September 9, 2010 - The Editor
Imam Feisal Abdul Rauf appeared on CNN last night, on the Larry King Show. Interviewed by Soledad O’Brien, he spoke of how he has served his community. The video is below.
Strangely – considering how the president had argued at an iftar dinner on Friday August 13 that it was Rauf’s right to build a mosque, and considering he has been a paid emissary of the State Department, the imam spoke of the Separation of Church and State. Around 3.23 in the video, while discussing the media interest in the “Ground Zero Mosque”, the following exchange took place. Strangely – considering how the president had argued at an iftar dinner on Friday August 13 that it was Rauf’s right to build a mosque, and considering he has been a paid emissary of the State Department, the imam spoke of the Separation of Church and State. Around 3.23 in the video, while discussing the media interest in the “Ground Zero Mosque”, the following exchange took place.
Soledad O’Brien: [Referring to the reactions to the ground Zero Mosque proposal] Do you think it’s been politicized?
Feisal Abdul Rauf: Absolutely! This is very dangerous and tragic for two reasons. Reason number one is that it goes against the fundamental American principle the Separation of Church and State. This concept of separation of religion and politics, or church and state, has a wisdom behind it, and the purpose behind it is not to politicize religion, because when you politicize religion it is dangerous.
Soledad O’Brien: But ultimately, when you look at the polls, something like seventy one percent of Americans think that, even though there’s a right to build there, a center that will include a mosque and other things which we’ll talk about in a minute, the wisdom of it may not be there. Is that political, or is that just people saying that sensitivity-wise, it’s the wrong thing to do?
Feisal Abdul Rauf: I am extremely concerned about sensitivity. But I am also concerned about responsibility. If we move from that location, the story will be….. that the radicals have taken over the discourse. The headlines in the Muslim world will be that Islam is under attack. And I’m less concerned about the radicals in America than I am about the radicals in the Muslim world.
Soledad O’Brien: But isn’t that also saying you’re less concerned about the voices of opposition here?
Feisal Abdul Rauf: No – I don’t mean it that way. I meant it that – the danger from the radicals in the Muslim world than our national security, to the national security of our troops. I have a niece who works in the army in southern Iraq. The concern for American citizens who live and work and travel overseas will increasingly be compromised if the radicals are strengthened and if we do, it will strengthen the argument of the radicals to recruit, politically to recruit, and their increasing aggression and violence against our country.
Soledad O’Brien: There are Ground Zero families that I’ve spoken to, who are on all sides of the debate, I mean they’re not all of one voice, as I’m sure you know, and they’ve said: “And what about me? I can’t find my son’s body, and they want to build a mosque on the spot where he might be.”
Feisal Abdul Rauf: Well first of all, this is not that spot – this is not Ground Zero proper. This is outside that. No-one’s body is in that location. I am very sensitive to those feelings. As an imam, as any religious person does, we have to minister to the pain and hurt to our congregations and our ministry and our communities. And it is part of our intention – which is why we are reaching out more to 9/11 families, which is why we would like to have a memorial in this center for 9/11 families, we have not finalized all our plans yet. We are willing to sit down and engage and do something, that will help us heal. You cannot heal a trauma by walking away from it. We have to sit down and talk about it, have a dialog about it, find a way to move through and beyond it.
As pointed out by Big Peace, the suggestion that his words about the radicals in the Muslim world: “his words can have only one meaning: Build this mosque or face the wrath of radical Islamists.”
At the start of his CNN interview (1.00), Rauf referred to how the location of the proposed mosque was chosen. He said:
“What happened was that Sharif el-Gamal, the owner of SoHo Properties, a member of my congregation, had noticed how the need for prayer space had been expanded. He felt a commitment to do something for his community and he found this particular building, and he negotiated it, acquired it, and offered it for us to use and to establish a center that would be the space for a vision that I’ve had for over a decade of over fifteen and almost twenty years, which is to establish a space which embodies the fundamental beliefs that we have as Jews, Christians, Muslims, which is to love our God and to love our neighbor.”
Sharif El-Gamal did not raise the money for the former coat factory’s $39 million mortgage on his own. He relied upon the backing of an Egyptian-born inhabitant of New York, called Hisham Elzanaty. As reported on New York’s Fox 5 News, Elzanaty, who owns a string of medical companies, made a $6,000 contribution to the Holy Land Foundation (HLF) charity in 1999. In 2001, HFL was designated as a terrorist entity, and in 2008, five members of HLF were convicted of funding terrorism. HLF had been one of many front groups used to fund-raise for the terrorist group Hamas.
Elzanaty (pictured) claims that when he made his donation, he was not aware that the charity channeled funds to Hamas.
(Imam Rauf would gain more trust if he finally comes clean and condemns Hamas as a terror organization. His failure to do so will always confirm suspicions that he is a supporter of a morer radical Islamist agenda than he admits to.)
Meanwhile, according to Associated Press, Hisham Elzanaty appears to be deciding that his commercial interests come above defending the existence of a mosque near Ground Zero. He is now prepared to sell his main share in the property, if he gets a higher offer. He has already had offers three times the £4.8 million that he paid. He said:
“I'm a businessman. This was a mere business transaction for me. Develop it, raze it, sell it. If someone wants to give me 18 or 20 million dollars today, it's all theirs.”
Sharif el-Gamal has apparently presented himself as the driving force of the mosque plans, and as the leading investor and the person responsible for decisions concerning the development of the former Burlington Coat Factory (Park 51). On CNN last night, Imam Rauf appeared to confirm that impression. Hisham Elzanaty has also given that impression. However, Associated Press approached el-Gamal’s spokesman Larry Kopp to find out what el-Gamal’s position is. Kopp claimed el-Gamal would not comment over the ownership.
If Elzanaty does sell his share of the investment, there is always the concern about who would buy him out. Already, as I wrote here, potential investors from Kuwait, Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia have been involved with a group (“Related Companies”) that has made a bid for control of the proposed 1,776 foot “One World Trade Center” or “Freedom Tower”, to be built on the site of Ground Zero.
In too many cases throughout the world, money for high-profile mosques has come from Saudi Arabia. Some of these mosques – such as the East London Mosque – has welcomed Saudi imams, such as Abdul Rahman al-Sudais, who supports Hamas and has condemned Jews as “monkeys and pigs”, “rats of the world” and the “offspring of apes and pigs.” The East London Mosque was also where one individual worshipped who would threaten America. On Christmas Day 2009, this individual, Umar Farouk Abdulmutallab, tried to detonate his explosive-laden underwear on a plane bound for Detroit.
If Hisham Elzanaty does sell his share in the property, the identity of the bidder who buys that share must be known.
So far, many people in the American establishment seem to believe whatever Imam Rauf tells them. If Imam Rauf cannot bring himself to condemn Hamas, he cannot be regarded as trustworthy promoter of “interfaith” harmony, and certainly he should not be paid to act as America’s emissary abroad.
The Editor, Family Security Matters
No comments:
Post a Comment