72 Percent of Muslim Americans Support Building the Ground Zero Mosque...Building It Right There On Top of Our Massacred Brothers and Sisters

The "moderate" Muslims of America have spoken and they are vastly in favor of a symbol of Islamic victory in America ....with 72% of them in favor of the Ground Zero Mosque being built on the very site where Islam struck its biggest blow against America - where the jihadis of Islam killed over 2500 innocent American civilians.

Over seven out of ten Muslim Americans feel it is more important to celebrate a Muslim victory over infidels than try to assimilate to America and try to let the horror heal.

72% of Muslim Americans have decided to poke their bony finger in America's eye on the 10th anniversary of 9/11 and say "This is our land, not yours."

The report (and poll) is at The Nation.

Most US Muslims back Ground Zero mosque


WASHINGTON - Most Muslim Americans support the proposal to build a mosque and Islamic community centre near Ground Zero, the site of the 9/11 attacks on New York, a survey shows.
The Pew Research Center survey found 81 percent of US Muslims have heard about the project, which is strongly opposed by American conservatives, and, of those, 72 percent say it should be allowed to be built.
At the same time, 20pc of the country's Muslims say it should not be allowed to be built, while 15pc say it should be allowed even though they personally believe it's a bad idea to build it near the WTC site, the survey found. The survey revealed a decidedly different view among the general public. Of about 78 percent who heard of the project, only 38 percent said it should be allowed to be built, while 47 percent said it should not. The mosque and Islamic centre would be built just 2 blocks from where the World Trade Center stood before being destroyed in the 2001 terrorist attack.
Asked about mosques or Islamic centres in their community, 14 percent of US Muslims said there had been opposition to building a mosque in the past few years and 15 percent said a mosque or Islamic centre in their community has been vandalized or a target of other hostility in the past 12 months, the survey found.

Ground Zero Mosque Jihadi Developers Apply For $5 Million of Taxpayer Money

You know, if the people behind the construction of the Ground Zero Mosque intentionally tried to piss off the American people any more, they couldn't do a better job than they already are. The latest affront to Americans is the fact that the developers have now applied for a federal grant that would give them $5 million for help in constructing the mosque on our Holy ground and that money would come from the taxpayers of America. Check that. The fact of the matter is that taxes paid by the families of the victims of 9/11 would PAY FOR THIS SYMBOL OF ISLAMIC VICTORY.

From the article at the Daily Mail:

Developers of a planned mosque at New York’s Ground Zero have applied for a $5million grant from a fund set up to rebuild the city after 9/11.

The audacious application was put in to the taxpayer-funded ‘community and cultural enhancement’ programme designed to repair lower Manhattan following the terrorist outrage.

If the application is successful,the money will be reportedly used to cover educational facilities at the 13-storey building and not the controversial prayer room.

But even so it will spark outrage and fury amongst the families of those who lost loved ones and re-ignite the row over the entire project.

The Park51 mosque has become a lightning rod for anti-Muslim feeling, with poll after poll indicating it should not be built so close to where the Twin Towers fell.

Serious questions have been raised about its backers including controversial Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf who refuses to rule out obtaining funding from countries in the Middle East which have backed terrorist regimes.

‘If Imam Feisal and his retinue want to know why they're not trusted, here's yet another reason,’ said. Irshad Manji, author of The Trouble With Islam and Director of the Moral Courage Project at New York University.

‘The New Yorkers I speak with have questions about Park51. Requesting money from public coffers without engaging the public shows a staggering lack of empathy - especially from a man who says he's all about dialogue.’

So there you have it. Another sharp stick in the eye of Americans from Manhattan, New York to Manhattan, Kansas. I wonder if the American peoples' tax dollars going into this public shame would mean that we actually own part of it? And if we own part of it, we just might be able to tear the son-of-a-bitch down? Hmmmm.

Anyway, I have two words for the developers of Park 51. Fuck you. You will NOT build this mosque, boys. And that, not the $5 million, you can take to the bank.

(Hat Tip: Learner)

Ground Zero mosque developers apply for $5m grant... from fund set up to rebuild Manhattan after 9/11 attacks


Developers of a planned mosque at New York’s Ground Zero have applied for a $5million grant from a fund set up to rebuild the city after 9/11.

The audacious application was put in to the taxpayer-funded ‘community and cultural enhancement’ programme designed to repair lower Manhattan following the terrorist outrage.

If the application is successful,the money will be reportedly used to cover educational facilities at the 13-storey building and not the controversial prayer room.

But even so it will spark outrage and fury amongst the families of those who lost loved ones and re-ignite the row over the entire project.

The Park51 mosque has become a lightning rod for anti-Muslim feeling, with poll after poll indicating it should not be built so close to where the Twin Towers fell.

Serious questions have been raised about its backers including controversial Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf who refuses to rule out obtaining funding from countries in the Middle East which have backed terrorist regimes.

‘If Imam Feisal and his retinue want to know why they're not trusted, here's yet another reason,’ said. Irshad Manji, author of The Trouble With Islam and Director of the Moral Courage Project at New York University.

‘The New Yorkers I speak with have questions about Park51. Requesting money from public coffers without engaging the public shows a staggering lack of empathy - especially from a man who says he's all about dialogue.’

The application was made to the Lower Manhattan Redevelopment Corporation, which is overseeing the $20billion (£12.5billion) in federal aid which is earmarked for rebuilding New York and its communities.

The bid appears to have been legal as religious groups can make such requests ‘as long as the request is for a facility or portion of a facility that is dedicated to non-religious activities or uses’.

However the board that makes the final decision must also consider its commitment to ‘an open, inclusive, and transparent planning process’ which could scupper the deal.

What is clear is that the application is well above the $100,000 to $1million which is the recommended range for grant applications, something else the board will have to weigh up. The board's decision is expected next year.

Currently on the site of the proposed mosque is a disused branch of Burlington Coat Factory which will be demolished to make way for the new $70million (£44million) building.

Construction is due to begin on September 11 next year – the tenth anniversary of the terrorist attack.

Some 2,995 people including 67 Britons were killed when terrorists flew passenger jets into the Twin Towers on September 11 2001.

The funding application was uncovered by U.S. politics and culture blog The Daily Beast.

It polled its readers to ask if the move was ‘inappropriate’ and 75 per cent agreed.

How About We Cut the Crap? Ground Zero Mosque's Imam Rauf Has BS'd America But Good

You know, the American people, due to our inherent tolerance of all others in this society, sometimes pay a price for our naivete'. And there are times when figures in America take extreme advantage of that quality in Americans. And usually, when we Americans find out we've been "had"... well, we don't take kindly to it.

Well, most Americans have never been subjected to "taqiyya" until now.

Taqiyya. noun. Refers to permissible lying in Islam. Taqiyya is generally allowable if it is done for the purpose of masking a Muslim's identity as such, or in waging conflict with an enemy. The aim is to mislead the enemy about the true nature, goals, or strength of Islam.

This article at Family Security Matters offers up a litany of just who the Imam Rauf truly is and how he has pulled the wool over the eyes of Americans from coast to coast. Trust me, Rauf has had his share of accomplices in this fraudulent set up called the Ground Zero Mosque but the bottom line is this clown has lied constantly and has, of course, revealed the nature of a "moderate" muslim that I constantly try to hammer home here at Holger Awakens.

Look at some of the mountain of evidence against this fraud:

But, as the public is slowly learning, Imam Rauf is no moderate and bridge-building is not his agenda. The project with which Rauf has been most closely associated is the “Sharia Index Project” which measures how closely each country approaches the ideal of complete conformity to sharia law. The ideal is replacing Western law with Islamic law, i.e. achieving worldwide Islamic supremacy.

2 Rauf obtained church status for the American Sufi Muslim Association, giving it exemption from taxes, from filing tax returns and from revealing its sources of funding. The Association gave a one bedroom apartment on the tenth floor of a high rise at 251 West 85th street (elsewhere listed as his wife’s residence) as its place of worship. In petitioning for church status, Rauf claimed as many as 500 people prayed there daily, five times a day. Steve Emerson’s Investigative Project, which dug up this scam, points out that there is no way this small apartment could have functioned as Rauf claimed it did. (Emerson’s group has also revealed that Faiz Khan, one of the Association’s three directors, is a “truther,” insisting at a 2006 conference of these U.S.-hating fantasists that the “most logical explanation” for 9/11 was that the hijackers were “working for corporate America.”)

So where does Rauf stand on Israel? Challenged to condemn Hamas in a radio interview, Rauf replied “Terrorism is a very complex question.” As National Review editor Rich Lowry has observed, that’s the stock answer for anyone excusing terrorism.

But Christine Brim of the Center for Security Policy has come closer to uncovering some of the planned activities of the center. On the basis of copious since-deleted pages on Rauf’s website (which she has managed to preserve for readers on www.bigpeace.com) Brim concludes that up to six floors of the 13 floor edifice are to be devoted to the Sharia Index Project, designed to benchmark sharia compliance, to distribute sharia propaganda and to enforce sharia law in America and worldwide.” The first now-hidden website reveals that the Sharia Index Project had its initial meeting, convened and chaired by Rauf, in Malaysia in August 2006 and the first four participants Rauf recruited were international leaders affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood (the fount of today’s radical Islam).

The article is long but it is chock-full of more and more and more indictments against this wolf in sheep's clothing. We've heard a lot about this man's status in both the Bush administration and the Obama administration but you have to realize that Western leaders are BEGGING to find any sort of muslim leader who fits our ideal of what we are supposed to be calling "moderates."

Hopefully, what comes out of this whole evil spectacle is that even as much as the Left in America tries to prop up islam in America as some sort of acceptable religion that deserves protection like any other, we Americans are going to see it for what it is - an expansionist movement designed to dominate America - one intent on replacing our Constitution with Sharia Law - one intent on owning this country, not living peaceably alongside fellow Americans.

We've exposed one high-placed liar and fraud ... get used to it, people, there are hundreds of "Imam Raufs" in this land right now.

The Scam Artist at the Ground Zero Mosque


While there has been much emotion and argument over the proposed mosque two blocks from Ground Zero, it has largely swirled over issues that miss the nature and significance of the issues involved. Thus we hear endless variations on the theme “How can a moderate imam whose stated goal is to promote healing in the wake of 9/11 be so insensitive to the feelings of those who lost those they loved at the hands of Islamic fanatics?”

But, as the public is slowly learning, Imam Rauf is no moderate and bridge-building is not his agenda. The project with which Rauf has been most closely associated is the “Sharia Index Project” which measures how closely each country approaches the ideal of complete conformity to sharia law. The ideal is replacing Western law with Islamic law, i.e. achieving worldwide Islamic supremacy.

How did the issue of the Ground Zero mosque come to be framed so poorly? It’s because Imam Rauf is an expert at gaming the system, exploiting every economic, political and psychological vulnerability of this society. How does he scam us? Let me count the ways.

1 In a burst of investigative journalism, The Bergen Record has documented how, thanks to his connections with powerful politicians (including Robert Janiszewski, the county’s disgraced former county executive), Rauf managed to obtain over $2 million in public financing for purchasing and rehabilitating low income apartments in Hudson County, New Jersey. Maintaining the buildings was another matter. Page after page of municipal health records, the Record reports, chronicle a barrage of tenant complaints from failure to pick up garbage to rat infestation to no heat or hot water. Union City has now brought suit, seeking receivership on two buildings, charging Rauf with ignoring orders by the city to address violations.

2 Rauf obtained church status for the American Sufi Muslim Association, giving it exemption from taxes, from filing tax returns and from revealing its sources of funding. The Association gave a one bedroom apartment on the tenth floor of a high rise at 251 West 85th street (elsewhere listed as his wife’s residence) as its place of worship. In petitioning for church status, Rauf claimed as many as 500 people prayed there daily, five times a day. Steve Emerson’s Investigative Project, which dug up this scam, points out that there is no way this small apartment could have functioned as Rauf claimed it did. (Emerson’s group has also revealed that Faiz Khan, one of the Association’s three directors, is a “truther,” insisting at a 2006 conference of these U.S.-hating fantasists that the “most logical explanation” for 9/11 was that the hijackers were “working for corporate America.”)

3 Rauf claims his mission, in his own words, is “to strengthen relations between the Western and Muslim worlds and to help counter radical ideology.” On the strength of this persona the State Department sends him off on junkets to the Middle East, most recently this summer.

But how can the State Department possibly believe a man openly dedicated to instituting sharia worldwide will counter Islamic radicalism when implementing sharia is the central demand of Islamic radicals?

If the relation of sharia to Islamic radicalism is beyond the comprehension of our State Department, there is the interview Rauf gave to Ed Bradley of 60 Minutes in the immediate aftermath of 9/11. He told Bradley “U.S. policies were an accessory to the crime.”

Today Rauf tries to explain this away. On CNN (September 8th) Rauf said he meant to say that the U.S. had empowered Islamist militants like bin Laden while fighting the Soviet Union in Afghanistan. Only trouble is that in the original interview a startled Bradley had a follow up question:“How?” And Rauf replied “Because we have been accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.” Rauf was clearly claiming that the U.S. had brought 9/11 upon itself (was “accessory to the crime”) by its brutality to Muslims. If that wasn’t clear enough, in 2005 Rauf told a Moslem audience in Australia “the U.S. has more Muslim blood on its hands than al Qaeda has on its hands of innocent non-Muslims.”

Apparently for the State Department, it’s enough to say 9/11 was a “crime” to pass muster as a Muslim moderate—it doesn’t matter to whom you attribute it.

4 Rauf exploits the ill-advised Jewish passion for interfaith dialogue (no matter how disingenuous the other side) to line up Jewish–especially rabbinic–support for the Ground Zero mosque. There are the familiar far-leftists like Arthur Waskow (formerly of the radical left-wing Institute for Policy Studies, now reincarnated as a rabbi), Rolando Matalon of the trendy B’nai Jeshurun congregation and, inevitably, the Union for Reform Judaism. But there are also the Orthodox Rabbis Schneier, father and son, and David Harris of the American Jewish Committee to whom Rauf’s position on Israel should be of some concern.

So where does Rauf stand on Israel? Challenged to condemn Hamas in a radio interview, Rauf replied “Terrorism is a very complex question.” As National Review editor Rich Lowry has observed, that’s the stock answer for anyone excusing terrorism.

But the most significant insight into Rauf’s views on Israel comes from a letter from Rauf published in The New York Times that The Wall Street Journal unearthed. Elsewhere (“Taiba at Ground Zero?” Family Security Matters, August 20) I have compared Rauf to Tariq Ramadan, the urbane and articulate Swiss born academic, grandson of of Muslim Brotherhood founder Hassan-al-Banna, whose role as an alleged moderate has made him a fixture of the “commentariat” on Islam on European television and even secured him an invitation from the British Prime Minister to serve on the government’s task force on preventing extremism. As French journalist Caroline Fourest documents extensively in her book Brother Tariq: The Doublespeak of Tariq Ramadan, Ramadan is adept at saying one thing to his Islamic followers, another to his Western audience. Rauf outdoes Ramadan at this game: he manages to address both audiences with opposing messages at the same time!

Let’s look at Rauf’s letter to The New York Times of Nov. 27, 1977, in which he comments on Sadat’s then ground breaking trip to Jerusalem. Rauf encourages his fellow Muslims to “give peace a chance.” So much for making a Western audience happy. He goes on to address specifically “my fellow Arabs.” To them he says “Learn from the example of the Prophet Mohammed, your greatest historical personality. After a state of war with the Meccan unbelievers that lasted for many years, he acceded in the Treaty of Hudabiya, to demands that his closest companions considered utterly humiliating. Yet peace turned out to be a most effective weapon against the unbelievers.” As The Wall Street Journal points out, Rauf is referring to the treaty that established a ten year truce during which Mohammed built up his forces to conquer Mecca. Rauf is telling the Arabs that Sadat is doing the same thing, offering a time-out before the ultimate conquest. In case they missed the point, he adds “In a true peace it is impossible that a purely Jewish state of Palestine can endure….In a true peace, Israel will, in our lifetimes, become one more Arab country, with a Jewish minority.”

Asked by The Wall Street Journal if his views had changed since the 1970s (when he also celebrated the Iranian revolution as “inspired by the very principles of individual rights and freedom that Americans ardently believe in”) Rauf professed himself “amused” that the Journal would dredge up letters he wrote as a young man. But he stood by his original views.

“As I reread those letters now, I see that they express the same concerns—a desire for peaceful solutions in Israel and for a humane understanding of Iran—that I have maintained, and worked hard on, in the years since those letters were published.” “Peaceful solutions” in the case of Israel,” as Rauf made crystal clear, meant Israel’s extinction.

5 Rauf claims that the mosque “sends the opposite statement to what happened on 9/11.” But as Amir Taheri has pointed out, the structure will be a rabat, the creation of which was ordered by Mohammed at the heart of infidel territory that had been successfully raided—and where the next raid would be prepared. As Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed, director general of Al-Arabiya TV, put it in the London daily Al-Sharq Al-Awsat, the mosque “will become an arena for the promoters of hatred, and a monument to those who committed the crime.”

This is more than well-informed speculation by individuals who understand the Moslem world. In August, as Die Zeit editor Josef Joffe wrote in The Wall Street Journal, the German authorities shut down the Taiba mosque and cultural center in Hamburg after it became a magnet drawing enthusiasts for jihad—along with actual practitioners—from around the world. It was a magnet, as Manfred Murck, deputy chief of Germany’s domestic security agency, explained “because it has the aura of the 9/11 assassins.” This was the mosque where Mohammed Atta and several other 9/11 hijackers had hung out, and Murck reported that “devotees of the 9/11 killers have come from all over on a tour of jihadism that starts in Hamburg, then proceeds to Madrid, then to London, where dozens were murdered in the tube in 2005.”

If the mere “aura” of Mohammed Atta proved so powerful in Hamburg, imagine what a magnet a mosque at the site of the greatest triumph over the infidels would be? In the imagination of the jihadists it will be almost as good as a mosque in the actual footprint of the towers, for the Burlington Coat factory was badly damaged when landing gear from one of the planes crashed through the roof.

And this is precisely the reason why Imam Rauf and his associates are so reluctant to accept the alternative site New York Governor Patterson has offered them, on the surface an easy way to put the controversy to rest. At any other site Imam Rauf would be unlikely to raise anything like the $100 million he can plausibly hope to obtain for a mosque in the shadow of what were once the World Trade Center towers. Moreover, it is important to note the title of Rauf’s book. The abridged English version is a comforting What’s Right with Islam is What’s Right with America. But it was published earlier in Malaysia under the very different title A Call to Prayer from the World Trade Center Rubble: Islamic Dawa in the Heart of America Post 9-11. Dawa means proselytizing. Rauf is set on spreading the message of Islam from the heart of Ground Zero—and the Burlington coat factory is as close as you get.

There is another backstory, not yet uncovered, as to why the Pomerantz family, owners of the site, sold it to Rauf’s group for $4.8 million, when they had turned down multiple offers, including one by developer Kevin Glodek for $18 million. Why did Kukiko Mitani, Pomerantz’s widow, claim that there were no other offers?

6 Rauf games the system by claiming he seeks reconciliation while demonizing the mosque’s opponents. He claims his life’s work is “peace-making” even as he issues dire warnings of worldwide violence if his Ground Zero mosque is blocked.

Speaking in a forum in Doha on his recent taxpayer funded tour, Rauf declared: “The battlefront is not between Muslims and non-Muslims. It is between moderates [and] extremists—radicals of all faith traditions.” Rauf treats those who are offended by a mosque at Ground Zero as the moral equivalent of jihadists. Not to be outdone, on August 22 Rauf’s wife Daisy Khan announced on national TV that America was a place “beyond Islamophobia.”

Even more outrageously, Rauf now claims he only insists on the present mosque site out of concern for American lives! Rauf used an hour long interview on Larry King Live (conducted by Soledad O’Brien) to claim that he would not have embarked on the project had he anticipated the outcry, but it now must go forward to save American lives: “If we move from that location…the headlines in the Muslim world will be that Islam is under attack.” Rauf warns that the 2006 riots in the wake of the Mohammed cartoons could pale in comparison, for anger will likely “explode in the Muslim world” leading to “something which could really become very, very, very dangerous indeed.“ But as Claudia Rosett points out on Forbes.com, it is Rauf himself who created and now stokes the “crisis.”

There is a strong parallel to the Danish cartoons incident but not the one Rauf draws. Those cartoons aroused no reaction whatever in the Muslim world until, months after their publication, a group of imams toured the Middle East to incite murderous rage among ever-so-easily outraged Muslims. Abd Al-Rahman Al-Rashed of Al-Arabiya, quoted earlier, insists that most of the world’s Muslims couldn’t care less about Rauf’s mosque and most don’t want it at a place “that tomorrow may become a source of pride for the terrorists and their Muslim followers.” If that changes it’s because Rauf succeeds in persuading Muslims “they are under attack.”

Moreover, our naïve State Department encourages Rauf’s dangerous game. State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said that Rauf could talk about the mosque (but not raise funds for it) during his Middle East tour. Crowley said “he wouldn’t be surprised” if Rauf was talking of the ongoing debate “as an example of our religious tolerance and resolving questions that come up within the rule of law.” This is a good example of what Charles Jacobs calls “our ruling delusional elites” in action.

7 To hear Imam Rauf, his 13 story mosque plus cultural center is designed “to cultivate understanding among all religions and cultures.” He promises (in his New York Times op-ed of September 7th) “a multifaith memorial dedicated to victims of the Sept. 11 attacks,” ”separate prayer spaces for Muslims, Christians, Jews and men and women of other faiths” and to promote “a culture of forging personal bonds across religious traditions.”

But Christine Brim of the Center for Security Policy has come closer to uncovering some of the planned activities of the center. On the basis of copious since-deleted pages on Rauf’s website (which she has managed to preserve for readers on www.bigpeace.com) Brim concludes that up to six floors of the 13 floor edifice are to be devoted to the Sharia Index Project, designed to benchmark sharia compliance, to distribute sharia propaganda and to enforce sharia law in America and worldwide.” The first now-hidden website reveals that the Sharia Index Project had its initial meeting, convened and chaired by Rauf, in Malaysia in August 2006 and the first four participants Rauf recruited were international leaders affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood (the fount of today’s radical Islam). The group was subsequently expanded to include “the Shi’a perspective” with one of the new recruits (identified by Anne Bayefsky on the basis of a photograph) Iran’s Mohammad Javad Larijani, who has justified torture of Iranian dissidents as legal punishments under sharia.

There is of course not a hint of “recognition of the rights of others, tolerance and freedom of worship,” the American values Rauf claims to pursue, in the Moslem Brotherhood or in sharia. Imposing sharia is what the Taliban is all about. On September 20 The Wall Street Journal described how Karzai’s reaching out to the Taliban is dividing Afghans. The Journal quotes Khwaja Mir, head of the provincial council in the majority-Tajik provincial council in the Panjshir Valley: “If we had accepted the Taliban’s ideology during Shah Masood’s time [the Northern Alliance leader murdered by Taliban before the American invasion] there wouldn’t have been any problem between us. But we didn’t because we wanted to live a free life.”

Rauf practices a consummate con. But a con needs a mark. The mark is someone who finds the surface story so appealing he is reluctant to dig down and check out the con’s claims. Rauf has found an unlimited supply of marks—our entire political and cultural elite. Perhaps stupidest of the lot is California Rabbi Haim Bialik (one of 71 religious leaders in California signing a pro-mosque petition) who declaimed: “The loneliness and isolation that Jews felt in the 1930s is palpable but now it’s directed to the Moslems.” Mayor Bloomberg is a close second. With the Statue of Liberty as backdrop, a gaggle of religious leaders at his side, Bloomberg declaimed: “I believe that this is an important test of the separation of church and state, as important a test as we may see in our lifetime.” Later Bloomberg said the mosque’s opponents “should be ashamed of themselves.”

The mosque at Ground Zero may never be built. Under the stress of all the opposition and embarrassing disclosures, Rauf and his partner, developer Sharif El-Gamal, already show signs of falling out. (El-Gamal, it turns out, has just been evicted from his SoHo offices for non-payment of rent and has had at least seven run-ins with the law, most recently for assaulting a barber.) One or both could decide to take the money and run. Donald Trump has already offered a 25% premium on the purchase price.

But while the future of the mosque remains uncertain, one thing is for sure: because of his skill in playing our elites for fools, Imam Faisal Abdul Rauf is a dangerous, dangerous, dangerous man indeed.

Revelation: New York Times Reporter Who Posted Positive Story On Ground Zero Mosque Trained By Imam Rauf's Organization

The conspiracy to erect a Victory Mosque at Ground Zero in New York City just keeps growing as it has been reported that the New York Times reporter who did an initial glowing report of the plans to build the mosque was actually trained by the organization run by the mosque's developer, Imam Rauf.

This whole damn story has taken more evil and insidious turns than one can even keep track of - and while Americans opposed to the construction of the Ground Zero mosque are labeled as "intolerant" and "islamophobes", every single individual involved in this mosque has been revealed to be a charlatain and yeah, I'm talking about you too, Mr. Mayor Bloomberg.

From the article at Family Security Matters:

A reporter who helped write the first and positive New York Times story on the Ground Zero Mosque was trained by the group run by mosque leader Feisal Abdul Rauf, according to that group’s website.

Rauf’s organization, the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), touted the journalist’s participation in a training program by ASMA’s “Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow” (MLT).

“Media trainings showed immediate results,” ASMA’s 2009 year-end report said.

Rauf’s group then cited Sharaf Mowjood, “a journalism student at Columbia University and trained at the MLT [Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow] conference, wrote a compelling story about the Muslim community’s plan to establish a center near Ground Zero. The story was published on the front page of the New York Times with Sharaf as co-author.” The article appeared in the Dec. 9, 2009, edition of the New York Times.

This article goes a long way in confirming what I have been pointing out about the more general propping up of islam in America - that this is a concerted effort on the part of Leftist politicians, the media and soft jihad muslim leaders in this country to move our Land towards islamic acceptance and eventual implementation of some for of Sharia Law.

The facts are there - we now see how complicit a major media outlet was in this effort to ram a mosque at hallowed 9/11 ground down the throats of New Yorkers and Americans...couple that with the almost incomprehensible support of it by the Mayor of New York City and then throw in the veiled support of the Federal government and one can see how we all are being set up.

Consider this - if a Victory mosque is built at Ground Zero, then explain to me how ANY mosque or any islamic initiative will not move forward in any part of this country.

New York Times Reporter Covering Mosque Story Was “Trained” By Imam Rauf


Who says so? Why, Imam Rauf, that’s who. From Steve Emerson’s Investigative Project on Terrorism:

A reporter who helped write the first and positive New York Times story on the Ground Zero Mosque was trained by the group run by mosque leader Feisal Abdul Rauf, according to that group’s website.

Rauf’s organization, the American Society for Muslim Advancement (ASMA), touted the journalist’s participation in a training program by ASMA’s “Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow” (MLT).

“Media trainings showed immediate results,” ASMA’s 2009 year-end report said.

Rauf’s group then cited Sharaf Mowjood, “a journalism student at Columbia University and trained at the MLT [Muslim Leaders of Tomorrow] conference, wrote a compelling story about the Muslim community’s plan to establish a center near Ground Zero. The story was published on the front page of the New York Times with Sharaf as co-author.” The article appeared in the Dec. 9, 2009, edition of the New York Times.

Mowjood could not be reached for comment. In an email, Times Metro Editor Joe Sexton, disputed ASMA’s representation about the program Mowjood attended.

“He participated in no training sessions sponsored by ASMA or the Cordoba Initiative,” Sexton wrote. He attended a lecture sponsored by ASMA in 2008. He was not a presenter or participant. He signed the sign-in sheet.”

Sexton added that “The experienced reporters here who have worked with him have had no questions about his professionalism.”

Yes, well, apparently Imam Rauf doesn’t have any questions about it either. See the IPT report for more.

Geert Wilders' Speech at the 9/11 Freedom Rally in New York City

Sometimes, just sometimes, you need a person from outside of your country to come to America to be able to fully deliver the horror of 9/11. Sometimes, while we Americans try to utter our memories of the carnage and the pain and the emotion of that day, it just sometimes gets garbled in the fact that we still cannot believe that it happened...happened to us.

Well, Dutchman Geert Wilders has seen his Netherlands and his Europe attacked continually by islamic terror over the decades and the man risks his life every time he steps into public and this past Saturday, he braved another round of attempts on his life by the jihadis to deliver a special message to Americans - this time, a speech at the 9/11 rally in New York City.

This is phenomenal. This is exactly what needed to be said. And more importantly, this is a message we must use to educate and convince our people against the threat today from islamic terror that is 100 times greater than on 9/11/01.

The transcript below comes from Family Security Matters:

9/11 Freedom Rally: Geert Wilders' Speech in New York


Dear friends,

May I ask you to be silent for ten seconds? Just be silent and listen. Ten seconds. And listen... What we hear are the sounds of life in the greatest city on earth. No place in the world, no place in human history, is as vibrant and dynamic as New York City. You hear the cars, you hear the people, you hear them rushing to their various destinations, you hear the sounds of business and of pleasure, you hear the cheers, you hear the cries, the buzzing sounds of human activity. And that is how it should be. Always.

Now close your eyes - I know it's a beautiful day, but close your eyes. I have been told that this day nine years ago was just such a beautiful day -- and remember, or try to remember, or try to imagine the sounds which were heard here on this spot under this same blue sky exactly nine years ago. The sound of shock, the sound of destruction, the sound of panic, the sound of pain, the sound of terror.

Did New York deserve this? Did America deserve this? Did the West deserve this? What, my friends, would you say to people who argue that New York, that America, that the West had itself to blame for those horrible sounds? There are people in this city who argue this. And they are angry because we are gathered here today to commemorate, to make a stand, to draw the line.

My friends, I have come from the other side of the Atlantic to share your grief for those who died here nine years ago. I have not forgotten how I felt that day. The scenes are imprinted on my soul, as they are on yours. But our hearts were not broken in the same way as the hearts of the relatives and friends of those who lost their lives here. Many relatives of the victims are here in our midst today. I wish to take this opportunity to express my deepest and most heartfelt condolences to them and to all of the people of New York and America.

Humbly, I stand here before you as a Dutchman and a European. I, too, however, cannot forget. How can anyone forget? Let me remind you of the words from Darryl Worley's 9/11 song.

Have you forgotten how it felt that day?
To see your homeland under fire
And her people blown away
Have you forgotten when those towers fell?
We had neighbors still inside going thru a living hell

Worley's response is our response: No, we will NEVER forget. We are here today because we have not forgotten all the loved ones that were lost and those left to carry on. And neither has the world. When the forces of Jihad attacked New York, they attacked the world.

Among those lost were people from 55 nations, people of every religion and every persuasion. No place on earth had a more multi-ethnic, multi-racial, and multi-lingual workforce than New York's proud towers. That is exactly why they were targeted. They constituted an insult to those who hold that there can be no peaceful cooperation among people and nations without submission to Sharia; to those who wish to impose the legal system of Islam on the rest of us. But New York and Sharia are incompatible.

New York stands for freedom, openness and tolerance. New York's Mayor recently said that New York is "rooted in Dutch tolerance". Those are true words. New York is not intolerant. How can it be? New York is open to the world. Suppose New York were intolerant. Suppose it only allowed people of one persuasion within its walls. Then it would be like Mecca, a city without freedom. Whatever your religion, persuasion or gender is, in New York you will find a home. In Mecca, if your religion isn't Islam, you are not welcome.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf claims the right to build a mosque, a house of Sharia here - on this hallowed ground. But, friends, I have not forgotten and neither have you. That is why we are here today. To draw the line. Here, on this sacred spot. We are here in the spirit of America's founding fathers. We are here in the spirit of freedom. We are here in the spirit of Abraham Lincoln, the President who freed the slaves. President Lincoln said: "Those who deny freedom to others, deserve it not for themselves." These words are the key to our survival. The tolerance that is crucial to our freedom requires a line of defense.

Mayor Bloomberg uses tolerance as an argument to allow Imam Rauf and his sponsors to build their so-called Cordoba Mosque. Mayor Bloomberg forgets, however, that openness cannot be open-ended. A tolerant society is not a suicidal society. It must defend itself against the powers of darkness, the force of hatred and the blight of ignorance. It cannot tolerate the intolerant - and survive. This means that we must not give a free hand to those who want to subjugate us. An overwhelming majority of Americans is opposed to building this mosque. So is an overwhelming majority everywhere in the non-Islamic world. Because we all realize what is at stake here. We know what this so-called Cordoba mosque really means.

Imam Rauf maintains that American secular law and Sharia law are based on the same principles. He refuses to condemn terrorists because he says terrorism is "a very complex question". He says America is "an accessory to the crime that happened on 9/11." "In fact," he literally said, "in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA."He also says that "terrorism will only end when the West acknowledges the harm it has done to Muslims."

That is why this man should not play the game he has in mind here in Manhattan. His "Blame the West, Blame America"-message is an insult. Americans - and by extension, all of us whose civilization was also attacked on 9/11/2001 - are not to blame for what happened here nine years ago today.

Osama bin Laden is not made in the USA. The West never "harmed" Islam before it harmed us. Most Americans do not want this so-called Cordoba Mosque to be built here. They understand that it is both a provocation and a humiliation. They understand the triumphant narrative of a mosque named after the Great Mosque of Cordoba which was constructed where a Christian cathedral stood before the land was conquered by Islam.

An overwhelming majority of Americans is opposed to building an Islamic cultural center close to Ground Zero. There is no lack of mosques in New York. There are dozens of buildings in which Muslims can pray. It isn't about a lack of space for prayers. It's about the symbolic meaning.

We who have come to speak today, object to this mosque project because its promoter and his wealthy sponsors have never suggested building a center to promote tolerance and interfaith understanding where it is really needed: In Mecca - a town where non-Muslims are not even allowed to enter, let alone build churches, synagogues, temples or community centers. So why should we do that?

Ordinary Americans object to the mosque project because currently no fewer than ten major multi-million dollar mosque projects are being planned in the United States as well as dozens in Europe, while not a single church is allowed in the kingdom of Saudi Arabia,while Jews are not even allowed to move their lips in prayer on the Temple Mount in Jerusalem,while the oldest Christians in the world, the Copts, are not free to renovate their churches, let alone to build one in Egypt.

My friends, that is why we are here today. What happens in New York must be seen in the perspective of the world. The events nine years ago made an enormous impact everywhere. Most people shared your pain, but, unfortunately, some did not. Nine years ago, when the news of the terrible atrocity in New York reached Europe, Muslim youths danced in the streets.

In a poll, two thirds of the Muslim immigrants in the Netherlands expressed partial or full understanding for the 9/11 terrorists.If a mosque were built here on Ground Zero such people would feel triumphant. But we, we will not betray those who died on 9/11. For their sakes we cannot tolerate a mosque on or near Ground Zero. For their sakes loud and clear we say: No mosque here! For their sakes, we must draw the line. So that New York, rooted in Dutch tolerance, will never become New Mecca.

But, let us also express our gratitude for the heroes of 9/11, those who went down in that Pennsylvania field, those who were standing freedom's watch at the Pentagon, and those who were here in New York nine years ago to risk and lose their lives for the victims. Friends, in honor of these victims, these heroes and their families, I believe that the words of Ronald Reagan, spoken in Normandy on the 40th anniversary of D-Day, resonate with new purpose on this hallowed spot.

President Reagan said: "We will always remember. We will always be proud. We will always be prepared, so we may always be free."

And, we, too, will always remember the victims of 9/11 and their loved ones who were left behind; We, too, will always be proud of the heroes; We will always defend liberty, democracy and human dignity; In the name of freedom: No mosque here!

Ground Zero Mosque Imam "Regrets Pain" But Can't Turn Back Now or Islamic Terrorists Will Freak Out

You know, this guy, this Imam Rauf, is so full of shit his eyes are brown. This idiot has the nerve now, with a straight face, to say that he regrets all of the pain caused by his decision to put a mosque so close to hallowed Ground Zero but HE CAN'T STOP IT NOW OR ISLAMIC TERRORISTS WOULD GET MAD AND STRIKE BACK! I mean, I had to read this article from Breitbart three times to actually believe that this sack of shit had the balls to say this stuff.

From the article, you get a first hand view of how islamists lie:

The cleric behind a proposed Islamic center in New York said he would not have planned it so close to the site of the September 11, 2001 attacks had he foreseen the level of "pain" triggered by the controversial project.

But imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said America's national security was now at stake in how it handles the 100-million-dollar center which has stirred raw emotions in the United States, and that changing the location would fuel violent extremism.

"If I knew this would happen, this would cause this kind of pain, I wouldn't have done it," the imam told CNN late Wednesday in his first televised interview since returning from a two-week State Department-sponsored cooperation tour of the Middle East.

He warned that Muslims worldwide could react more violently than they had done to the bloody riots that followed the publication of Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in 2005, strengthen extremists' ability to recruit followers and increase violence against Americans.

And now....here comes the money quote....here comes the threat that these islamists always use:

"But if you don't do this right, anger will explode in the Muslim world. If this is not handled correctly, this crisis could become much bigger than the Danish cartoon crisis."

Okay, I don't know about you folks but I am sick and fucking tired of this veiled threat of muslim violence and outcry for anything perceived as an attack on Islam. You know what, Imam Rauf? The Danish cartoon crisis didn't mean shit to anyone. Yeah, you muslims got your panties in a bunch over them but us infidels felt no pain from the whole thing - not one iota and further, you think we give a flying fuck if y'all get pissed off if the Ground Zero mosque is shut down?!

We have this moron saying that we can't possibly change course because of the threat of muslim reprisals - well, hasn't he just admitted the violence and facade of this s0-called "religion"? Hasn't Imam Rauf just admitted that Islam spreads by threat and force and coercion?

We can't burn any Qur'ans because it might cause backlash against Americans and American troops....we can't move a mosque because islamists might blow up some trains....we can't report suspicious muslims because they will sue our asses...we can't criticize islamic terror for fear of being called islamophobic and we can't etch out a picture of Mohammed or one of these satanists will cut off our heads.

Enough. Enough. Since when do Americans fear ANYONE in this world? Take your threat, take your warning, Imam Rauf, and shove it up your lying skank ass. And while you're at it, shove that mosque of yours up the same canal.

NY imam regrets 'pain' over mosque site


The cleric behind a proposed Islamic center in New York said he would not have planned it so close to the site of the September 11, 2001 attacks had he foreseen the level of "pain" triggered by the controversial project.

But imam Feisal Abdul Rauf said America's national security was now at stake in how it handles the 100-million-dollar center which has stirred raw emotions in the United States, and that changing the location would fuel violent extremism.

"If I knew this would happen, this would cause this kind of pain, I wouldn't have done it," the imam told CNN late Wednesday in his first televised interview since returning from a two-week State Department-sponsored cooperation tour of the Middle East.

But he stressed the center, which includes a mosque, to be built about two blocks from Ground Zero should go ahead, "because we have to now make sure that whatever we do actually results in greater peace, not in greater conflict."

He warned that Muslims worldwide could react more violently than they had done to the bloody riots that followed the publication of Danish cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed in 2005, strengthen extremists' ability to recruit followers and increase violence against Americans.

"If we move from that location, the story will be the radicals have taken over the discourse," said Abdul Rauf, who has been an imam in New York for more than 25 years.

"The headlines in the Muslim world will be that Islam is under attack."

Abdul Rauf said he acknowledged the uproar that has swelled over the Islamic center -- which includes a mosque as well as separate prayer rooms for Christians, Jews and men and women of other faiths -- and recognized there was "a certain anger" over the plans.

"We would not have done something that would create more divisiveness," he said, adding that "I understand the sensitivity of the people" including relatives of 9/11 victims who are speaking out against the center's plans.

"But if you don't do this right, anger will explode in the Muslim world. If this is not handled correctly, this crisis could become much bigger than the Danish cartoon crisis."

He opened the door to compromise, however, saying that "nothing is off the table" when it comes to moving the site of the planned center.

"We are consulting, talking to various people about how to do this so that we negotiate the best and safest option."

A late August poll by Quinnipiac University showed New York voters, by a 71-21 percent margin, overwhelmingly do not want a new mosque built near the Ground Zero site.

Abdul Rauf portrayed his group's fight to set up the center as a battle between the "moderates" and "radicals" on both sides of the debate, and noted that there was no controversy over the mosque plans when The New York Times ran a front-page story on it late last year.

He said the center had been "absolutely" politicized in recent months by politicians bent on using it as a campaign issue ahead of November mid-term elections in the United States.

Abdul Rauf also urged a small Florida church to reconsider its plans to go ahead with a Koran burning ceremony to mark Saturday's ninth anniversary of 9/11, a move that has fueled growing fears it will ignite a fresh wave of anti-Muslim sentiment and extremist violence that could endanger US troops.

"It is something that is not the right thing to do," the imam said.

"With freedom comes responsibility," he added. "This is dangerous to our national security and is also the un-Christian thing to do.... Jesus said to love your enemy. We are not your enemy."

The Truth Behind The Ground Zero Mosque

By Findalis of Monkey in the Middle

The ruins of the World Trade Center and the ground that they occupied are considered by many people (myself included) sacred ground.  Thus the proposal for a Mosque to be built at Ground Zero is offensive to us, due to the nature of the attacks that day, the religion of the attackers and the joy the Muslim world had when the news of the destruction and death of that infamous day was broadcast to them.

The members of the left-wing  and their mouthpieces in the media are screaming how the Imam of this Mosque is a moderate, is a bridge-builder, is a true man of peace, a loving man.  Just listen to his views:



Why is it that Muslims cannot or will not accept responsibility for this atrocity?  In fact they are the biggest deniers of the truth behind 9/11.  They claim George Bush, the CIA, the Israelis, MI-5, and or the Mossad all did 9/11 to discredit Islam, attack Afghanistan and Iraq, kill Saddam Hussein and steal the oil of Iraq.

Now those who support this monstrosity have shown their true colors.  Listen to their noise, their hatred, their sense of self-righteousness.  No where do they check their rhetoric or anti-Semitism, even when it is known that they were being filmed.  Keep your eyes open around the 3:55 mark (Hat Tip to Israel Matzav)



For the record:  The majority of those you have just seen where bussed in from other cities.  It seems that the majority of New Yorkers are AGAINST this Mosque being built at Ground Zero!!

Now I ask you.  Who are the real racists?  The ones opposing the proposed Mosque or the supporters who blame 9/11 and now this ground swell of opposition on the Jews?

Obama's 'Teachable' Shariah Moment

While the MSM is busying trying to help President Obama spin what he said about supporting the Ground Zero mosque on Friday night, this article at Family Security Matters speaks to what Obama actually meant and what position it all has put him in. The great part of this article is how it points to the associations that Obama has made while President of this Land. Let's face it, you'd have to have your head buried in the sand to not notice the connection between this mosque and some extremely bad organizations in this world - and not only has Obama ignored those evil connections, he has actually lent credence to them.

From the article:

Imam Rauf makes no bones about that being his purpose. So do some of his most prominent backers, like the Muslim Brotherhood front, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the Brotherhood's Palestinian franchise, the designated terrorist group Hamas. In fact, according to the New York Post, on Sunday, Mahmoud al-Zahar, an Hamas co-founder and leader in Gaza, told WABC Radio host Aaron Klein: "We have to build the mosque [at Ground Zero]. We have to build everywhere. In every area we have [as] Muslim[s], we have to pray and this mosque is the only site of prayer."

What else have we learned so far from Mr. Obama's teachable shariah moment? We now know that the President is willing to associate with members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), not just in Cairo - where he insisted they be invited to hear his famous paean to Islam last year - but in the White House. For example, leaders of known MB front groups like Ingrid Mattson of the Islamic Society of North America and Salam al-Marayati of the Muslim Public Affairs Council were in the company at the Iftar dinner Friday when Mr. Obama fervently embraced the Ground Zero mosque.

You see there from the article the connection made between Obama and the Muslim Brotherhood. Was it just coincidence that Obama's major speech to muslims of the world came from Cairo (the home of the Muslim Brotherhood)? I think not.

I'll leave you today with this question, which you can ponder: "If Shariah Law was to be proposed and approved in a major city in America, and President Barack Hussein Obama was subsequently asked if he approved of this system actually becoming a reality in an American city....would Obama state that Shariah goes against the rule of law of this Land laid down by the Constitution or would Obama respond that islamists in America have the religious freedom to institute their traditions?

Obama's 'Teachable' Shariah Moment


On Friday night, Barack Obama gave his full-throated endorsement to a mosque and "cultural center" on private property that has been purchased in Lower Manhattan adjacent to the site where the World Trade Center's twin towers once stood. By Saturday, however, he wanted the American people to know that he was not commenting on "the wisdom" of putting such a mosque by that hallowed ground - just "the right" of its backers like Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to do it, pursuant to the Constitution's protection of religious freedom.

Unfortunately for the President - but fortunately for the country - it is too late for such ludicrous contortions and dissembling. However much Mr. Obama and his fellow Democrats now regret his original White House statement, it has created a "teachable moment." Not just about the Ground Zero mosque but about the larger enterprise it is intended to serve: bringing the law of Saudi Arabia and Iran, shariah, to America.

Imam Rauf makes no bones about that being his purpose. So do some of his most prominent backers, like the Muslim Brotherhood front, the Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR), and the Brotherhood's Palestinian franchise, the designated terrorist group Hamas. In fact, according to the New York Post, on Sunday, Mahmoud al-Zahar, an Hamas co-founder and leader in Gaza, told WABC Radio host Aaron Klein: "We have to build the mosque [at Ground Zero]. We have to build everywhere. In every area we have [as] Muslim[s], we have to pray and this mosque is the only site of prayer."

Al-Zahar also enthused about shariah, calling it the "tradition of Islam" which "is controlling every source of our life as regards to marriage, divorce, our commercial relations." He added ominously that, "Even the Islamic people or Muslims in [the United States] are living now in the tradition of Islam."

What else have we learned so far from Mr. Obama's teachable shariah moment? We now know that the President is willing to associate with members of the Muslim Brotherhood (MB), not just in Cairo - where he insisted they be invited to hear his famous paean to Islam last year - but in the White House. For example, leaders of known MB front groups like Ingrid Mattson of the Islamic Society of North America and Salam al-Marayati of the Muslim Public Affairs Council were in the company at the Iftar dinner Friday when Mr. Obama fervently embraced the Ground Zero mosque.

This is an important insight since we know from uncontested evidence submitted by the government in the largest terrorism finance trial in U.S. history - the Holy Land Foundation case - that the Muslim Brotherhood's mission in America is "destroying Western civilization from within and ‘sabotaging' its miserable house by their hands and the hands of the believers so that it is eliminated and God's religion is made victorious over all other religions."

What on earth is the President of the United States doing fraternizing with, and thereby legitimating, operatives of an organization with such a seditious mission - to say nothing of endorsing their most immediate priority: the Ground Zero Mosque?

We have also learned that the Obama administration insists that Imam Rauf, another Brotherhood apparatchik, is a "moderate." Never mind the abundant evidence to the contrary - not least his statement that he wants to bring shariah to America. Believing him to be a good "ambassador" for the United States, the Obama-Hillary Clinton State Department has gone so far as to send Rauf on a taxpayer-funded trip to Arab capitals. While there, he will surely try to parlay the President of the United States' explicit endorsement of his Ground Zero project and sponsorship of his travels into funding from oil-rich promoters of shariah to build his 13-story, $100 million megamosque within spitting distance of some of America's most hallowed real estate.

There is much more yet to be learned, of course. For example: Why is the U.S. government promoting the Brotherhood's effort to penetrate our capital markets via "shariah-compliant finance," including its direct ownership of a huge player in that field, AIG? Which other shariah-adherent Muslims are getting their expenses paid by the State Department as they network around the globe on behalf of their seditious agenda? How much is this outrageous program costing, and what does Foggy Bottom have to show for it? Why did Team Obama cosponsor a UN resolution last Fall imposing "shariah blasphemy" laws that utterly conflict with the First Amendment's protection of free speech?

As he hosted the Ramadan fast-breaking dinner at the White House on Friday, President Obama showed his true colors on shariah. Trying to dress up the Ground Zero mosque or any other aspect of this brutally repressive, totalitarian and inherently unconstitutional program as a matter of "religious freedom" does not pass the giggle test. Shariah is about power, not faith, and no amount of Obama subsidies, solidarity or spin on behalf of that agenda will persuade the American people to allow the so-called "tradition of Islam" to supplant our civil liberties, form of government and way of life.

When, Exactly, Did Someone Come Up With the Idea That There Is "Moderate" Islam?

I've been waiting and waiting, searching and searching, for an article on Islam that would finally call a spade a spade...one that would finally "out" the bullshit that has permeated our society and news media that there is this "thing" that is actually "moderate islam. Well, I found it! Hooray!

This article at Family Security Matters takes Islam on, head on and brings to light what I have been saying for years here that there is NO SUCH THING as moderate Islam. My favorite section of the article is this:

Utilizing the word “Radical” when describing a Muslim terrorist, suggests that there is such a thing as a “Moderate” as well. I am not saying all Muslims are terrorists. I am saying there is no moderate Islam. There are plenty of Muslims who aren't actively furthering the cause of jihad. But that doesn't mean that there is a form of Islam that is peaceful and non-supremacist.

I know I will take a lot of flak for that last comment; I will be accused of ‘hate speech’. Well, if you want hate speech, read the Quran!

When you consider just how many people in this world have been killed in the name of Mohammed and Allah, it is truly amazing to me the lack of knowledge that most Americans have about this fake religion. Let's look at another part of the article:

Dr. Ahmed is also the author of 12 books, all dealing with the problems of women in Muslim societies and the hidden causes that led to tragic events such as September 11. During my interview with him, we were discussing how anyone who says they are a Muslim must believe and embrace Sharia law. Dr. Ahmed made a telling comment referring to Muslim Americans:

“A Muslim is a Muslim, no matter where they live in the world”. “The terms “radical” and “moderate” Muslim is a Western term, you never hear these terms in Muslim countries”.

This point holds true for each and every Muslim. They must subscribe to all of the Quran and the Hadith. They cannot pick and choose what parts or verses they like or they would not be a “true” Muslim. So, once again, I am not saying all Muslims are terrorists. I am saying there is no moderate Islam.

If we continue to use words like “moderate” and “radical” we are subscribing to the famous quote by Lenin “A lie told often enough becomes truth”.

You know, if you think about it, there aren't too many people that look at world history and would make the statement that there were moderate and radical Nazis - you know, the radical Nazis help execute the Jews but oh boy, there were millions of moderate Nazis that didn't do that! Of course that angle has never been taken because it is ludicrous. But some might say, "Nazism isn't a religion!" Well, neither is Islam. They are both violent political ideologies.

I never agreed with President Bush's agreement to purport this peaceful nature of Islam - perhaps he felt the need to after 9/11 to try and maintain order in this country but we saw the evidence clearly after the 9/11 attacks - we saw muslim populations around the world celebrate the 9/11 attacks and right here in the United States, after the carnage of those attacks, we saw NO condemnation of the attacks by any muslim leaders - it was literally months and months after the attack that we saw any feeble form of condemnation.

When you sift through the political correctness doctrine of the Left in America and through the lies of the islamists, you will finally understand what we are up against - an ideology hellbent on the overthrow of our country, the overthrow of our Constitution, the overthrow of our culture and the overthrow of our freedom of religion.

I made the comment last night in a chat room that I think is appropriate now, with the lastest islamic attack on America, namely the Ground Zero mosque. My comment was:

" Isn't it ironic that religious freedoms in America have paved the way for a mosque to be built at Ground Zero by a "religion" that allows no religious freedom?"

Does the Constitution of the United States provide for the freedom of expression by ANY group? Does the Constitution provide for the safe haven of an enemy of the Union?

Stop Enabling Stealth Jihad and Creeping Sharia


On September 17, 2001, just six days after the worst attack on American soil, President Bush gave a speech at the Islamic Center of Washington, D.C. Below is the end of that speech, in which he stated:

“These acts of violence against innocents violate the fundamental tenets of the Islamic faith. And it's important for my fellow Americans to understand that.

The face of terror is not the true faith of Islam. That's not what Islam is all about. Islam is peace. These terrorists don't represent peace. They represent evil and war.

When we think of Islam we think of a faith that brings comfort to a billion people around the world. Billions of people find comfort and solace and peace. And that's made brothers and sisters out of every race -- out of every race.

America counts millions of Muslims amongst our citizens, and Muslims make an incredibly valuable contribution to our country. Muslims are doctors, lawyers, law professors, members of the military, entrepreneurs, shopkeepers, moms and dads. And they need to be treated with respect. In our anger and emotion, our fellow Americans must treat each other with respect.

Women who cover their heads in this country must feel comfortable going outside their homes. Moms who wear cover must be not intimidated in America. That's not the America I know. That's not the America I value.

I've been told that some fear to leave; some don't want to go shopping for their families; some don't want to go about their ordinary daily routines because, by wearing cover, they're afraid they'll be intimidated. That should not and that will not stand in America.

Those who feel like they can intimidate our fellow citizens to take out their anger don't represent the best of America, they represent the worst of humankind, and they should be ashamed of that kind of behavior.”

Although I didn’t agree with what he stated, I understood at the time why he said it. Right after September 11, we had many incidents of mosques being vandalized. People were being beaten and killed, some of whom were not even Muslim, but rather Hindu’s and Sikh men. These had been mistaken to be followers of Osama bin Laden because of their turbans and beards.

Things were truly getting out of hand. Hate crimes were up by astounding rates. According to an article by the Associated Press on June 29, 2003:

“Hate crimes against people because of their ethnicity or national origin--those not Hispanic, not black and not Asian or American Indian--also increased sharply, from 354 in 2000 to 1,501 in 2001. That category includes people of Middle Eastern descent or origin. The increases, the FBI said, occurred "presumably as a result of the heinous incidents that occurred on Sept. 11.”

But the statement “Islam is a religion of peace” has been stated over and over by many a politician thousands of times. It has now become mainstream and common place. So much so, that this continued all the way through the Bush Presidency. On October 4, 2007 George W. Bush spoke on Al Arabiya television and claimed that:

“The Islamic religion is a great religion that preaches peace.”

The very next day, on October 5, he hosted an iftar event at the White House, celebrating the daily breaking of the fast observed by Muslims during the month of Ramadan. Here he said:

“That’s not a Christian act to kill innocent people, and those who carried out the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks against New York and Washington do not reflect the views of the vast majority of peaceful people in the Middle East.”

Funny that he even stated that at a Ramadan get-together. Well Mr. Bush, I can agree with that statement: “That’s not a Christian act to kill innocent people”. But then again, Muslims are not Christians are they?

As they often do with so many other statements, Muslim leaders and C.A.I.R. (Council on American Islamic Relations) are experts on utilizing what people say to their advantage. So, what started in order to quell anger and violence led to other “politically correct” terms.

Think back to pre-9/11 days. Do you recall anyone using the term “Radical Muslim” or “Moderate Muslim”? Interesting if you think about it; it’s not like we hadn’t seen Muslim terrorists in the news prior to 9/11.

Remember the Munich Olympic Massacre of 1972? The P.L.O. murdered 11 Israeli athletes and a German policeman in front of the entire world. Did the news refer to them as “radical Muslims”? No, they called them what they were; Muslim terrorists. Remember here in the U.S. the first time they tried to bring down the towers on February 26, 1993? Were they “radical Muslims” then? No, they were terrorists.

Now, we have the Obama administration, who in their infinite wisdom has removed each and every word from the National Security Strategy (pdf) that in any way, shape or form refers to Islam. No longer will anyone that works for the Government be allowed to say, use or write “Islamic terrorist”, “Islamic extremist”, “Jihad”, “Jihadist”, “ Islamist”… you get the point. I am sure the term “Muslim maniac” is out as well, even though that wasn’t specifically mentioned.

Utilizing the word “Radical” when describing a Muslim terrorist, suggests that there is such a thing as a “Moderate” as well. I am not saying all Muslims are terrorists. I am saying there is no moderate Islam. There are plenty of Muslims who aren't actively furthering the cause of jihad. But that doesn't mean that there is a form of Islam that is peaceful and non-supremacist.

I know I will take a lot of flak for that last comment; I will be accused of ‘hate speech’. Well, if you want hate speech, read the Quran!

Instead of believing what I say, allow me to quote the guest I had just last week on my radio show “America Akbar”. My guest was Dr. Thomas Ahmed. Dr. Ahmed is an Islamic convert who was born and raised in Sudan. A holder of 5 university degrees and expert on Islam, he is now an ordained Christian minister.

Dr. Ahmed is also the author of 12 books, all dealing with the problems of women in Muslim societies and the hidden causes that led to tragic events such as September 11. During my interview with him, we were discussing how anyone who says they are a Muslim must believe and embrace Sharia law. Dr. Ahmed made a telling comment referring to Muslim Americans:

“A Muslim is a Muslim, no matter where they live in the world”. “The terms “radical” and “moderate” Muslim is a Western term, you never hear these terms in Muslim countries”.

This point holds true for each and every Muslim. They must subscribe to all of the Quran and the Hadith. They cannot pick and choose what parts or verses they like or they would not be a “true” Muslim. So, once again, I am not saying all Muslims are terrorists. I am saying there is no moderate Islam.

If we continue to use words like “moderate” and “radical” we are subscribing to the famous quote by Lenin “A lie told often enough becomes truth”.

This week I had Usama Dakdok as a guest on my show. Usama was born in Egypt and raised in a Christian home as the son of a Baptist pastor. Usama learned about Islam in school because it was, and still is, a mandatory subject. To further his knowledge of Islam, he studied Islamic law in college and came to the U.S. in 1992. In 2001 Usama founded the Straight Way of Grace Ministry.

He travels throughout the United States equipping Christians to be effective witnesses of Jesus Christ to their Muslim neighbors, as well as ministering to Muslims directly.

We spoke about “moderate” vs. “radical” Islam and Usama, who is very to the point to say the least, stated:

“There is no such thing as a ‘moderate Muslim’,’ moderate Muslim’ exists only on paper. A moderate Muslim is a good Muslim who is practicing Taqiyya”. (Lying as commanded by the Quran and Hadith to further Islam) “Islam is worse than a cancer that is spreading throughout America”.

We, all of us, need to stop enabling the Muslims in this country and throughout the world. If you use the term “radical” or “moderate”, stop! If you hear someone else using it, correct them!

I have said in every lecture and written many times before: political correctness will be the death of this country. You think I am being too harsh? You think I am spewing hate or imagining how much power a word can have?

Think about it, first they were “terrorists” and then they were labeled as “radicals”. Then, quite recently, as in the case of Major Nidal Hasan, after he shot and murdered 13 and wounded 30, he was termed “misunderstood” and no news station said he was a Muslim. The 86 page report by the Pentagon never even mentions his motives even though he screamed “Allah Akbar” as he shot his fellow soldiers in cold blood. What’s more is that the words “Islam” or “Muslim” are never mentioned in 86 pages. Not even once, despite his personal business cards inscribed with the letters SoA (“Soldier of Allah”).

Then we had the SUV bomber in Times Square, ah yes, Faisal Shahzad. He was the victim. Remember the first reports? He was laid off, lost his mortgage and was “upset”.

No, the truth was: he quit his job and stopped paying his mortgage because he knew he was going to carry out Jihad in America. It would be stupid to pay your mortgage when you are traveling back and forth to Pakistan 13 times in one year for training and to be a good Muslim.

Stop enabling and before you call me or anyone else who speaks out on Islam a bigot or a hater, read the damn Quran. Then we’ll talk.

The Crisis of Leadership In the White House

In this article at Family Security Matters, the Editor does a masterful job of tearing apart Barack Hussein Obama's handling of the Ground Zero mosque issue and also, Obama's overall handling of Islam.

My favorite portion of the article is the summation which states:

In a time of economic crisis, people look to their president for leadership, for words that will inspire, give hope and, more importantly, unite the nation. Napoleon Bonaparte once suggested that “A leader is a dealer in hope.” The president’s speeches made over the last few days have only sown division and anxiety. The floundering attempts to extricate himself from this situation could be seen as the outward signs of a president in the first throes of political suicide.

I have a theory of why Obama has booted this whole affair so badly - it's one of passion. We have seen from the very start of the Obama Presidency, his adamant desire to reach out to the islamists in this world but the telling issue is the passion that Obama displays when he address muslims. If you look at his recorded messages to the Iranians, his speech in Cairo and even in this much smaller speech at the onset of Ramadan, you see a man inspired by islam - we have seen him go out of his way to minimize radical islamic terror and at the same time, also go out of his way to promote the advances and ideals of islam in the world's history.

What I am trying to say here is this - Barack Hussein Obama is an ADVOCATE of islam. And in my view, Obama views islam and its followers of this world as he views the blacks in the communities that he helped organize - those two groups are what drives this President's passion. And I don't think I have to highlight how dangerous an islamic advocate is sitting in our White House.

While many of us will look at Obama's support of the Ground Zero mosque with contempt and real confusion as to how he can turn his back on the victims and the victims' families...it is critical that we understand that Barack Hussein Obama doesn't see the victims and their families as you and me see them - Obama sees them as collateral damage in a movement that he supports.

A Crisis of Leadership?


On Friday, in the State Dining Room at the White House, President Barack Obama hosted an iftar dinner for Muslim guests. The tradition of holding iftar dinners at the White House – where a meal is eaten after the dawn to dusk fast that Muslims make during Ramadan - began under the Clintons. The person who initiated these meals in 1996 and advised Hillary Clinton on subsequent White House iftar dinners was Abdurahman Alamoudi, who would later be jailed for 23 years after he admitted terrorism charges. This year’s White House iftar dinner, held on Friday 13, could prove to be extremely unlucky for the president.

Two days before the meal, the president gave a Ramadan speech in which his chosen words were inaccurate. He stated that: “Islam has always been in America.” As discussed here on FSM, there is no factual evidence to support such a claim.

On Friday evening, President Obama addressed guests that included Keith Ellison, John Conyers and also, as Frank Gaffney reported, the White House Muslim adviser and sharia-supporting Dalia Mogahed, as well as Ingrid Mattson who is head of Muslim Brotherhood front group ISNA, and Salam Al-Marayati who is president of the Muslim Public Affairs Council, which also began as an American branch of the Egyptian Muslim Brotherhood.

The full text of the iftar dinner address by President Obama can be found here. Comments made within this speech have shocked and outraged Americans. These comments showed that he was supportive of the “right” of Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf to build a mosque near the site of Ground Zero. In his preprandial address to around 120 guests, Obama said:

“Recently, attention has been focused on the construction of mosques in certain communities – particularly New York. Now, we must all recognize and respect the sensitivities surrounding the development of Lower Manhattan. The 9/11 attacks were a deeply traumatic event for our country. And the pain and the experience of suffering by those who lost loved ones is just unimaginable. So I understand the emotions that this issue engenders. And Ground Zero is, indeed, hallowed ground.

But let me be clear. As a citizen, and as President, I believe that Muslims have the same right to practice their religion as everyone else in this country. (Applause.) And 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. This is America. And our commitment to religious freedom must be unshakeable. The principle that people of all faiths are welcome in this country and that they will not be treated differently by their government is essential to who we are. The writ of the Founders must endure.”

The contentious issues of Rauf’s intentions to build a mosque are nothing to do with whether or not Muslims have any “right” to build a mosque. The problematic issue is one of where such a mosque is built. Imam Rauf and his wife Daisy Khan have shown no respect or consideration for the victims of 9/11. Khan told relatives of 9/11 victims that a mosque at Ground Zero would provide “much needed party space and much needed venue space.” After 9/11, Rauf himself had said of 9/11 that

“United States policies were an accessory to the crime that happened.... Because we have been accessory to a lot of innocent lives dying in the world. In fact, in the most direct sense, Osama bin Laden is made in the USA.”

On Tuesday August 10 Philip J. Crowley, the State Department Press Secretary, had confirmed during a question and answer session that Rauf had been funded to go abroad to act as an emissary of the United States:

“Imam Feisal will be traveling to Qatar, Bahrain, and the UAE on a U.S. Government-sponsored trip to the Middle East. He will discuss Muslim life in America and religious tolerance. This is part of a program – and yesterday, I actually was in error. I attributed it to our ECA Bureau, Education and Cultural Affairs. It’s actually our International Information Programs – IIP, our office that handles this particular program.

We have about 1,200 of these kinds of programs every year, sending experts on all fields overseas. Last year, we had 52 trips that were specifically focused on religious – promoting religious tolerance. We will expect to have roughly the same number of programs this year. For Imam Feisal, this will be his third trip under this program. In 2007, he visited Bahrain, Morocco, the UAE and Qatar. And earlier this year in January, he also visited Egypt. So we have a long-term relationship with him. His work on tolerance and religious diversity is well-known and he brings a moderate perspective to foreign audiences on what it’s like to be a practicing Muslim in the United States. And our discussions with him about taking this trip preceded the current debate in New York over the center.”

The comments by the president on Friday were seen by many people as condoning the construction of the mosque. By pretending that the construction of the mosque near Ground Zero was something he supported on grounds of “religious freedom” seemed disingenuous. In 2003 there were 90 mosques in New York City, serving the religious needs of 600,000 to 800,000 Muslims. There are now around 100 mosques. The political dimensions of Imam Rauf’s mission to build a mosque on the disused Burlington Coat Factory site (a building damaged by fuselage from one of the planes that flew into the WTC) worry many people.

CNN produced a poll two days before Obama’s iftar dinner speech, in which it was claimed that almost 70 percent of Americans oppose the construction of the Ground Zero Mosque, and 29 percent favor it. The full results of the poll can be viewed here (pdf document).

The day before the CNN poll was released, a Marist poll showed that New York’s formerly popular mayor Michael Bloomberg, who has been a strong advocate for the Park51 mosque, had his approval ratings drop to below 50 percent for the first time. The same poll showed that of New Yorkers, 53 percent opposed the construction of the mosque, 34 percent approved and 13 percent were unsure.

Debra Burlingame, co-founder of 9/11 Families for a Safe and Strong America has condemned the Iftar Dinner speech. She wrote that

Barack Obama has abandoned America at the place where America’s heart was broken nine years ago, and where her true values were on display for all to see. Since that dark day, Americans have been asked to bear the burden of defending those values, again and again and again. Now this president declares that the victims of 9/11 and their families must bear another burden. We must stand silent at the last place in America where 9/11 is still remembered with reverence or risk being called religious bigots.

We are stunned by the president’s willingness to disregard what Americans should be proud of: our enduring generosity to others on 9/11–a day when human decency triumphed over human depravity. On that day, when 3,000 of our fellow human beings were killed in barbaric act of raw religious intolerance unlike this country had ever seen, Americans did not turn outward with hatred or violence, we turned to each other, armed with nothing more than American flags and countless acts of kindness. In a breathtakingly inappropriate setting, the president has chosen to declare our memories of 9/11 obsolete and the sanctity of Ground Zero finished. No one who has lived this history and felt the sting of our country’s loss that day can truly believe that putting our families through more wrenching heartache can be an act of peace.


On Saturday Sarah Palin, who had previously condemned the choice of location for the “Park51 Mosque” used her Facebook page to ask some direct questions of the president:

Mr. President, should they or should they not build a mosque steps away from where radical Islamists killed 3000 people? Please tell us your position. We all know that they have the right to do it, but should they? And, no, this is not above your pay grade. If those who wish to build this Ground Zero mosque are sincerely interested in encouraging positive "cross-cultural engagement" and dialogue to show a moderate and tolerant face of Islam, then why haven't they recognized that the decision to build a mosque at this particular location is doing just the opposite? Mr. President, why aren't you encouraging the mosque developers to accept Governor Paterson's generous offer of assistance in finding a new location for the mosque on state land if they move it away from Ground Zero? Why haven't they jumped at this offer? Why are they apparently so set on building a mosque steps from what you have described, in agreement with me, as "hallowed ground"? I believe these are legitimate questions to ask.

Less than 24 hours after the message first went online, 16,900 people confirmed that they “liked” the statement.

The omens were already there for all to see, including the president and his speech-writers, and they indicated that any open support of the mosque would not be a wise political move. But in his iftar dinner speech, President Obama once again seemed to care more that he should appear in a positive light in Muslim nations. The speech was translated into three languages – Arabic and Persian, and also Russian (pdf documents). Muslim “advocacy” organizations in America may have been impressed, and perhaps many Muslims too, by the apparent endorsement by the president for the construction of a mosque near Ground Zero.

However, by invoking the Founding Fathers to declare the “right” of the backers of the mosque to construct a religious building, whose proposed imam is already in receipt of U.S. government funding, the president came close to denigrating another of the Founding Fathers’ rules: the “Establishment Clause” in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights.

The speech on Friday was delivered by the president with force and passion – he sounded angry at the thought that people could object to the “right” of a mosque to be built anywhere in America, even in the close vicinity of what for many is seen as a sign of the intolerance of Islam. Once again, the president presented a view of Islam that any student of its history could rip apart with ease:

“Al Qaeda’s cause is not Islam - it’s a gross distortion of Islam.”

And

“Muslim American clerics have spoken out against terror and extremism, reaffirming that Islam teaches that one must save human life, not take it.”

Islam is a political ideology that has always used violence to achieve its ends, from the time of the prophet’s caravan raids (Sura 8 of the Koran) to when Mohammed ordered the decapitation of the entire male population of the Jewish Banu Qurayzah tribe at Medina (according to Ibn Ishaq, Sira 5), and to the conversion by the sword that is always denied by Islam’s dissemblers and apologists. Few Muslims like to admit that for two years after Mohammed’s death there was widespread apostasy among the groups of people who had become conquered by Islam. From 632 to 633 AD, the first Caliph Abu Bakr, father of Mohammed’s child-bride Aisha, engaged in what was known as the Ridda Wars (Apostasy Wars) to force those Arabic rulers who had abandoned Islam to once again submit to the religion whose name, appropriately enough, means “submission.”

Obama is right to suggest that everyone has a right to practice their faith freely, and Muslims must have rights to be allowed to practice their religion (though not to practice sharia punishments such as flogging, decapitating and stoning). But by apparently siding with an imam who seems to have no concern for the relatives of 9/11, he made a grand political faux pas.

On Saturday, while he was in Panama City, Florida, the president had to qualify his statement, following the outcry that it had provoked. He said:

“I was not commenting and I will not comment on the wisdom of making the decision to put a mosque there. I was commenting very specifically on the right people have that dates back to our founding. That's what our country is about.”

He also said on Saturday that:

“I think it’s very important, as difficult as some of these issues are, that we stay focused on who we are as a people and what our values are all about.”

Perhaps, when he has made efforts to change even NASA’s role, according to its administrator Charles Bolden, to one of providing Muslim outreach work, the president himself is the one who has not focused on “who we are as a people.” In July, Bolden said that: “perhaps foremost, he (Obama) wanted me to find a way to reach out to the Muslim world and engage much more with dominantly Muslim nations to help them feel good about their historic contribution to science ... and math and engineering.”

With America in a financial crisis and with its borders insecure and its people anxious, it seems the president has spent time reassuring Muslim nations that America is “tolerant,” rather than reassuring American citizens that their concerns and feelings are to be taken into consideration.

What the president has effectively done by apparently back-tracking on his statements, one day after he made them, has further demonstrated a lack of purpose and will. It is a sign of weakness to make a bold statement one day and on the next day to apparently back down.

This year’s White House iftar dinner appears to have seriously damaged the president’s credibility. Iftar dinners in the White House did not originate from a person with the most noble of intentions. The man who organized the first iftar dinner – Abdurahman Alamoudi – was a Muslim Brotherhood supporter who went on to become an active terrorist. In Lafayette Park in October 2000, Alamoudi had declared that he was a supporter of Hamas and Hezbollah. When, in 1996, Alamoudi had initiated the first iftar dinner in the White House he knew exactly what he thought of America and how America should be changed.

In Illinois, in the same year that he initiated White House iftar dinners, at a speech at the Islamic Society of Palestine convention, Abdurahman Alamoudi had said:

“Muslims sooner or later will be the moral leadership of America. It depends on me and you. Either we do it now or we do it after a hundred years, but this country will become a Muslim country. And I think if we are outside this country, we can say, “Oh, Allah, destroy America.” But once we are here, our mission in this country is to change it.”

The words of the president’s speech-writer, though designed to cause harmony, have sounded to many as if the dystopian future presented in Alamoudi’s 1996 speech is becoming a reality. The president appears (unwittingly, perhaps) to have taken sides against the families of the 9/11 victims. He additionally appears to be supporting Imam Rauf, a man who is already on the government payroll and who has previously suggested that America had been an accessory to 9/11.

In a time of economic crisis, people look to their president for leadership, for words that will inspire, give hope and, more importantly, unite the nation. Napoleon Bonaparte once suggested that “A leader is a dealer in hope.” The president’s speeches made over the last few days have only sown division and anxiety. The floundering attempts to extricate himself from this situation could be seen as the outward signs of a president in the first throes of political suicide.