hamlet, Act 3, scene 2: “The lady doth protest too much, methinks.”

The statement made elsewhere by Daisy Khan in which she claims “extremists” have caused the “silent majority of Muslims” to suffer seems to have another meaning. The extremists have caused Muslims to suffer because ordinary Muslims have been targeted by non-Muslims, who then label all Muslims. Her claims that no Muslims in America would be at risk for leaving Islam seems to be based upon ignorance, denial or political dishonesty. Is this “taqiyya”?

In this edition of Family Security Matters, we have a story about Somalis arriving in large numbers in America. An upcoming link is something that you should follow only if you have a very strong stomach. I cannot watch the entire video, though I have seen the start, the middle and the end. Mansur Mohamed was a Muslim in Somalia who decided to change his religion from Islam to Christianity. In 2008, he was decapitated, following edicts written in the Koran and the Hadiths (see the documentation in Alyssa A. Lappen’s article). The video of Mansur’s beheading for becoming an apostate is here. It is barbaric. It is ghastly, but it is still “Islamic”, in the most literal sense. The prophet of Islam himself said that apostates should be killed.

Officially, as a direct consequence of Islamic tradition set out by the prophet Mohammed, the death penalty is a legal punishment for Muslim apostates in Iran, Saudi Arabia, Afghanistan, in 12 states in the north of Nigeria, in Yemen, Qatar, Sudan and Mauritania.

Most of these countries signed the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights, where Article 18 states:

  • Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief in teaching, practice, worship and observance.

The Hadith of Sahih Bukhari states (Volume 9, Book 84, Number 57):

according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.'”

And again in Bukhari’s collection of Hadiths, Volume 9, Book 83, Number 17:

Allah’s Apostle said, “The blood of a Muslim who confesses that none has the right to be worshipped but Allah and that I am His Apostle, cannot be shed except in three cases: In Qisas for murder, a married person who commits illegal sexual intercourse and the one who reverts from Islam (apostate) and leaves the Muslims.”

Somalis are arriving in larger numbers than ever before, coming from a culture where Sharia law has been exercised in regions controlled by Sharia councils in 2006, and more recently by regions under the control of Al Shabaab. If Daisy Khan really does not think that any Muslim will be killed for leaving their faith in any American city, she is ignoring existing examples from Europe which has had a far larger concentration of Muslim immigrants, and where so-called honor killings related to Islam have happened in almost every European nation.

And in North America, honor killings appear to be getting worse. Last month the father and brother of a young Canadian woman were given life sentences for her murder, with no parole for 18 years. In December 2007, 16-year old Aqsa Parvez was strangled to death in her family home at Mississauga. Muhammed Parvez, aged 57 and her 26-year old brother Waqas, were arrested. They admitted killing Aqsa, for the “crime” of being too “Western”.

An Egyptian man called Yaser Abdel-Said who was living in Texas is still wanted by the FBI for the murder of his two daughters, Amina and Sarah, at their home in Irvine. The girls were murdered apparently for being too “Western” in their outlook.

The case of Riqfa Barry also involved alleged threats of death from her family against a young girl in Florida who converted to Christianity from Islam.

Daisy Khan should accept that people really are concerned about what Islam will bring into America. Denying that killing happens – when it does, throughout the Muslim world – is NOT an honest response to a problem. It is the response of a politician, not the response of a “spiritually honest” person.

Perhaps – after condemning the bus advertisement campaign of Pamela Geller and Robert Spencer – Daisy Khan could at least make a statement denouncing aspects of sharia law that call for the murder of apostates from Islam.

She and her husband, Feisal Abdul Rauf, could also do the decent thing and reassure New Yorkers by signing the Freedom Pledge. Failure to do so only proves that the mosque leaders have an agenda only to “advance” Islam, and that they have no respect for the feelings and sensitivities of non-Muslims.

If a Ground Zero Mosque goes ahead, even though it is an obvious affront and insult to the lives of those who lives were destroyed on 9/11, it is vitally important that those who are building such a mosque are honest, and do not engage in religious “politics”. If they believe that they are providing some spiritual healing to the region, they must act accordingly, and not dissemble and act as political fronts. They should also be entirely clear as to the exact sources of their funds.

Anything less than full financial disclosure and a complete repudiation of any sharia laws that contradict the basic rights of Americans (as contained in the Constitution and the Bill of Rights) will show that Daisy Khan and Feisal Abdul Rauf’s intentions with this Ground Zero Mosque are not honorable, and certainly not American.

It is a simple question – “Do you uphold the values of the American Constitution and its definitions of freedom of religious conscience over the capital punishments of Sharia law?”

Daisy Khan and Feisal Abdul Rauf have hitherto avoided answering this important question or gone on the offensive and attacked those who question their intentions.

If ASMA cannot reassure its critics that it cherishes Americanism above the more barbaric practices of Sharia law, every decent American should campaign to have the Ground Zero Mosque banned.

The Editor, FamilySecurityMatters.org

2010/07/15

Let’s roll! Your chance to stop Ground Zero mosque

Source: WND

Firefighter who lost 93 friends in 9/11 attacks fights to preserve ‘landmark’

By Chelsea Schilling
© 2010 WorldNetDaily

Tim Brown at November 2009 press conference by 911 Never Forget Coalition

A former firefighter and Sept. 11 first responder is urging New York City officials to block construction of a 13-story Islamic mosque to be built just steps from Ground Zero where Muslim terrorists murdered nearly 100 of his personal friends in the name of Allah.

Tim Brown, who survived the Twin Towers’ collapse, is represented by the constitutional law firm American Center for Law and Justice as he urges New York City officials to landmark the site of the planned Islamic mosque.

The ACLJ attended a July 13 hearing before the Landmarks Preservation Commission, a New York City agency responsible for identifying and designating city landmarks. The commission has been asked to designate the current building near Ground Zero as a landmark. The hearing record has been left open for one week to allow for written public comment.

The ACLJ is asking Americans to add their names to its committee to stop the Ground Zero mosque. At the time of this report, the petition had been signed by more than 4,000 people.

Atlas Shrugs blogger Pamela Geller noted that Council on American-Islamic Relations leader Zead Ramadan attended this week’s hearing and testified for the mosque, claiming opposition to the mosque is due to “Islamophobia.”

But ACLJ Deputy Political Director Sam Nunberg told the commission, “It would be a travesty to permit this building to be removed. It would be like removing the sunken ships from Pearl Harbor in order to erect a memorial for the Japanese Kamikazes killed in the surprise attack of U.S. troops.”

Brown, former member of the elite Mayor’s Emergency Response Team, said he was eating breakfast on the third floor of Seven World Trade Center when the first plane hit.

In his 2002 testimony, Brown said at one point he went outside to look at One World Trade Center.


Wreckage from plane that hit the twin towers fell on the same building that may serve as an Islamic cultural center.

“The whole plaza area was burning debris, plane parts and bodies; a lot of fire in the plaza area,” he said.

Brown instantly responded to the command post in the lobby of One World Trade Center.

He described a somber moment with two fellow firefighters, Terry Hatton and Chris Blackwell, in which he saw them for the last time.

“I gave them both hugs. Terry said to me, ‘I love you, brother. It might be the last time I see you.’ Then he went in the stairwell,” Brown recalled. “Then Chris Blackwell looked at me and said, ‘This isn’t good, Tim.’

“That was the last I saw him also.”

After the second plane struck, Brown was directed to Tower Two. He exited the building to gather an emergency medical services crew and re-entered the lobby.

“[W]e heard the roar above us,” he said. “I know I never looked up. I don’t think anybody ever looked up. But there was no question what it was. It was a very tremendous sound … So we just turned and ran for our lives. Now it was the flight/fright thing, because everybody knew we were all going to die. …

“Everything started blowing toward us that wasn’t nailed down. You could not any longer run into the wind because you were getting pummeled by stuff. You couldn’t see anybody to communicate.

“You couldn’t hear anything. It was becoming our grave.”

Brown escaped death by taking cover in the doorway of the Tall Ships Restaurant at the World Trade Center Marriott Hotel between the towers. He climbed through the debris and assisted teams of rescue workers as he searched for trapped victims.

In a May interview with Fox News, Brown said he lost 93 of his friends in the terrorist attack.

Now he is speaking out against construction of the new Islamic mosque that plans to open its doors Sept. 11, 2011 – on the 10th anniversary of that fateful day.

“I don’t understand the need to put it there,” he said.

Formerly known as the Cordoba House and renamed Park51, the mosque is the creation of the American Society for Muslim Advancement. As WND reported, the building at Park Place, just blocks north of the former World Trade Center site, was the site of a Burlington Coat Factory until a plane’s landing-gear assembly crashed through the roof when 19 Muslim terrorists hijacked airliners and flew them into the towers.


Aerial photo of World Trade Center Ground Zero following Sept. 11 attacks. Red square to right of Ground Zero marks former Burlington Coat Factory and proposed location of the 13-story mosque.

The building was purchased last July by real-estate company Soho Properties, a business run by Muslims. Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, Kuwait-born founder of the Muslim society, was an investor in that transaction.

Rauf has announced his plans to turn the building into a complete Islamic cultural center, with a mosque, a museum, “merchandising options” and room for seminars to reconcile religions, “to counteract the backlash against Muslims in general,” Speigel reported. The project may cost as much as $150 million. Plans for the facility also include a 500-seat performing-arts theater, fitness center, swimming pool, library, public conference rooms, basketball courts and restaurants, according to the Tribeca Tribune.


The old Burlington Coat Factory building, site of proposed Ground Zero mosque

But Brown wants to know where the funding for the project is coming from. In his appearance on Fox News, he personally asked Imam Rauf who is paying for the mosque.

Rauf responded, “It came from members of our community.”

Brown replied, “I know. You said that. But that does not answer our question. Is the money from Shariah-compliant financing?”

Rauf did not answer Brown’s question. Instead, he responded by defending Shariah financing, saying, “All Shariah is ultimately is about God’s law, about doing things which are about justice to everybody. This is about building trust.”

As WND reported, Rauf has made a variety of controversial statements, including the following:

  • Rauf asserted that the Quran “certainly doesn’t counsel terrorism, murder or mayhem,” said special agent James Margolin, spokesman for the FBI New York office. And he said terrorists have misinterpreted the Quranic term “jihad” to mean violent, or armed, struggle against nonbelievers. Rauf claims it means internal struggle.
  • The Sydney Morning Herald reported Rauf said the U.S. and the West must acknowledge the harm they’ve done to Muslims before terrorism can end. He said the West must understand the terrorists’ point of view – and he blamed Christians for starting mass attacks on civilians. “The Islamic method of waging war is not to kill innocent civilians. But it was Christians in World War II who bombed civilians in Dresden and Hiroshima, neither of which were military targets,” he said.
  • In an interview with BeliefNet on Islam and America, a reporter asked Rauf, “Some Islamic charities are being investigated for terrorist ties. Have you seen what you consider to be reputable Islamic charities being financially damaged?” Rauf responded, “We believe that a certain portion of every charity has been legitimate. To say that you have connections with terrorism is a very gray area. It’s like the accusation that Saddam Hussein had links to Osama bin Laden. Well, America had links to Osama bin Laden – does that mean that America is a terrorist country or has ties to terrorism?”
  • The New York Times reported Rauf said he believes “Islamic terrorists do not come from another moral universe – that they arise from oppressive societies that he feels Washington had a hand in creating.”

As WND reported, Rauf recently refused during a live radio interview to condemn violent jihad groups as terrorists. He repeatedly refused on-air to affirm the U.S. designation of Hamas as a terrorist organization or call the Muslim Brotherhood extremists.

WND also reported a scholar and charity head appointed to President Obama’s White House Fellowships Commission is closely tied to Rauf and the Islamic center project.

Meanwhile, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has said he objects to the idea of an Islamic mosque at the site of Ground Zero.

Likewise, former U.S. representative and Republican candidate for New York governor Rick Lazio has requested an investigation into the project’s funding sources. In the following video posted on YouTube, Brown publicly thanked Lazio for standing with him in his effort to block the mosque construction at Ground Zero:

In June, a crowd estimated at between 5,000 and 10,000 people thronged the site of the future mosque in protest of the plans.

Now the Landmarks Preservation Commission is expected to determine whether to block the building plans and designate the building as a landmark. A decision could come as early as next month.

The ACLJ says it is preparing court action and will seek an injunction, if necessary, to prevent a rushed procedural violation that would sidestep the rules and “disrespect the memory of the Sept. 11 victims.”

The legal group notes that the commissioners have landmarked some 22,000 buildings in the city – including one at 18 West 11th St. where Bill Ayers’ terrorist group, Weather Underground, was building bombs when one detonated.

“If the commission felt it appropriate to landmark that building, the location under debate now surely deserves landmark status due to the fact that a wheel from Sept. 11 ringleader Mohammed Atta’s hijacked American Airlines Flight 11 [e]mbedded in the building itself,” the ACLJ website states.

ACLJ chief counsel Jay Sekulow said in a statement today, “The fact is that this is not the location to build an Islamic mosque. This is sacred ground, and for many family and friends of the Sept. 11 victims building an Islamic mosque on this site would be offensive.”

He added, “We’ve heard from thousands of Americans – and many New Yorkers – who understand that such a move would be a tragic mistake. We will continue to pursue all avenues to ensure that this mosque is not built near Ground Zero.”

(Editor’s note: Concerned individuals may e-mail Robert Tierney, chair of the Landmarks Preservation Commission, or send a letter to:

Landmarks Preservation Commission
Municipal Building
1 Centre St., 9th floor
New York City, N.Y. 10007)

2010/07/14

Opponents Pack Hearing on Mosque Near Ground Zero

Source: Newsmax

Dozens of opponents and some supporters of a mosque planned near ground zero attended a raucous hearing Tuesday about whether the building where the Muslim place of worship would be created warrants designation as a city landmark and should be protected from development.

Republican gubernatorial candidate Rick Lazio, who has sought an investigation into the funding of the mosque, was among the witnesses who testified in support of giving the building landmark status, which could complicate plans by Muslim groups to develop a community center and mosque there.

After noting the lower Manhattan building’s history and architectural significance, Lazio said it also warranted landmark designation because on Sept. 11, 2001, it was struck by airplane debris from the terror attacks against the nearby World Trade Center. That connection to the attacks, he said, made it “a place of deep historical significance and a reminder of just what happened on New York’s darkest day.”

Lazio has called on state Attorney General Andrew Cuomo, his Democratic opponent in the governor’s race, to investigate the funding of the project. On Tuesday, he repeated that request and said the pace of the landmark designation process should be slowed to allow time to thoroughly investigate the matter.

Nearly 100 people attended the hearing at a college campus on the Upper East Side of Manhattan. Fifty-six people testified at the hearing, which turned contentious at times, with some speakers drowned out by shouts from the audience and with one man escorted out by campus security.

“To deprive this building of landmark status is to allow for a citadel of Islamic supremacy to be erected in its place,” said Andrea Quinn, a freelance audio technician from Queens who said she had worked with people at the World Trade Center.

But Rafiq Kathwari, who described himself as a moderate Muslim, said the landmark discussion had been hijacked.

“This has been made by a very vocal minority into an issue of bigotry,” said Kathwari, as he held up his U.S. passport and was nearly drowned out by shouts from the crowd. “I’m standing in a hall in which I feel ashamed to be an American.”

The mosque and the related community center are a project of several groups, including the American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative, which promotes cross-cultural understanding between Islam and the West. Cordoba’s director, Imam Faisel Rauf, has refused to disclose the sources of funding for the mosque.

But Sharif El-Gamal, the CEO of the company that owns the property, said that the project’s backers were committed to transparency and were working to set up a nonprofit organization.

“We are going to go through a capital campaign,” which will consist of equity debt, bonds, grants and fundraising from the grass roots, he said. They were committed to working with the attorney general’s Charities Bureau, which supervises charitable organizations and works to protect donors, he said.

El-Gamal testified at the hearing, saying they were opposed to designating the building a landmark because it does not meet the requirements of historical significance.

“This is not the Woolworth building, this is not the Chrysler building,” he said later in an interview.

The five-story building on Park Place, a few blocks north of Wall Street, was completed between 1857 and 1858 and is an Italian Renaissance-inspired palazzo. It formerly housed a department store, which closed after the building was damaged on Sept. 11. Muslim prayer service is held at the building at least one day a week.

Landmark status could require the owners to obtain the approval of the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission before making significant changes. It’s unlikely that, if granted such status, the building could be demolished.

The city’s 11-member Landmarks Preservation Commission is expected to vote later this summer on whether the building meets the standards of architectural, cultural and historic characteristics to qualify it for landmark status.
© Copyright 2010 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.

2010/07/12

The Two Faces of the Ground Zero Mosque

Source: Middle East Forum

by Raymond Ibrahim

Depending on whether Islamists address Americans or fellow Muslims, the same exact words they use often relay diametrically opposed meanings. One example: when Americans hear Muslims evoke “justice,” the former envision Western-style justice, whereas Muslims naturally have Sharia law justice in mind.

Islamists obviously use this to their advantage: when addressing the West, Osama bin Laden bemoans the “justice of our causes, particularly Palestine”; yet, when addressing Muslims, his notion of justice far transcends territorial disputes and becomes unintelligible from a Western perspective: “Battle, animosity, and hatred—directed from the Muslim to the infidel—is the foundation of our religion. And we consider this a justice and kindness to them. The West perceives fighting, enmity, and hatred all for the sake of the religion [i.e., Islam] as unjust, hostile, and evil. But who’s understanding is right—our notions of justice and righteousness, or theirs?” (Al Qaeda Reader, p. 43).

Of course, that Osama bin Laden—slayer of 3,000 Americans and avowed enemy to the rest—exhibits two faces, one to Americans another to Muslims, is not surprising. Yet the reader may well be surprised to discover that the controversial Cordoba Initiative, which plans on manifesting itself as the largest American mosque, situated atop Ground Zero—that is, atop the carnage caused by none other than bin Laden—also has two faces, conveying one thing to Americans, quite another to Muslims.

The very name of the initiative itself, “Cordoba,” offers different connotations to different people: In the West, the Andalusian city of Cordoba is regularly touted as the model of medieval Muslim progressiveness and tolerance for Christians and Jews. To many Americans, then, the choice to name the mosque “Cordoba” is suggestive of rapprochement and interfaith dialogue; atop the rubble of 9/11, it implies “healing”—a new beginning between Muslims and Americans. The Cordoba Initiative’s mission statement certainly suggests as much:

Cordoba Initiative aims to achieve a tipping point in Muslim-West relations within the next decade, bringing back the atmosphere of interfaith tolerance and respect that we have longed for since Muslims, Christians and Jews lived together in harmony and prosperity eight hundred years ago.

Oddly enough, the so-called “tolerant” era of Cordoba supposedly occurred during the caliphate of ‘Abd al-Rahman III (912-961)—well over a thousand years ago. “Eight hundred years ago,” i.e., around 1200, the fanatical Almohids—ideological predecessors of al-Qaeda—were ravaging Cordoba, where “Christians and Jews were given the choice of conversion, exile, or death.” A Freudian slip on the part of the Cordoba Initiative?

At any rate, the true history of Cordoba, not to mention the whole of Andalusia, is far less inspiring than what Western academics portray: the Christian city was conquered by Muslims around 711, its inhabitants slaughtered or enslaved. The original mosque of Cordoba—the namesake of the Ground Zero mosque—was built atop, and partly from the materials of, a Christian church. Modern day Muslims are well aware of all this. Such is the true—and ominous—legacy of Cordoba.

More pointedly, throughout Islam’s history, whenever a region was conquered, one of the first signs of consolidation was/is the erection of a mosque atop the sacred sites of the vanquished: the pagan Ka’ba temple in Arabia was converted into Islam’s holiest site, the mosque of Mecca; the al-Aqsa mosque, Islam’s third holiest site, was built atop Solomon’s temple in Jerusalem; the Umayyad mosque was built atop the Church of St. John the Baptist; and the Hagia Sophia was converted into a mosque upon the conquest of Constantinople.

(Speaking of, in 2006, when the Pope visited the Hagia Sophia in Turkey, there was a risk that the “Islamic world [would go] into paroxysms of fury” if there was “any perception that the pope is trying to re-appropriate a Christian center that fell to Muslims,” for example, if he had dared pray there—this even as Muslims today seek to build a mosque on the rubble of the Twin Towers.)

Such double-standards lead us back to the issue of double-meanings: As for the literal wording of the mosque project, “Cordoba House,” it too offers opposing paradigms of thought: to Westerners, the English word “house” suggests shelter, intimacy—coziness, even; in classical Arabic, however, the word for house, dar, can also mean “region,” and is regularly used in a divisive sense, as in Dar al-Harb, i.e., “infidel region of war.” Thus, to Muslim ears, while “Cordoba” offers allusions of conquest and domination, dar is further suggestive of division and separation (from infidels, a la the doctrine of al-Wala’ wa al-Bara’, for instance).

Words aside, even the mosque’s scheduled opening date—9/11/2011—has two aspects: to Americans, opening the mosque on 9/11 is to proclaim a new beginning with the Muslim world on the ten-year anniversary of the worst terror strikes on American soil; however, it just so happens that Koranic verse 9:111 is one of the loftiest calls for suicidal jihad—believers are exhorted to “kill and be killed”—and is probably the reason al-Qaeda originally chose that date to strike. So while Americans may think the mosque’s planned 9/11 opening is meant to commemorate that date, cryptically speaking, it is an evocation for all out war. A “new beginning,” indeed, but of a very different sort, namely, the propagation of more Islamists and jihadists—mosques are, after all, epicenters of radicalization—on, of all places, soil sacred to America.

Some final thoughts on the history of Cordoba and the ominous parallels it bodes for America: though many Christian regions were conquered by Islam prior to Cordoba, its conquest signified the first time a truly “Western” region was conquered by the sword of Islam. It was also used as a base to launch further attacks into the heart of Europe (until decisively beaten at the Battle of Tours), just as, perhaps, the largest mosque in America will be used as a base to subvert the rest of the United States. And, the sacking of the original Cordoba was facilitated by an insider traitor—a warning to the U.S., which seems to have no end of traitors and willing lackeys.

Such, then, is the dual significance of the Cordoba Initiative: What appears to many Americans as a gesture of peace and interfaith dialogue, is to Muslims allusive of Islamist conquest and consolidation; mosques, which Americans assume are Muslim counterparts to Christian churches—that is, places where altruistic Muslims congregate and pray for world peace and harmony—are symbols of domination and centers of radicalization; the numbers of the opening date, 9/11/11, appear to Americans as commemorative of a new beginning, whereas the Koranic significance of those numbers is suicidal jihad. Of course, the two faces of the Cordoba House should not be surprising considering that the man behind the initiative, Feisal Abdul Rauf, also has two faces.

Going along with the historic analogy, there is one bit of good news: As opposed to the vast majority of onetime Western/Christian nations annexed by Islam, Cordoba, Spain did ultimately manage to overthrow the Islamic yoke. Though only after some 700 years of occupation.

Raymond Ibrahim is associate director of the Middle East Forum, author of The Al Qaeda Reader, and guest lecturer at the National Defense Intelligence College.

This text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

2010/05/26

NYC Community Board Oks Ground Zero Mosque Plans

Source: Newsmax

NYC Community Board Oks Ground Zero Mosque Plans

Wednesday, 26 May 2010 06:55 AM

After hours of contentious public comment, a New York City community board voted late Tuesday to support a plan to build a mosque and cultural center near ground zero.

“It’s a seed of peace,” board member Rob Townley said. “We believe that this is significant step in the Muslim community to counteract the hate and fanaticism in the minority of the community.”

The vote was 29-to-1 in favor of the plan, with 10 abstentions. The move by the Manhattan Community Board 1, while not necessary for the building’s owners to move forward with the project, is seen as key to obtaining residents’ support.

Some board members wanted to postpone a vote until the next meeting to gather more information about the project and the organizations sponsoring it. But the motion failed.

The meeting was unruly, with project opponents jeering at speakers and yelling comments such as “You’re building over a Christian cemetery!” while holding signs that read, “Show respect for 3000,” among other things.

Many said they were not opposed to a mosque — just not one that’s two blocks from ground zero.

The families of Sept. 11 victims “would be wounded by erecting a mega mosque so close to the place where their loved ones were massacred,” said Viviana Hernandez, a chaplain. “Even though they may have altruistic reasons, the real terrorists will see it as a win on their side.”

Tea party activist Mark Williams has called the proposed center a monument to the terror attacks.

The organizations sponsoring the project said they are trying to establish a vibrant and inclusive-world class facility.

Plans for the Cordoba House include a performing arts center, swimming pool, culinary school, child care facilities and worship space.

It would provide 150 full-time jobs, 500 part-time jobs and an investment in more than $100 million in infrastructure in the city’s financial district, according to Daisy Khan, spokeswoman for the Cordoba House.

Khan’s husband, Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf, (See information below about the Imam, then tell those of 9/11 this is a peaceful Imam.) executive director of the Cordoba Initiative, one of the project’s sponsors, said he understood the pain that people have about 9/11. But he said his community and congregation were among those that died in the attacks.

“We have condemned the terror of 9/11,” he said. “We have worked to ensure that our mosques are not recruiting grounds for terrorists.”

Manhattan Borough President Scott Stringer said in a statement that by supporting the multi-faith community and cultural center, the board “sent a clear message that our city is one that promotes diversity and tolerance.”

Stringer has been the target of disparaging remarks by Williams for supporting the plans and has defended his position and denounced offensive speech directed at him or at Muslims.

He said before the vote that he understood the sensitivities of the families of 9/11 victims.

“I don’t think anybody wants to do anything to disrespect those families. They made the ultimate sacrifice,” he said. “At the same time, we have to balance diversity and look for opportunities to bring different groups together.”

Police Commissioner Raymond Kelly said there were no security concerns about building a mosque in the area.

The American Society for Muslim Advancement and the Cordoba Initiative have said that they bought the building in 2009 and planned to break ground later this year. It could take up to three years to build the Cordoba House. A Friday prayer service has been held at the building since September 2009.

Besides the political and social opposition to the project, city officials say the plan also could be hindered by a decades-old proposal to give landmark status to a building that would be replaced by the mosque and center.

City officials say the current building, constructed between 1857 and 1858 in the Italian Renaissance palazzo style, is historically and architecturally significant.

Bruce Wallace, who lost a nephew on 9/11, said the center can change the misperceptions about Islam.

“The moderate Muslim voice has been squashed in America,” he said. “Here is a chance to allow moderate Muslims to teach people that not all Muslims are terrorists.”

Who is Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf?

Discover The Networks

Born in Kuwait in 1948, Feisal Abdul Rauf is the Imam of Masjid al-Farah, a New York City mosque. He holds a bachelor’s degree in physics from Columbia University and a master’s degree from the Stevens Institute of Technology in New Jersey. His father, Dr. Muhammad Abdul Rauf (1917-2004), was an Egyptian contemporary of Hassan al-Banna, founder of the Muslim Brotherhood. The elder Rauf was a professor at Al-Azhar University until 1948; in 1965 he moved to New York, where he purchased – with $1.3 million in funding from Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Libya – a plot of Manhattan real estate to serve as a site for a large Islamic cultural center whose construction was bankroled by sources in 46 Islamic nations.

In 1990 Feisal Abdul Rauf opened al-Farah Mosque in lower Manhattan. Seven years later, he established the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), a New-York based nonprofit organization which has been run by Rauf’s wife, Daisy Khan, since 2005.

In a 60 Minutes interview that aired on September 30, 2001, Rauf said that the 9/11 attacks were part of a larger Islamic “reaction against the U.S. government politically, where we [the U.S.] espouse principles of democracy and human rights, and [yet] where we ally ourselves with oppressive regimes in many of these countries.” “I wouldn’t say that the United States deserved what happened,” Rauf elaborated, “but United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.” Rauf further stated that “because we [Americans] have been accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world,” it could be said that “[i]n fact, in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.”

Rauf, who has been entrusted with the task of conducting post-9/11 sensitivity training for the FBI, contends that Muslims have been unfairly targeted by law-enforcement authorities in recent years. “There’s no doubt we’ve been profiled since 9/11,” he said in 2005. “The Patriot Act has kind of made Muslims — there’s a sense of ‘guilty till proven innocent’ rather than the other way around.”

In the summer of 2002, Rauf began lecturing on Islam at the 750-acre campus of Chautauqua Institution, located in western New York State. Around that time, he also befriended Karen Armstrong, who later wrote the foreword for Rauf’s 2004 book, What’s Right with Islam. In that foreword, Armstrong lauds Rauf as “a Muslim who can speak to Western people in a way they can understand.”

Rauf’s book suggests that the “American Constitution and system of governance uphold the core principles of Islamic law” (i.e., sharia). The author concludes, therefore, that the “American political structure is sharia-compliant.” In December 2007 Rauf promoted What’s Right with Islam at a Malaysia gathering of Hizb ut Tahrir, which seeks to impose sharia on the United States and other countries worldwide.

Rauf depicts jihad as the Islamic world’s defensive reaction to Western provocations, rather than as a seminal Islamic tradition of aggression that long predated any Muslim interactions with the West. In March 2004 the Sydney Morning Herald described Rauf as someone who believed that “the U.S. and the West must acknowledge the harm they have done to Muslims before terrorism can end.” The Herald then quoted Rauf as having said: “The Islamic method of waging war is not to kill innocent civilians. But it was Christians in World War II who bombed civilians in Dresden and Hiroshima, neither of which were military targets.” In one particularly significant passage, the Herald article stated: “Imam Feisal … said there could be little progress until the U.S. acknowledged backing dictators and the U.S. President gave an ‘America Culpa’ speech to the Muslim world.”

In a June 2005 interview, Rauf was asked whether non-Muslims should be troubled by the Qur’an’s assertion that, as the host phrased it, “people … from other religions should either be beheaded … killed, tortured, [or] murdered.” Rauf replied that “many of these verses were revealed in certain contexts where the Prophet [Muhammad] and his followers were not allowed to practice their religion,” and thus “permission was granted to the Muslims to fight those who fought them for that reason.” “The vast history of Islam through the 14 centuries of history,” Rauf added, “has proven that except for certain moments in history, the predominant attitude of Muslims toward non-Muslims, especially to Jews and Christians, was one of friendship, was one of engagement.” In 2009, Rauf took up this theme again, writing: “Religious freedom is at the core of Islam.”

Rauf believes that Muslim charities have been subject to undue scrutiny since 9/11. In 2005 an interviewer asked him to comment on the fact that “some Islamic charities are being investigated for terrorist ties.” Rauf replied: “We believe that a certain portion of every [Islamic] charity has been legitimate. To say that you have connections with terrorism is a very gray area. It’s like the accusation that Saddam Hussein had links to Osama bin Laden. Well, America had links to Osama bin Laden – does that mean that America is a terrorist country or has ties to terrorism? It’s that type of logic.”

In 2008 Rauf revisited the question of whether sharia could be effectively incorporated into Western legal and political systems. He hailed Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams for the “forward thinking” that had led Williams to advocate on behalf of “plural jurisdiction,” which would permit Muslim enclaves in Britain to be governed by a separate set of laws consistent with sharia. In March 2009, Rauf said that “Islamic law and American democratic principles have many things in common,” and he claimed that sharia’s endorsement of “political justice” and “economic justice … for the weak and impoverished” is a creed that “sounds suspiciously like the Declaration of Independence.”

Rauf contends that authentic Islam is highly respectful of women’s rights and freedoms. In a 2009 piece he penned for the Huffington Post, Rauf stated: “The Prophet Muhammad has been known as the first feminist. … Gender equality is an intrinsic part of Islamic belief.”

In a May 7, 2010 sermon he delivered in New York City, Rauf seemed to suggest that the perpetrators of 9/11 may not actually have been Muslims. “Some people say it was Muslims who attacked [the U.S.] on 9/11,” he said, before drifting into another topic.

In recent years, Rauf and ASMA have pursued a project known as the Cordoba Initiative, whose mission is to recapture an “atmosphere of interfaith tolerance and respect” in “Muslim-West relations.” Funded by numerous countries that are members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, this Initiative aims to build a 13-story, $100 million mosque just 600 feet from Ground Zero in lower Manhattan.

In addition to his work with ASMA, the New York-based Rauf teaches Islam and Sufism at the Center for Religious Inquiry at St. Bartholomew’s Church. He also is a member of the World Economic Forum Council of 100 Leaders (Islamic West dialogue); sits on the board of trustees of the Islamic Center of New York; and serves as an adviser to the Interfaith Center of New York.

OTHER RESOURCES:

The Ground Zero Mosque Developer: Muslim Brotherhood Roots, Radical Dreams
By Alyssa A.Lappen
May 14, 2010