So, who's building the 51 Park Place Islamic Community Center with Mosque and, they say, a swimming pool, and what are their connections with that faction of Islam we have come to know and loathe? There is one Sharif El-Gamal who became suddenly and mysteriously very rich and is buying properties such as 45 Park Place. The mystery is like unto Hillary's $100,000,000 success in cattle futures.

Where does El-Gamal's money come from? He won't say. But the money trail is growing.

What does he do for fun?

“. . . there is a video of Ground Zero Mosque developer Sharif El-Gamal at an Anti-Israeli rally in NYC yelling inflammatory statements over a bullhorn. This video supposedly will be made available in the following weeks leading up to the 9/11 anniversary on September 11th, 2010.”

Sounds revealing. From further down in the same article:

“There is word of a[n] investigation that is ongoing into Sharif El-Gamal of the SOHO Properties real estate business by the NYS Division of Licensing Real Estate*in Manhattan for non-payment of apartment rental deposits to customers that were supposed to be in escrow…The NYS Division of Licensing Real Estate in Manhattan will neither confirm or deny that there is a investigation*into Sharif El-Gamal*and SOHO Properties that started in May of 2010.Sharif el-Gamal’s guarantor’s (co-signer)*on a $39 million mortgage, Hisham Elzanaty, is evidently the same person listed as having contributed $1,000 to Obama’s campaign, as well as numerous other donations to other politicians, including recently to Democratic Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, a mosque supporter.”

Mmhmm. From here.

Bit of blog-swatting about it over here. My my.

Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf – such a peach:

"'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.'

This is outrageously specious, but it depends on the ignorance of the listeners. The bombings of Dresden and Hiroshima were not justified by the bombers on the basis of Christian theology. The bombings by terrorists -- 9/11, 3/11, etc. -- are justified on the basis of Islamic theology. By claiming that they are equivalent, Abdul Rauf obscures the Islamic roots of modern-day terrorism, thus hindering the prospects for the reform within Islam that is so desperately needed if jihad terrorism is ever going to cease.
Imam Feisal said the bombing in Madrid had made his message more urgent. He said there was an endless supply of angry young Muslim rebels prepared to die for their cause and there was no sign of the attacks ending unless there was a fundamental change in the world.

Yes indeed. But displaying a lack of the self-critical faculty that he shares with radical Muslims, he makes no mention, at least according to this report, of the Islamic roots of terror, and of the need for Muslims who truly (rather than deceptively) oppose terror to address this problem."

That's from AtlasShrugs2000. Paints the picture of the imam who will, with no regard to fairness, himself displease when it comes to us, meaning thee and me. Like he needs to do this crap, and like we need to put up with it. I mean, we could bomb his car. Look what it did for the Corleones.

There's more. This fellow may charitably be described as "part of the precipitate."

And Imam Rauf's funding comes from whom and where, again?

But meanwhile, Yossi Klein Halevi. He's a “gentleman crying, 'Peace, peace,' yet there is no peace.”
Stupid, stupid, because there is no smart!

“The proposed site was close enough to have been hit by a landing-gear assembly from one of the crashed airliners on 9/11 -- and that's way too close.

They're also nervous about the project's backers -- even before Elzanaty popped up -- deciding that, with those folks involved, anywhere might be too close.

As The Post reported yesterday, Rauf has been catching iffy tax breaks since 1998 for an organization run from his wife's Upper West Side apartment.

How'd he do it? By telling the IRS the one-bedroom digs were actually a mosque where 500 people prayed daily.

These are only the latest revelations about the mosque's backers, who've run up a cumulative record of petty crime, slumlording and tax-scamming.

And that's being generous.

Rauf, who's due back in New York this weekend after a long trip abroad, has plenty of explaining to do to the people he's been thumbing in the eye for weeks.

First there is Elzanaty's role, of course.
Then there's the elephant in the room: Whence the $100 million needed for the mosque?”

From The New York Post.

Really, the contention that Imam Rauf is not a terrorism practitioner seems unduly disingenuous. He's an orchestrator, and manifestly thinks himself an armed Soldier Of God.

And is Rauf the moderate, as these people go? Shouldn't we send such “moderation” straight to hell? Is this sort of thing acceptable to free, adult mankind?

There will be no help to be found in Obama. Breaking the enemies of mankind and democracy is not what he wants to do. No wonder I voted for Bush twice – his is a much better character. No wonder I will vote against Obama next chance I get. However personable he can be, he believes in all the wrong things, and so does Michelle.

Add to that this from American Thinker. Something rather different.

Sure, there's the Time article anybody can find... but.

Here's another view of Sharif el-Gamal link
He doesn't seem quite so sinister in this view.

(bold and quote formats are mine for readability)

"Mr. Gamal has told supporters that he will take no money linked to “un-American” values and that donations will be vetted by federal and state authorities and separate boards for the center and the mosque."

Strange, and yet much of the controversy surrounds the fact that he intended not to tell everyone where his money came from, esp countries like Iran, Syria, and Saudi Arabia. So which is it?

Well, within the link I gave above it also says...

But since he is not required to expose where the money comes from that leaves an opening. Given the current climate, esp in a place like NYC, I suspect there is a low threshold of trust for the legitimacy of the sources of funding for the building of a mosque.

Sorry, in copying from the link I had intended to include the following:

Would such bonds be enough to gain the public trust ?

It seems to me that as much distrust as there is regarding this man and this project,
something more sinister would have been evident by now
given the amount of media and public scrutiny he has received.
Certainly the legal problems he had with the City of NY
was no different than a very large number of landlords have had
regarding rent deposits not being held in escrow,
and not nearly enough to warrant such distrust.

One could wonder if any major project like this community center could stand up to a similar level of scrutiny.

The question is....why should they?

I find it odd that, in large part, it is the conservative free marketeers who are the ones wanting to intervene in a private venture.

Who are those. I don't see anyone who is protesting and wanting to intervene wearing such signs.

Those are the ones who have vilified the private community center project by raising the specter of ties to terrorists organizations and by demanding an accounting of funding.

Really? Where are these conservative free marketeers? I just see a lot of regular people.

Where is the contrary evidence that there are no ties to terrorist states? The money is hidden.

There is no evidence of funds for the community center tied to terrorists states. Its called a witch hunt.

I suspect you would be outraged if a private entity you supported was subject to the same level of scrutiny....calling it leftist extremism and unAmerican.

Who are the regular people to whom you refer? Pamela Geller, the blogger leading the crusade against the Islamization of America? or the Dove Outreach Church and its "burn a Koran" day?

Or perhaps, just those who state that liberal tit suckers continually hammer Christians?

Then they have nothing to hide and can account for every dollar donated to build said mosque to the public.

Anything you suspect about me will be abjectly wrong and biased.

I never stated I supported a Koran burning wacko.

Yes, I believe liberal tit suckers are among those who continually hammer Christians. And under our Constitution I guess they have every right to do so, just as others want to hammer the rise of Islam in this country. Ain't it great! :D

From hammering the rise of Islam (and the witch hunt over a private project that you evidently support) to burning Korans is just a matter of extremes.

Neither supports the concept at the very foundation of our country to protect and respect the rights of the minority.

Where did I say that I support "the witch hunt over a private project"?

Kitchens said it best...
http://www.slate.com/id/2266154/?from=rss

When you said..."Then they have nothing to hide and can account for every dollar donated to build said mosque to the public."

Why should they?

When you hold one particular private enterprise on private property to different standard that you hold all other private enterprises on private property....then IMO, it is a witch hunt.

Kitchens just screams about the coming caliphate like a madman.

not in my mind - The fact that they don't WANT to or REFUSE to do so is more troubling IMO.

Of course I am on the record as saying that they should be able to build the damn thing - whatever it is being called this week.

How the hell do you get that I support a witch hunt (your words) out of that?

Where is he wrong?

Simple.

As I said, unless you hold all other private enterprises to the same standard...its a witch hunt.

Just my opinion.

There is no evidence of this coming Caliphate (particularly among Muslims in the US) other than in the mind of Kitchens and other Islamaphobes.

I am all for the government investigating potential terrorists threats (within the limits of the law) where every they may be.

I am not for demagoguing a religion of 1+ billion, the overwhelming majority of whom just want to mind their own business and practice their religion without being subject to intolerance.

And I am not for imposing a double standard on one religion in the US based on fear.

:corn:

True. Have they asked all those guys building men's rooms where their money came from?

If "Ground Zero" is four blocks by four blocks (16 blocks), and no Islamic Cultural Center is to be built within 3 blocks of it (10x10=100 blocks), that is a prohibition of 84 city blocks where no Islamic Cultural Center can be built. (GZ is not exactly 4x4 and there are not exactly 3 buildable blocks in every direction. But you get the point.)

Evidently you have no knowledge at all of the Islamofascists' mind, their expressed goals, and so forth, all out of their own mouths.

The Muslims in the US are less inclined to such things than overseas fascists, and that's a saving grace. And yet... the overseas fascists remain capable of recruiting among Americans.

Consider the potential reduction of our troubles if there were no Islamofascists. (Cue John Lennon's "Imagine") Now wouldn't that be nice? Lots fewer non-fascist Muslims getting blown up every other day, too, not so?

You persistently don't seem very capable of understanding an enemy, Redux, and you exhibit this inability in writing. That's why I keep telling you you're fatuous -- you can be relied upon to show it.

:dedhors2:

There has been a small mosque/Islamic center within four blocks of "Ground Zero" for years.

http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2010/0...r-ground-zero/

The small mosque within the proposed cultural/community center would replace that old existing mosque.

But the cultural/community center would be much more. With a proposed board of directors including Christian and Jewish religious leaders as well as other community leaders, its mission is to facilitate a greater understanding of each others religious beliefs and strengthen relations to help counter radical ideology and religious intolerance where ever it exists (and that includes dispelling the myths of Hitchins and his followers here).

Seems like a reasonable goal to me...but haters (and those with a political agenda) will still find a reason to hate....on both sides.

I heard not replace, but augment, as the current mosque is seriously overcrowded, with people waiting in line to get in.

:lol2: Sorry but this is just to funny. "Proposed". I guess that is why there are so many people standing up to support it. Like I said earlier, he certainly has a right to build it. And people have a right to protest it and block it by any legal means. That is the way the system works.

I stand corrected.

Not a big deal, but I think it's important to note there's a need, or at least desire, the builders are responding to, not simply provocation.

The community center is also providing numerous services and facilities for the entire lower Manhattan community -- 500-seat auditorium, theater, performing arts center, fitness center, swimming pool, basketball court, childcare area, bookstore, culinary school, art studio, food court....

Uh oh...child care center...where terrorist supporters can indoctrinate children. :eek:

That's OK, they're children of terrorists anyway.

No wonder Jews conspired with bin Laden to attack it. Must be true. Some extremist told me how to think.

Christian Science Monitor
Emphasis mine, but this emphasis should be **everyone's**.

mine too.

Yet you support governments legislating to restrict personal religious /cultural practices (bans on burqa-style Islamic veils)?

Shall we not discuss that in the appropriate thread?

That gets into tricky area, Redux. In this case, you have to judge the religious freedom of the individual against the need for public safety.

I agree if there is ANY substantive evidence that women wearing burhkas pose a public safety threat.....any more than Sikhs wearing turbans. And I have seen none.

I guess not - ok. YES I do... to an extent.

In my religion, wearing cloths when temperatures exceed 21 degrees C is a sin. Nakedness is my demand for religious freedom. After all, a naked body is not a threat to public safety. Especially my body (an example of how man was created in the image of god).

I demand to be freed from the bonds of cotton. I demand my religious freedom.

My religion requires wearing an AK-47 and hand grenades.

Actually, Sikh daggers do run into this very issue on occasion.

I subscribe to the Ben Franklin notion that "those who sacrifice liberty for safety (security) deserve neither."

Particularly when it is based on emotions and not evidence that such sacrifices of liberty will ensure greater safety/security.

Incredible, fucking incredible. :facepalm:

Sad and embarrassing. It made me laugh, but only for a moment or two. Unfortuntately I've come into contact with characters like these far too often.

I'm sorry... what?

This is actually fairly entertaining, I may be killing time on OpenBook more often.

I never heard of OpenBook before. It's a neat idea.

funny, sad and true ... oh and entertaining.

Koran burner Derek Fenton booted from his job at NJ Transit
The protester who burned pages from the Koran outside a planned mosque near Ground Zero has been fired from NJTransit, sources and authorities said Tuesday.

Derek Fenton's 11-year career at the agency came to an abrupt halt Monday after photographs of him ripping pages from the Muslim holy book and setting them ablaze appeared in newspapers.

Fenton, 39, of Bloomingdale, N.J., burned the book during a protest on the ninth anniversary of Sept. 11 outside Park51, the controversial mosque slated to be built near Ground Zero.

He was apparently inspired by Pastor Terry Jones, the Florida clergyman who threatened to burn the Koran that day but later changed his mind.

NJ Transit said Fenton was fired but wouldn't give specifics.

"Mr. Fenton's public actions violated New Jersey Transit's code of ethics," an agency statement said.

"NJ Transit concluded that Mr. Fenton violated his trust as a state employee and therefore [he] was dismissed."

Fenton was ushered from the protests by police on Saturday and questioned, but he was released without charges.

"He said, 'This is America,' and he wanted to stand up for it, in a Tea Party kind of way," a police source said.

If Fenton was fired for burning the Koran while off-duty, his First Amendment rights probably were violated, Chris Dunn of the New York Civil Liberties Union said.

"The Supreme Court has recognized a constitutional right to burn the flag. As reprehensible as it may be, burning the Koran would be protected as well."

Read more:
Here we go ...................

on a lighter note...

Read more:

We're talking about this, yes?
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...anistan_01.jpg

If I worked in a bank, I'd be worried if this couple came in. You have no way of knowing if there are firearms under there. Nor indeed whether the wearer is actually a woman.

It doesn't matter if they're women or not. Women rob banks. Women carry bombs and blow themselves up. But I wouldn't let 'em cash a check.

Pete - If I owned a deli or a convenience store or any retail anything... I'd wanna see everyone's face - period. There is no statistical data to support this I am sure, but banks are not real keen on them coming in dressed this way.

The ban is not based on public safety, at least according to Pres. Sarkozy, but is addressing the issue of the need for Muslims to become more integrated into French society in order to be more accepted and because he believes it is a form of oppression.

I agree with Sarkozy that is is absolutely a form of oppression for those women forced into wearing the burkha by their husbands rather than be choice.

The problem with the law is that it wont accomplish what is intended; it wont lead to these women becoming more integrated into French society or being less oppressed...but will likely leave them even more oppressed....prisoners in their own homes.

Who knows what they're packing underneath those robes.
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedi...ercian_Nun.JPG

http://saccoscom.x-shops.com/images/T/cassocks.gif

Fair enough, Spex. But at least you'd be able to identify them on the security cameras after they whacked you on the back of the hand with a ruler.

They could fit a yardstick under all that stuff. We're talking heavy artillary.:p:

Read more:

This should make everyone feel much better - This way the money won't be coming from supposed terrorists - it'll be coming from us. Problem solved.