No Mosques At Ground Zero

NY POST: El-Gamal doesn’t own BOTH buildings on Park Place!
August 9, 2010, 4:30 am
Filed under: Islam and mosques, mayor bloomberg sells out, mosque at ground zero

August 8, 2010 : Amazing what comes out AFTER the Landmark Commission meets. And NOW the Chairwoman of CB 1 is shocked? SHOCKED that they weren’t told this information. The Post headline says it all:

Half-baked mosque

Developer owns only part of site!!

“…The developers of the controversial mosque proposed near Ground Zero own only half the site where they want to construct the $100 million building …

One of the two buildings on Park Place is owned by Con Edison, even though Soho Properties told officials and the public that it owns the entire parcel. And any potential sale by Con Ed faces a review by the state Public Service Commission.

“We never heard anything about Con Ed whatsoever,said a stunned Julie Menin, the chairwoman of Community Board 1, which passed a May resolution supporting the mosque.

Daisy Khan, one of the mosque’s organizers ….  claimed ignorance about the Con Ed ownership of 49-51 Park Place and referred questions to Soho Properties, which bought the building at 45-47 Park Place in 2009.

Rep. Peter King (R-LI) who opposes the mosque, said the developers seemed to be “operating under false pretenses. I wonder what else they are hiding.” Said King, “If we can’t have the full truth on this, what can we believe?” …

To Read the entire article Go HERE


NMAFZ asks:  So what happens now, since Con Ed owns part of the property?? Nothing? Or will we finally get an investigation?? Full disclosure.? And maybe , just maybe they will have to “SHOW US THE MONEY!!”


5 Comments so far
Leave a comment

I’m still in shock that Bloomberg sold out the way he did. I REALLY hope this will block the building of that mosque for good!

Comment by Coreen Kerr

The Muslim religion is the fastest growing religion per capita in Canada , especially in the minority

Last month I attended my annual training session that’s required for maintaining my federal prison security clearance. During the training session there was a presentation by three speakers representing the Roman Catholic, Protestant and Muslim faiths, who explained each of their beliefs.

I was particularly interested in what the Islamic Imam had to say. The Imam gave a great presentation of the basics of Islam, complete with a video.

After the presentations, time was provided for questions and answers.

When it was my turn, I directed my question to the Imam and asked: ‘Please, correct me if I’m wrong, but I understand that most Imams and clerics of Islam have declared a holy jihad [Holy war] against

the infidels of the world and, that by killing an infidel, (which is a command to all Muslims) they are assured of a place in heaven. If that’s the case, can you give me the definition of an infidel?’

There was no disagreement with my statements and, without hesitation, he replied, ‘Non-believers!’

I responded, ‘So, let me make sure I have this straight. All followers of Allah have been commanded to kill everyone who is not of your faith so they can have a place in heaven. Is that correct?’

The expression on his face changed from one of authority and command to that of a little boy who had just been caught with his hand in the cookie jar.’

He sheepishly replied, ‘Yes.’

I then stated, ‘Well, sir, I have a real problem trying to imagine Pope John Paul commanding all Catholics to kill those of your faith or Dr. Stanley ordering all Protestants to do the same in order to
guarantee them a place in heaven!’

The Imam was speechless!

I continued, ‘I also have a problem with being your friend when you and your brother clerics are telling your followers to kill me!
Let me ask you a question: Would you rather have your Allah, who tells you to kill me in order for you to go to heaven, or my Jesus who tells me to love you because I am going to heaven and He wants
you to be there with me?’

You could have heard a pin drop as the Imam hung his head in shame. Needless to say, the organizers and/or promoters of the Diversification training seminar were not happy with my way of dealing
with the Islamic Imam, and exposing the truth about the Muslims’ beliefs.

In twenty years there will be enough Muslim voters in Canada to elect the Prime Minister!

I think everyone in Canada should be required to read this. There is no way this will be widely publicized, unless each of us send it on!
This is your chance to make a difference…


Comment by Swarn

This is an urban legend. Are you Rick Mathes? Please read below the corrected details of this exchange found on:

Analysis: The above text, circulating via email since September 2003, was indeed written by Rick Mathes, executive director of Mission Gate Prison Ministry in Chesterfield, Missouri. In subsequent statements on the ministry’s website Mathes affirmed that the incident took place exactly as he described it in the article.

However, a different version of events was reported in an article by Greg Kearney of the Lee News Service in which a spokesperson for the Missouri Department of Corrections, which sponsored the training session, stated that the “imam” Mathes refers to above was a prison inmate and ordinary Muslim, not a trained cleric, and that although the inmate did answer various questions about his faith to the best of his ability, the issues of jihad and violence against non-believers were neither raised nor discussed during the exchange.

It is therefore a case of Mathes’ word against the prison official’s. I have not been able to find public statements by anyone else in a position to confirm the facts.

As to the substance of the alleged debate — whether or not it is a core tenet of Islam that believers must wage holy war against non-believers wherever they are found — there is fierce disagreement on that issue even among acknowledged experts in Muslim culture and theology, so I will not attempt to defend one side or the other in this brief commentary. See the resources below for further reading.

Comment by neveragain911

I’ll answer your question only at the end:

You asked: So what happens now, since Con Ed owns part of the property?? Nothing? Or will we finally get an investigation?? Full disclosure.? And maybe , just maybe they will have to “SHOW US THE MONEY!!”

What happened is that the mosque exercised its option to buy, which it had as per the terms of the lease. Both sides are now awaiting the results of an appraisal, and then the mosque has to decide whether or not to accept the price.

Based on how much 45-47 place was really worth (about $18M), I expect 49 Park Place to be worth about the same.

If the mosque accepts, then the property sale may have to be approved by the Public Service Commission. But, according to this article, it would only come into play if it “could impact the utility’s capacity to deliver services“, in this case, electricity and gas.

What I’m getting is that the Pomerantz family took out a 99-year master lease that may or may not allow alterations to the 49 Park Place property, and sold it along with 45-47 Park Place to Soho Equities (the mosque).

I don’t think that one would get an investigation, since it’s unclear if the PSC has to get involved.

Comment by aemoreira81

So why hasn’t a suit been filed against the City to enjoin the City from taking steps that will remove this property from the tax rolls. It is a primary responsibility of the planning and zoning boards to PROTECT THE TAX BASE. These boards are immune to hearing that someone is offended by a proposed land use…but they have to respond to complaints of errosion of the tax base.

Comment by M Ferign

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: