Roxbury mosque -- terrorist front or victim of smear campaign?

It's not cut and dried at all, it's very complicated. After looking at the articles you've cited, I wouldn't be surprised if there was some sort of sweetheart deal with the BRA. I can't tell whether other religious organizations have had similar largesse, since the assertion is not backed up by examples, but it wouldn't surprise me if various people and organizations, religious and otherwise, have gotten their share of sweetheart deals from the city. This sort of thing is most likely to be just a garden-variety matter of knowing the right people and greasing the right wheels. And to the extent that some people and groups are upset at this sort of thing, they have a right to be upset about it, no matter who got the benefit.

The rest is harder to figure out. There is no question that bashing Muslims is big sport in the post-9/11 world. Conversely, it's also all too easy to dismiss any criticism by calling it Muslim-bashing. Emerson certainly seems like a scoundrel, and his connections with Scaife make him even more suspect.

I wanted to read the litigation complaint, but for some reason I couldn't open the PDF file on my computer. But as a litigation lawyer, the competing claims of the lawyers look to me like just so much litigation posturing. The truth is usually somewhere in between the claims of each side.

But Joe, I know you have a background in real estate law -- isn't the normal operation of a group dealing in urban renewal land essentially indistinguishable from a group giving out favors? How do you tell the difference?

At any rate, if my feel for the value of the in-kind portion is correct, the "comps" say they got a fair deal.

In response to your comment re Hillel Stavis' article on FrontPageMag, namely

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21846,

your comment at

http://www.frontpagemag.com/GoPostal/commentdetail.asp?
ID=21846&commentID=692121,

I wrote the following:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/GoPostal/commentdetail.asp?ID=21846&commentID=703928

I will quote it in its entirety here:

I have read your piece (http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976734709) and here's what I have to say about your statements, being somewhat familiar with the ISB mosque scandal, the work of Steven Emerson and of the David Project:

To quote you, always "check the facts" -- your partisanship either made you blind or unwilling to indeed "check the facts."

To wit,


1. The Iand in question is actually not in such a bad area as you would have us think, and is near major thoroughfares, business areas and educational institutions -- the Roxbury Community College, Northeastern University, Wentworth Institute, etc. As for the value of that land, you conveniently chose to ignore what the discovery process brought forth during the pending litigation -- some of this info has been made publicly available by the newspapers, the courts, etc. in recent months, and it would not appear to support your statements.


2. Also interesting is the fact (as Mr. Stavis' article points out) that the ISB was going to pay in kind for the monetary deficiency of the deal -- the kind being wahabbist/jihadist brainwash, propaganda and indoctrination at the Roxbury college, directed at the very same slice of the population, which was so susceptible to the "preachings" of the Nation of Islam founder Louis Farrakhan, in whose organization Mr. Muhammed Ali-Salaam, the Deputy Director of the BRA and member of the ISB, used to be an official. What a strange coincidence!


3. You wrote, "The Policari suit against the Boston Redevelopment Authority was spawned by the David Project for Jewish Leadership. No one in our local Jewish community denies this, and it was casually mentioned last week in our Jewish Advocate newspaper." In your article (see the above URL) you quote:

"As discussed previously," Kolodner wrote, "Evan Slavitt is preparing to file a lawsuit. The BRA will be the defendant and we have identified a viable plaintiff. Separation of church and state is the basis of the case ... Filing the lawsuit will serve to trip the switch on the larger agenda of exposing the radical fundamentalist underpinnings of the Mosque and its leaders.

"We need to develop a media campaign," Kolodner continued, "I have worked with Steve Emerson's office and we have comprehensive and compelling data."

------

So what? What did you find surprising, unethical, or conspiratorial about that? Judging by your photo on your website, you were not born yesterday.

You further wrote and quoted:

------

The David Project lists as part of their "About Us" page:

By promoting a fair and honest understanding of the Arab-Israeli conflict, The David Project leads the ideological effort against the forces intent on defaming, weakening and destroying the Jewish State.

So, I suppose exposing these horrible terrorists and preventing them from having a mosque must be a great way to defend Israel?

------

Damn right, Ms. Nerad! It is one of the more effective ways to do so. Given what kind of Islam such mosque would be preaching, and given that 80% or so of the American mosques are "owned and operated" by the notorious Islamic Society of North America, with funds coming out of, well, duh, Saudi Arabia and other lovely Gulf states. This way of fighting terrorists, incidentally, does not only help Israel, but also the United States, and the rest of the world, too. In case you haven't paid attention, the Third World War has been going on for quite some time, well before 9/11, and I probably need not remind you that it is being waged between the "civilized" world (all those aspiring to be or to become free and democratic) and the forces of medieval darkness as represented by militant Islam.


4. In your web article, you wrote the following on Steven Emerson:

I've known of this guy since the Oklahoma City bombing, when he was the primary hysterical red-herring. Journalists like Emerson make me itch. I would love to know how much of his stuff is right -- because *SOME* of it is. But you will never, ever be able to trust how much.

Wikipedia has a bit to say about the man and he merits a sort of anti-fan site of his own.

If Emerson is part of the information trail linking ISB to terrorist groups, I actually would make a snap judgement in favor of ISB. Emerson is like a red-baiter -- perhaps a crescent-baiter? He sees Islamic terrorists under his bed. He is paranoid, whether or not they are out to get him. Just read some of his stuff.

------

Hmmm, somehow your snap judgment did not smell of objectivity to me, so, out of sheer curiosity (being familiar with the man himself as well as his work), I checked with Wikipedia, and here is what it says:

------

Steven Emerson is an American print and television investigative journalist and national security expert. He is a leading terrorism analyst often consulted by media networks such as MSNBC, NBC, CNN, and Fox News, and is widely regarded as one of the world's authorities on Islamist financial networks and operational structures. He is known for having predicted, before September 11, 2001, that Islamists would launch a major terrorist attack on U.S. soil, and for having warned the U.S. Congress in 1998 of the danger posed by Osama bin Laden.

He is a regular advisor to the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies.

------

Wow, Ms. Nerad, you apparently have more wisdom than "the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies" collectively.

Yes, Mr. Emerson made a mistake with the Oklahoma City bombing, which he publicly admitted. But then again, he was right so many times that on balance I tend to trust the man, as I find him intelligent, knowledgeable and brave.

Have you, Ms. Nerad, ever made any mistakes? Guess not. Nor have Karl Marx, Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Kim Il Sung, Fidel Castro, Turkmen-bashi, Prophet Mohammad, and other proponents of freedom and democracy.


5. And then, Ms. Nerad, after your intricate, deft, and elaborate dance, comes your final pas, where you drop your last, seventh veil: "There's nothing special going on here -- except Jewish persecution of Moslems." The King is naked, ladies and gentlemen!

Ahhh, yes, it's those Jews at it again. The Elders of Zion never tire, do they, Ms. Nerad? First, they refused to accept Jesus and then The Prophet; then they drank the blood of innocent Christian babies; but since that surely was not enough, they created communism; then they collaborated with the Nazis; and now they give birth to neo-Conservatism (never mind that 80% or so of American Jews consider themselves Liberal Progressive). Poor, poor Moslems, who are persecuted at the hands of those crooked-nosed sons of pigs and monkeys ... My heart goes out to them. And to you, Ms. Nerad, as "I feel your pain." Lord, if I only knew how to make you feel more of it ...

P.S. By the way, the $2 million parcel value was given by none other than BRA's own Muhammed Ali-Salaam. Weird, ha?

Also, your statement that "Religious organizations including a retirement home for Catholic priests and Jewish philanthropies have gotten land from the city here before. It's only discrimination if not everyone gets an even deal." deserves a special comment. You mentioned the Globe article, http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/10/08/islamic_society_raps_media_on_bias/, but it does not shed much light:

Meanwhile, city officials sought yesterday to prove that they provided no special benefit when they sold the society the 2-acre parcel in Roxbury. They offered a list of other religious institutions -- including the Christian Science Church, the Regina Cleari Retired Priests Home, and Beth Amedrish Agudal Beth Jacob Synagogue -- that took advantage of the opportunity to buy public land under the city's urban renewal program over the past four decades. They did not provide details.

So much for the "Happy prior customers of the BRA." Do you think those "other" religious entities offered "in-kind" religious instruction of the type our generous Moslem friends did at ISB? Why, I think it is such a swell idea! Maybe we should have all our public schools exposed to such wahabbi jihadist theology so as to make our world an even better place to live, whadda you think?

Ugh ... Ms. Nerad, just what crevasse have you crawled out from? "Social Justice" my foot ... With citizens like you, who needs enemies? You represent the quintessential "fifth column." Joe McCarthy, where art thou when we really need you?

The text of my last comment got improperly displayed. The way to read it is to copy and paste it into any text editor -- the whole thing will then get shown. Maybe the webmaster needs to look at this bug.

I'll take another stab at it:

In response to your comment re Hillel Stavis' article on FrontPageMag, namely

http://www.frontpagemag.com/articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=21846,

and your comment at

http://www.frontpagemag.com/GoPostal/commentdetail.asp?
ID=21846&commentID=692121,

I wrote the following:

http://www.frontpagemag.com/GoPostal/commentdetail.asp?ID=21846&commentID=703928

I will quote it in its entirety here:

I have read your piece (http://www.gather.com/viewArticle.jsp?articleId=281474976734709) and here's what I have to say about your statements, being somewhat familiar with the ISB mosque scandal, the work of Steven Emerson and of the David Project:

To quote you, always "check the facts" -- your partisanship either made you blind or unwilling to indeed "check the facts."

To wit,


1. The Iand in question is actually not in such a bad area as you would have us think, and is near major thoroughfares, business areas and educational institutions -- the Roxbury Community College, Northeastern University, Wentworth Institute, etc. As for the value of that land, you conveniently chose to ignore what the discovery process brought forth during the pending litigation -- some of this info has been made publicly available by the newspapers, the courts, etc. in recent months, and it would not appear to support your statements.


2. Also interesting is the fact (as Mr. Stavis' article points out) that the ISB was going to pay in kind for the monetary deficiency of the deal -- the kind being wahabbist/jihadist brainwash, propaganda and indoctrination at the Roxbury college, directed at the very same slice of the population, which was so susceptible to the "preachings" of the Nation of Islam founder Louis Farrakhan, in whose organization Mr. Muhammed Ali-Salaam, the Deputy Director of the BRA and member of the ISB, used to be an official. What a strange coincidence!


3. You wrote, "The Policari suit against the Boston Redevelopment Authority was spawned by the David Project for Jewish Leadership. No one in our local Jewish community denies this, and it was casually mentioned last week in our Jewish Advocate newspaper." In your article (see the above URL) you quote:

"As discussed previously," Kolodner wrote, "Evan Slavitt is preparing to file a lawsuit. The BRA will be the defendant and we have identified a viable plaintiff. Separation of church and state is the basis of the case ... Filing the lawsuit will serve to trip the switch on the larger agenda of exposing the radical fundamentalist underpinnings of the Mosque and its leaders.

"We need to develop a media campaign," Kolodner continued, "I have worked with Steve Emerson's office and we have comprehensive and compelling data."

------

So what? What did you find surprising, unethical, or conspiratorial about that? Judging by your photo on your website, you were not born yesterday.

You further wrote and quoted:

------

The David Project lists as part of their "About Us" page:

By promoting a fair and honest understanding of the Arab-Israeli conflict, The David Project leads the ideological effort against the forces intent on defaming, weakening and destroying the Jewish State.

So, I suppose exposing these horrible terrorists and preventing them from having a mosque must be a great way to defend Israel?

------

Damn right, Ms. Nerad! It is one of the more effective ways to do so. Given what kind of Islam such mosque would be preaching, and given that 80% or so of the American mosques are "owned and operated" by the notorious Islamic Society of North America, with funds coming out of, well, duh, Saudi Arabia and other lovely Gulf states. This way of fighting terrorists, incidentally, does not only help Israel, but also the United States, and the rest of the world, too. In case you haven't paid attention, the Third World War has been going on for quite some time, well before 9/11, and I probably need not remind you that it is being waged between the "civilized" world (all those aspiring to be or to become free and democratic) and the forces of medieval darkness as represented by militant Islam.


4. In your web article, you wrote the following on Steven Emerson:

I've known of this guy since the Oklahoma City bombing, when he was the primary hysterical red-herring. Journalists like Emerson make me itch. I would love to know how much of his stuff is right -- because *SOME* of it is. But you will never, ever be able to trust how much.

Wikipedia has a bit to say about the man and he merits a sort of anti-fan site of his own.

If Emerson is part of the information trail linking ISB to terrorist groups, I actually would make a snap judgement in favor of ISB. Emerson is like a red-baiter -- perhaps a crescent-baiter? He sees Islamic terrorists under his bed. He is paranoid, whether or not they are out to get him. Just read some of his stuff.

------

Hmmm, somehow your snap judgment did not smell of objectivity to me, so, out of sheer curiosity (being familiar with the man himself as well as his work), I checked with Wikipedia, and here is what it says:

------

Steven Emerson is an American print and television investigative journalist and national security expert. He is a leading terrorism analyst often consulted by media networks such as MSNBC, NBC, CNN, and Fox News, and is widely regarded as one of the world's authorities on Islamist financial networks and operational structures. He is known for having predicted, before September 11, 2001, that Islamists would launch a major terrorist attack on U.S. soil, and for having warned the U.S. Congress in 1998 of the danger posed by Osama bin Laden.

He is a regular advisor to the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies.

------

Wow, Ms. Nerad, you apparently have more wisdom than "the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies" collectively.

Yes, Mr. Emerson made a mistake with the Oklahoma City bombing, which he publicly admitted. But then again, he was right so many times that on balance I tend to trust the man, as I find him intelligent, knowledgeable and brave.

Have you, Ms. Nerad, ever made any mistakes? Guess not. Nor have Karl Marx, Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Kim Il Sung, Fidel Castro, Turkmen-bashi, Prophet Mohammad, and other proponents of freedom and democracy.


5. And then, Ms. Nerad, after your intricate, deft, and elaborate dance, comes your final pas, where you drop your last, seventh veil: "There's nothing special going on here -- except Jewish persecution of Moslems." The King is naked, ladies and gentlemen!

Ahhh, yes, it's those Jews at it again. The Elders of Zion never tire, do they, Ms. Nerad? First, they refused to accept Jesus and then The Prophet; then they drank the blood of innocent Christian babies; but since that surely was not enough, they created communism; then they collaborated with the Nazis; and now they give birth to neo-Conservatism (never mind that 80% or so of American Jews consider themselves Liberal Progressive). Poor, poor Moslems, who are persecuted at the hands of those crooked-nosed sons of pigs and monkeys ... My heart goes out to them. And to you, Ms. Nerad, as "I feel your pain." Lord, if I only knew how to make you feel more of it ...

P.S. By the way, the $2 million parcel value was given by none other than BRA's own Muhammed Ali-Salaam. Weird, ha?

Also, your statement that "Religious organizations including a retirement home for Catholic priests and Jewish philanthropies have gotten land from the city here before. It's only discrimination if not everyone gets an even deal." deserves a special comment. You mentioned the Globe article, http://www.boston.com/news/local/massachusetts/articles/2004/10/08/islamic_society_raps_media_on_bias/, but it does not shed much light:

Meanwhile, city officials sought yesterday to prove that they provided no special benefit when they sold the society the 2-acre parcel in Roxbury. They offered a list of other religious institutions -- including the Christian Science Church, the Regina Cleari Retired Priests Home, and Beth Amedrish Agudal Beth Jacob Synagogue -- that took advantage of the opportunity to buy public land under the city's urban renewal program over the past four decades. They did not provide details.

So much for the "Happy prior customers of the BRA." Do you think those "other" religious entities offered "in-kind" religious instruction of the type our generous Moslem friends did at ISB? Why, I think it is such a swell idea! Maybe we should have all our public schools exposed to such wahabbi jihadist theology so as to make our world an even better place to live, whadda you think?

Ugh ... Ms. Nerad, just what crevasse have you crawled out from? "Social Justice" my foot ... With citizens like you, who needs enemies? You represent the quintessential "fifth column." Joe McCarthy, where art thou when we really need you?

The text of my last comment got improperly displayed.
The way to read it is to copy and paste it into a text editor
-- the whole thing will then get shown.

Maybe the webmaster needs to look at this bug.

Seva Brodsky
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGIC,GGIC:2005-09,GGIC:en&q=seva+brodsky says:
To quote you, always "check the facts" -- your partisanship either made you blind or unwilling to indeed "check the facts."


Well, let's see about this...

1. The Iand in question is actually not in such a bad area as you would have us think, and is near major thoroughfares, business areas and educational institutions -- the Roxbury Community College, Northeastern University, Wentworth Institute, etc. As for the value of that land, you conveniently chose to ignore what the discovery process brought forth during the pending litigation -- some of this info has been made publicly available by the newspapers, the courts, etc. in recent months, and it would not appear to support your statements.

Nonsense. I didn't ignore it. I believe most of that information is spread by the David Project. The "discovery project" wouldn't hold up to any real estate appraiser in the world. That parcel is fairly priced at about $100K/acre against any other similarly situated parcel in Roxbury. Present your data if you want to argue about facts, don't just refer to journalism that you aren't willing to quote. You're a law student -- you know what hearsay is.

2. Also interesting is the fact (as Mr. Stavis' article points out) that the ISB was going to pay in kind for the monetary deficiency of the deal -- the kind being wahabbist/jihadist brainwash, propaganda and indoctrination at the Roxbury college, directed at the very same slice of the population, which was so susceptible to the "preachings" of the Nation of Islam founder Louis Farrakhan, in whose organization Mr. Muhammed Ali-Salaam, the Deputy Director of the BRA and member of the ISB, used to be an official. What a strange coincidence!

Facts, dear. Have you visited the mosque? Have you spoken to folks there? They are not Wahabists -- they are an open, moderate community. You're engaging in the same sort of smear tactics. SHOW ME FACTS, or at least experiential first person evidence. Anyone can call them jihadist, but you show absolutely no evidence. The only evidence of this that exists is one Egyptian exile who found that *gasp* among the Sunni, Shi'a, and Sufi and various library texts, there were also radical texts in their library.

Harvard gives them a good review:
The ISBCC will offer monthly lectures for the next ten years at RCC and will donate books to the college's library. The lectures will be tailored to the interests of the RCC students. Both the city and the ISB hopes the community center will attract Muslim businesses and residents to the Roxbury community, which could have an enormous impact on the area's economics. This will be a gradual process as it was when the ISB was first established in Central Square. The center also agreed to maintain two local parks as a method of compensation to the city for setting aside the land. The center will also benefit the larger Boston community by providing a forum for interfaith dialogue and interactions with civic leaders. In December 2004 the ISBCC held a press conference to repudiate claims that members of the ISB board have ties to radical Islamic groups. The press release the center issued says "The ISBCC is designed with a blend of traditional Bostonian architecture, including hints of Islamic accents symbolically bringing together the east and the west. Its architecture is symbolic of its mission, as well. The center will provide civil and social services to the dynamic and diverse Roxbury community as well as avenues for interfaith dialogue and festivity." A variety of religious and civic leaders were present at the press conference as they had been at the groundbreaking two years prior.


Boston Dialogue, too:
http://www.bostondialogue.org/images/Dialoge_News_letter_issue5.pdf
Margaret Herzig of the Public
Conversations Project, Salma Kazmi of the
Islamic Society of Boston, and David
Dolev of Temple Beth Shalom were
honored with plaques for their outstanding
and dedicated work in promoting dialogue
and tolerance.

Most recently, Ms. Kazmi was invited by Community Change to address changing dynamics in the Boston community:
http://www.communitychangeinc.org/events2.html
The Islamic Society of Boston practices and promotes a comprehensive, balanced view of Islam. The ISB strives to embody the "middle path" to which Quran calls - a path of moderation, free of extremism, and representative of the Islamic vision of healthy community.

From CCI's homepage:
Community Change Inc. (CCI) is a non-profit organization with a particular focus on systemic racism. We are committed to serving as a center for action and collaboration among individuals and multiracial grassroots groups in the fight to achieve racial justice and equity.


This is America, we compare viewpoints here. Some of us even recognize that there are Jews who are raving zionists, and Jews who are not. Likewise, there is diversity in the Muslim community. It would be best for both communities if they encouraged dialogue and moderation and leashed the slavering dogs of war in their midst.

My goal is not to comfort the enemy but to empower those in the Muslim community most likely to be able to protect us all.


3. You wrote, "The Policari suit against the Boston Redevelopment Authority was spawned by the David Project for Jewish Leadership. No one in our local Jewish community denies this, and it was casually mentioned last week in our Jewish Advocate newspaper." In your article (see the above URL) you quote:

"As discussed previously," Kolodner wrote, "Evan Slavitt is preparing to file a lawsuit. The BRA will be the defendant and we have identified a viable plaintiff. Separation of church and state is the basis of the case ... Filing the lawsuit will serve to trip the switch on the larger agenda of exposing the radical fundamentalist underpinnings of the Mosque and its leaders.

"We need to develop a media campaign," Kolodner continued, "I have worked with Steve Emerson's office and we have comprehensive and compelling data."

------

So what? What did you find surprising, unethical, or conspiratorial about that? Judging by your photo on your website, you were not born yesterday.


47 years ago in July, actually. And what I find conpiratorial? That Evan Slavitt has denied a connection between the David Project smear campaign and the Policari suit. That all sorts of folks associated with the "media campaign" have denied connection (until it came out more blatantly) to the press.

If they weren't hiding something they thought, at least, would reduce the impact of their actions, wouldn't they be up front?


You further wrote and quoted:
So, I suppose exposing these horrible terrorists and preventing them from having a mosque must be a great way to defend Israel?

------

Damn right, Ms. Nerad! It is one of the more effective ways to do so. Given what kind of Islam such mosque would be preaching

Show me facts, please. I do not find the same issues you do.

For example, Harvard's Pluralism Project http://www.pluralism.org/research/profiles/display.php?profile=74077
finds a very different population at ISB that you postulate. Have you even checked this on your own?

Harvard reports:
The center will also provide an opportunity for Muslim women to leave their mark on the community. The design process for the center has taken into consideration the needs of women members. The designers needed to balance the needs of both "conservative" and "liberal" members of the Muslim community currently attending the ISB mosque. The more conservative members prefer separate entrances and separate prayer spaces for men and women while the more "liberal" members want involvement of women at all levels and in as many activities as possible. The architects attempted to create a space which would be comfortable for a wide range of people.


This is not a mosque locked down by conservative Moslems (far less "jihadists"). And I'll note for those who might not know, that orthodox Jews still separate men from women in prayer, also.


4. In your web article, you wrote the following on Steven Emerson:

If Emerson is part of the information trail linking ISB to terrorist groups, I actually would make a snap judgement in favor of ISB. Emerson is like a red-baiter -- perhaps a crescent-baiter? He sees Islamic terrorists under his bed. He is paranoid, whether or not they are out to get him. Just read some of his stuff.

I checked with Wikipedia, and here is what it says:

------

He is a regular advisor to the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies.

------

Wow, Ms. Nerad, you apparently have more wisdom than "the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies" collectively.


No, I do not. But you would also find that those same folks are consulting all kinds of wingnuts. I'm personally familiar with a number of CIA analysts, and they check everything, even the not-consistently-reliable sources.

That someone gets credit for being right sometimes doesn't mean that he's an authority on everything he touches. Have you researched whether Mr. Emerson, for example, came to Boston? Or is he just a friend of the David Project and willing to help them out.


Have you, Ms. Nerad, ever made any mistakes? Guess not. Nor have Karl Marx, Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Kim Il Sung, Fidel Castro, Turkmen-bashi, Prophet Mohammad, and other proponents of freedom and democracy.

If you were in a court of law, youngster, that would draw an objection. Did it make you feel bold and powerful for a moment, though? Don't trust that feeling. It won't serve you well in real life.


5. And then, Ms. Nerad, after your intricate, deft, and elaborate dance, comes your final pas, where you drop your last, seventh veil: "There's nothing special going on here -- except Jewish persecution of Moslems." The King is naked, ladies and gentlemen!

Ahhh, yes, it's those Jews at it again. The Elders of Zion never tire, do they, Ms. Nerad? First, they refused to accept Jesus and then The Prophet; then they drank the blood of innocent Christian babies; but since that surely was not enough, they created communism; then they collaborated with the Nazis; and now they give birth to neo-Conservatism (never mind that 80% or so of American Jews consider themselves Liberal Progressive). Poor, poor Moslems, who are persecuted at the hands of those crooked-nosed sons of pigs and monkeys ... My heart goes out to them. And to you, Ms. Nerad, as "I feel your pain." Lord, if I only knew how to make you feel more of it ...

Seva, I *am* Jewish. My mother, my grandparents. I was married to a Conservative Jew for years and kept better kosher at the time than he did. I am, in fact, one of those 80% or so of liberal progressive Jews. What in G*d's name are you?

What in the world are you trying to prove with this drivel?


Meanwhile, city officials sought yesterday to prove that they provided no special benefit when they sold the society the 2-acre parcel in Roxbury. They offered a list of other religious institutions -- including the Christian Science Church, the Regina Cleari Retired Priests Home, and Beth Amedrish Agudal Beth Jacob Synagogue -- that took advantage of the opportunity to buy public land under the city's urban renewal program over the past four decades. They did not provide details.

So much for the "Happy prior customers of the BRA."


One might assume that the details are public record. Redevelopment deals are always sweetheart deals, as I mentioned in my article. What's your point? Have all those folks come forward saying how they were slighted by the city? No, they have not. The only complaint is Policari, set up as a shill by the David Project et al.


Do you think those "other" religious entities offered "in-kind" religious instruction of the type our generous Moslem friends did at ISB?

They did not offer "religious instruction." They offered classes on Islam. In case your legal education doesn't distinguish, this is the same principal that allows tax-funded public schools, like RCC, to offer classes *on* religion, but not religious instruction.


Ugh ... Ms. Nerad, just what crevasse have you crawled out from? "Social Justice" my foot ... With citizens like you, who needs enemies? You represent the quintessential "fifth column." Joe McCarthy, where art thou when we really need you?


*gryn* Oh, my dear, you are too young to remember what that was really about, and so am I.

I will not accuse you of any of the monsterous things you libel me with. But I am sorry you live with such hate. I hope someday you will find some peace and tolerance in your heart.

SN: Seva Brodsky
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient-ff&ie=UTF-8&rls=GGIC,GGIC:2005-09,GGIC:en&q=seva+brodsky says:
To quote you, always "check the facts" -- your partisanship either made you blind or unwilling to indeed "check the facts."

Well, let's see about this...

SB: Let us see indeed:

1. The Iand in question is actually not in such a bad area as you would have us think, and is near major thoroughfares, business areas and educational institutions -- the Roxbury Community College, Northeastern University, Wentworth Institute, etc. As for the value of that land, you conveniently chose to ignore what the discovery process brought forth during the pending litigation -- some of this info has been made publicly available by the newspapers, the courts, etc. in recent months, and it would not appear to support your statements.

SN: Nonsense. I didn't ignore it. I believe most of that information is spread by the David Project. The "discovery project" wouldn't hold up to any real estate appraiser in the world. That parcel is fairly priced at about $100K/acre against any other similarly situated parcel in Roxbury. Present your data if you want to argue about facts, don't just refer to journalism that you aren't willing to quote. You're a law student -- you know what hearsay is.

SB: "Nonsense"? "Hearsay"? You "believe most of that information is spread by the David Project"? When I wrote that "you conveniently chose to ignore what the discovery process brought forth during the pending litigation " I meant exactly that -- the discovery during the process of litigation, when requests for the production of documents are made. I suggest you look up the definition in Black's legal dictionary.

So you want the facts? Here is a fact that was brought fourth during the discovery proceedings, which you so conveniently happened to ignore in my post-scriptum to the comment in re your Gather.com article: "the $2 million parcel value was given by none other than BRA's own Muhammed Ali-Salaam." What do you make of that? Further, the land in question is adjacent to Northeastern University, and is therefore highly valuable, especially since that campus has been expanding rapidly for a number of years. If anything, the parcel's value has increased substantially ever since the initial proposal for the sale of land was made by the ISB to the BRA way back when.

2. Also interesting is the fact (as Mr. Stavis' article points out) that the ISB was going to pay in kind for the monetary deficiency of the deal -- the kind being wahabbist/jihadist brainwash, propaganda and indoctrination at the Roxbury college, directed at the very same slice of the population, which was so susceptible to the "preachings" of the Nation of Islam founder Louis Farrakhan, in whose organization Mr. Muhammed Ali-Salaam, the Deputy Director of the BRA and member of the ISB, used to be an official. What a strange coincidence!

SN: Facts, dear. Have you visited the mosque? Have you spoken to folks there? They are not Wahabists -- they are an open, moderate community. You're engaging in the same sort of smear tactics. SHOW ME FACTS, or at least experiential first person evidence. Anyone can call them jihadist, but you show absolutely no evidence. The only evidence of this that exists is one Egyptian exile who found that *gasp* among the Sunni, Shi'a, and Sufi and various library texts, there were also radical texts in their library.

SB: Facts? I just gave you some. Don't you think there is something strange about a Farrakhanite, who is working at BRA, to be the inside man for the ISB? Given that, don't you think there was an inherent conflict of interests in that deal? The organization you choose to call "open, moderate community" is actually run by the Islamic Society of North America, which preaches Wahabbi type of Islam, supplies most of the money (coming from the Gulf states, first and foremost Saudi Arabia, naturally), and owns 80% of all the mosques in the U.S. You see, the ISB, being an allegedly grassroots non-profit organization, simply could not possess the kind of money ($22 million, to be exact) that was required to build the new mosque in Roxbury.

There is much more evidence of Wahabbi penetration of the ISB should you choose to open your eyes and ears -- what about those 2 founding members of the ISB, one of whom is in a U.S. jail for terrorism, and the other one who is hiding from U.S. justice in Arabian lands? Besides, talking to those "folks"at the mosque is like talking to the KGB about the advantages of the Soviet workers' paradise over the evil capitalist West. What did you expect -- that they would criticize ISB or their interpretation of Islam? If one wants to learn the truth, one better pay attention to what the dissidents and the critics (rather than the proponents and propagandists) have to say.

As for the suggested "experiential first person evidence" -- my oh my, where do I start? Shall I do the data dump from my Palm Pilot and my computer so as to introduce you to the dozens, if not hundreds, of the "open" and "moderate" promoters of Islam whom I've met since 9/11 and who, while presenting a tolerant and polished face to the West, are in fact engaging in double talk, saying something entirely different to their Muslim audience? Let me toss just a few of the better known names of such alleged "moderates": Sari Nusseibeh, Khalil Shikaki, Tariq Ramadan, the aforementioned Mahdi Bray, and many-many-many more.

SN: Harvard gives them a good review:
The ISBCC will offer monthly lectures for the next ten years at RCC and will donate books to the college's library. The lectures will be tailored to the interests of the RCC students. Both the city and the ISB hopes the community center will attract Muslim businesses and residents to the Roxbury community, which could have an enormous impact on the area's economics. This will be a gradual process as it was when the ISB was first established in Central Square. The center also agreed to maintain two local parks as a method of compensation to the city for setting aside the land. The center will also benefit the larger Boston community by providing a forum for interfaith dialogue and interactions with civic leaders. In December 2004 the ISBCC held a press conference to repudiate claims that members of the ISB board have ties to radical Islamic groups. The press release the center issued says "The ISBCC is designed with a blend of traditional Bostonian architecture, including hints of Islamic accents symbolically bringing together the east and the west. Its architecture is symbolic of its mission, as well. The center will provide civil and social services to the dynamic and diverse Roxbury community as well as avenues for interfaith dialogue and festivity." A variety of religious and civic leaders were present at the press conference as they had been at the groundbreaking two years prior.

SB: "Harvard" in this case means the Harvard's Pluralism Project, http://www.pluralism.org/research/profiles/display.php?profile=74077, which in their mission statement promotes religious "pluralism" and which can hardly be called a non-biased non-partisan organization. BTW, as their site acknowledges (see the above URL), "Much of the information contained in this profile was obtained from an interview with Salma Kazmi [of the ISB] on June 20, 2005." Objectivity, you say?

Not all religions and religious movements deserve equal treatment and respect -- some are intolerant, totalitarian, and even downright murderous. For a while there I thought you were a journalist -- what about the diversity of sources, representing all sides of the issue? Since we are on the subject of Harvard, are you aware that their Middle East Studies department is run with much Saudi and other Gulf money? Just go to their building and take a look at the abundance of Saudi propaganda on display there, including the freely available brochures and booklets, gratis. He who pays orders the music. In this case, the payor is the wahabbi establishment of Arabia. The music, therefore, is jihadi Islam, in spite of how "open" or "moderate" those ISB folks may appear. BTW, thanks to the brave Rachel Fish, Harvard Divinity's School was unable to get Sheikh Zayed blood money. Alas, recently Harvard took yet more of oil money from the Gulf, along with another university (in DC). Thus, the objectivity of statements coming out of Harvard on the subject of Islam and related issues should be immediately suspect, wouldn't you think?

SN: Boston Dialogue, too:
http://www.bostondialogue.org/images/Dialoge_News_letter_issue5.pdf
Margaret Herzig of the Public Conversations Project,
Salma Kazmi of the Islamic Society of Boston, and
David Dolev of Temple Beth Shalom
were honored with plaques for their outstanding and dedicated work in promoting dialogue and tolerance.

SB: Sure, yet another case of blatantly biased partisanship. Public Conversations, at least on the face of it, appears to be yet another starry-eyed, tree-hugging, kumbaya-singing bunch of wishful thinkers, hoping to just dream away the world's troubles. Or is it? Let's take a closer look: The Boston Dialogue Foundation Center in Revere lists its prayer times -- guess how many per day? That's right -- five. What does this tell us? Correct, this is Islam (see the above URL). I hardly need to mention the self-interest of the ISB rep Salma Kazmi. As for David Dolev -- oh my, have I got stories to tell you about him ... Suffice it to say that he is buddies with Mahdi Bray, a black American Muslim cleric from DC, who is nothing short of Islamo-fascist, and as I need not remind you, we are known by the company we keep, ne ce pas?

We Jews have more than enough enablers and defenders of our sworn enemies, if our history teaches us anything. Moreover, some of our fellow Jews even become our own worst enemies. Enter the 5th column: Torquemada the Grand Inquisitor, Mordechai Vanunu the traitor, Israel Shamir the hater, and our own local trio of Howie Lenow, Hilda Silverman and Marty Federman, to name but a few. Ugh, I even know some of these self-hating Jews personally, I'm sorry to say, including David Dolev.

SN: Most recently, Ms. Kazmi was invited by Community Change to address changing dynamics in the Boston community:
http://www.communitychangeinc.org/events2.html
The Islamic Society of Boston practices and promotes a comprehensive, balanced view of Islam. The ISB strives to embody the "middle path" to which Quran calls - a path of moderation, free of extremism, and representative of the Islamic vision of healthy community.

Now again, Salma Kazmi is the proverbial KGB propagandist trying to convince the West of the benevolence of the USSR. Please, spare us such childish nonsense, won't you? "Middle path" my foot. Does the name of Dr. Joseph Goebbels ring a bell?

SN: From CCI's homepage:
Community Change Inc. (CCI) is a non-profit organization with a particular focus on systemic racism. We are committed to serving as a center for action and collaboration among individuals and multiracial grassroots groups in the fight to achieve racial justice and equity.

SB: Blah, blah, blah -- yet more certified hard-core kumbaya.

SN: This is America, we compare viewpoints here. Some of us even recognize that there are Jews who are raving zionists, and Jews who are not. Likewise, there is diversity in the Muslim community. It would be best for both communities if they encouraged dialogue and moderation and leashed the slavering dogs of war in their midst.

SB: Yes, we do compare viewpoints here. Problem is, not all viewpoints are equally valid or worthy of serious consideration or even discussion, let alone respect. Sorry, but I have no use for moral and cultural relativism. As a matter of fact, I just came back to Israel from a trip to Uzbekistan over the Passover break, where I discovered sane and tolerant Islam (as practiced there) alive and well -- reason being, of course, that the further one strays from Arabia, the saner it gets. Unfortunately, that model is not applicable in much of the Muslim world, especially in the Arab countries, especially in Saudi Arabia. When I asked the brave Canadian Muslim Irshad Manji about the so-called "interfaith dialogue" with the Muslims, she responded in her characteristic straightforward manner, saying something like: "It's a bunch of bull.... Not until they reform and become civilized."

SN: My goal is not to comfort the enemy but to empower those in the Muslim community most likely to be able to protect us all.

A noble and worthwhile goal indeed. Except that, sadly, there aren't many such Muslims. Fact is, one could easily count them, as they are so few and far in between. Most of the ones who disagree with the militant Islamist nuts are afraid, and wouldn't speak up. The few brave Muslim souls who are out there are under fatwas and death threats. You can easily find out who they are. As for the outspoken public figures, I challenge you to come up with a dozen known Muslim personalities who are not afraid to appear in public and challenge the prevailing Muslim dogmas and politics. I'll even give you a head start: Irshad Manji (under death threats), Khaled Abu Toameh (always in danger), Wafa Sultan (under death threats), Amir Abbas Fakhravar (under death threats), Ayaan Hirsi Ali (under death threats), Atwar Bahjat (killed recently). Please continue, if you can.

Besides, how can YOU, of all people, empower THEM? They are dissidents, but you are apparently not interested in dissidents -- conformists and people towing the party line is what you seem to like, judging by your statements and references to specific people.

3. You wrote, "The Policari suit against the Boston Redevelopment Authority was spawned by the David Project for Jewish Leadership. No one in our local Jewish community denies this, and it was casually mentioned last week in our Jewish Advocate newspaper." In your article (see the above URL) you quote:

"As discussed previously," Kolodner wrote, "Evan Slavitt is preparing to file a lawsuit. The BRA will be the defendant and we have identified a viable plaintiff. Separation of church and state is the basis of the case ... Filing the lawsuit will serve to trip the switch on the larger agenda of exposing the radical fundamentalist underpinnings of the Mosque and its leaders.

"We need to develop a media campaign," Kolodner continued, "I have worked with Steve Emerson's office and we have comprehensive and compelling data."

------

So what? What did you find surprising, unethical, or conspiratorial about that? Judging by your photo on your website, you were not born yesterday.

SN: 47 years ago in July, actually. And what I find conpiratorial [sic]? That Evan Slavitt has denied a connection between the David Project smear campaign and the Policari suit. That all sorts of folks associated with the "media campaign" have denied connection (until it came out more blatantly) to the press.

If they weren't hiding something they thought, at least, would reduce the impact of their actions, wouldn't they be up front?

SB: Then I suggest you look up the definition of conspiracy in Black's or even Webster's. Duh ...

SN: You further wrote and quoted:
So, I suppose exposing these horrible terrorists and preventing them from having a mosque must be a great way to defend Israel?

------

SB: Damn right, Ms. Nerad! It is one of the more effective ways to do so. Given what kind of Islam such mosque would be preaching

SN: Show me facts, please. I do not find the same issues you do.

SB: Then you are intentionally looking in all the wrong places, or closing your eyes and ears, or both. Seek and ye shall find. Google is our friend.

SN: For example, Harvard's Pluralism Project http://www.pluralism.org/research/profiles/display.php?profile=74077 finds a very different population at ISB that you postulate. Have you even checked this on your own?

SB: Oh no, not that Harvard's Pluralism Project again ... Can't you find another Potemkin village, please? You are beginning to bore me.

SN: Harvard reports:
The center will also provide an opportunity for Muslim women to leave their mark on the community. The design process for the center has taken into consideration the needs of women members. The designers needed to balance the needs of both "conservative" and "liberal" members of the Muslim community currently attending the ISB mosque. The more conservative members prefer separate entrances and separate prayer spaces for men and women while the more "liberal" members want involvement of women at all levels and in as many activities as possible. The architects attempted to create a space which would be comfortable for a wide range of people.

SB: Wow ... The extremes of open-mindedness, pluralism and tolerance that these people are willing to go to ... That's it, I'm converting to Islam and giving all my possessions to the ISB, if this is how wonderful, warm and fuzzy they are.

SN: This is not a mosque locked down by conservative Moslems (far less "jihadists"). And I'll note for those who might not know, that orthodox Jews still separate men from women in prayer, also.

SB: Yeah, sure, and they (the Orthodox Jews, that is) still stone and behead people for adultery and other such dangerous transgressions, and kill their daughters and sisters for bringing dishonor upon their families, to say nothing of what they do to their outright enemies.

Oops, did I say Jews? I'm sorry, my wiring must've gotten screwed up.

BTW, do you remember the lynching of the two unfortunate Israeli reservists took a wrong turn and ended up in Ramallah, which was accidentally caught on film by an Italian TV crewman? Or the "moderate" Muslims across the world dancing on 9/11? How do you explain the fact that when several days ago I went to the Temple Mount and wanted to enter the Dome of the Rock, I was told by the Arab guards there that only Muslims were allowed to enter? When I asked why, I got no reply. Anyone can go to the Western Wall or the the Church of the Holy Sepulcher, the holiest sites of Judaism and Christianity, but the same cannot be said about the Muslim holy sites, be it in Jerusalem, Mecca or Medinah. Why?

4. In your web article, you wrote the following on Steven Emerson:

If Emerson is part of the information trail linking ISB to terrorist groups, I actually would make a snap judgement in favor of ISB. Emerson is like a red-baiter -- perhaps a crescent-baiter? He sees Islamic terrorists under his bed. He is paranoid, whether or not they are out to get him. Just read some of his stuff.

I checked with Wikipedia, and here is what it says:

------

He is a regular advisor to the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies.

------

Wow, Ms. Nerad, you apparently have more wisdom than "the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies" collectively.


SN: No, I do not. But you would also find that those same folks are consulting all kinds of wingnuts. I'm personally familiar with a number of CIA analysts, and they check everything, even the not-consistently-reliable sources.

SB: I challenge you to find another substantial screw-up by Steven Emerson, other than his admitted mistake of Oklahoma City bombing (BTW, even now, there are still some unanswered questions there). Even one such demonstrated mistake will do. I consider him to be a VERY reliable source, as apparently do the folks at the White House, National Security Council, FBI, Justice Department, Congress and intelligence agencies.

SN: That someone gets credit for being right sometimes doesn't mean that he's an authority on everything he touches. Have you researched whether Mr. Emerson, for example, came to Boston? Or is he just a friend of the David Project and willing to help them out.

SB: As a matter of fact, I have indeed met Mr. Emerson a few years ago in Boston, well before the ISB mosque scandal broke out AND before the David Project gained any prominence -- moreover, I am not sure anyone heard of them by then yet.

Have you, Ms. Nerad, ever made any mistakes? Guess not. Nor have Karl Marx, Lenin, Mao, Stalin, Kim Il Sung, Fidel Castro, Turkmen-bashi, Prophet Mohammad, and other proponents of freedom and democracy.

SN: If you were in a court of law, youngster, that would draw an objection. Did it make you feel bold and powerful for a moment, though? Don't trust that feeling. It won't serve you well in real life.

SB: We are not in a court of law, missie (I am but 3 years younger than you -- check the facts first). BTW, this last comment of yours would draw the same objection if we were in a court of law.

5. And then, Ms. Nerad, after your intricate, deft, and elaborate dance, comes your final pas, where you drop your last, seventh veil: "There's nothing special going on here -- except Jewish persecution of Moslems." The King is naked, ladies and gentlemen!

Ahhh, yes, it's those Jews at it again. The Elders of Zion never tire, do they, Ms. Nerad? First, they refused to accept Jesus and then The Prophet; then they drank the blood of innocent Christian babies; but since that surely was not enough, they created communism; then they collaborated with the Nazis; and now they give birth to neo-Conservatism (never mind that 80% or so of American Jews consider themselves Liberal Progressive). Poor, poor Moslems, who are persecuted at the hands of those crooked-nosed sons of pigs and monkeys ... My heart goes out to them. And to you, Ms. Nerad, as "I feel your pain." Lord, if I only knew how to make you feel more of it ...

SN: Seva, I *am* Jewish. My mother, my grandparents. I was married to a Conservative Jew for years and kept better kosher at the time than he did. I am, in fact, one of those 80% or so of liberal progressive Jews. What in G*d's name are you?

What in the world are you trying to prove with this drivel?

SB: Oh-oh, she's Jewish, oops ... That must mean you can claim the high moral ground and bash your own kind, as you have that birthright, eh? Let's set the record straight: first, I knew you were Jewish -- I know people who know you. Besides, one can easily find that via Google. Moreover, what does it mean, being Jewish? As you describe yourself (see http://www.gather.com/viewProfile.jsp?memberId=15714), your religious affiliation is "Unitarian/Buddhist" -- so what are you, after all? A "Unitarian/Buddhist" bi-sexual liberal progressive "ethnic" Jew, who kept "better kosher" [sic] than her husband? My oh my, are we confused, or what ... Did you see "Hannah and her sisters" by another confused Jew, Woody Allen? Do you remember the protagonist's attempts to try on the various religions? At least he finally realized his impasse and tried to shoot himself, albeit unsuccessfully, whereas you would never do such a thing, as you are too sure of your comfortably fuzzy uncertainty, which gives you so much self-confidence.

What in G*d's name am I? Why the missed "o" all of a sudden? So are you Jewish or aren't you? Well, I am, and certain of it. I am not some "Unitarian/Buddhist" or a "Totalitarian/Marxist" -- no sirree (sorrry, no, ma'am) -- I am a 100% true-blue (and white, as in white-and-blue) Jew, straight (as in not homo-, bi-, or tri-sexual), Libertarian (as in Classical Liberal), but called all sorts of names by your kind -- from neo-Con to right-wing extremist (but then again, what do I care?). And I am certainly not a "self-hating Jew," Ms. Nerad. Hint-hint ...

SB: Meanwhile, city officials sought yesterday to prove that they provided no special benefit when they sold the society the 2-acre parcel in Roxbury. They offered a list of other religious institutions -- including the Christian Science Church, the Regina Cleari Retired Priests Home, and Beth Amedrish Agudal Beth Jacob Synagogue -- that took advantage of the opportunity to buy public land under the city's urban renewal program over the past four decades. They did not provide details.

So much for the "Happy prior customers of the BRA."

SN: One might assume that the details are public record. Redevelopment deals are always sweetheart deals, as I mentioned in my article. What's your point? Have all those folks come forward saying how they were slighted by the city? No, they have not. The only complaint is Policari, set up as a shill by the David Project et al.

SB: The reason there were no prior complaints is probably because nothing fishy went on with those deals. Had there been any funny business, I'm sure we would have heard from the ACLU, as they only like to defend the Muslims, Commies, or Nazis, but not Christians or Jews or conservatives.

Do you think those "other" religious entities offered "in-kind" religious instruction of the type our "generous" Moslem friends did at ISB?

SN: They did not offer "religious instruction." They offered classes on Islam. In case your legal education doesn't distinguish, this is the same principal that allows tax-funded public schools, like RCC, to offer classes *on* religion, but not religious instruction.

SB: The difference being, of course, that public schools offer classes on religion taught by secular staff teachers, whereas here we would have Islamist propaganda taught by ... why, Islamists themselves, naturally. Duh ...

Ugh ... Ms. Nerad, just what crevasse have you crawled out from? "Social Justice" my foot ... With citizens like you, who needs enemies? You represent the quintessential "fifth column." Joe McCarthy, where art thou when we really need you?

SN: *gryn* Oh, my dear, you are too young to remember what that was really about, and so am I.

I will not accuse you of any of the monsterous things you libel me with. But I am sorry you live with such hate. I hope someday you will find some peace and tolerance in your heart.

SB: Hate can be a healthy and useful emotion -- it allows us to fight our enemies and to win. Love alone, unfortunately, cannot conquer the world and make it better. Bad guys (and gals) need to be wiped out first, lest they kill everyone else, leaving no love in this world. I suggest you read Menachem Begin's "The Revolt" -- it should teach you a thing or two about love and hate, peace and righteous war.

As far as the monstrous things you accuse me of accusing you of (wow, what a construct) -- let the readers make up their own minds.

As for the poor Muslims oppressed by the evil Jews (see my post-scriptum) -- get real. Get very-very real, while there is still time. Before they kill us all.

But don't take my word for it:

http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/05/17/muslim_reformer_still_a_target/

Ms. Nerad,

I wanted to extend you my thanks for your articulate, intelligent, and above all *informed* defense of our masjid. They are putting a cap on the minaret soon and there will be a ceremony to commerate this, inshallah. I will inshallah be thinking of you and all the people from the Jewish, Christian, and other religions who've helped protect our masjid from destruction.

Also, in our Qur'an, we are told that we should protect all religious buildings in which remember Allah, not just mosques. But except in Paradise, there will always be people who forget this under the label of all faiths.

May Allah guide us all to help each other avoid or resolve conflict quickly and easily in Boston and everywhere, and inshallah spend more time on our main job as lovers of the Divine: Remembering and coming nearer to Him and His will.

Your friend Abdul Hakeem

Well, the ISB has now dismissed their defamation lawsuit against all defendants. Every single one, including the two media defendants. They have conceded that they have no case. The only justification was the withdrawal of the appeal of a case that (i) they won at the trial court level, and (ii) they always said had no merit whatsoever. Meanwhile, the discovery in the defamation case revealed numerous false statements by the ISB concerning its organization, the trustees, and its funding. Not to mention the fact that Mr. Ali-Salaam was at the same time working for the BRA and actively raising funds abroad for the ISB.

Where is the conspiracy? I suggest it is the ISB's abuse of the legal system to quash criticism. I suggest it is the way that the ISB manipulated the BRA process to get a piece of land that Ali-Salaam himself said was worth $2 million at a bargain basement price without any meaningful review or oversight. I wait to see whether, once the mosque is complete, its management will stock it with the kind of anti-semitic, vicious literature so common now in the Islamic discourse about Jews, Israel, and America. Indeed, I wait to see whether the mosque will open its doors to the inter-faith discussion it now professes to desire, or will make sure that the citizens are unaware of the substance of the discussions.

And, by the way, Mr. B., when Jordan controlled the West Bank, it destroyed Jewish places of worship and used Jewish tombstones as paving stones. The great church of Hagia Sophia in Istambul was converted to a mosque. When the Tomb of Joseph was overrun, the mob took pleasure in destroying Jewish Prayerbooks. The history of Islamic governments is the history of churches and synagogues destroyed, desecrated, or taken over.

Care to substantiate that "no case," Evan? Otherwise, I'm going to assume you're talking from a point of no information. The negotiations between the ISB et al and the David Project et al were long and complicated, with a number of progressive Jewish groups in town coming down on the side of the mosque and pressuring the David Project to back down. You are parroting the POV of one side of the argument.

How would you feel if someone blasted someone on your synagogue board for, say, being disloyal to their teaching job because they were a government employee but yet they were raising money for a school in Israel rather than working with the PTA.

There are destructive zionist fanatics in nearly every synagogue, willing to fund the destruction of Palestinians if not actually do the work with their own hands. As the Christians would say, "Let him who is without sin, throw the first stone." How many of your schul's leadership, Evan, were JDL in their youth?

The only way we can have peace is to say "Enough!" and "Never again." Never again for *anyone*; none of us should have to live with hate.

Hello again,

To respond to Mr. Evan S: As I said, except in Paradise there will be people who forget what the Qur'an has asked of us, people of all faiths.

It's in our mutal interest to ensure we are not one of those who forgets!

Those who forget and cause injustice and pain to people for the sake of their own interests will have plenty to answer for from Allah, so don't worry about sins from the past. We don't need to get revenge, leave them to Allah. The whole reason for Allah's judgement is that we don't have to make it our business! This is a great gift from Allah, so even though what you mention is terrible and unlawful, don't burden your heart with what is in His hands.

We should instead work together to solve problems *in the present* in the best way for everyone, Allah willing, and I hope you know that I am sincere. Only Allah knows who His servants are, so insha'Allah we could be neighbors in Paradise.

Abdul Hakeem

First, as to your personal attack, the answer is none. Absolutely zero. None of my shul's board or leadership were part of the JDL. Nor was I for that matter.

Second, the issue is very different from what you set forth. On the one hand, Mr. Ali-Salaam was in theory representing the interests of the BRA and the citizens of Boston when he was working as a BRA official on this very transaction. At the same time, he was also working for the ISB raising funds abroad. Surely even you recognize at least the appearance of impropriety in working both sides of the street. To be even more specific, there is a letter that I have seen in the public record, written on BRA stationery, purporting to enclose a $25,000 contribution to the RCC on behalf of the ISB signed by Ali-Salaam and two members of the ISB management. Making things worse, the letter requests that the contribution be kept secret.

More generally, I "parrot" no view. I am familiar with all the filings in the case, the discovery, and with the ISB's continual restatement of the "facts." One trustee discovered saying grotesque things is asserted to have been off the board for many years. An IRS filing appears showing that is not true. Oho, they say, that was just a mistake (in a federal filing under the pains of perjury) but leave that alone. Another document turns up. A new story appears.

The burden is on the ISB to justify this long and inflammatory case, not on anyone else. The fact remains, it was intended to impose huge costs on people simply voicing their opinions and it did. The fact that the ISB dismissed the case just before a number of people were going to have to testify under oath tells the whole story.

And to you Mr. Hakeem. You responded to not one single fact. Did I mis-state the historical record? It is not revenge that I seek but justice. "Let justice flow down like the waters and righteousness like the mighty stream." Those who have done wrong face justice in this world as well as the next.

Evan,

I responded to all stories you mentioned. If they are true, and I have no reason to doubt them and no desire to prove them one way or the other, I will say again that these actions were terrible and unlawful.

And I agree that Allah will punish the unjust in this world and the next. But there is a danger when people take on the role of judging and punishing a group of people in the name of Allah upon themselves. It may to some appear as piety but a closer inspection, I think you will agree, will reveal that lashing out against one group of people *without differentiating between individuals* in the name of Allah is the height of blasphemy.

To harm a group without differentiating between individuals is a sort of bigotry.

I love history also by the way, but let's not let it spoil the present. I could take you in Syria to churches built by the Crusaders which have continued without interruption. I have seen them with my own eyes, and heard the hymns with my own ears. I could take you in Istanbul to dozens of beautiful synagogues. The Jews there still speak the Spanish they brought over from Moorish Spain as they fled to the Ottoman Empire from the massacres perpetrated on them alleged Christians. Evan, the world is so wide and Allah has filled it with many things that would change forever the hostile tone you take with strangers.

If you and I can reach out to each other and speak as friends and speak as two dazed lovers of the Divine merely following a different practice, it's possible that our children and our grandchildren will live in a safer and more peaceful world. Why don't we make ourselves living symbols of our ideals as best we can?

Regards,

Abdul Hakeem

The question about the JDL is not an attack, it's an honest question. My experience is that in my generation (I'm 48) and my brothers' (in their 60's) a lot of my peers were drawn into the romance of the Israeli freedom fighter. I know folks of the boomer generation and a bit older who were involved in things as young folks they are reluctant to own today.

The "IRS filing" you're referring to is the ISB's 1023, the "initial filing for exemption." In it, they have to file the names and a short bio for each board member.

Although you say it's filed under legal sanctions (true) you would also find that a huge proportion of the organization who file for their initial exemption do not have their ducks in a row.

That the ISB might have listed a board member that they invited but never participated shouldn't be a shock, although it certainly put them in a difficult position years later. I never saw any record of a journalist going into their minutes book to see if he ever attended -- I only saw the allegation that at their origin, they'd invited someone to serve who *later* developed an association with Hamas, was it? The governing party in the PA. I don't remember, maybe you know.

I am not trying to say that the ISB is blameless. But I do believe, from the beginning, that the effort to shut down their effort to build a house of worship is deplorable, and the idea that this is a victory for the David Project and such is really missing the point.

Everyone is trying to reconcile now -- workman's circle is having a big event on the 14th, trying to deruffle feathers in the community. Maybe you should consider going and finding some broader information than you have.

The contribution letter you're talking about was $10K, in December of 1999. It was on BRA stationery, which is inappropriate. It requests that the donation remain *anonymous* -- don't you think "secret" is a little loaded here?

But again, that is the BRA employee's problem. And there is still a suit against the BRA. Are you saying that because he acted inappropriately, the Moslem community of Boston should be punished in toto?

If so, it would have to be that the Jewish community would take on some restitution for every synagogue board member (and, good for you that you have a "clean" board, that's nice!) who as a "civilian" was a JDL-type, or had some malfeasance in relation to fundraising at his or her business. I don't see that happening.

It's so much easier to point out a Moslem as a terrorist than to point out the early biographies of most of Israel's leaders, or contemporary speeches of Jewish hawks which call for blood. The rhetoric around the previous set of conflicts in southern Lebanon would provide plenty of examples.

All I'm trying to say is, when we stir up things like this, we invite a mirror no one wants on everyone's actions. And those actions stir rancor, and the rancor stirs prejudice, and eventually, no one has peace.

People needs to begin with people saying "This situation is unfortunate. But unless you are willing to accept suffering and a lot of obligation, we must reconcile."

The reconciliation is in process. If your goal is to see justice down to the last measure, you must be willing for the process to be long and painful, and to punish those on both sides.

I just wrote a letter to Editor and Publisher, for example, (and blogged it here) dismayed that no one is pointing out that an equally egregious unprofessional papertrail marks the reporter from the Herald -- and later with Fox television -- who promoted the David Project party line from their "ad hoc committee" meetings without doing fair investigation, or revealing the DP involvement in the Policari suit, or any number of other bits that violate journalistic ethics.

Again, as our christian friends would say, "Let him who is without sin throw the first stone." The whole thing was a mess on all sides, but ultimately the people who took the damage were the membership of the ISB. Not the David Project, and not the city of Boston (although they might want to review the BRA employee's actions, yes, I do not believe that they were cheated -- you have to learn more about the "sausage making" of urban renewal projects before you think this might be exceptional).

That whole thing still has a chance of seeing review and justice.

But for the rest of it, let's set aside rancor and consider it a long conflict ended to no one's satisfaction, but in peace. In the real world, that's often all you can hope for.

The problem with the "lets all be friends and call it over" approach is that it just glosses over real issues and real problems. Shall we tell those who lost loved ones on 9/11 that it would just be unpleasant to continue to pursue those who planned and directed the attack? After all, that would avoid further rancor. I suppose you would advise the Chechens to just set aside the inhumane massacres by the Russian Army in the spirit of pleasantness and friendship? The problem is that there are real issues and principles at stake here. It is not mere courtesy to stand by when those preach death to the Jews or who call for the beheading of women newscasters because they are immodest. As Edmund Burke said, "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for good people to stand aside." [Quotation slightly modified to bring in line with current usage].